WWC review of this study

Outcomes report: Los Angeles Unified School District, California.

Cognitive Concepts, Inc. (2003). . Retrieved from http://www.cogcon.com/research/proven/LAUSD.pdf.

  • Randomized Controlled Trial
     examining 
    74
     Students
    , grades
    K-3
At least one statistically significant positive finding
Meets WWC standards without reservations

Reviewed: January 2009

Alphabetics outcomes—Statistically significant positive effects found
Outcome
measure
Comparison Period Sample Intervention
mean
Comparison
mean
Significant? Improvement
index

Oral Reading Assessment Level- Jimerson (ORAL-J): Blending into Words subtest

Earobics® vs. Business as usual

Posttest

K-Grade 3;
74 students

17.31

14.86

Yes

 
 
24
More Outcomes

Oral Reading Assessment Level- Jimerson (ORAL-J): Segmenting into sounds subtest

Earobics® vs. Business as usual

Posttest

K-Grade 3;
74 students

45.31

35.8

Yes

 
 
24

Oral Reading Assessment Level- Jimerson (ORAL-J): Rhyming words subtest

Earobics® vs. Business as usual

Posttest

K-Grade 3;
74 students

7.16

4.26

Yes

 
 
22

Oral Reading Assessment Level- Jimerson (ORAL-J): Sound of Letters subtest

Earobics® vs. Business as usual

Posttest

K-Grade 3;
74 students

27.8

26.17

No

--

Oral Reading Assessment Level- Jimerson (ORAL-J): Letter naming subtest

Earobics® vs. Business as usual

Posttest

K-Grade 3;
74 students

57.49

57.26

No

--
Reading fluency outcomes—Indeterminate effects found
Outcome
measure
Comparison Period Sample Intervention
mean
Comparison
mean
Significant? Improvement
index

Oral Reading Assessment Level- Jimerson (ORAL-J): Words per minute 1

Earobics® vs. Business as usual

Posttest

K-Grade 3;
74 students

39.21

35.49

No

--
More Outcomes

Oral Reading Assessment Level- Jimerson (ORAL-J): Words per minute 3

Earobics® vs. Business as usual

Posttest

K-Grade 3;
74 students

36.7

33.86

No

--

Oral Reading Assessment Level- Jimerson (ORAL-J): Words per minute 2

Earobics® vs. Business as usual

Posttest

K-Grade 3;
74 students

34.11

31.63

No

--

Characteristics of study sample as reported by study author.


  • 82% English language learners

  • Urban
    • 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
    • x
    • w
    • y

    California

Setting

The study took place in one elementary school located Los Angeles, California.

Study sample

Nineteen teachers identified students in kindergarten through third grade with reading difficulties. More than 80% of students were English language learners. The study author administered pretests (ORAL-J and Test of Memory and Learning [TOMAL]) to students to divide them into two similar groups. The groups were then randomly assigned to be either the intervention or comparison groups. Each group originally had 43 students, but there was some attrition due to poor attendance. In the analysis sample, 39 students were in the treatment group and 35 students were in the comparison group.

Intervention Group

Students in the intervention group were given directions on how to use Earobics® software. They received instruction with Earobics® for 30 minutes a day, five days a week from October through December. In addition, the intervention group received its regular whole class reading instruction with the Open Court Reading curriculum.

Comparison Group

Students in the comparison classes received the regular whole class reading instruction with the Open Court Reading curriculum during the language arts period.

Outcome descriptions

For both pre- and posttests, the authors administered eight subtests of the ORAL-J: Early Literacy Achievement test: Blending into Words, Segmenting into Sounds, Rhyming Words, Letter Naming, and Sound of Letters subtests, as well as three administrations of the Words per Minute subtest.3 The TOMAL was also used in the study, but it was not included in this review because it was outside the scope of the Beginning Reading review. For a more detailed description of these outcome measures, see Appendices A2.1 and A2.2.

Support for implementation

No information on teacher training is provided. The Earobics® group worked in a computer lab, with minimal teacher instruction.

 

Your export should download shortly as a zip archive.

This download will include data files for study and findings review data and a data dictionary.

Connect With the WWC

newsflash icon contact icon facebook icon twitter icon
loading
back to top