Read, Write & Type!™ shows no statistically significant alphabetics advantages over the Auditory Discrimination in Depth® comparison¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causalr?·q3
Currency · newest study 2007 · 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? Against the Auditory Discrimination in Depth® group, RWT showed no statistically significant differences on any of three phonological awareness measures or two phonics measures; the domain-average effect size was –0.14, favoring the comparison. → What Works Clearinghouse 2007
Evidence¶
What Works Clearinghouse 2007¶
What Works Clearinghouse, U.S. Department of Education. (2007). WWC Intervention Report: Read, Write & Type!™. http://www.fcrr.org/TechnicalReports/RWTfullrept.pdf
q3 · i? · causal · r?
Randomized comparison of RWT (final analysis sample 52) with ADD (52) across five schools. Appendix A3.1 prints effect sizes of 0.02 (blending), –0.18 (elision), –0.15 (segmenting), –0.24 (word attack), and –0.14 (word identification), all ns; the alphabetics average for this comparison was –0.14, ns, improvement index –6.
"the study authors found that there were no statistically significant differences between the groups on any of the three phonological awareness measures (phoneme blending, phoneme elision, and phoneme segmenting subtests of the Comprehensive Test of Phonological Processes) or the two phonics measures"
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- One-year follow-up and LiPS-vs-RWT supplemental comparisons showed mostly non-significant differences, with some follow-up alphabetics effects remaining significant — related
- Read, Write & Type!™ shows statistically significant positive effects on phoneme segmenting and word attack relative to regular classroom instruction for low-achieving first graders — related
- Read, Write & Type!™ shows no discernible effects on reading comprehension or vocabulary for beginning readers — related
- No individual alphabetics outcome reached statistical significance in the WWC analysis — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
rwt-no-advantage-over-auditory-discrimination-in-depth |
title |
Read, Write & Type!™ shows no statistically significant alphabetics advantages over the Auditory Discrimination in Depth® comparison |
description |
Read, Write & Type!™ shows no statistically significant alphabetics advantages over the Auditory Discrimination in Depth® comparison |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
moderate |
newest_evidence |
2007 |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-07 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
1 — what-works-clearinghouse-2007 |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.