Search

Purpose: We examined the effectiveness of a multistrategy inference intervention designed to increase inference making and reading comprehension for middle-grade struggling readers., Method: A total of 66 middle-grade struggling readers were randomized to treatment (n = 33) and comparison (n = 33) conditions. Students in the treatment group received explicit instruction in 4 inference strategies (i.e., clarification using text clues; activating and using prior knowledge; understanding character perspectives and author's purpose; answering inferential questions). In addition, narrative and informational texts were carefully chosen and sequenced to build requisite background knowledge to form inferences. Intervention was delivered in small groups of 3 students for 10 days of instruction., Results: One-way analysis of covariance models on outcome measures with the respective pretest scores as a covariate revealed significant gains on a proximal measure of Egyptian-content knowledge (g = 1.37) and on a standardized measure of reading comprehension-i.e., Wechsler Individual Achievement Test-Third Edition Reading Comprehension (g = 0.46)., Conclusion: The moderate effect on a standardized measure of reading comprehension provides preliminary evidence for the effectiveness of this multistrategy inference intervention in improving reading comprehension of middle-grade struggling readers.

This study used multigroup structural equations to evaluate the possibility that a theory-driven, evidence-based, yearlong reading program for sixth-grade struggling readers moderates the interrelationships among elements of the simple model of reading (i.e., listening comprehension, word reading, and reading comprehension; Hoover & Gough, 1990). Our specific interest was in the relation of theory, program, and evaluation. Our motivating assumptions were that 1) a well-designed, theory-based program affects performance in predictable ways and that 2) treatment effects may be present even when group differences in posttest means are not robust. The analysis sample comprised 327 students, 113 in the business-as-usual condition and 214 in treatment. We pretested students in the fall of sixth grade and collected posttest data in the fall of seventh grade. There were 217 cases in the posttest sample, 47 comparison students and 170 treatment students at posttest. The findings support the possibility that treated sixth-grade students improved in response to an intensive, yearlong intervention, when conceptualizing change in terms of predictable interrelationships of important underlying skills, rather than in terms of group mean differences at posttest. Specifically, the results suggest that verbal knowledge is less proximal to the reading comprehension of students who have become proficient in the use of text processing and reading comprehension strategies. (Contains 4 tables and 3 figures.)

This study investigated the reading profiles of middle school Spanish-speaking emergent bilinguals (EBs) with significantly below grade level reading comprehension and whether these profiles varied in their reading comprehension performance over time. Latent profile analyses were used to classify Grade 6 and 7 Hispanic EBs (n = 340; 39% female) into subgroups based on their word reading and vocabulary knowledge. Growth models were then fit within each profile to evaluate reading comprehension performance over time. Analyses revealed four latent profiles emerged: (a) very low word reading and low vocabulary (10%), (b) low word reading and low vocabulary (71%), (c) average word reading and low vocabulary (16%), and (d) high word reading and low vocabulary (3%). Subgroups varied in their reading comprehension initially and over one year. Students in the subgroup marked by very low word reading and low vocabulary showed the lowest reading comprehension performance initially; however, they also showed the greatest growth over one year. These findings suggest that there is heterogeneity in the reading skill profiles of Spanish-speaking EBs with reading comprehension difficulties. They also underscore the prevalence of word reading difficulties among these students. These may be important factors to consider when developing interventions to prevent and remediate these difficulties. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Considerable research evidence supports the provision of explicit instruction for students at risk for reading difficulties; however, one of the most widely implemented approaches to early reading instruction is Guided Reading (GR; Fountas & Pinnel, 1996), which deemphasizes explicit instruction and practice of reading skills in favor of extended time reading text. This study evaluated the two approaches in the context of supplemental intervention for at-risk readers at the end of Grade 1. Students (n= 218) were randomly assigned to receive GR intervention, explicit intervention (EX), or typical school instruction (TSI). Both intervention groups performed significantly better than TSI on untimed word identification. Significant effects favored EX over TSI on phonemic decoding and one measure of comprehension. Outcomes for the intervention groups did not differ significantly from each other; however, an analysis of the added value of providing each intervention relative to expected growth with typical instruction indicated that EX is more likely to substantially accelerate student progress in phonemic decoding, text reading fluency, and reading comprehension than GR. Implications for selection of Tier 2 interventions within a response-to-intervention format are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Effective implementation of response-to-intervention (RTI) frameworks depends on efficient tools for monitoring progress. Evaluations of growth (i.e., slope) may be less efficient than evaluations of status at a single time point, especially if slopes do not add to predictions of outcomes over status. We examined progress monitoring slope validity for predicting reading outcomes among middle school students by evaluating latent growth models for different progress monitoring measure–outcome combinations. We used multi-group modeling to evaluate the effects of reading ability, reading intervention, and progress monitoring administration condition on slope validity. Slope validity was greatest when progress monitoring was aligned with the outcome (i.e., word reading fluency slope was used to predict fluency outcomes in contrast to comprehension outcomes), but effects varied across administration conditions (viz., repeated reading of familiar vs. novel passages). Unless the progress monitoring measure is highly aligned with outcome, slope may be an inefficient method for evaluating progress in an RTI context. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

