Apps With Genuine Research Support
The market for educational apps aimed at preschoolers is enormous and largely ahead of the research — most apps have thin or nonexistent evidence behind them. But a small number of well-designed apps have accumulated genuine research support, and the chapter names the features that separate them from the rest.
This list narrows things down to apps with actual published studies behind them, not just marketing claims of being "research-based."
The Book's Criteria for Genuine Evidence
- ✓ Systematic, sequential presentation of letter-sound relationships, not random letter play.
- ✓ Immediate, specific feedback that responds to what the child actually did.
- ✓ Active engagement required — the child has to do something meaningful, not just watch.
- ✓ Appropriate pacing, with enough time on each concept before moving on.
- ✓ No distracting gamification that pulls attention away from the literacy content.
- ✓ Look for apps with published research behind them, not just marketing that claims to be evidence-based.
Apps With Published Research Behind Them
GraphoGame
The most extensively studied literacy app in this category, with dozens of peer-reviewed publications and randomized controlled trials across more than twenty countries, developed in collaboration with the University of Cambridge and University of Jyväskylä. Studies have shown meaningful gains in phonological awareness and decoding with as little as 15 minutes a day, a few times a week. Most published research targets kindergarten and early elementary ages, though some studies have included preschoolers; check the specific language version and age recommendation before choosing it for a child under 5.
Visit GraphoGame ↗Waterford Upstart
A structured pre-K reading, math, and science program with matched-sample studies involving over 1,000 preschool children, showing statistically significant gains on standardized early literacy assessments (effect sizes of +0.50 to +0.90). It received a "Promising" evidence rating under ESSA review standards. Designed specifically for PreK, with built-in family engagement tools.
Visit Waterford Upstart ↗OgStar Early Reader
Evaluated in a pilot randomized controlled trial with preschool children heading into kindergarten, using standard DIBELS literacy measures (letter naming, phoneme segmentation, nonsense word reading). Smaller-scale evidence than GraphoGame or Waterford, but a genuine controlled study rather than marketing claims.
Visit OgStar Reading ↗Teach Your Monster to Read
Developed in direct collaboration with literacy and game-design experts and reading researchers, with a systematic sequence that mirrors synthetic phonics instruction used in UK schools. Widely used and teacher-endorsed; the evidence base is less extensive than GraphoGame's peer-reviewed trials, but its instructional design closely follows the book's criteria (sequential, adaptive, feedback-driven). Ages roughly 3–7.
Visit Teach Your Monster to Read ↗A Note on Reading the Evidence Yourself
- — Company-funded research is not automatically untrustworthy, but independent, peer-reviewed studies (published in academic journals, not just a company's own website) carry more weight.
- — Look for the actual sample size and study design — a randomized controlled trial with more than a few dozen children means much more than a testimonial or an internal "efficacy study."
- — An app studied in kindergarten or first grade doesn't automatically transfer its evidence to preschoolers; check the ages actually included in the published research, not just the marketed age range.
- — As the book emphasizes, even the best-researched app is a supplement to responsive adult interaction, not a replacement for it — no app has been shown to outperform a present, engaged adult reading with a child.
CopyRight 2026.