there’s broad agreement that interventions that have been proven effective in one or more research studies stand a better chance of having a positive effect on students and increasing the return on education investments than those without any evidence to back them. a review of the research on lli by the what works clearinghouse (2017) determined that, after 12-18 weeks, lli had positive effects on general reading achievement, potentially positive effects on reading fluency, and no discernible effects on alphabetics for students in grades k-2. however, the existing evidence on lli was also based on students in a very different grade span (k-2 rather than 6-9), and some of the implementation challenges reported by study schools were uniquely relevant to secondary schools, meaning that elementary schools would not face these challenges. unlike elementary teachers, secondary literacy teachers are not typically trained in the foundational reading skills that are part of lli and other intervention programs for students with limited literacy.
the district also formed a collaborative of secondary literacy intervention teachers to study the features of successful reading intervention programs, discuss implementation, and track the growth of their students on reading assessments. “we have to prove that reading intervention can be effective at the secondary level — we still have such inconsistent results,” said nancy lai, ousd’s director of language and literacy. efficacy of the leveled literacy intervention system for k–2 urban students: an empirical evaluation of lli in denver public schools. while we agree with some of the author’s points (about read 180, for example), there are other programs like ours that demonstrate with strong evidence that it is possible to positively impact secondary teachers’ literacy teaching practices across disciplines and thereby improve academic outcomes for secondary students. you can read more about our most recent seed grant here: /sli-wins-seed-grant-and-top-score-in-2018-award-program/ we would be very happy to connect with anyone who would like to know more about reading apprenticeship — how it works, our evidence base, and/or our ongoing professional learning institutes (face-to-face and online) for secondary and post-secondary teachers interested in supporting disciplinary literacy in their subject area classrooms.
lli is a short-term, intensive intervention system designed to help teachers provide daily, small-group according to the wwc review, the extent of evidence for lli on the reading the wwc based its effectiveness rating. an analysis of the five most-used programs for early reading shows that they often diverge from evidence-based practices. one lli book, for example, follows a girl as she gets, pros and cons of fountas and pinnell, evidence based reading programs, evidence based reading programs, lli levels, lli dyslexia. evidence for essa review of lli k\u20132 essa has reviewed the research on lli, finding strong evidence of effectiveness for students in grades k-2. these findings are based on two independent, empirical studies conducted by the university of memphis\’s center for research in educational policy (crep).
the essa evidence standards and meet their local needs. having worked with many children who were given the lli a number of other research-based, peer-reviewed programs the lli program is a reading intervention program that has level or difficulty. a-‐z that are made for k-‐8th grade. each intervention system is research based (fountas and pinnell, 2010). the lli intervention should be, lli structure, lli goals, lli phonics, lli components
When you search for the Is LLI evidence based , you may look for related areas such as pros and cons of fountas and pinnell, evidence-based reading programs, lli levels, lli dyslexia, lli structure, lli goals, lli phonics, lli components. is fountas and pinnell research based? is lli a tier 3 intervention? does lli teach phonics? what is the lli reading program?