Home arrow Tools/Interventions arrow Instruction Tools Chart
Instruction Tools Chart

Supplemental Resources

Instruction Tools Chart pdf

Instruction Library rtf

Glossary of Terms rtf

Video Tour Video - Coming Soon!

Users Guide pdf

The tools chart below reflects the results of the first annual review of research studies of Instructional Programs by the Center's Technical Review Committee (TRC).

The Center defines instruction as follows: Additional or alternative intervention programs to the core curriculum conducted in small groups or individually with evidence of efficacy for improving academic outcomes for students whose performance is unsatisfactory in the core program.


Chart Features

  • Across the top of the chart are the standards by which the TRC reviews each program study. Click on each standard for a detailed description of how the rating was defined.
  • The vendors/developers of the program have provided implementation information which includes the cost of the program, what is needed to implement it, the support provided, how the program is intended to be used, and with whom it should be used. To access this information, click on name of the program in the "Program" column.
  • The ratings in the chart can be clicked on to view the specific data submitted for Participants, Design, Fidelity of Implementation, Measures, and Effect Size.

The National Center on RTI publishes this chart to assist educators and families in becoming informed consumers who can select instructional programs that best meet their individual needs.

The Center's Technical Review Committee (TRC) on Instruction independently established a set of criteria for evaluating the scientific rigor of studies demonstrating the efficacy of instructional programs. The TRC rated each submitted study against these criteria but did not compare it to other studies on the chart. The presence of a particular program on the chart does not constitute endorsement and should not be viewed as a recommendation from either the TRC on Instruction or the National Center on RTI.

Please note that all submissions to the TRC review process were voluntary. An individual, firm, or other vendor whose program appears on the chart chose to submit its program for TRC review and then to have its program and TRC ratings displayed on the chart. The National Center on RTI does not publish the names of individuals, firms, or other vendors who submit programs for review but decide against having the results included on the chart.

The National Center on RTI will issue another call for instructional programs in fall 2010.




Use the scroll bar feature on the right to view all of the tools on the chart.

