Extensive Reading Interventions for Students With Reading Difficulties After Grade 3
TL;DR: Wanzek et al. as discussed by the authors extended a report of research on extensive interventions in kindergarten through third grade to students in Grades 4 through 12, recognizing that many of the same questions about the effectiveness of reading interventions with younger students are important to address with older students, including how effective are extensive intervention in improving reading outcomes for older students with reading difficulties or disabilities and what features of extensive interventions are associated with improved outcomes.
Abstract: This synthesis extends a report of research on extensive interventions in kindergarten through third grade (Wanzek & Vaughn, 2007) to students in Grades 4 through 12, recognizing that many of the same questions about the effectiveness of reading interventions with younger students are important to address with older students, including (a) how effective are extensive interventions in improving reading outcomes for older students with reading difficulties or disabilities and (b) what features of extensive interventions (e.g., group size, duration, grade level) are associated with improved outcomes. Nineteen studies were synthesized. Ten studies met criteria for a meta-analysis, reporting on 22 distinct treatment/comparison differences. Mean effect sizes ranged from 0.10 to 0.16 for comprehension, word reading, word reading fluency, reading fluency, and spelling outcomes. No significant differences in student outcomes were noted among studies related to instructional group size, relative number of hours of ...
Citations
More filters
TL;DR: The combined corpus of 82 study-wise effect sizes was meta- analyzed to determine the overall effectiveness of reading interventions studied over the past 30 years, how the magnitude of the effect varies based on student, intervention, and research design characteristics, and what differences in effectiveness exist between more recent interventions and older ones.
Abstract: This meta-analysis synthesizes the literature on interventions for struggling readers in Grades 4 through 12 published between 1980 and 2011. It updates Scammacca et al.’s analysis of studies published between 1980 and 2004. The combined corpus of 82 study-wise effect sizes was meta-analyzed to determine (a) the overall effectiveness of reading interventions studied over the past 30 years, (b) how the magnitude of the effect varies based on student, intervention, and research design characteristics, and (c) what differences in effectiveness exist between more recent interventions and older ones. The analysis yielded a mean effect of 0.49, considerably smaller than the 0.95 mean effect reported in 2007. The mean effect for standardized measures was 0.21, also much smaller than the 0.42 mean effect reported in 2007. The mean effects for reading comprehension measures were similarly diminished. Results indicated that the mean effects for the 1980–2004 and 2005–2011 groups of studies were different to a statistically significant degree. The decline in effect sizes over time is attributed at least in part to increased use of standardized measures, more rigorous and complex research designs, differences in participant characteristics, and improvements in the school’s “business-as-usual” instruction that often serves as the comparison condition in intervention studies.
265 citations
Cites background or result from "Extensive Reading Interventions for..."
...In their meta-analysis on reading interventions that provided at least 75 sessions to students in Grades 4 through 12, Wanzek et al. (2013) found mean effect sizes ranged from 0.10 (reading comprehension outcomes) to 0.16 (reading fluency and word-reading fluency outcomes), comparable to the…...
[...]
...All studies in Wanzek et al. (2013) were included in the present meta-analyses....
[...]
...Wanzek et al. (2013) focused their meta-analysis on adolescent reading interventions that provided at least 75 sessions to students in Grades 4 through 12....
[...]
...Flynn et al. (2012) and Wanzek et al. (2013) were unable to find moderator variables that explained the variability present in the effect sizes in their meta-analyses....
[...]
TL;DR: It is demonstrated that severe reading and spelling difficulties can be ameliorated with appropriate treatment and research should intensify the application of blinded randomized controlled trials.
Abstract: Children and adolescents with reading disabilities experience a significant impairment in the acquisition of reading and spelling skills. Given the emotional and academic consequences for children with persistent reading disorders, evidence-based interventions are critically needed. The present meta-analysis extracts the results of all available randomized controlled trials. The aims were to determine the effectiveness of different treatment approaches and the impact of various factors on the efficacy of interventions. The literature search for published randomized-controlled trials comprised an electronic search in the databases ERIC, PsycINFO, PubMed, and Cochrane, and an examination of bibliographical references. To check for unpublished trials, we searched the websites clinicaltrials.com and ProQuest, and contacted experts in the field. Twenty-two randomized controlled trials with a total of 49 comparisons of experimental and control groups could be included. The comparisons evaluated five reading fluency trainings, three phonemic awareness instructions, three reading comprehension trainings, 29 phonics instructions, three auditory trainings, two medical treatments, and four interventions with coloured overlays or lenses. One trial evaluated the effectiveness of sunflower therapy and another investigated the effectiveness of motor exercises. The results revealed that phonics instruction is not only the most frequently investigated treatment approach, but also the only approach whose efficacy on reading and spelling performance in children and adolescents with reading disabilities is statistically confirmed. The mean effect sizes of the remaining treatment approaches did not reach statistical significance. The present meta-analysis demonstrates that severe reading and spelling difficulties can be ameliorated with appropriate treatment. In order to be better able to provide evidence-based interventions to children and adolescent with reading disabilities, research should intensify the application of blinded randomized controlled trials.
