The evidence base for the Lovaas Model is small: only two of 58 reviewed studies met WWC evidence standards¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · quant-synthesis r2 · q2
Currency · newest study 2010 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? Of 58 studies reviewed, one randomized controlled trial met WWC evidence standards and one met standards with reservations; the remaining 56 did not meet standards or eligibility screens. → Lovaas Model of Applied Behavior Analysis 2010

Evidence¶

Lovaas Model of Applied Behavior Analysis 2010¶

Lovaas Model of Applied Behavior Analysis. (2010). WWC Intervention Report, U.S. Department of Education, What Works Clearinghouse. https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/InterventionReport/295

q2 · i? · quant-synthesis · r2

The WWC's systematic review screened 58 studies against its evidence standards for the Early Childhood Education Interventions for Children with Disabilities protocol. The two qualifying studies included 51 children ages 18 to 42 months in two locations; the WWC considers the extent of evidence small in all four covered domains.

"Fifty-eight studies reviewed by the WWC investigated the effects of the Lovaas Model on children with disabilities. One study (Sallows & Graupner, 2005) is a randomized controlled trial that meets WWC evidence standards. One study (Smith, Groen, & Wynn, 2000) is a randomized controlled trial with severe attrition that meets WWC evidence standards with reservations."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• The evidence base for Accelerated Reader with adolescent learners is thin: only 2 of 318 reviewed studies met WWC standards — related
• The evidence base for Corrective Reading in grades K–3 is small: one of 25 reviewed studies met WWC standards, and no studies addressed general reading achievement — related
• Meeting the WWC attrition standard is now an important consideration for researchers whose studies may be reviewed by federal evidence reviews — related
• The evidence base for ASAP rests on two randomized controlled trials meeting WWC standards without reservations, out of eight identified studies — related
• Only one of seven eligible studies of I CAN Learn® met WWC group design standards, and it met them only with reservations — related
• The evidence base for PALS in the Adolescent Literacy review rests on a single randomized trial of 120 students across 12 schools, rated as meeting standards with reservations — related
• The evidence base for Reading Mastery with adolescent learners is small: only 2 of 175 reviewed studies met WWC evidence standards — related
• Only three of twelve identified OLI studies met WWC group design standards — related
• Only one of 10 identified studies of InsideTrack© Coaching met WWC group design standards without reservations — related