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¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · causal r2 · q3
Currency · newest study 2012 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i? Of 97 studies reviewed, only Fuchs et al. (1997) met WWC evidence standards (with reservations); the remaining 96 did not meet standards or eligibility screens. → Peer-Assisted Learning Strategies 2012 q3 i? The qualifying study randomly assigned 22 schools but included only 12, and students were nonrandomly selected after random assignment, which led to the with-reservations rating. → Peer-Assisted Learning Strategies 2012 (2)

Evidence¶

Peer-Assisted Learning Strategies 2012¶

Peer-Assisted Learning Strategies. (2012). WWC Intervention Report: Adolescent Literacy — Peer-Assisted Learning Strategies. U.S. Department of Education, What Works Clearinghouse. https://kc.vanderbilt.edu/pals/

q3 · i? · review · r3

The Research Summary section reports the scope of reviewed research: 97 studies were examined, of which one met WWC evidence standards with reservations and the rest did not meet standards or eligibility screens.

"Ninety-seven studies reviewed by the WWC Adolescent Literacy topic area investigated the effects of Peer-Assisted Learning Strategies. One study (Fuchs, Fuchs, Mathes, & Simmons, 1997) is a randomized controlled trial with randomization problems that meets WWC evidence standards with reservations."

Peer-Assisted Learning Strategies 2012 (2)¶

Peer-Assisted Learning Strategies. (2012). WWC Intervention Report: Adolescent Literacy — Peer-Assisted Learning Strategies. U.S. Department of Education, What Works Clearinghouse. https://kc.vanderbilt.edu/pals/

q3 · i? · causal · r2

Study description of the Fuchs et al. (1997) trial: 22 schools stratified by reading level and socioeconomic status were randomized, but only 12 schools (20 treatment and 20 control teachers) participated, with 60 PALS and 60 comparison students. The report attributes the with-reservations rating to nonrandom selection of students after random assignment.

"Although random assignment of 22 schools was conducted, only 12 schools were included in the study. These 12 schools were equally divided between the Peer-Assisted Learning Strategies and control conditions and among the high-, middle-, and low-level designations."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• The evidence base for Accelerated Reader with adolescent learners is thin: only 2 of 318 reviewed studies met WWC standards — related
• Only three of twelve identified OLI studies met WWC group design standards — related
• In the meeting-standards study, PALS classrooms used more one-on-one and peer-mediated instruction and less teacher-led instruction than comparison classrooms — related
• The WWC Adolescent Literacy review rates PALS as having potentially positive effects on reading comprehension from one trial of students averaging 9.8 years old, with an effect size of 0.48 that is not statistically significant when adjusted for clustering — related
• PALS outcomes in reading fluency and general literacy achievement were excluded from the WWC rating because they did not meet baseline equivalence standards — related
• PALS effects on the learning-disability subsets analyzed separately were not statistically significant, while the full-sample effect was significant in one study (Fuchs et al., 1997) and not in the other (Saenz et al., 2005) — related
• The evidence base for Reading Mastery with adolescent learners is small: only 2 of 175 reviewed studies met WWC evidence standards — related
• Of 130 studies of school-based OST programs reviewed, 22 studies of 18 different programs met WWC standards or met them with reservations — a narrower finding that bears on this claim
• The evidence base for the program is a single RCT of 3,074 randomly assigned youth, with 1,196 in the follow-up analysis sample, and the WWC rates the extent of evidence as small — related
• The supporting evidence for FLIGHT comes from a single randomized controlled trial with compromised random assignment — related
• The evidence base for the Lovaas Model is small: only two of 58 reviewed studies met WWC evidence standards — related