Fluency-building activities for struggling readers in grades 4–9 have strong evidence, based on 33 studies¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · quant-synthesis r3 · q3
Currency · newest study 2022 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i? The WWC panel assigned a strong level of evidence to purposeful fluency-building activities, based on 33 studies of their effectiveness. → Vaughn 2022

q3 i? The WWC panel assigned a strong level of evidence to purposeful fluency-building activities, based on 33 studies. → Vaughn 2022

Evidence¶

Vaughn 2022¶

Vaughn, S., Gersten, R., Dimino, J., Taylor, M. J., Newman-Gonchar, R., Krowka, S., Kieffer, M. J., McKeown, M., Reed, D., Sanchez, M., St. Martin, K., Wexler, J., Morgan, S., Yañez, A., & Jayanthi, M. (2022). Providing Reading Interventions for Students in Grades 4–9 (WWC 2022007). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance (NCEE), Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/PracticeGuide/29

q3 · i? · quant-synthesis · r3

The evidence summary for Recommendation 2 reports a strong evidence level "based on 33 studies of the effectiveness of fluency-building activities"; nineteen met WWC standards without reservations and fourteen with reservations.

"based on 33 studies of the effectiveness of fluency-building activities."

Studies bearing on this claim¶

Does practice to build reading fluency improve fluency and comprehension for struggling readers? This table gathers the studies behind this claim and the 8 narrower claims that bear on it: 5 distinct studies (2 review, 2 causal, 1 quant-synthesis), q2–q3, 0 of 5 with an effect size coded. One row per study, codes as each entry records them; no effect is averaged and no verdict is drawn. Built by scripts/synthesize_claim.py from eval/synthesis/; a row that looks wrong is fixed on the claim it comes from.

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Multisyllabic word-reading instruction for struggling readers in grades 4–9 has strong evidence, based on 32 studies — related
• In the Rashotte, MacPhee, and Torgesen (2001) RCT, SpellRead™ produced statistically significant positive effects on alphabetics and reading fluency for fifth- and sixth-grade struggling readers after eight weeks — a narrower finding that bears on this claim
• Corrective Reading produced statistically significant positive effects on oral reading fluency in a randomized controlled trial of third-grade struggling readers — a narrower finding that bears on this claim
• Sound Partners tutoring has positive effects on reading fluency of beginning readers — a narrower finding that bears on this claim
• Practice making sense of stretch text has moderate evidence, based on 15 studies — related
• Repeated reading has potentially positive effects on reading comprehension for students with learning disabilities, with a small extent of evidence — related
• Interventions combining repeated reading, modeled/assisted reading, and explicit feedback outperformed control groups in English reading fluency for emergent bilinguals — a narrower finding that bears on this claim
• Fluency Formula™ shows a positive but statistically non-significant effect on second-grade oral reading fluency (effect size 0.26, improvement index +10) — a narrower finding that bears on this claim
• Comprehension-building practices for struggling readers in grades 4–9 have strong evidence, based on 34 studies — related
• Repeated listening improves oral reading fluency in second-grade students, with Listening Only outgaining Reading While Listening and Reading Only — a narrower finding that bears on this claim
• The HELPS one-to-one fluency program significantly outperformed control on GORT Fluency and GORT-Comprehension for grade 2 Spanish-speaking ELLs — related
• Scaffolded Close Reading Improves Comprehension For Struggling Readers — related
• Repeated reading shows no discernible effects on general reading achievement for students with learning disabilities — related