The Wilson Reading System shows no discernible effects on reading comprehension¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r2 · q3
Currency · newest study 2007 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i? The single study reported no statistically significant effects on the GRADE and WRMT-R passage comprehension subtests, with an average effect size of 0.17 that was not substantively important. → What Works Clearinghouse 2007

Evidence¶

What Works Clearinghouse 2007¶

What Works Clearinghouse, U.S. Department of Education. (2007). WWC Intervention Report: Wilson Reading System®. What Works Clearinghouse, Beginning Reading. https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/InterventionReport/546

q3 · i? · causal · r2

The comprehension findings table reports GRADE passage comprehension effect size 0.28 (ns, improvement index +11) and WRMT-R passage comprehension effect size 0.07 (ns, +3), for a domain average effect size of 0.17, neither statistically significant nor substantively important under WWC criteria.

"Torgesen et al. (2006) examined two outcomes in this domain (the WRMT–R passage comprehension subtest and the GRADE passage comprehension subtest) and reported no statistically significant effects."

Discussion¶

Learner Variables¶

• Reading and Language — outcome: instruction changes it

Related Claims¶

• Systematic phonics outperforms unsystematic or no-phonics instruction on children's reading overall, but its advantage over whole-word teaching on novel words is untested in children and contested — the general claim this finding bears on, with the studies behind it
• The Wilson Reading System shows potentially positive effects on alphabetics for beginning readers, based on a single randomized controlled trial — related
• Corrective Reading showed no statistically significant effects on reading comprehension outcomes — related