254 citations
TL;DR: In the past decade, the Office of Special Education Programs in the U.S. Department of Education commissioned two nationally representative, longitudinal studies of the academic achievement of students with disabilities in elementary and high schools as discussed by the authors.
Abstract: T EA C H IN G E xc ep ti on al C hi ld re n , V ol . 46 , N o. 4 , pp . 13 –1 8. C op yr ig ht 2 01 4 T he A ut ho r( s) . D O I: 1 0. 11 77 /0 04 00 59 91 45 22 96 6 We begin with this little noticed but important and uncontestable fact: Many students with disabilities are performing abysmally in America’s schools. In the past decade, the Office of Special Education Programs in the U.S. Department of Education commissioned two nationally representative, longitudinal studies of the academic achievement of students with disabilities in elementary and high schools—the Special Education Elementary Longitudinal Study (SEELS) and the National Longitudinal Transition Study-2 (NLTS-2). In 2008, the SEELS data indicated that 64% of the elementary school children with learning disabilities (LD) were scoring below the 20th percentile on the Woodcock-Johnson Passage Comprehension Test (Schiller, Sanford, & Blackorby, 2008). High school students with LD, according to the NLTS-2 data, were on average 3.4 years behind grade level in reading; 3.2 years behind in math. One quarter of the students with LD dropped out of school and only 46% of students with LD had paid employment 2 years later (Wagner, Marder et al., 2003; Wagner, Newman et al., 2003).
137 citations
Cites background from "Extensive Reading Interventions for..."
...Further, the success rate of older students (Grades 4 and older) participating in Tier 2 type interventions is less than that of primary-grade students (e.g., Gilbert et al., 2013; O’Connor & Fuchs, 2013; Vaughn et al., 2010; Wanzek et al., 2013)....
[...]
Book•
[...]
TL;DR: The Dyslexia Debate examines how we use the term "dyslexia" and questions its efficacy as a diagnosis as mentioned in this paper, while many believe that a diagnosis of dyslexia will shed light on a reader's struggles and help identify the best form of intervention.
Abstract: The Dyslexia Debate examines how we use the term 'dyslexia' and questions its efficacy as a diagnosis. While many believe that a diagnosis of dyslexia will shed light on a reader's struggles and help identify the best form of intervention, Julian G. Elliott and Elena L. Grigorenko show that it adds little value. In fact, our problematic interpretation of the term could prove to be a major disservice to many children with difficulties learning to read. This book outlines in detail the diverse ways in which reading problems have been conceptualized and operationalized. Elliott and Grigorenko consider the latest research in cognitive science, genetics, and neuroscience, and the limitations of these fields in terms of professional action. They then provide a more helpful, scientifically rigorous way to describe the various types of reading difficulties and discuss empirically supported forms of intervention.
132 citations
TL;DR: In this article, a systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted to identify effective academic interventions for elementary and middle school students in the United States, focusing on socioeconomic status as a major predictor of educational achievement.
Abstract: Socioeconomic status is a major predictor of educational achievement. This systematic review and meta-analysis seeks to identify effective academic interventions for elementary and middle school st...
123 citations
Cites background or result from "Extensive Reading Interventions for..."
...K to 12 with learning disabilities; and Edmonds et al. (2009); Flynn, Zheng, and Swanson (2012); Wanzek et al. (2013); and Scammaca, Roberts, Vaughn, and Stuebing (2015) reviewed programs for struggling readers in Grades 6 to 12, 5 to 9, above fourth grade, and Grades 4 to 12, respectively....
[...]
...The negative estimate may seem counterintuitive, but has been noted in other reviews as well (e.g., Wanzek et al., 2006; Wanzek et al., 2013)....
[...]
References
More filters
Book•
01 Apr 2002
TL;DR: This work focuses on the development of a single model for Multilevel Regression, which has been shown to provide good predictive power in relation to both the number of cases and the severity of the cases.
Abstract: 1. Introduction to Multilevel Analysis. 2. The Basic Two-Level Regression Model. 3. Estimation and Hypothesis Testing in Multilevel Regression. 4. Some Important Methodological and Statistical Issues. 5. Analyzing Longitudinal Data. 6. The Multilevel Generalized Linear Model for Dichotomous Data and Proportions. 7. The Multilevel Generalized Linear Model for Categorical and Count Data. 8. Multilevel Survival Analysis. 9. Cross-classified Multilevel Models. 10. Multivariate Multilevel Regression Models. 11. The Multilevel Approach to Meta-Analysis. 12. Sample Sizes and Power Analysis in Multilevel Regression. 13. Advanced Issues in Estimation and Testing. 14. Multilevel Factor Models. 15. Multilevel Path Models. 16. Latent Curve Models.
