Rhythm for Reading had no statistically significant effect on overall reading ability in a pupil-randomised waitlist RCT with Year 7 pupils below Level 4 in English¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · causal r2 · q3
Currency · newest study 2014 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i? The intervention produced an effect size of 0.03 (95% CI -0.13 to 0.18) on the NGRT composite reading score, which was not statistically significant. → Styles et al. 2014 q3 i? An ANOVA of post-test reading score by randomised group showed no significant impact of the intervention. → Styles et al. 2014 (2)

Evidence¶

Styles et al. 2014¶

Dr Ben Styles, Rebecca Clarkson, Katherine Fowler. (2014). Rhythm for Reading: Evaluation Report and Executive Summary. Education Endowment Foundation. http://www.controlled-trials.com/ISRCTN10404460/

q3 · i? · causal · r2

Intention-to-treat analysis of a pupil-randomised waitlist controlled trial (419 pupils randomised, 175 intervention and 180 control in the final model). The primary outcome effect size was 0.03 with confidence interval passing through zero, so the difference was not statistically significant.

"Rhythm for Reading demonstrated an effect size for all pupils of 0.03 and an effect size for children on free school meals (FSM) of 0.11."

Styles et al. 2014 (2)¶

Dr Ben Styles, Rebecca Clarkson, Katherine Fowler. (2014). Rhythm for Reading: Evaluation Report and Executive Summary. Education Endowment Foundation. http://www.controlled-trials.com/ISRCTN10404460/

q3 · i? · causal · r2

ANOVA on post-test reading scores in the same trial reported no significant impact of randomised group (F=0.56, p=0.45, n=366). Equivalence was not tested; the report states the difference may have occurred by chance.

"An ANOVA of post-test reading score by randomised group showed no significant impact of the intervention (F=0.56, p=0.45, n=366)."

Discussion¶

Learner Variables¶

• Reading and Language — outcome: instruction changes it

Related Claims¶

• A significant interaction between intervention group and pre-test score suggests Rhythm for Reading was associated with worse outcomes for lower-ability pupils and better outcomes for higher-ability pupils — related
• The Vocabulary Enrichment Full Programme showed no statistically significant impact on Year 7 pupils' reading ability in a pupil-randomised controlled trial — related
• The LIT programme showed no statistically significant impact on reading ability at the Year 7 year-group level — related
• The Paired Reading programme showed no evidence of impact on Year 7 and Year 9 pupils' overall reading ability in a cluster RCT — related