LiPS shows potentially positive effects on reading fluency: authors found significant effects on GORT–III Reading Accuracy and Reading Rate, but WWC analyses did not confirm significance¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r2 · q3 · i2 medium
Currency · newest study 2010 · checked against its sources 2026-10-20 (automated, 1 of 1 entry) · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i2 Study authors found statistically significant effects favoring the LiPS group on the GORT–III Reading Accuracy and Reading Rate subtests, but WWC analyses found neither comparison statistically significant; the WWC-calculated effect size for each subtest was 0.43. → What Works Clearinghouse 2010 q3 i2 The WWC-calculated average effect across the two fluency outcomes (effect size 0.43) was large enough to be considered substantively important under WWC criteria (at least 0.25). → What Works Clearinghouse 2010

Evidence¶

What Works Clearinghouse 2010¶

What Works Clearinghouse, U.S. Department of Education. (2010). What Works Clearinghouse Intervention Report: Lindamood Phoneme Sequencing® (LiPS®). Students with Learning Disabilities. https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/InterventionReport/279

q3 · i2 · causal · r2

Posttest findings from the Torgesen et al. (2001) RCT (n = 50). The authors reported significant effects on both GORT–III subtests; the WWC calculated an effect size of 0.43 favoring LiPS on each, and its analyses found neither comparison statistically significant, but the average effect met the WWC substantively-important threshold of 0.25.

"Torgesen et al. (2001) found statistically significant effects favoring the LiPS® group for two measures of reading fluency: the Reading Accuracy and Reading Rate subtests from the Gray Oral Reading Test–III."

Discussion¶

Learner Variables¶

• Reading Fluency — outcome: instruction changes it

Related Claims¶

• The evidence base for LiPS with students with learning disabilities is small: one RCT met WWC standards out of 31 reviewed studies — related
• LiPS has no discernible effects on reading comprehension for students with learning disabilities — related
• Read Naturally® shows no discernible effects on reading fluency for students with learning disabilities, with small negative effect sizes on GORT-III accuracy and rate — related
• LiPS has potentially positive effects on alphabetics for students with learning disabilities, with statistically significant advantages on two of eight measures — related
• Earobics® has potentially positive effects on reading fluency, with no statistically significant fluency findings — related
• LiPS shows potentially positive effects on math: no statistically significant effect on the WJ–R Calculation subtest, but a positive effect size of 0.30 judged substantively important — related
• Fluency interventions for older students show very small effects on rate and accuracy and virtually no effect on standardized comprehension — related
• LiPS has potentially negative effects on writing: comparison students significantly outperformed LiPS students on the KTEA Spelling subtest — related
• In Torgesen et al. (2010), LiPS produced statistically significant positive effects on word accuracy/fluency, phonemic decoding, phonological awareness, and spelling versus a basal reading program — related