5,395 citations
TL;DR: In this article, the effect size estimator of Glass's estimator, the sample mean difference divided by the sample standard deviation, is studied in the context of an explicit statistical model.
Abstract: Glass's estimator of effect size, the sample mean difference divided by the sample standard deviation, is studied in the context of an explicit statistical model. The exact distribution of Glass's estimator is obtained and the estimator is shown to have a small sample bias. The minimum variance unbiased estimator is obtained and shown to have uniformly smaller variance than Glass's (biased) estimator. Measurement error is shown to attenuate estimates of effect size and a correction is given. The effects of measurement invalidity are discussed. Expressions for weights that yield the most precise weighted estimate of effect size are also derived.
3,880 citations
"Extensive Reading Interventions for..." refers methods in this paper
...For all studies, the Hedges (1981) procedure for calculating unbiased estimates of Cohen’s d was used (this statistic is also known as Hedges’s g)....
[...]
TL;DR: The two methods of instruction were not differentially effective for children who entered the study with different levels of phonological ability, and the best overall predictors of long-term growth were resource room teacher ratings of attention/behavior, general verbal able, and prior levels of component reading skills.
Abstract: Sixty children with severe reading disabilities were randomly assigned to two instructional programs that incorporated principles of effective instruction but differed in depth and extent of instruction in phonemic awareness and phonemic decoding skills. All children received 67.5 hours of one-to-one instruction in two 50-minute sessions per day for 8 weeks. Both instructional programs produced very large improvements in generalized reading skills that were stable over a 2-year follow-up period. When compared to the growth in broad reading ability that the participants made during their previous 16 months in learning disabilities resource rooms, their growth during the intervention produced effect sizes of 4.4 for one of the interventions and 3.9 for the other. Although the children's average scores on reading accuracy and comprehension were in the average range at the end of the follow-up period, measures of reading rate showed continued severe impairment for most of the children. Within 1 year following the intervention, 40% of the children were found to be no longer in need of special education services. The two methods of instruction were not differentially effective for children who entered the study with different levels of phonological ability, and the best overall predictors of long-term growth were resource room teacher ratings of attention/behavior, general verbal ability, and prior levels of component reading skills.
1,020 citations
"Extensive Reading Interventions for..." refers background or methods or result in this paper
...Two studies that could not be included in the meta-analysis examined the impact of extensive intervention on word reading or decoding fluency (Torgesen et al., 2001; Wilson & Frederickson, 1995)....
[...]
...Torgesen et al. (2001) reported significant mean standard score gains from pretest to posttest of 6.6 to 12.3 on two measures of passage comprehension for two treatments implemented 1:1 for approximately 68 hours for upper-elementary students with LD....
[...]
...Six studies that could not be included in the meta-analysis measured the effects of extensive intervention on word reading and decoding (Benner et al., 2011; England et al., 2002; Gabor, 2010; Rankhorn et al., 1998; Torgesen et al., 2001; Wilson & Frederickson, 1995)....
[...]
...Five additional studies measured spelling outcomes following extensive intervention (England et al., 2002; Gabor, 2010; Rankhorn et al., 1998; Torgesen et al., 2001; Wilson & Frederickson, 1995)....
[...]
...Three studies examined pretest to posttest gains for students’ reading fluency following intervention (Mercer et al., 2000; Snider, 1997; Torgesen et al., 2001)....
[...]
TL;DR: In this article, the authors present quality indicators for experimental and quasi-experimental studies for special education, intended not only to evaluate the merits of a completed research report or article but also to serve as an organizer of critical issues for consideration in research.
Abstract: This article presents quality indicators for experimental and quasi-experimental studies for special education. These indicators are intended not only to evaluate the merits of a completed research report or article but also to serve as an organizer of critical issues for consideration in research. We believe these indicators can be used widely, from assisting in the development of research plans to evaluating proposals. In this article, the framework and rationale is explained by providing brief descriptions of each indicator. Finally, we suggest a standard for determining whether a practice may be considered evidence-based. It is our intent that this standard for evidenced-based practice and the indicators be reviewed, revised as needed, and adopted by the field of special education.
941 citations
"Extensive Reading Interventions for..." refers methods in this paper
...Random assignment to treatment, fidelity data collection, and use of reliable and valid standardized measures are three elements of high-quality studies that improve the validity of the findings (Gersten et al., 2005; IES, 2008)....
[...]
01 Jan 2015
869 citations
"Extensive Reading Interventions for..." refers background in this paper
...In 2008, the Institute of Education Sciences (IES) issued a research-based practice guide on adolescent literacy (Grades 4–12), making recommendations for effective instruction (Kamil et al., 2008)....
[...]