Improved reading skills by students who used Fast ForWord® to Reading Prep.
Scientific Learning Corporation. (2006). MAPS for Learning: Product Reports, 10(1), 1–6.
-
examining48Students, gradeK
Fast ForWord® Intervention Report - Beginning Reading
Review Details
Reviewed: March 2013
- Randomized Controlled Trial
- Meets WWC standards without reservations
This review may not reflect the full body of research evidence for this intervention.
Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.
Please see the WWC summary of evidence for Fast ForWord®.
Findings
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Woodcock-Johnson (WJ): Letter-Word Identification subtest |
Fast ForWord® vs. business as usual |
Posttest |
Kindergarten;
|
109.60 |
105.10 |
No |
-- | |
|
Reading Edge: Initial Sound Discrimination subtest |
Fast ForWord® vs. business as usual |
Posttest |
Kindergarten;
|
29.40 |
23.40 |
No |
-- | |
|
Reading Edge: Non-Word Recognition subtest |
Fast ForWord® vs. business as usual |
Posttest |
Kindergarten;
|
15.40 |
12.50 |
No |
-- | |
|
Test of Phonological Awareness (TOPA) |
Fast ForWord® vs. business as usual |
Posttest |
Kindergarten;
|
106.00 |
105.00 |
No |
-- | |
|
Reading Edge: Initial Sound Knowledge subtest |
Fast ForWord® vs. business as usual |
Posttest |
Kindergarten;
|
61.50 |
58.80 |
No |
-- | |
|
Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills (DIBELS): Letter Naming Fluency subtest |
Fast ForWord® vs. business as usual |
Posttest |
Kindergarten;
|
26.10 |
28.00 |
No |
-- | |
|
Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills (DIBELS): Initial Sound Fluency subtest |
Fast ForWord® vs. business as usual |
Posttest |
Kindergarten;
|
14.60 |
19.80 |
No |
-- |
Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.
Sample Characteristics
Characteristics of study sample as reported by study author.
-
2% English language learners -
Suburban
Study Details
Setting
The study took place in a suburban elementary school.
Study sample
During the fall of the 2005–06 school year, 48 low-performing kindergarten students participated in the study. Using random assignment, 25 students were assigned to the Fast For- Word® group and 23 students to a comparison group. A total of seven students in the study were receiving other services: four in the intervention group (one for speech, two for special education, and one was an English language learner) and three in the comparison group (two for speech and one for special education).
Intervention Group
All students in the Fast ForWord® group used the Fast ForWord® to Reading Prep product. The Fast ForWord® to Reading Prep protocol called for students to use the product for 30 minutes a day, 5 days a week, for 12–16 weeks. Intervention group students were pulled out of their classroom at the beginning of the day to receive the instruction in the intervention.
Comparison Group
Students in the comparison group took part in the regular school curriculum, which included oral language and group activities.
Outcome descriptions
The Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills (DIBELS) Initial Sound Fluency and Letter Naming Fluency subtests and the Woodcock-Johnson (WJ) Letter-Word Identification subtest were administered as pretests in mid-September and as posttests in mid-December. The Test of Phonological Awareness (TOPA) and Reading Edge (Initial Sound Discrimination, Initial Sound Knowledge, and Non-Word Recognition subtests) were also administered as posttests in mid-December. Findings on the TOPA and Reading Edge tests were not included in the original study but were provided directly to the WWC by the study authors. For a more detailed description of these outcome measures, see Appendix B.
Support for implementation
The intervention teachers were given background information on how phonemic awareness and the acoustic properties of speech can impact development of language and reading skills. They were then trained to implement the program, including approaches for using Progress Tracker, the program’s reporting system, to monitor student performance. Teachers were also trained to assess potential participants for the study and to assess student outcomes.
Fast ForWord® Intervention Report - Adolescent Literacy
Review Details
Reviewed: August 2010
- The study is ineligible for review because it does not use a sample within the age or grade range specified in the protocol.
This review may not reflect the full body of research evidence for this intervention.
Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.
Please see the WWC summary of evidence for Fast ForWord®.
Findings
Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.
Sample Characteristics
Study sample characteristics were not reported.An indicator of the effect of the intervention, the improvement index can be interpreted as the expected change in percentile rank for an average comparison group student if that student had received the intervention.
For more, please see the WWC Glossary entry for improvement index.
An outcome is the knowledge, skills, and attitudes that are attained as a result of an activity. An outcome measures is an instrument, device, or method that provides data on the outcome.
A finding that is included in the effectiveness rating. Excluded findings may include subgroups and subscales.
The sample on which the analysis was conducted.
The group to which the intervention group is compared, which may include a different intervention, business as usual, or no services.
The timing of the post-intervention outcome measure.
The number of students included in the analysis.
The mean score of students in the intervention group.
The mean score of students in the comparison group.
The WWC considers a finding to be statistically significant if the likelihood that the finding is due to chance alone, rather than a real difference, is less than five percent.
The WWC reviews studies for WWC products, Department of Education grant competitions, and IES performance measures.
The name and version of the document used to guide the review of the study.
The version of the WWC design standards used to guide the review of the study.
The result of the WWC assessment of the study. The rating is based on the strength of evidence of the effectiveness of the intervention. Studies are given a rating of Meets WWC Design Standards without Reservations, Meets WWC Design Standards with Reservations, or >Does Not Meet WWC Design Standards.
A related publication that was reviewed alongside the main study of interest.
Study findings for this report.
Based on the direction, magnitude, and statistical significance of the findings within a domain, the WWC characterizes the findings from a study as one of the following: statistically significant positive effects, substantively important positive effects, indeterminate effects, substantively important negative effects, and statistically significant negative effects. For more, please see the WWC Handbook.
The WWC may review studies for multiple purposes, including different reports and re-reviews using updated standards. Each WWC review of this study is listed in the dropdown. Details on any review may be accessed by making a selection from the drop down list.
Tier 1 Strong indicates strong evidence of effectiveness,
Tier 2 Moderate indicates moderate evidence of effectiveness, and
Tier 3 Promising indicates promising evidence of effectiveness,
as defined in the
non-regulatory guidance for ESSA
and the regulations for ED discretionary grants (EDGAR Part 77).