Claims

SFA® shows mixed effects on general reading achievement for beginning readers

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · quant-synthesis r2 · q3
Currency · newest study 2017 · 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? Across six studies, general reading achievement outcomes were positive and substantively important for one study and indeterminate for five studies. → Success for All® 2017

Evidence

Success for All® 2017

Success for All®. (2017). WWC Intervention Report: Beginning Reading. What Works Clearinghouse, U.S. Department of Education. https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/InterventionReport/672

q3 · i? · quant-synthesis · r2

The WWC general reading achievement synthesis covered six studies including 2,574 students in 42 schools. Only Madden et al. (1993) showed a substantively important positive effect; the other five studies, including Skindrud and Gersten (2006), were indeterminate.

"In the six studies that reported findings, the estimated impact of the intervention on outcomes in the general reading achievement domain was positive and substantively important for one study and indeterminate for five studies."

Discussion

Page metadata
Field Value
type claim
id sfa-mixed-effects-general-reading-achievement
title SFA® shows mixed effects on general reading achievement for beginning readers
description SFA® shows mixed effects on general reading achievement for beginning readers
status review
evidence_strength mixed
newest_evidence 2017
generated by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-07
trust unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content
sources 1 — success-for-all-2017

Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.