Results
Proven results.
We compared the performance of children supported by the Leiamos Methodology against a control group, at two points of assessment.
In numbers
- 0+reading activities available on the platform.
- >0%recovery rate for children at risk in learning to read.
- 0+reading journeys powered by Leiamos.
- Words
- Pseudowords
- Critical value — Words
- Critical value — Pseudowords
| Group | Words | Pseudowords |
|---|---|---|
| Control group | 34.1% | 33.7% |
| Intervention group | 58.5% | 61.7% |
The values refer to the second assessment point. At the first, both groups started from very low performance.
1st grade
The intervention group, following the Leiamos Methodology, achieved results above the minimum expected level.
Minimum critical values for the age
- 58%Words
- 50,8%Pseudowords
Skills assessedDomains assessed: word reading and pseudoword reading. At the first assessment point, both groups showed very low performance. By the second point, the intervention group surpassed the critical thresholds set as the minimum acceptable for their age (58% for words and 50.8% for pseudowords), while the control group remained below those thresholds.
Preschool
Skills assessedResults compared across two skills fundamental to learning to read: phonemic segmentation (the ability to break words down into their sounds) and explicit phonemic awareness (the ability to consciously manipulate speech sounds), between a control group (no intervention) and an intervention group (using the Leiamos Methodology).
What was observedAt the first assessment point, both groups showed low performance. By the second point, the intervention group clearly surpassed the defined critical thresholds, while the control group made progress but did not reach the minimum desirable levels.
Applying the Leiamos Methodology had a significant impact on students' phonemic awareness.