|
|
Hancock, C. M. (2002). Accelerating reading trajectories: The effects of dynamic research-based instruction. Dissertation Abstracts International, 63(06), 2139A.
(UMI No. 3055690)
Mesa, C. L. (2004). Effect of Read Naturally software on reading fluency and comprehension. Unpublished master’s thesis, Piedmont College, Demorest, GA.
Additional source:
Read Naturally. (n. d.). Case 3: First graders, South Forsyth County, Ga. Retrieved April 25, 2007, from http://www.readnaturally.com/why
/case3.htm
Denton, C. A., Fletcher, J. M., Anthony, J. L., & Francis, D. J. (2006). An evaluation of intensive intervention for students with persistent reading difficulties. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 39(5), 447–466. Confound: this study included Read Naturally but combined it with another intervention, so the analysis could not separate the effects of the intervention from other factors.
Heistad, D. (n.d.). A Minneapolis study of the effects of Read Naturally on fluency and reading comprehension: A supplemental service intervention. Minnesota: Minneapolis Public Schools. Does not use a strong causal design: for the portion of the sample of interest to this WWC review, there was only one intervention unit and one comparison unit, so the analysis could not separate the effects of the intervention from other factors.
Read Naturally. (2005). Read Naturally: Rationale & research. Retrieved from http://www.readnaturally.com/pdf/rationale&research.pdf. Does not use a strong causal design: the study did not use a comparison group.
Read Naturally. (n.d.). Case 1: Original study, Minneapolis, Minn. Retrieved April 25, 2007, from http://www.readnaturally.com/why/case1.htm. Does not use a strong causal design: this study was a quasi-experimental design but did not use achievement pretests to establish that the comparison group was equivalent to the intervention group at baseline.
Read Naturally. (n.d.). Case 2: Special education students, Huron County, Mich. Retrieved April 25, 2007, from http://www.readnaturally.com/why/case2.htm. Complete data were not reported: the WWC could not compute effect sizes.
Read Naturally. (n. d.). Case 4: Two-school study, Minneapolis, Minn. Retrieved April 25, 2007, from http://www.readnaturally.com/why/case4.htm. Complete data were not reported: the WWC could not compute effect sizes.
Read Naturally. (n.d.). Case 5: Four-school study, Minneapolis, Minn. Retrieved April 25, 2007, from http://www.readnaturally.com/why/case5.htm. Complete data were not reported: the WWC could not compute effect sizes.
Read Naturally. (n.d.). Case 6: Second graders, Elk River, Minn. Retrieved April 25, 2007, from http://www.readnaturally.com/why/case6.htm. Complete data were not reported: the WWC could not compute effect sizes.
Read Naturally. (n.d.). Case 7: Second graders, Leavenworth, Kan. Retrieved April 25, 2007, from http://www.readnaturally.com/why/case7.htm. Does not use a strong causal design: the study did not use a comparison group.
Read Naturally. (n.d.). Case 8: Improved TAAS scores, San Antonio, Tex. Retrieved April 25, 2007, from http://www.readnaturally.com/why/case8.htm. Does not use a strong causal design: the study did not use a comparison group.
Read Naturally. (n.d.). Case 9: Special education students, Upper Lake, Calif. Retrieved April 25, 2007, from http://www.readnaturally.com/why/case9.htm. Does not use a strong causal design: the study did not use a comparison group.
Read Naturally. (n.d.). Case 10: Third grade student, Mathews County, Va. Retrieved April 25, 2007, from http://www.readnaturally.com/why/case10.htm. Does not use a strong causal design: the study did not use a comparison group.
Ihnot, C., & Marston, D. (1990). Using teacher modeling and repeated reading to improve the reading performance of mildly handicapped students. Unpublished master's thesis, Minneapolis, University of Minnesota.6
|Institute of Education Sciences