Program Study Study Quality Effect Size
Participants Design Fidelity of
Implemen-
tation		 Measures Full Sample Disaggre-
gated Sample
Number of
outcome measures		 Mean Range Subgroup(s)
Academy of READING Fiedorowicz & Trites (1987) Convincing Evidence Partially Convincing Evidence Unconvincing Evidence Partially Convincing Evidence 24 Reading 0.21 -0.64 to 0.60 Null
AWARD Reading Block & Mangier (Tech. Rep.) Unconvincing Evidence Partially Convincing Evidence Unconvincing Evidence Unconvincing Evidence 5 Reading Inadequate
information		 Null
Corrective Reading Decoding Benner, Beaudoin, & Stein (2005) Unconvincing Evidence Unconvincing Evidence Partially Convincing Evidence Convincing Evidence 4 Reading Inadequate
information		 Null
Gunn, Biglan, Smolkowski, & Ary (2000) Convincing Evidence Convincing Evidence Unconvincing Evidence Convincing Evidence 5 Reading Inadequate
information		 Null
Early Vocabulary Connections Nelson, Vadasy, & Sanders (in submission) Convincing Evidence Convincing Evidence Partially Convincing Evidence Convincing Evidence 3 Reading 0.38 0.23 to 0.67 Null
Failure Free Reading Torgesen et al. (2006) Convincing Evidence Partially Convincing Evidence Convincing Evidence Convincing Evidence 18 Reading
1 Writing
1 Math		 Inadequate
information		 Null
Hot Math Tutoring Fuchs, et al. (2008) Convincing Evidence Convincing Evidence Convincing Evidence Convincing Evidence 4 Math 0.88 0.38 to 1.15 Null
My Sidewalks Intensive Reading Intervention Baird-Wilkerson (2008) Convincing Evidence Convincing Evidence Unconvincing Evidence Convincing Evidence 14 Reading 0.01 -0.12 to 0.24 Null
Number Rockets Fuchs et al. (2005) Convincing Evidence Convincing Evidence Convincing Evidence Convincing Evidence 7 Math 0.33 0.03 to 0.64 Null
Pirate Math Individual Tutoring Fuchs et al. (2009) Convincing Evidence Convincing Evidence Convincing Evidence Convincing Evidence 7 Math 0.50 0.14 to 0.79 Null
Read Naturally Heistad (2005) Convincing Evidence Partially Convincing Evidence Unconvincing Evidence Convincing Evidence 3 Reading 0.26 0.14 to 0.39 Null
Reading Mastery Carlson & Francis (2002) Unconvincing Evidence Unconvincing Evidence Unconvincing Evidence Unconvincing Evidence 2 Reading Inadequate
information		 Null
Gunn, Biglan, Smolkowski, & Ary (2000) Convincing Evidence Convincing Evidence Unconvincing Evidence Convincing Evidence 5 Reading Inadequate
information		 Null
Reading Recovery Schwartz (2005) Convincing Evidence Partially Convincing Evidence Unconvincing Evidence Convincing Evidence 10 Reading 0.90 0.14 to 2.09 Null
Center, et al. (1995) Convincing Evidence Unconvincing Evidence Unconvincing Evidence Partially Convincing Evidence 8 Reading Inadequate
information		 Null
Iversen & Tunmer (1993) Convincing Evidence Unconvincing Evidence Unconvincing Evidence Convincing Evidence 8 Reading
2 Writing		 Inadequate
information		 Null
Responsive Reading Instruction Mathes et al. (2005) Convincing Evidence Partially Convincing Evidence Convincing Evidence Convincing Evidence 3 Reading
1 Writing
1 Math		 0.59 -0.14 to 2.00 Null
Sound Partners (1-3) Vadasy, Sanders, & Peyton (2005) Convincing Evidence Partially Convincing Evidence Partially Convincing Evidence Convincing Evidence 8 Reading
1 Writing		 0.82 0.37 to 1.21 Null
Sound Partners Kindergarten Vadasy & Sanders (in press) Unconvincing Evidence Convincing Evidence Convincing Evidence Convincing Evidence 5 Reading
1 Writing 		0.66 0.23 to 0.97 Students with Alphabetics < 15
Vadasy & Sanders (2008) Convincing Evidence Partially Convincing Evidence Convincing Evidence Convincing Evidence 6 Reading
1 Writing		 0.39 -0.13 to 0.62 Null
Vadasy, Sanders, & Peyton (2006) Convincing Evidence Convincing Evidence Convincing Evidence Convincing Evidence 6 Reading
1 Writing		 0.50 0.11 to 0.99 Null
SRSD For Writing Strategies Lane et al. (in submission) Convincing Evidence Convincing Evidence Convincing Evidence Convincing Evidence 14 Writing 0.56 0.05 to 1.35 Null
Harris, Graham, & Mason (2006) Convincing Evidence Partially Convincing Evidence Convincing Evidence Convincing Evidence 15 Writing 1.38 0.30 to 3.19 Null
Graham, Harris, & Mason (2005) Convincing Evidence Partially Convincing Evidence Convincing Evidence Convincing Evidence 15 Writing 1.36 0.10 to 2.17 Null
Stepping Stones to Literacy Nelson, Sanders, & Gonzalez (2010) Unconvincing Evidence Convincing Evidence Partially Convincing Evidence Convincing Evidence 4 Reading 0.21 -0.05 to 0.36 Null
Nelson, Benner, & Gonzalez (2005) Convincing Evidence Convincing Evidence Convincing Evidence Convincing Evidence 6 Reading 0.72 0.50 to 1.02 Null
Nelson, Stage, Epstein, & Pierce (2005) Convincing Evidence Convincing Evidence Convincing Evidence Convincing Evidence 5 Reading 0.69 0.07 to 1.00 Null
Structured Supplemental Spelling Instruction Graham, Harris, & Chorzempa (2002) Convincing Evidence Partially Convincing Evidence Convincing Evidence Convincing Evidence 2 Reading
7 Writing		 0.49 -0.42 to 0.91 Null
Legend:      Convincing Evidence Convincing Evidence      Partially Convincing Evidence Partially Convincing Evidence      Unconvincing Evidence Unconvincing Evidence