This meta‐analysis examined the effectiveness of improving reading comprehension for students in K‐12 classrooms using intelligent tutoring systems (ITSs), a computer‐based learning environment that provides customizable and immediate feedback to the learner. Nineteen studies from 13 publications incorporating approximately 10 000 students were included in the final analysis; using robust variance estimation to account for statistical dependencies, the 19 studies yielded 88 effect size estimates. The meta‐analysis indicated that the overall random effect size of ITSs on reading comprehension was 0.60 (using a mix of standardized and researcher‐designed measures) with a 95% confidence interval 0.36 to 0.85 (p < 0.001). This review confirms previous studies comparing ITSs to human tutoring: ITSs produced a small effect size when compared to human tutoring (0.20, 0.02–0.38, p = 0.036, n = 21). All comparisons to human tutoring used standardized measures. This review also found that ITSs produced a larger effect size on reading comprehension when compared to traditional instruction (0.86) for mixed measures and (0.26) for standardized measures. These findings may be of interest to practitioners and policy makers seeking to improve reading comprehension using consistent and accessible ITSs. Recommendations for researchers include conducting studies to understand the difference between traditional and updated versions of ITSs and employing valid and reliable standardized tests and researcher‐designed measures.

Orthographic processing – the ability to perceive, access, differentiate, and manipulate orthographic knowledge – is essential when learning to recognize words. Despite its critical importance in literacy acquisition, the field lacks a tool to assess this essential cognitive ability. The goal of this study was to design a computer-based assessment of orthographic processing and investigate its psychometric properties. The rationale for designing specific items was discussed, methods used to separate orthographic processing from word recognition and spelling ability were presented, and item suitability was examined. Person separation reliability was .91 for this assessment. Validity evidence was gathered and reported.

Many words in English resemble one another in multiple ways. Words with similar spellings are referred to as orthographic neighbors. The purpose of this within‐subject experimental study was to examine the effect of orthographic neighbors on the spelling acquisition of second‐grade students. In each of five sessions of a computer‐based experiment, 71 participants were presented with two prime words and prompted to learn the spelling of seven novel words. The latter seven words were control words (no meaningful connection with the corresponding prime word) and neighbor words (words representing various types of connections with the corresponding prime word). Spelling tasks were administered twice: immediately after the experiment and two days later. The findings suggest that spelling acquisition depends on two critical factors: orthographic neighbor type and orthographic processing ability. Students’ spelling acquisition was supported by analogizing rime neighbors (e.g., rain/vain). However, facilitative effects were not found for substitution neighbors (e.g., rain/ruin) and transposition neighbors (e.g., clam/calm). Additionally, a student’s level of orthographic processing was an important determinant of spelling acquisition; students with well‐developed orthographic processing ability correctly learned the novel words regardless of the presence of rime neighbors. In contrast, acquiring spelling was far more difficult for students with less developed orthographic processing ability, but their spelling acquisition was strongly facilitated by the presence of rime neighbors. Implications of this research are (a) learners’ orthographic processing skills should be considered when designing spelling instruction and (b) early elementary students need instructional support when making orthographic analogies for substitution and transposition neighbors.

No abstract