Research

Eleven studies reviewed by the WWC investigated the effects of Lexia Reading. Two studies (Gale, 2006; Macaruso, Hook, & McCabe, 2006) are randomized controlled trials that meet WWC evidence standards. One study (Macaruso & Walker, 2008) uses a quasi-experimental design that meets WWC evidence standards with reservations. The remaining eight studies do not meet either WWC evidence standards or eligibility screens.

Meets evidence standards

Macaruso, Hook, and McCabe (2006) randomly assigned 10 classrooms in five schools to either a treatment group that was exposed to Lexia Reading Phonics Based Reading⁵ and Strategies for Older Students components or to a control group that did not. Eighty-three students in the five treatment group classrooms participated in Lexia Reading for two to four weekly sessions of 20 to 30 minutes each, and 84 students in the five comparison group classrooms received regular classroom instruction during that time.

Gale (2006) identified kindergarten and first-grade students whose fall Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills (DIBELS) test scores indicated that they needed substantial intensive intervention. Among those students, 41 kindergarten students and 38 first-grade students were randomly assigned to one of three groups, with 39 kindergarten and 37 first-grade students remaining after attrition: (1) Lexia Early Reading, (2) Earobics^® Step 1, or (3) control. Students in groups 1 and 2 received the supplemental interventions during the five-week study period in addition to their regular instruction; students in the control group received no reading instruction beyond their regular language arts class time.

Meets evidence standards with reservations

Macaruso and Walker (2008) randomly assigned classrooms to treatment and comparison groups; however, they excluded treatment group students from the analysis sample if they did not complete at least 45 Lexia Reading sessions. Because this exclusion leads to a nonrandom sample of classroom students in the analysis sample, the WWC considers this design to be quasi-experimental. The study analyzed the effects of Lexia Early Reading on 26 kindergarten students in three classes who were assigned to receive Lexia Early Reading compared with 45 students in three classes who were not.

Extent of evidence

The WWC categorizes the extent of evidence in each domain as small or medium to large (see the What Works Clearinghouse Extent of Evidence Categorization Scheme). The extent of evidence takes into account the number of studies and the total sample size across the studies that meet WWC evidence standards with or without reservations.⁶

The WWC considers the extent of evidence for Lexia Reading to be small for alphabetics, fluency, comprehension, and general reading achievement.