WWC review of this study

Individual Differences in Gains from Computer-Assisted Remedial Reading.

Wise, Barbara W.; Ring, Jeremiah; Olson, Richard K. (2000). Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, v77 n3 p197-235. Retrieved from: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ618647

  • Quasi-Experimental Design
     examining 
    200
     Students
    , grades
    2-5

Reviewed: June 2016

Meets WWC standards with reservations


Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.

Study sample characteristics were not reported.

Reviewed: November 2015



Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.

Study sample characteristics were not reported.

Reviewed: February 2014

At least one finding shows promising evidence of effectiveness
At least one statistically significant positive finding
Meets WWC standards with reservations
Alphabetics outcomes—Statistically significant positive effect found for the domain
Outcome
measure
Comparison Period Sample Intervention
mean
Comparison
mean
Significant? Improvement
    index
Evidence
tier

Nonword decoding %C

Phonological Training including Auditory Discrimination in Depth (A.D.D.) vs. Another intervention

End of training

Full sample;
200 students

52.90

38.40

Yes

 
 
34
 

Lindamood Auditory Conceptualization Test (LAC) II RS

Phonological Training including Auditory Discrimination in Depth (A.D.D.) vs. Another intervention

End of training

Full sample;
198 students

9.80

6.70

Yes

 
 
31
 

Phoneme deletion %C

Phonological Training including Auditory Discrimination in Depth (A.D.D.) vs. Another intervention

Follow-up 2

Follow-up sample;
54 students

60.60

47.80

Yes

 
 
26
 

Phoneme deletion %C

Phonological Training including Auditory Discrimination in Depth (A.D.D.) vs. Another intervention

End of training

Full sample;
200 students

50.70

39.70

Yes

 
 
25
 

Pseudoword reading %C

Phonological Training including Auditory Discrimination in Depth (A.D.D.) vs. Another intervention

End of training

Full sample;
200 students

51.40

39.70

Yes

 
 
25
 

Phoneme deletion %C

Phonological Training including Auditory Discrimination in Depth (A.D.D.) vs. Another intervention

Follow-up 1

Follow-up sample;
54 students

52.00

41.80

No

--

Lindamood Auditory Conceptualization Test (LAC) II RS

Phonological Training including Auditory Discrimination in Depth (A.D.D.) vs. Another intervention

Follow-up 2

Follow-up sample;
47 students

10.30

8.10

No

--

Time-limited RS

Phonological Training including Auditory Discrimination in Depth (A.D.D.) vs. Another intervention

Follow-up 1

Follow-up sample;
54 students

42.60

38.60

No

--

Time-limited RS

Phonological Training including Auditory Discrimination in Depth (A.D.D.) vs. Another intervention

Follow-up 2

Follow-up sample;
54 students

57.70

52.40

No

--

PIAT Standard Scores

Phonological Training including Auditory Discrimination in Depth (A.D.D.) vs. Another intervention

End of training

Full sample;
200 students

93.80

91.50

No

--

PIAT Standard Scores

Phonological Training including Auditory Discrimination in Depth (A.D.D.) vs. Another intervention

Follow-up 1

Follow-up sample;
54 students

91.40

88.40

No

--

Wide Range Achievement Test (WRAT): Spelling subtest

Phonological Training including Auditory Discrimination in Depth (A.D.D.) vs. Another intervention

End of training

Full sample;
200 students

83.00

81.60

No

--

PIAT Standard Scores

Phonological Training including Auditory Discrimination in Depth (A.D.D.) vs. Another intervention

Follow-up 2

Follow-up sample;
54 students

90.60

88.50

No

--

Wide Range Achievement Test (WRAT): Spelling subtest

Phonological Training including Auditory Discrimination in Depth (A.D.D.) vs. Another intervention

Follow-up 2

Follow-up sample;
54 students

86.60

83.90

No

--

PIAT: Spelling Standard Scores

Phonological Training including Auditory Discrimination in Depth (A.D.D.) vs. Another intervention

End of training

Full sample;
200 students

88.50

88.30

No

--

Wide Range Achievement Test (WRAT): Spelling subtest

Phonological Training including Auditory Discrimination in Depth (A.D.D.) vs. Another intervention

End of training

Full sample;
199 students

79.10

79.50

No

--

Time-limited RS

Phonological Training including Auditory Discrimination in Depth (A.D.D.) vs. Another intervention

End of training

Full sample;
200 students

36.50

39.30

No

--
Comprehension outcomes—Indeterminate effect found for the domain
Outcome
measure
Comparison Period Sample Intervention
mean
Comparison
mean
Significant? Improvement
    index
Evidence
tier

PIAT: Comprehension Standard Scores

Phonological Training including Auditory Discrimination in Depth (A.D.D.) vs. Another intervention

End of training

Full sample;
199 students

95.50

93.90

No

--

Gates-MacGinitie Reading Tests (GMRT): Comprehension subtest normal curve equivalent (NCE)

Phonological Training including Auditory Discrimination in Depth (A.D.D.) vs. Another intervention

End of training

Full sample;
193 students

25.60

25.20

No

--


Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.

Characteristics of study sample as reported by study author.


  • Female: 41%
    Male: 59%

  • Suburban
    • B
    • A
    • C
    • D
    • E
    • F
    • G
    • I
    • H
    • J
    • K
    • L
    • P
    • M
    • N
    • O
    • Q
    • R
    • S
    • V
    • U
    • T
    • W
    • X
    • Z
    • Y
    • a
    • h
    • i
    • b
    • d
    • e
    • f
    • c
    • g
    • j
    • k
    • l
    • m
    • n
    • o
    • p
    • q
    • r
    • s
    • t
    • u
    • x
    • w
    • y

    Colorado
  • Race
    Asian
    1%
    White
    96%
  • Ethnicity
    Hispanic    
    4%
    Not Hispanic or Latino    
    96%
 

Your export should download shortly as a zip archive.

This download will include data files for study and findings review data and a data dictionary.

Connect With the WWC

loading
back to top