"If we are to achieve results never before accomplished, we must expect to employ methods never before attempted." ~SIR FRANCIS BACON 1561-1626~

About Research-Based

Read Right Methodology is Research-Based and Supported by Science

Struggling readers are not to blame for their failure—neither are parents, the economic or social status of families, nor classroom teachers. Instead, the ideology and instructional strategies underlying routine reading instruction are wrong.

Data documenting Read Right methodology’s exceptional effectiveness verify that popular ideas about reading are the cause of mediocre results. Case studies; evaluative studies performed independently by schools; and third-party, gold-standard research conducted by a highly respected research firm support Read Right’s ability to produce rapid and lasting reading improvement. Visit our “Data” page for extensive information.

Here are examples of the power of Read Right methodology:

Independent, Gold-Standard Research of Effectiveness

Scott C, Nelsestuen K, Autio E, Deussen T, and Hanita M (2010). Evaluation of Read Right reading program in Omaha Middle and High Schools, Portland, OR, Education Northwest. Education Northwest, a private, non-profit research organization conducted a high-quality study (double-randomized, controlled) to determine if Read Right was an effective intervention for students in two middle and two high schools. The duration of the study was for one semester. The average hours of participation was just 18. In spite of this, the results supported the effectiveness of Read Right reading program as a reading intervention. Read Right participants performed significantly better than the controls in reading comprehension as measured by the Gates MacGinitie Test of Reading. The p value was .0005, which means that there were less than 5 chances in 10,000 that the result was due to chance rather than to participation in Read Right. For African-American students, the p value was .007.

The Education Northwest Research Was Highly Rated by the National Center on Response to Intervention

Education Northwest’s independent study examining the effectiveness of Read Right tutoring was reviewed by the Technical Review Committee of the National Center on Response to Intervention. The technical experts gave the research high marks for rigor, validity, and reliability.

Read Right Reading Intervention Program Compared to Striving Readers Project Schools

In response to widespread frustration on the part of schools serving middle and high schools struggling to find intervention programs that work, the Federal Government initiated the Striving Readers Project. Schools selected to participate provided students with an intervention program for one school year. Two versions of a standardized, norm-referenced test of reading was administered to students before each program began and at the end of the school year. Schools used various measurement instruments, so the Federal Government used effect-size statistics appropriate for use with any standardized and norm-referenced test to analyze the data. Effect-size, unlike most statistical analysis tools, does not require the same test. For a variety of reasons (including government disinterest), Read Right tutoring for reading was not chosen for a Striving Readers trial. However, the effect size scores generated by the Education Northwest comprehensive study can be used to compare Read Right’s effectiveness with results generated for Striving Readers schools. As you review these results, keep this in mind: Read Right tutoring for the Education Northwest study lasted half a school year (4.5 months). Striving Readers school project sites lasted a full school year (9 months):
  • The effect size for the top-performing Read Right school was .58. The effect size for the top-performing Striving Readers project school was .29 — the top-performing Read Right school showed twice the results in half the time as compared to the top-performing Striving Readers Project school.
  • Two of four Read Right schools produced higher effect sizes than every school in the Striving Readers Project.
  • The third of four Read Right schools scored better than 7 of the top 10 Striving Readers schools.
  • The fourth Read Right program site did not produce significant gain. However, the majority of Striving Readers Project Sites showed no significant gain.

Other Third Party Research

Dr. Jerry Litzenberger, Ph.D. in psychometrics and an experienced consultant to public schools conducted two separate studies for Read Right clients. One study compared at-risk 10th graders who participated in Read Right tutoring with at-risk 10th graders from the same district who did not participate in Read Right. The measurement instrument was the reading portion of the Washington State Assessment of Learning (WASL) that had to be passed to graduate from high school. The following results were noted by Dr. Litzenberger in his executive summary of the research:
  • No differences in performance were found between Read Right and control students in their WASL scores at grade 7.
  • Highly significant differences in reading performance were found on grade 10 WASL following tutoring with the Read Right program.
  • Read Right students’ WASL scores in reading were significantly higher at the .001 level. These differences would happen by chance less than one time in a thousand.
The second study conducted by Dr. Litzenberger was a longitudinal study. Elementary and middle school students were tested with the Woodcock Reading Mastery Test prior to their participation in Read Right, at the end of the school year in which their participation occurred, and again in an average of 3.5 years later (range = 2-5 years) .The following results were noted by Dr. Litzenberger in his executive summary of the research:
  • Students enrolled in Read Right made highly significant gains from pre-test to post-test on all six subtests of the Woodcock Reading Mastery Tests.
  • Student gains between pretest and retest two to five years later were also highly significant.
  • Student gains between pretest and retest two to five years later were also highly significant.
  • Comparisons of student scores from posttest to retest found no significant differences on any subtest except Word Identification. This means that reading gains maintained over extended periods of time.
Final reports of these studies are available upon request.

