In Study 2, intensified and narrowed Tier II instruction produced significant and moderate-to-large impacts for RTI-identified preschoolers¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r2 · q2
Currency · newest study 2016 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? The Study 2 Tier II instruction, narrower in scope, more intensive, and delivered to smaller groups, yielded significant and moderate-to-large impacts. → Lonigan 2016

Evidence¶

Lonigan 2016¶

Lonigan, C. J., & Phillips, B. M. (2016). Response to Instruction in Preschool: Results of Two Randomized Studies with Children At Significant Risk of Reading Difficulties. Journal of Educational Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000054

q2 · i? · causal · r2

Summary statement of the two randomized studies' comparative outcomes: Study 1 impacts were minimal whereas Study 2's intensified Tier II instruction showed "significant and moderate-to-large impacts". No effect size values are printed in the available text, so impact is not coded.

"Impacts of Tier II instruction in Study 1 were minimal; however, there were significant and moderate-to-large impacts in Study 2."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• In Study 1, code-focused Tier II instruction yielded only a marginal advantage on letter names and no significant differences on other code-related measures — related
• In Study 1, language-focused Tier II instruction produced no significant main effects on language outcomes for RTI-identified preschoolers — reports the opposite
• In Study 1, effects of language-focused Tier II instruction were moderated by qualification status: dual-qualified children gained on expressive language while language-only children scored lower on definitional vocabulary — related
• Screening classification errors carry asymmetric costs: false positives risk unnecessary intensive placement while false negatives delay early intervention — related