Study: 89426

National Assessment of Title I: Interim Report. Volume II: Closing the Reading Gap: First Year Findings from a Randomized Trial of Four Reading Interventions for Striving Readers. NCEE 2006-4002 [Wilson Reading vs. business as usual]

Torgesen, Joseph; Myers, David; Schirm, Allen; Stuart, Elizabeth; Vartivarian, Sonya; Mansfield, Wendy; Stancavage, Fran; Durno, Donna; Javorsky, Rosanne; Haan, Cinthia (2006). National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance. Retrieved from: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED491144

Practice Guide

Review Details

Reviewed: October 2021

No statistically significant positive
findings

Meets WWC standards with reservations

For:

Practice Guide (findings for Wilson Reading System®)

Using:

Rating:

Meets WWC standards with reservations because it is a compromised randomized controlled trial, but the analytic intervention and comparison groups satisfy the baseline equivalence requirement.

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

Passage reading fluency-oral outcomes—Indeterminate effect found for the domain
Outcome measure	Comparison	Period	Sample	Intervention mean	Comparison mean	Significant?	Improvement index	Evidence tier
Oral Reading Fluency Subtest: AIMSweb	Wilson Reading System® vs. Business as usual	0 Days	Wilson Reading v C5th grade sample; 91 students	96.70	96.80	No	--

Reading Comprehension outcomes—Indeterminate effect found for the domain
Outcome measure	Comparison	Period	Sample	Intervention mean	Comparison mean	Significant?	Improvement index	Evidence tier
Group Reading Assessment and Diagnostic Evaluation (GRADE): Passage Comprehension subtest	Wilson Reading System® vs. Business as usual	0 Days	Wilson Reading v C5th grade sample; 91 students	92.10	90.80	No	--

Word and pseudoword reading outcomes—Indeterminate effect found for the domain
Outcome measure	Comparison	Sample	Intervention mean	Comparison mean	Significant?	Improvement index
Word Attack Subtest: Woodcock Reading Mastery Test-Revised	Wilson Reading System® vs. Business as usual	Wilson Reading v C5th grade sample; 91 students	99.50	95.10	No	--
Word Identification Subtest: Woodcock Reading Master Tests - Revised	Wilson Reading System® vs. Business as usual	Wilson Reading v C5th grade sample; 91 students	93.40	91.30	No	--
Test of Word Reading Efficiency (TOWRE)- Sight Word Efficiency subtest	Wilson Reading System® vs. Business as usual	Wilson Reading v C5th grade sample; 91 students	88.30	88.80	No	--
Test of Word Reading Efficiency (TOWRE)- Phonemic Decoding Efficiency subtest	Wilson Reading System® vs. Business as usual	Wilson Reading v C5th grade sample; 91 students	86.40	87.80	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.

Female: 41%
Male: 59%
Suburban
- 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
Pennsylvania

Race
Black		43%
White		57%

Study Details

Setting

The study was conducted in 50 elementary schools located within 27 school districts outside of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.

Study sample

The study sample was 43 percent Black and 57 percent White. Fifty-nine percent of the sample was male and 41 percent of the sample was female. Thirty-one percent of the sample had been diagnosed with a specific learning disability. Finally, 50 percent of the sample was eligible for free or reduced-price lunch.

Intervention Group

The study examined the effectiveness of a reading intervention for students struggling with reading. In this contrast, the intervention group received the Wilson Reading System® (word-level components only). Students met in small groups of three with a teacher for 50 minutes a day, five days a week, from the first week of November through the first weeks of May. The Wilson Reading System® (word-level components only) was a 12-step program based on the Orton-Gillingham method that utilizes 10 principles on instruction and direct, multisensory teaching that emphasize word study, spelling, and fluency. The comprehension and vocabulary components of the Wilson Reading System® were excluded for the purposes of the study.

Comparison Group

Students in the comparison condition received typical reading instruction and interventions provided by their schools.

Support for implementation

Intervention teachers participated in approximately 70 hours of professional development.