A Meta-Analytic Review of Spelling Interventions for Students With or At-Risk for Learning Disabilities.
Brennan W Chandler, Jessica R Toste, Christina Novelli et al.
✦ AI-curated · Sources linked
In 30 seconds
This meta-analysis reviewed spelling interventions evaluated in randomized controlled trials, quasi-experimental studies, and single-case designs among 2,229 students in Grades K–9, the vast majority with or at risk for learning disabilities. Across group-design studies, interventions had small, significant effects on spelling (g = 0.33, 95% CI = [0.26, 0.40]) and word reading (g = 0.25, 95% CI = [0.13, 0.37]). Single-case studies also showed significant effects on both outcomes. Whole-word study and multilinguistic approaches benefited spelling, while phonemic approaches showed transfer to word reading.
Key findings
- Group-design interventions had a small significant effect on spelling (g = 0.33, 95% CI = [0.26, 0.40]) and word reading (g = 0.25, 95% CI = [0.13, 0.37]).
- Single-case designs showed significant effects on spelling (BC-SMD = 2.47, 95% CI = [1.82, 3.13]) and word reading (BC-SMD = 1.52, 95% CI = [0.83, 2.21]).
- Whole-word study (g = 0.56, 95% CI = [0.41, 0.71]) and multilinguistic approaches (g = 0.43, 95% CI = [0.25, 0.60]) benefited spelling outcomes.
- Phonemic spelling approaches were associated with improved word reading outcomes (g = 0.45, 95% CI = [0.35, 0.55]).
Why it matters
Spelling instruction may support both spelling performance and word reading for students with or at risk for learning disabilities, although average effects in group-design studies were small. The findings also suggest that intervention approach may matter, with different approaches associated with spelling versus word-reading outcomes. This evidence helps clarify potential instructional targets while underscoring the need for further replication.
What to keep in mind
The review combined randomized, quasi-experimental, and single-case designs, and only one included study involved general education students; findings therefore primarily concern students with or at risk for learning disabilities.