|
|
Research
Two studies reviewed by the WWC investigated the effects of Kaplan SpellRead. Both studies (Torgesen et al., 2006; Rashotte, MacPhee, & Torgesen, 2001) were randomized controlled trials that met WWC evidence standards.
Met evidence standards
Torgesen et al. (2006) examined the effects of Kaplan SpellRead on 203 third-grade students in eight school units4 in Pennsylvania. Students in the comparison group participated in the regular reading program at their schools.
Rashotte, MacPhee, & Torgesen (2001) randomly assigned 47 first-grade and second-grade students from one school in Newfoundland, Canada, to the intervention and comparison groups. Students in the intervention group received the Kaplan SpellRead program. Students in the comparison group received the regular literacy-based reading program at their school.
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 met WWC evidence standards with or without reservations. 5 The WWC considers the extent of evidence for Kaplan SpellRead to be small for alphabetics, fluency, and comprehension. No studies that met WWC evidence standards with or without reservations addressed general reading achievement.
5 The Extent of Evidence Categorization was developed to tell readers how much evidence was used to determine the intervention rating, focusing on the number and size of studies. Additional factors associated with a related concept, external validity, such as the students' demographics and the types of settings in which studies took place, are not taken into account for the categorization.
