Through Google, I was able to also come across three case studies done, in coordination with school boards using the program. I considered adding to my research based on these studies; however, I decided against it for several reasons. The studies in question did not use control groups, did not collect meaningful statistical data, and were sponsored by the creators of the program. 

Ultimately, I realized that Empower Reading is not evidence-based, it’s research based. Meaning that while Empower Reading does not have strong experimental evidence supporting its efficacy, the program itself is based on well researched principles. This is not necessarily a bad thing. Many education programs do not have direct evidence, in relation to their efficacy, simply because no one has done the research yet. This being said, I do think when talking about the program’s efficacy, it needs to be established that any claims of Empower Reading being a high yield strategy is based on theoretical and anecdotal evidence, only. 

While we cannot deterministically review the efficacy of Empower Reading from an experimental basis, we can evaluate it based on the efficacy of the principles it uses. According to the website, the program teaches spelling, decoding, and reading comprehension using the following strategies:

• Balanced and flexible teaching approaches and methodologies

• Explicit teaching of skills and knowledge needed for decoding and comprehension of different types of text

• Delivery of instruction at different paces to meet individual student and group needs

• A ‘self-talk’ dialogue and an organizational structure that support students to become independent readers

• Modelling by the teacher of how students can become an expert reader

• Many activities to practice and solidify the skills and strategies being taught

• Retraining of unproductive attitudes and beliefs about success and failure

Looking at this list I can identify several factors that have strong evidence supporting their efficacy. The program makes use of an individualized curriculum, which according to my 2019 secondary meta-analysis has the highest effect size of any teaching intervention studied with meta-analysis, with an effect size (ES) of 2.35. The program uses direct instruction, which according to Hattie’s latest work has an ES of .57. The program includes phonics, which Hattie has found an ES of .58. The program uses meta-cognition strategies, which according to Hattie has an ES of .58. Lastly the program uses the direct instruction of spelling which according to a meta-analysis by Graham et al, has an ES of .79. Overall, the Empower Reading program employs many strategies that are very high yield according to the current evidence and while I cannot say the program is evidence-based, I think it is highly likely that Empower Reading is a good reading instruction program.