On the TWS-3 subtests in the 2006 RCT, Spelling Mastery favored the Predictable Words subtest (effect size 0.57, WWC-adjusted p = 0.07) over the Unpredictable Words subtest (effect size 0.11)¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causalr2·q3·i1small
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.
q3 i1 In the supplemental findings for Darch et al. (2006), the TWS-3 Predictable Words subtest showed a larger effect (0.57, improvement index +22) than the Unpredictable Words subtest (0.11, +5), and the WWC-computed p-value of 0.07 for the Predictable Words subtest was not statistically significant. → tws3-subtests
Evidence¶
tws3-subtests¶
U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, What Works Clearinghouse. (2014, January). Students with Learning Disabilities intervention report: Spelling Mastery. Retrieved from https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/InterventionReport/579
q3 · i1 · causal · r2
Supplemental subtest analysis within the Darch et al. (2006) RCT of 42 students. Appendix D prints a TWS-3 Predictable Words mean difference of 3.24 (effect size 0.57, p = 0.04 as reported) and an Unpredictable Words mean difference of 0.71 (effect size 0.11, p = 0.16); after the WWC difference-in-differences adjustment the Predictable Words result was not statistically significant.
"A difference-in-differences adjustment was needed and resulted in a WWC-computed p-value of 0.07 for the TWS Predictable Words subtest; therefore, the WWC does not find the result to be statistically significant."
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- Spelling Mastery showed substantively important but not statistically significant positive effects on all four writing measures in a grades 2–4 RCT against basal spelling instruction — related
- Spelling Mastery has potentially positive effects on writing for students with learning disabilities, based on two RCTs with a small extent of evidence — a broader claim this one bears on
- Spelling Mastery produced statistically significant positive effects on all three writing measures in a fourth-grade RCT against Visual Imagery instruction — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
spelling-mastery-tws3-subtest-pattern |
title |
On the TWS-3 subtests in the 2006 RCT, Spelling Mastery favored the Predictable Words subtest (effect size 0.57, WWC-adjusted p = 0.07) over the Unpredictable Words subtest (effect size 0.11) |
description |
On the TWS-3 subtests in the 2006 RCT, Spelling Mastery favored the Predictable Words subtest (effect size 0.57, WWC-adjusted p = 0.07) over the Unpredictable Words subtest (effect size 0.11) |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
weak |
newest_evidence |
2014 |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-07 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
1 — tws3-subtests |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.