Daily speed drills produced an 18.7% relative gain in silent reading speed among grade 4-6 pupils without injuriously affecting quality of reproduction¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r1 · q2
Currency · newest study 1916 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? After seven months of daily speed drills, drill groups read 18.7% faster relative to no-drill groups, with only a trifling loss in quality. → Peters 1916

Evidence¶

Peters 1916¶

Peters, C. C. (1916). The Influence of Speed Drills Upon the Rate and the Effectiveness of Silent Reading. The Journal of Educational Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0073150

q2 · i? · causal · r1

Quasi-experiment in Royersford, Pa. public schools, 1914-15: 207 pupils in grades three to six, drill and no-drill groups compared across four tests from November to June; the summary table expresses drill-group work as a percentage of the no-drill base, showing "a relative gain of 18.7% in speed".

"This table shows a relative gain of 18.7% in speed but a trifling loss in quality as the result of the speed drills."

Discussion¶

Learner Variables¶

• Reading Fluency — outcome: instruction changes it

Related Claims¶

• Speed-drill gains in reading speed were concentrated in the early part of the training period — related
• An anomalous third-test result was attributed to urging all pupils to read as rapidly as possible, which spurred the no-drill group more — related
• The experiment did not confirm that speed increase carries increased reading effectiveness within the same individual — related
• Instructed slow reading ran about 40% below normal rate and rapid reading about 16% below normal time, fairly uniformly across groups except seventh graders — related
• Rate of silent reading rises most rapidly in grades 2, 3 and 4, while quality of silent reading increases at about the same rate throughout the grades. — related