Evaluation of a personalized game-based learning app for developing young children’s reading skills
Bang, H. J., & Siebert-Evenstone, A. L. (2024). Research Square. https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-3826156/v1.
-
examining1,092Students, gradesPK-K
Grant Competition
Review Details
Reviewed: December 2024
- Grant Competition (findings for My Reading Academy)
- Quasi-Experimental Design
- Meets WWC standards with reservations because it uses a cluster quasi-experimental design that provides evidence of effects on individuals by satisfying the baseline equivalence requirement for the individuals in the analytic intervention and comparison groups.
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.
Findings
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Phonological Awareness Literacy Screening-Kindergarten (PALS-K): Alphabet Knowledge subtest |
My Reading Academy vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Kindergarten;
|
N/A |
N/A |
No |
-- | |
|
Phonological Awareness Literacy Screening-Kindergarten (PALS-K): Letter Sounds subtest |
My Reading Academy vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Kindergarten;
|
N/A |
N/A |
No |
-- | |
|
Phonological Awareness Literacy Screening-Kindergarten (PALS-K): Beginning Sound Awareness subtest |
My Reading Academy vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Kindergarten;
|
N/A |
N/A |
No |
-- | |
|
Alphabet knowledge |
My Reading Academy vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
pre-Kindergarten;
|
N/A |
N/A |
No |
-- | |
|
Phonemic Awareness |
My Reading Academy vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
pre-Kindergarten;
|
N/A |
N/A |
No |
-- | |
|
Phonics |
My Reading Academy vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
pre-Kindergarten;
|
N/A |
N/A |
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.
-
Female: 50%
Male: 51% -
- 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
- v
- x
- w
- y
Texas, Virginia
-
Race Asian 3% Black 32% Other or unknown 28% White 37% -
Ethnicity Hispanic 26% Other or unknown 74% -
Eligible for Free and Reduced Price Lunch Other or unknown 100%
Study Details
Setting
The study took place in four school districts in Virginia and Texas in 34 prekindergarten and 42 kindergarten classrooms.
Study sample
The analytic sample included 34 pre-kindergarten classrooms (16 intervention 18 comparison) and 42 kindergarten classrooms (14 intervention, 28 comparison). There were 473 pre-kindergarten students (222 intervention, 251 comparison) and 619 kindergarten students (180 intervention, 439 comparison). The pre-kindergarten students were 4 years old on average and the kindergartner students were 5 years old on average. About half of the children were boys and half were girls. Racially, 37% were White, 32% were Black, and 3% were Asian. About one-fourth (26%) identified their ethnicity as Hispanic. The sample included no English language learners and no students with an Individual Education Program (IEP) or receiving special education services.
Intervention Group
Reading App is a personalized, mastery-based game that fosters learning to read through play. It is designed to meet individual students' literacy learning needs and help them build on their existing knowledge, and is used as a supplement to the core curricula. The children interact with learning materials to master learning objectives. Teachers were asked to use Reading App for at least 60 minutes per week.
Comparison Group
Comparison condition students received business-as-usual instruction.
Support for implementation
Teachers were provided with the software for Reading App.
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).