Evidence-Based Studies
Treatment Group/Matched Control Group
The effects of Read Naturally on students’ oral reading fluency and reading comprehension
Wright, S. (2006)
California State University, San Marcos
A study by Stacy Wright, a Masters in Education student at California State University San Marcos, found that students using Read Naturally Software Edition had greater gains in fluency and comprehension than students who did not receive intervention instruction.
The study involved 12 third-grade students in southern California who were identified by their teachers as “at risk.” The students were paired up based on similarities in their learning and academic profiles. One student from each pair was randomly assigned to an experimental group, and the other student was assigned to a control group.
All students were given a pretest to determine their baseline reading fluency and comprehension levels.
The students in the experimental group used Read Naturally SE for 30 minutes a day, three times a week, for 10 weeks. The students in the control group remained in the general education classroom and did not receive any reading intervention instruction.
After 10 weeks, all of the students were given a posttest to determine their growth in reading fluency and comprehension. The results are summarized in the following table and charts.
| Control Group | Read Naturally | ||
| Oral Reading Fluency* | Pretest | 117 | 106 |
| Posttest | 118 | 128 | |
| Increase | 1 | 22 | |
| Comprehension** | Pretest | 62% | 63% |
| Posttest | 62% | 68% | |
| Increase | 0% | 5% | |
| *Words correct per minute **Percentage of comprehension questions answered correctly | |||
Oral Reading Fluency Scores
A comparison of the students’ pretest and posttest scores for oral reading fluency showed that, on average, the Read Naturally students had gains of 22 words per minute compared to average gains of only one word per minute by students in the control group (see the following chart).
Average Oral Reading Fluency Scores
Comprehension Scores
A comparison of the students’ pretest and posttest scores for comprehension showed that, on average, the Read Naturally students had gains of five percent in the number of comprehension questions answered correctly compared to no gain by students in the control group (see the following graph).
Average Comprehension Scores
Evidence-Based Studies
Overview of Evidence-Based Studies
Strong Evidence for the Read Naturally Strategy
- Christ, T. J., & Davie, J. (2009): Empirical evaluation of Read Naturally effects: A randomized control trial
- Arvans, R. (2010): Improving reading fluency and comprehension in elementary students using Read Naturally
Moderate Evidence for the Read Naturally Strategy
- Tucker, C. & Jones, D. (2010): Response to intervention: Increasing fluency, rate, and accuracy for students at risk for reading failure
- Heistad, D. (2005): The effects of Read Naturally on fluency and reading comprehension: A supplemental service intervention (four-school study)
- Heistad, D. (2008): The effects of Read Naturally on grade 3 reading: A study in the Minneapolis Public Schools
- Graves, A. W., Duesbery, L., Pyle, N. B., Brandon, R. R., & McIntosh, A. S. (2011): Two studies of Tier II literacy development: Throwing sixth graders a lifeline
Promising Evidence for the Read Naturally Strategy
Please let us know what questions you have so we can assist. For Technical Support, please call us or submit a software support request.