Cited as Effective & Recommended

Read Right has been cited as effective and recommended by the following:
  • Peterson CL, Caverly DC, Nicholson SA, O’Neal S, Cusenbary S (2000): Building reading proficiency at the secondary school level: A guide to resources. Austin, TX: Southwest Texas State University, Southwest Educational Development Laboratory.
  • Recommended by the National Drop-Out Prevention Center as an effective intervention (Read Right received the Center’s highest rating: strong evidence of effectiveness)
  • Read Right has been included on multiple state lists of programs qualifying as providers of Supplemental Educational Services

Evidence from Read Right Online Tutoring Students:

  • Student A: In August 2019, 5-year-old child figures out how to read on his own, a month before starting kindergarten. His parents follow the book, Read Right! Coaching Your Child to Excellence in Reading by Dee Tadlock, Ph.D. (New York: McGraw-Hill, 2005). September school testing in kindergarten reveals the child reads at an upper first/lower second grade level. School-testing in November 2020, early in his first grade year, indicates he reads at a third grade level.
  • Student B: 12-year-old starts Read Right in January 2021 at a 3rd grade level. After 22 sessions, school testing reveals student now meets grade level standard for Grade 5.
  • Student C: 28-year-old starts Read Right in January 2021 at a 3rd grade level. After 17 sessions, reads at a Grade 8 level and begins reading professional manuals.

Evidence from Read Right School-Based Project Sites:

The measuring device was the comprehension sub-set of the Gates-MacGinitie Test of Reading. Both grade level gains and Normal Curve Equivalency Gains (NCE) are reported.
  • Horizon Elementary School: 44 struggling readers gained 2.8 grade levels in one school year (NCE gain= 21.5).
  • First Creek Middle School (the lowest performing middle school in the district): 62 struggling readers gained 2.2 grade levels in one school year (NCE gain=24.4).
  • Hillside Junior High School: 70 struggling readers gained 2.5 grade levels in one school year (NCE gain= 14.0).
  • Wellpinit High School: (located on the Spokane Indian Reservation): 34 struggling readers gained 4.6 grade levels in one school year (NCE gain=20.3).

Read Right’s methods are rapid and effective. Dozens of educators, school administrators, parents, and students verify its effectiveness in our Written and Video Testimonials.

Awards Received by Read Right:

Read Right has received awards from both the world of schools and from the corporate world:
  • In September, 2003, Southwest Region Ohio School Boards Association named Read Right an Outstanding New Student Program. Read Right was in the top three and was among 12 programs that earned the award from 53 who were nominated.
  • Dee Tadlock, Ph.D., developer of Read Right, was nominated for the prestigious Brock International Prize for Innovation in Education and placed third out of nine nominees.
  • Saskatchewan Labour Force Development Board’s Training in Excellence Award, March, 1999

Record of Replication:

Between 1982 and 1991, Dr. Tadlock used Read Right methods in classrooms. The company, Read Right Systems, was founded in 1991. At that time, she began training site-based staff (adult program volunteers at workforce literacy projects, classroom teachers and their teaching assistants) to use her methods with students ages 7 through 78. As a result, she has 40 years of experience transforming thousands of struggling readers into successful readers, both as an actively working professional and as a trainer of individuals using her methods. Read Right has been implemented in 44 U.S. states, Canada, Mexico, and China. Projects have included K-12 schools, colleges, juvenile detention centers, adult prisons, community-based organizations and corporations for workforce literacy. Presently, all of the juvenile corrections facilities and adult prisons in the State of North Dakota use Read Right as their preferred tool to significantly improve the literacy levels of inmates.

Something happened to the people that went to the Read Right reading program that motivated them. They paid attention to detail because they could read better. Our safety record was the most improved in all of the Weyerhaeuser Canada operations the year we brought in Read Right.

— Bob Edwards, Manager, Weyerhaeuser Saw Mill, Kamloops, BC, Canada —