READ 180® shows no discernible effects on alphabetics for adolescent readers¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · reviewr3·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 two studies meeting standards without reservations, alphabetics outcomes (Stanford 10 Spelling, Test of Word Reading Efficiency) were neither statistically significant nor substantively important, yielding a no-discernible-effects rating (average improvement index 0). → READ 180® 2016
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? · review · r3
The review's alphabetics rating statement: both qualifying studies (Fitzgerald & Hartry 2008, two cohorts; Kim et al. 2010) reported indeterminate effects. Table 6 reports two studies, 746 students, seven schools, medium-to-large extent of evidence.
"In the two studies that reported findings, the estimated impact of the intervention on outcomes in the alphabetics domain was neither statistically significant nor large enough to be substantively important."
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- READ 180® has potentially positive effects on reading fluency for adolescent readers — related
- READ 180® has positive effects on general literacy achievement for adolescent readers — related
- Fast ForWord has no discernible effects on alphabetics and general literacy achievement and potentially positive effects on reading fluency and comprehension for adolescent learners — related
- The extent of evidence for Fast ForWord is small for alphabetics and reading fluency and medium to large for comprehension and general literacy achievement — related
- READ 180 shows a modest average effect size of +0.08 across five studies, qualifying it for a Strong evidence rating — related
- SpellRead™ shows potentially positive effects on alphabetics for adolescent readers, with an average improvement index of +23 across two studies — related
- Failure Free Reading shows no discernible effects on alphabetics outcomes for beginning readers — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
read-180-no-discernible-effects-alphabetics |
title |
READ 180® shows no discernible effects on alphabetics for adolescent readers |
description |
READ 180® shows no discernible effects on alphabetics for adolescent readers |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
moderate |
newest_evidence |
2016 |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-07 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
1 — read-180-2016 |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.