Word-reading interventions yield significant positive effects on adolescent literacy outcomes overall (g = 0.30)¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · quant-synthesis r? · q3 · i1 small
Currency · newest study 2026 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i1 Across 200 effects from 34 studies, word-reading interventions produced a statistically significant positive summary effect on adolescent literacy outcomes (g = 0.30, SE = 0.11, p = .009). → Julia J. Yi 2026

Evidence¶

Julia J. Yi 2026¶

Julia J. Yi, A. Angelique Aitken, Emily Sharp, Adiba Nusrat, Micheal Sandbank. (2026). What Works for Teaching Word Reading to Adolescents? A Meta-Analytic Investigation. Educational Psychology Review. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-026-10124-9

q3 · i1 · quant-synthesis · r?

RVE meta-analysis (correlated and hierarchical effects working model) of 200 effects nested in 34 studies of word-reading interventions for middle and high school students. The printed effect size is g = 0.30: the summary effect "was 0.30 (SE = 0.11, p = .009)"; half the sample were identified as having a learning disability.

"The summary effect of word-reading interventions on all adolescent literacy outcomes, estimated from 200 effects across 34 studies, was 0.30 (SE = 0.11, p = .009)."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Corrective Reading showed statistically significant positive effects on two of four alphabetics outcomes, but the alphabetics domain average effect was neither significant nor substantively important — related
• The MSDS curriculum showed no statistically significant effects on word recognition, spelling, fluency, or comprehension outcomes — related
• SpellRead™ shows potentially positive effects on alphabetics for adolescent readers, with an average improvement index of +23 across two studies — related
• Word-reading interventions significantly improve decoding, nonword decoding, reading comprehension, and spelling (g = 0.29-0.45) but not reading fluency — related
• Prior reviews report positive word-reading intervention effects for adolescents but with a wide range (0-1.31) due to broad outcome conceptualization — related
• SpellRead™ shows potentially positive effects on comprehension for adolescent readers, with an average improvement index of +11 — 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 — related