|
|
Effectiveness
Findings
The WWC review of interventions for Beginning Reading addresses student outcomes in four domains: alphabetics, fluency, comprehension, and general reading achievement. The study included in this report covers two domains: alphabetics and comprehension. The findings below present the authors’ estimates and WWC-calculated estimates of the size and the statistical significance of the effects of LiPS® on students.8
Alphabetics. The Torgesen et al. (2003) study findings for alphabetics are based on the performance of LiPS® students and comparison students on three measures of phonological awareness and two measures of phonics.
- When the LiPS® group was compared with the Read, Write and Type™ group, the study authors found that there were no statistically significant differences between the groups on the three phonological awareness measures (Phoneme Blending, Phoneme Elision, and Phoneme Segmenting subtests of the Comprehensive Test of Phonological Processes) and the two phonics measures (Word Identification and Word Attack subtests of the Woodcock Reading Mastery Test).
- When the LiPS® group was compared with the regular classroom instruction group, the authors reported, and the WWC confirmed, statistically significant positive effects for LiPS® on two of the phonological awareness measures (Phoneme Elision and Phoneme Segmenting), but the authors did not find statistically significant effects on the third phonological awareness measure—Phoneme Blending. The authors reported, and the WWC confirmed, statistically significant positive effects of LiPS® on the two phonics measures (Word Identification and Word Attack).
Comprehension. The Torgesen et al. (2003) study findings for comprehension are based on the performance of LiPS® students and comparison students on the Passage Comprehension subtest of the Woodcock Reading Mastery Test and a Vocabulary subtest of the Stanford Binet Intelligence test (reported as a verbal IQ measure).
- When the LiPS® group was compared with the Read, Write and Type™ group, the authors found that there was no statistically significant difference between the groups on the comprehension measures.
- When the LiPS® group was compared with the regular classroom instruction group, the authors found that LiPS® had no statistically significant effect on the Vocabulary subtest. The authors found a statistically significant positive effect on the Passage Comprehension subtest. In WWC computations, the effect was not statistically significant.
Rating of effectiveness
The WWC rates the effects of an intervention in a given outcome domain as positive, potentially positive, mixed, no discernible effects, potentially negative, or negative. The rating of effectiveness takes into account four factors: the quality of the research design, the statistical significance of the findings, the size of the difference between participants in the intervention condition and the comparison condition, and the consistency in findings across studies (see the WWC Intervention Rating Scheme).
8 The level of statistical significance was reported by the study authors or, where necessary, calculated by the WWC to correct for clustering within classrooms or schools and for multiple comparisons. For an explanation, see the WWC Tutorial on Mismatch. For the formulas the WWC used to calculate the statistical significance, see Technical Details of WWC-Conducted Computations. In the case of Torgeson et al. (2003), a correction for multiple comparisons was needed, so the significance levels may differ from those reported in the original study.
