Reading & Literacy Letter to the Editor

‘No Effects’ Reading Study Was Poorly Designed

June 14, 2010 1 min read
  • Save to favorites
  • Print

To the Editor:

Once again, Education Week has published a summary of a study that, with one small exception, suggests “no effects” for programs designed to improve student engagement and depth of reading comprehension (“Study of Reading Programs Finds Little Proof of Gains in Student Comprehension,” May 12, 2010). This follows in a long line of “no effects” studies coming from the federal Institute of Education Sciences (“‘No Effects’ Studies Raising Eyebrows,” April 1, 2009).

These reports are frustrating and misleading. A test of the null hypothesis in statistics only allows one to make probabilistic conclusions when there is a positive effect. Unfortunately, the data from these null-result experiments are often reported with the implication that the programs are ineffective, when it is more likely that the design and measurements were poorly controlled and failed to provide a test of the reading programs. There are many ways to obtain no results in large-scale “quasi-scientific” experiments.

Suppose we want to examine the effectiveness of the drug Prozac. Half the subjects are assigned to a treatment condition in which they take Prozac daily, and half the subjects to a placebo condition. If we find no significant difference between the experimental and the control group, can we conclude that Prozac is not effective in treating depression? What if we also know that only 30 percent of the subjects in the treatment group actually took Prozac, and we find out that several subjects in the control condition took Prozac?

Such a study clearly would not allow us to make conclusions about the effectiveness of the drug. Yet this example of “research” is almost a direct parallel to the latest large-scale studies of reading-program effectiveness.

Your newspaper must stop reporting poorly designed, null-result studies with inflammatory headlines such as “Supplementary Reading Programs Found Ineffective” (May 13, 2009). These headlines should instead read “Millions of Federal Dollars Wasted on Poorly Designed Study of Reading.”

Carol M. Santa
John L. Santa

Kalispell, Mont.

Carol M. Santa is the founder and co-owner of Project CRISS, one of the reading programs included in the Institute of Education Sciences study, and a past president of the International Reading Association.

Related Tags:

A version of this article appeared in the June 16, 2010 edition of Education Week as ‘No Effects’ Reading Study Was Poorly Designed


This content is provided by our sponsor. It is not written by and does not necessarily reflect the views of Education Week's editorial staff.
Equity & Diversity Webinar
Classroom Strategies for Building Equity and Student Confidence
Shape equity, confidence, and success for your middle school students. Join the discussion and Q&A for proven strategies.
Content provided by Project Lead The Way
This content is provided by our sponsor. It is not written by and does not necessarily reflect the views of Education Week's editorial staff.
Professional Development Webinar
Disrupting PD Day in Schools with Continuous Professional Learning Experiences
Hear how this NC School District achieved district-wide change by shifting from traditional PD days to year-long professional learning cycles
Content provided by BetterLesson
Jobs Virtual Career Fair for Teachers and K-12 Staff
Find teaching jobs and other jobs in K-12 education at the EdWeek Top School Jobs virtual career fair.

EdWeek Top School Jobs

Teacher Jobs
Search over ten thousand teaching jobs nationwide — elementary, middle, high school and more.
View Jobs
Principal Jobs
Find hundreds of jobs for principals, assistant principals, and other school leadership roles.
View Jobs
Administrator Jobs
Over a thousand district-level jobs: superintendents, directors, more.
View Jobs
Support Staff Jobs
Search thousands of jobs, from paraprofessionals to counselors and more.
View Jobs

Read Next

Reading & Literacy Opinion How to Make the Science of Reading Work for Teachers
One state took a different path with good initial results, writes a state chief academic officer.
Lisa Coons
5 min read
Searching knowledge concept. Men and women stand next to book and find necessary information. Independent training and education.
Rudzhan Nagiev/iStock
Reading & Literacy Most States Screen All Kids for Dyslexia. Why Not California?
The state teachers' union has historically been among those opposing a bill to screen students for signs of the disorder.
5 min read
Dyslexia word formed with wooden blocks.
iStock/Getty Images
Reading & Literacy Q&A Why Printed Books Are Better Than Screens for Learning to Read: Q&A
UCLA professor Maryann Wolf outlines the best ways to teach reading to kids who have grown up using digital devices.
3 min read
ed tech survey march 2023 klein q&a
F. Sheehan / Education Week and Getty<br/><br/>
Reading & Literacy From Our Research Center Reading on Screens for Class Assignments, in Charts
The EdWeek Research Center surveyed teachers nationally to probe how they use digital and printed reading materials.
1 min read
ed tech survey march 2023 bushweller
F. Sheehan / Education Week and Getty