The WWC rates PALS as having potentially positive effects on alphabetics, no discernible effects on fluency, and mixed effects on comprehension for beginning readers¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · quant-synthesis r2 · q3
Currency · newest study 2012 · checked against its sources 2026-10-20 (automated, 1 of 1 entry) · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i? Based on three studies including 3,130 beginning readers, the WCC rating is potentially positive effects on alphabetics (average improvement index +14, range –17 to +36), no discernible effects on fluency (–8), and mixed effects on comprehension (+3, range –12 to +17). → Peer-Assisted Learning/Literacy Strategies 2012

Evidence¶

Peer-Assisted Learning/Literacy Strategies 2012¶

Peer-Assisted Learning/Literacy Strategies. (2012). WWC Intervention Report, Beginning Reading. U.S. Department of Education, What Works Clearinghouse. https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/InterventionReport/364

q3 · i? · quant-synthesis · r2

The report's effectiveness summary synthesizes three studies (2 RCTs meeting standards without reservations, 1 with reservations) covering 3,130 kindergarten and first-grade students; it concludes PALS "was found to have potentially positive effects on alphabetics, no discernible effects on fluency, and mixed effects on comprehension." Extent of evidence is medium to large for alphabetics, small for fluency and comprehension.

"PALS was found to have potentially positive effects on alphabetics, no discernible effects on fluency, and mixed effects on comprehension for beginning readers."

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 outcomes in reading fluency and general literacy achievement were excluded from the WWC rating because they did not meet baseline equivalence standards — related
• Read Naturally® shows mixed effects on reading fluency for beginning readers (average improvement index +7 percentile points) — related
• Leveled Literacy Intervention has positive effects on general reading achievement, potentially positive effects on reading fluency, and no discernible effects on alphabetics for beginning readers in grades K–2 — related
• Read Naturally® shows potentially positive effects on general reading achievement for beginning readers (average improvement index +10 percentile points) — related
• Read Naturally® shows no discernible effects on comprehension for beginning readers — related
• Read Naturally® shows no discernible effects on alphabetics for beginning readers — related
• The Frechtling, Zhang, and Silverstein (2006) study showed a substantively important positive average alphabetics effect, while Hecht (2003) did not — related
• Ladders to Literacy shows potentially positive effects on alphabetics, with an average improvement index of +25 percentile points and a domain average effect size of 0.69 — related
• One-year follow-up and LiPS-vs-RWT supplemental comparisons showed mostly non-significant differences, with some follow-up alphabetics effects remaining significant — related
• Earobics® has positive effects on alphabetics for K–3 beginning readers, based on four WWC-reviewed studies — related
• Reading Recovery has potentially positive effects on alphabetics for beginning readers — related
• Lexia Reading has potentially positive effects on alphabetics for beginning readers — related
• PALS shows strong evidence of positive effects on first-grade literacy, with an average effect size of +0.23 across three studies — related