A second outcome measure, the Progress in English test, suggested RTI may have a negative impact (effect size -0.09), making results mixed and sensitive to what is tested¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r1 · q2
Currency · newest study 2014 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? On the Progress in English test the RTI group scored lower than control (effect size -0.09), in contrast to the positive NGRT result. → Gorard et al. 2014

Evidence¶

Gorard et al. 2014¶

Stephen Gorard, Nadia Siddiqui, Beng Huat See. (2014). Response to Intervention: Evaluation Report and Executive Summary. Education Endowment Foundation. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED581264

q2 · i? · causal · r1

Post-test analysis of the Progress in English test in the same waiting-list RCT (Table 3: intervention mean 12.96, control 13.55). The report notes "an effect size of -0.09" and that these mixed results highlight the sensitivity of outcomes to what is tested.

"Results were also analysed using a second measure, the Progress in English test. In contrast to the New G roup Reading Test, this test suggested that the approach may have a negative impact on outcomes (an effect size of -0.09)."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Gain-score analysis from NGRTA pre-test to NGRTB post-test gave a similar small positive effect (+0.15) for RTI — related
• RTI showed a small positive headline effect of +0.19 on the New Group Reading Test, but the spoilt trial means it should not be taken as indicative of impact — related
• In Study 2, intensified and narrowed Tier II instruction produced significant and moderate-to-large impacts for RTI-identified preschoolers — related