Pretest oral reading fluency moderated the effects of the CCT intervention on reading comprehension, with greater benefits for students with lower pretest fluency¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causalr2·q3
Currency · newest study 2019 · 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? Pretest oral reading fluency showed a statistically significant interaction with intervention condition in predicting posttest reading comprehension (β = −0.116, p = .03), such that lower pretest fluency was associated with a greater CCT effect. → Nathan H. Clemens 2019
Evidence¶
Nathan H. Clemens 2019¶
Nathan H. Clemens, Eric Oslund, Oi-man Kwok, Melissa Fogarty, Deborah Simmons, and John L. Davis. (2019). Skill Moderators of the Effects of a Reading Comprehension Intervention. Exceptional Children, 85(2), 197–211. https://doi.org/10.1177/0014402918787339
q3 · i? · causal · r2
Secondary analysis of a randomized controlled trial with 226 Grade 6–8 struggling readers, using latent variable models with pretest comprehension and demographic covariates. The interaction of condition with pretest ORF was significant: "β = −0.116, p = .03".
"However, pretest ORF demonstrated a statistically significant interaction with condition (β = −0.116, p = .03), indicating pretest reading fluency moderated the effects of intervention condition. The negative effect indicates that as students' pretest ORF scores decreased, a greater effect of the CCT intervention was observed"
Discussion¶
Learner Variables¶
- Reading and Language — moderator: an instructional effect differs with it
- Reading Fluency — moderator: an instructional effect differs with it
Related Claims¶
- The CCT intervention produced statistically significant main effects favoring CCT on reading comprehension (ES = 0.14), TOSREC (ES = 0.28), and taught vocabulary (ES = 0.43), but not on SWE or ORF — related
- The CCT treatment effect on comprehension was statistically significant only for students with pretest ORF up to 0.20 SD above the sample mean (64.0% of the sample), and not for higher-fluency students — possibly the same claim (merge candidate)
- The CCT intervention showed no statistically significant effect on posttest oral reading fluency, including within the low-fluency region of significance — 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.