PALS shows potentially positive effects on reading comprehension for students with learning disabilities (average effect size 0.75, not statistically significant)¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · quant-synthesis r1 · q3 · i2 medium
Currency · newest study 2012 · checked against its sources 2026-10-20 (automated, 1 of 1 entry) · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i2 WWC calculations found no statistically significant effect on the CRAB Questions Correct subscale in either study, but effect sizes of 0.60 (Fuchs et al., 1997) and 0.91 (Saenz et al., 2005) were substantively important, yielding a potentially positive effects rating with a domain average of 0.75 (improvement index +26). → What Works Clearinghouse 2012

Evidence¶

What Works Clearinghouse 2012¶

What Works Clearinghouse, U.S. Department of Education. (2012). Peer-Assisted Learning Strategies. WWC Intervention Report, Students with Learning Disabilities. http://kc.vanderbilt.edu/pals/

q3 · i2 · quant-synthesis · r1

WWC synthesis of two studies measuring reading comprehension with the CRAB Questions Correct subscale in subsets of students with learning disabilities (40 and 20 students): Saenz et al. (2005), a randomized controlled trial, and Fuchs et al. (1997), which randomized schools but which the WWC reviewed as a quasi-experimental design (meeting standards with reservations) because teachers knew their condition when they selected students. The Fuchs et al. (1997) effect size was 0.60; the Saenz et al. (2005) effect size was 0.91; the domain average across studies was 0.75, improvement index +26, not statistically significant.

"However, the WWC-calculated effect size for this measure was 0.60—large enough to be considered substantively important according to WWC criteria. The WWC characterizes these study findings as a substantively important positive effect."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Peer-assisted instruction and small-group instruction by adults have large, robust short-term effect sizes for K-6 struggling students — the general claim this finding bears on, with the studies behind it
• PALS showed no statistically significant effects on near-transfer and far-transfer reading fluency for first graders — 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
• PALS shows no discernible effects on mathematics for students with learning disabilities — 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
• For first-grade nonresponders, PALS showed a substantively important negative (but statistically non-significant) effect on reading comprehension versus adult tutoring — related
• PALS shows potentially positive effects on reading fluency for students with learning disabilities, with a substantively important but not statistically significant WWC-calculated effect size of 0.41 in Saenz et al. (2005) — related
• For first-grade nonresponders, PALS showed no statistically significant effects on seven alphabetics outcomes compared with adult tutoring — related