The purpose of this study was to investigate the relations among oral and silent reading fluency and reading comprehension for students in Grades 6 to 8 (n = 1,421) and the use of fluency scores to identify middle school students who are at risk for failure on a high-stakes reading test. Results indicated moderate positive relations between measures of fluency and comprehension. Oral reading fluency (ORF) on passages was more strongly related to reading comprehension than ORF on word lists. A group-administered silent reading sentence verification test approximated the classification accuracy of individually administered ORF passages. The correlation between a maze task and comprehension was weaker than has been reported for elementary students. The best predictor of a high-stakes reading comprehension test was the previous year's administration of the grade-appropriate test; fluency and verbal knowledge measures accounted for only small amounts of unique variance beyond that accounted for by the previous year's administration. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The authors examine the reassessments of the National Reading Panel (NRP) report (National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, 2000) by G. Camilli, S. Vargas, and M. Yurecko (2003); G. Camilli, P. M. Wolfe, and M. L. Smith (2006); and D. D. Hammill and H. L. Swanson (2006) that disagreed with the NRP on the magnitude of the effect of systematic phonics instruction. Using the coding of the NRP studies by Camilli et al. (2003, 2006), multilevel regression analyses show that their findings do not contradict the NRP findings of effect sizes in the small to moderate range favoring systematic phonics. Extending Camilli et al. (2003, 2006), the largest effects are associated with reading instruction enhanced with components that increase comprehensiveness and intensity. In contrast to Hammill and Swanson, binomial effect size displays show that effect sizes of the magnitude found for systematic phonics by the NRP are meaningful and could result in significant improvement for many students depending on the base rate of struggling readers and the size of the effect. Camilli et al. (2003, 2006) and Hammill and Swanson do not contradict the NRP report, concurring in supporting comprehensive approaches to reading instruction. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The cognitive attributes of Grade 1 students who responded adequately and inadequately to a Tier 2 reading intervention were evaluated. The groups included inadequate responders based on decoding and fluency criteria (n = 29), only fluency criteria (n = 75), adequate responders (n = 85), and typically achieving students (n = 69). The cognitive measures included assessments of phonological awareness, rapid letter naming, oral language skills, processing speed, vocabulary, and nonverbal problem solving. Comparisons of all four groups identified phonological awareness as the most significant contributor to group differentiation. Measures of rapid letter naming, syntactic comprehension/working memory, and vocabulary also contributed uniquely to some comparisons of adequate and inadequate responders. In a series of regression analyses designed to evaluate the contributions of responder status to cognitive skills independently of variability in reading skills, only the model for rapid letter naming achieved statistical significance, accounting for a small (1%) increment in explained variance beyond that explained by models based only on reading levels. Altogether, these results do not suggest qualitative differences among the groups, but are consistent with a continuum of severity associated with the level of reading skills across the four groups. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]