Trial reportJournal of school psychology2014
Evaluating the impact of feedback on elementary aged students' fluency growth in written expression: a randomized controlled trial.
Trial report in Journal of school psychology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Promoting Handwriting Fluency for Preschool and Elementary-Age Students: Meta-Analysis and Meta-Synthesis of Research From 2000 to 2020.Frontiers in psychology · 2022Pooled it
- Effectiveness of a remedial educational program on enhancing spelling skills in primary school students with learning disabilities.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
- A developmental perspective on feedback: How corrective feedback influences children's literacy, mathematics, and problem solving.Educational psychologist · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The purpose of this randomized controlled trial was to evaluate elementary-aged students' writing fluency growth in response to (a) instructional practices, (b) sex differences, and (c) student's initial level of writing fluency. Third-grade students (n=133) in three urban elementary schools were randomly assigned to either an individualized performance feedback condition (n=46), a practice-only condition (i.e., weekly writing practice; n=39), or an instructional control condition (n=48) for 8weeks. Findings included support for use of performance feedback as an instructional component in general education classrooms (Hedges' g=0.66), whereas simple practice with curriculum-based measurement in written expression did not produce growth significantly greater than standard instructional practices. The hypothesis that girls write significantly more than boys was supported. However, girls and boys did not differ in their rate of growth. Finally, students' initial risk status in writing fluency did not differentially predict growth in writing fluency over the course of the study. Implications for incorporating feedback as a basic component of intervention in writing are discussed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.