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)¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · quant-synthesis r1 · q3 · i1 small
Currency · newest study 2012 · checked against its sources 2026-10-20 (automated, 1 of 1 entry) · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i1 WWC calculations found no statistically significant effects on reading fluency in either qualifying study, but the WWC-calculated average effect size across the two fluency measures in Saenz et al. (2005) was 0.41, large enough to be substantively important, yielding a potentially positive effects rating; the entry also reports a domain average across both studies of 0.36 (improvement index +14), a figure not in the quoted passage. → 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 · i1 · quant-synthesis · r1

WWC synthesis of two studies (Fuchs et al., 1997, 40 students; Saenz et al., 2005, 20 ELL students with learning disabilities), both against business-as-usual: Saenz et al. (2005) is a randomized controlled trial; Fuchs et al. (1997) randomized schools, but the WWC reviewed it as a quasi-experimental design (meeting standards with reservations) because teachers knew their condition when they selected students. The Saenz et al. (2005) fluency effect size was 0.41; the "domain average for reading fluency across all studies" was 0.36, improvement index +14, not statistically significant.

"However, the WWC-calculated average effect size across these two measures was 0.41—large enough to be considered substantively important by the WWC. 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
• PALS shows potentially positive effects on reading comprehension for students with learning disabilities (average effect size 0.75, not statistically significant) — 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
• Read Naturally® shows potentially positive effects on writing for students with learning disabilities, with a substantively important but non-significant effect size on the WIAT Written Expression subtest — related
• PALS shows strong evidence of positive effects on first-grade literacy, with an average effect size of +0.23 across three studies — related