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¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r? · q3 · i1 small
Currency · newest study 2010 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i1 In the same RCT, Read Naturally® showed no statistically significant effect on the WIAT Written Expression subtest, but the WWC-calculated average effect size (0.34) exceeded the 0.25 substantively-important threshold, yielding a 'potentially positive effects' rating and a +13 percentile-point improvement index. → Read Naturally® 2010

Evidence¶

Read Naturally® 2010¶

Read Naturally®. (2010). WWC Intervention Report: Read Naturally®. What Works Clearinghouse, U.S. Department of Education. https://www.readnaturally.com

q3 · i1 · causal · r?

Writing-domain finding from the same WWC-reviewed RCT (Chenault et al., 2006; 20 students randomly assigned). The tabled effect size was 0.34 (mean difference 3.20, ns), improvement index +13 percentile points; the WWC rated the domain "potentially positive effects" because one study showed a substantively important positive effect.

"Chenault et al. (2006) found no statistically significant effects on the Written Expression subtest of the Wechsler Individual Achievement Test (Second Edition). The WWC confirmed this finding. However, the WWC-calculated average effect size was large enough to be considered substantively important (greater than 0.25)."

Discussion¶

Learner Variables¶

• Writing Skills — outcome: instruction changes it

Related Claims¶

• Growth Mindset interventions have potentially positive effects on postsecondary academic achievement (improvement index +13) — related
• LiPS shows potentially positive effects on math: no statistically significant effect on the WJ–R Calculation subtest, but a positive effect size of 0.30 judged substantively important — related
• SMART® effects on comprehension were not statistically significant on either subtest, though the domain-average effect size was substantively important — related
• 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) — related
• The evidence base for Read Naturally® with students with learning disabilities is small: one qualifying RCT of 20 students, with 42 of 43 reviewed studies excluded — related
• Earobics® has potentially positive effects on reading fluency, with no statistically significant fluency findings — related
• Students with EDF grow into school-assessed learning disabilities, written expression first and reading comprehension next