Claims

READ 180® comprehension effects are inconsistent across cohorts within the same study

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · causal r3 · q3
Currency · newest study 2016 · 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? In Fitzgerald and Hartry (2008), Cohort 1 showed statistically significant positive comprehension differences, but Cohort 2 showed no statistically significant differences. → READ 180® 2016 q3 i? The Cohort 2 comprehension effect sizes were not large enough to be substantively important. → READ 180® 2016 (2)

Evidence

READ 180® 2016

READ 180®. (2016). What Works Clearinghouse Intervention Report: Adolescent Literacy, Updated November 2016. U.S. Department of Education, What Works Clearinghouse. http://www.hmhco.com/products/read-180/

q3 · i? · causal · r3

Randomized controlled trial in Brockton, Massachusetts afterschool programs (grades 4–6), Cohort 1: statistically significant positive differences on Stanford 10 Vocabulary and Reading Comprehension subtests, with the comprehension result substantively important per WWC criteria.

"For Cohort 1, the authors reported statistically significant positive differences between the READ 180® Enterprise Edition and comparison groups on both outcomes, and the result for the Reading Comprehension subtest was large enough to be considered substantively important"

READ 180® 2016 (2)

READ 180®. (2016). What Works Clearinghouse Intervention Report: Adolescent Literacy, Updated November 2016. U.S. Department of Education, What Works Clearinghouse. http://www.hmhco.com/products/read-180/

q3 · i? · quant-synthesis · r2

Same RCT, second cohort (2007–08): the WWC confirmed "no statistically significant differences between the intervention and comparison groups for Cohort 2," and the effect sizes were not substantively important.

"The authors also reported, and the WWC confirmed, no statistically significant differences between the intervention and comparison groups for Cohort 2."

Discussion

Page metadata
Field Value
type claim
id read-180-comprehension-inconsistent-across-cohorts
title READ 180® comprehension effects are inconsistent across cohorts within the same study
description READ 180® comprehension effects are inconsistent across cohorts within the same study
status review
evidence_strength mixed
newest_evidence 2016
generated by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-07
trust unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content
sources 2 — read-180-2016, read-180-2016-2

Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.