Small-group instructional intervention for students struggling in literacy and English language development is supported by six RCTs at moderate evidence level¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · reviewr?·q2
Currency · newest study 2014 · 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.
q2 i? Providing small-group instructional intervention to struggling students rests on six randomized controlled trials meeting WWC standards, five in primary grades K-2 and one in grades 6-8. → Baker 2014
Evidence¶
Baker 2014¶
Baker, S., Geva, E., Kieffer, M. J., Lesaux, N., Linan-Thompson, S., Morris, J., Proctor, C. P., & Russell, R. (2014). Teaching Academic Content and Literacy to English Learners in Elementary and Middle School. What Works Clearinghouse Practice Guide. https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/PracticeGuide/19
q2 · i? · review · r?
The guide's evidence summary for Recommendation 4 reports "Six randomized controlled trials met WWC standards", assessing impacts of small-group interventions, with results reported for English learner samples or subsamples or entire samples including native English speakers.
"Six randomized controlled trials met WWC standards – Five studies focused on primary (K-2) – One study focused on grades 6-8"
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- Small group instruction is associated with significantly larger effect sizes than CAI and incentive components in targeted secondary interventions — the general claim this finding bears on, with the studies behind it
- A WWC practice guide rests its recommendation to teach academic vocabulary intensively across several days on six studies meeting WWC standards (five RCTs, one quasi-experiment) — related
- Integrating oral and written English language instruction into content-area teaching shows positive impacts on content-area acquisition in five RCTs — related
- The evidence base for Read Well® with English language learners is small, resting on one randomized controlled trial of 34 students in one school — related
- The supporting evidence is a randomized controlled trial in which 108 kindergarten English learners watched 54 episodes of Arthur or Between the Lions over one school year — related
- The evidence base for Corrective Reading in grades K–3 is small: one of 25 reviewed studies met WWC standards, and no studies addressed general reading achievement — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
small-group-intervention-literacy-eld-moderate-evidence |
title |
Small-group instructional intervention for students struggling in literacy and English language development is supported by six RCTs at moderate evidence level |
description |
Small-group instructional intervention for students struggling in literacy and English language development is supported by six RCTs at moderate evidence level |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
moderate |
newest_evidence |
2014 |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-09 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
1 — baker-2014 |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.