Fall oral vocabulary skills did not moderate TRI treatment effects for struggling English learners on any outcome¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causalr2·q3
Currency · newest study 2018 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person
Subclaims¶
Reading the evidence codes
q is the design tier, i the impact, n the sample, and the kind with its r
the rigour judged within that kind: what each code means.
This claim: no standardized effect is recorded in observations/ for it yet, so no benchmark reading is possible.
q3 i? Model 2 found no evidence that the significant treatment effect for treatment versus control struggling ELs was moderated by fall oral vocabulary skills on Letter-Word Identification (B = 2.48, p = .10), Word Attack (B = 3.07, p = .08), or Passage Comprehension (B = −0.26, p = .87). → Steven J. Amendum 2018
Evidence¶
Steven J. Amendum 2018¶
Steven J. Amendum, Mary Bratsch-Hines, Lynne Vernon-Feagans. (2018). Investigating the Efficacy of a Web-Based Early Reading and Professional Development Intervention for Young English Learners. Reading Research Quarterly, 53(2). https://doi.org/10.1002/rrq.188
q3 · i? · causal · r2
Model 2 moderation analysis in the RCT of 108 ELs, testing fall TOLD-P:4 Oral Vocabulary as a moderator of treatment effects; the Letter-Word Identification interaction was non-significant (B = 2.48, p = .10), as were the Word Attack and Passage Comprehension interactions.
"no evidence existed that the significant treatment effect for treat- ment versus control struggling ELs was moderated by fall oral vocabulary skills (B = 2.48, p = .10)"
Discussion¶
Learner Variables¶
- Communication Skills — moderator: an instructional effect differs with it
Related Claims¶
- Struggling English learners in TRI classrooms significantly outperformed control struggling ELs on spring Letter-Word Identification (g = .43) — related
- Struggling English learners in TRI classrooms significantly outperformed control struggling ELs on spring Word Attack (g = .45) — related
- TRI treatment did not significantly improve spring Passage Comprehension for struggling English learners — related
- Control struggling English learners showed slower word-level growth than control nonstruggling peers, while treatment struggling ELs gained at a similar but not catching-up rate — related
- VIP effects did not differ between English language learners and fluent English speakers in the study authors' analyses — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
status |
review |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-11-01 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.