Search

We conducted a meta-analysis of 28 studies comprising 39 samples to ask the question, "What is the magnitude of the association between various baseline child cognitive characteristics and response to reading intervention?" Studies were located via literature searches, contact with researchers in the field, and review of references from the National Reading Panel Report. Eligible participant populations included at-risk elementary school children enrolled in the third grade or below. Effects were analyzed using a shifting unit of analysis approach within three statistical models: cognitive characteristics predicting growth curve slope (Model 1, mean r = 0.31), gain (Model 2, mean r = 0.21), or postintervention reading controlling for preintervention reading (Model 3, mean r = 0.15). Effects were homogeneous within each model when effects were aggregated within study. The small size of the effects calls into question the practical significance and utility of using cognitive characteristics for prediction of response when baseline reading is available.

No studies have investigated the cognitive attributes of middle school students who are adequate and inadequate responders to Tier 2 reading intervention. We compared students in Grades 6 and 7 representing groups of adequate responders (n = 77) and inadequate responders who fell below criteria in (a) comprehension (n = 54); (b) fluency (n = 45); and (c) decoding, fluency, and comprehension (DFC; n = 45). These students received measures of phonological awareness, listening comprehension, rapid naming, processing speed, verbal knowledge, and nonverbal reasoning. Multivariate comparisons showed a significant Group-by-Task interaction: the comprehension-impaired group demonstrated primary difficulties with verbal knowledge and listening comprehension, the DFC group with phonological awareness, and the fluency-impaired group with phonological awareness and rapid naming. A series of regression models investigating whether responder status explained unique variation in cognitive skills yielded largely null results consistent with a continuum of severity associated with level of reading impairment, with no evidence for qualitative differences in the cognitive attributes of adequate and inadequate responders.

Purpose: Agreement across methods for identifying students as inadequate responders or as learning disabled is often poor. We report (1) an empirical examination of final status (postintervention benchmarks) and dual-discrepancy growth methods based on growth during the intervention and final status for assessing response to intervention and (2) a statistical simulation of psychometric issues that may explain low agreement. Methods: After a Tier 2 intervention, final status benchmark criteria were used to identify 104 inadequate and 85 adequate responders to intervention, with comparisons of agreement and coverage for these methods and a dual-discrepancy method. Factors affecting agreement were investigated using computer simulation to manipulate reliability, the intercorrelation between measures, cutoff points, normative samples, and sample size. Results: Identification of inadequate responders based on individual measures showed that single measures tended not to identify many members of the pool of 104 inadequate responders. Poor to fair levels of agreement for identifying inadequate responders were apparent between pairs of measures. In the simulation, comparisons across 2 simulated measures generated indices of agreement (?) that were generally low because of multiple psychometric issues inherent in any test. Conclusions: Expecting excellent agreement between 2 correlated tests with even small amounts of unreliability may not be realistic. Assessing outcomes based on multiple measures, such as level of curriculum-based measure performance and short normreferenced assessments of fluency, may improve the reliability of diagnostic decisions.

This article describes a randomized controlled trial conducted to evaluate the effects of an intensive, individualized, Tier 3 reading intervention for second grade students who had previously experienced inadequate response to quality first grade classroom reading instruction (Tier 1) and supplemental small-group intervention (Tier 2). Also evaluated were cognitive characteristics of students with inadequate response to intensive Tier 3 intervention. Students were randomized to receive the research intervention (N = 47) or the instruction and intervention typically provided in their schools (N = 25). Results indicated that students who received the research intervention made significantly better growth than those who received typical school instruction on measures of word identification, phonemic decoding, and word reading fluency and on a measure of sentence- and paragraph-level reading comprehension. Treatment effects were smaller and not statistically significant on phonemic decoding efficiency, text reading fluency, and reading comprehension in extended text. Effect sizes for all outcomes except oral reading fluency met criteria for substantive importance; however, many of the students in the intervention continued to struggle. An evaluation of cognitive profiles of adequate and inadequate responders was consistent with a continuum of severity (as opposed to qualitative differences), showing greater language and reading impairment prior to the intervention in students who were inadequate responders.

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. (Contains 3 figures and 4 tables.)

This study compared the effects on reading outcomes of delivering supplemental, small-group intervention to first-grade students at risk for reading difficulties randomly assigned to one of three different treatment schedules: extended (4 sessions per week, 16 weeks; n = 66), concentrated (4 sessions per week, 8 weeks; n = 64), or distributed (2 sessions per week, 16 weeks; n = 62) schedules. All at-risk readers, identified through screening followed by 8 weeks of oral reading fluency (ORF) progress monitoring, received the same Tier 2 reading intervention in groups of 2 to 4 beginning in January of Grade 1. Group means were higher in word reading and ORF at the final time point relative to pretest; however, the groups did not differ significantly on any reading outcome or on rates of adequate intervention response. Of potential covariates, site, age, free lunch status, program coverage rate, and tutor were significantly related to student outcomes; however, the addition of these variables in multivariate models did not substantially change results. Rates of adequate intervention response were lower than have been reported for some first-grade interventions of longer duration. (Contains 3 tables.)

We conducted a meta-analysis of 28 studies comprising 39 samples to ask the question, “What is the magnitude of the association between various baseline child cognitive characteristics and response to reading intervention?” Studies were located via literature searches, contact with researchers in the field, and review of references from the National Reading Panel Report. Eligible participant populations included at-risk elementary school children enrolled in the third grade or below. Effects were analyzed using a shifting unit of analysis approach within three statistical models: cognitive characteristics predicting growth curve slope (Model 1, mean r = .31), gain (Model 2, mean r = .21), or postintervention reading controlling for preintervention reading (Model 3, mean r = .15). Effects were homogeneous within each model when effects were aggregated within study. The small size of the effects calls into question the practical significance and utility of using cognitive characteristics for prediction of response when baseline reading is available. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The cerebellar hypothesis of dyslexia posits that cerebellar deficits are associated with reading disabilities and may explain why some individuals with reading disabilities fail to respond to reading interventions. We tested these hypotheses in a sample of children who participated in a grade 1 reading intervention study ( n = 174) and a group of typically achieving children ( n = 62). At posttest, children were classified as adequately responding to the intervention ( n = 82), inadequately responding with decoding and fluency deficits ( n = 36), or inadequately responding with only fluency deficits ( n = 56). Based on the Bead Threading and Postural Stability subtests from the Dyslexia Screening Test-Junior, we found little evidence that assessments of cerebellar functions were associated with academic performance or responder status. In addition, we did not find evidence supporting the hypothesis that cerebellar deficits are more prominent for poor readers with "specific" reading disabilities (i.e., with discrepancies relative to IQ) than for poor readers with reading scores consistent with IQ. In contrast, measures of phonological awareness, rapid naming, and vocabulary were strongly associated with responder status and academic outcomes. These results add to accumulating evidence that fails to associate cerebellar functions with reading difficulties. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: In order to better understand the extent to which operationalizations of response to intervention (RTI) overlap and agree in identifying adequate and inadequate responders, an existing database of 399 first grade students was evaluated in relation to cut-points, measures, and methods frequently cited for the identification of inadequate responders to instruction. A series of 543 2×2 measures of association (808 total comparisons) were computed to address the agreement of different operationalizations of RTI. The results indicate that agreement is generally poor and that different methods tend to identify different students as inadequate responders, although agreement for identifying adequate responders is higher. Approaches to the assessment of responder status must use multiple criteria and avoid formulaic decision making. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Purpose: Agreement across methods for identifying students as inadequate responders or as learning disabled is often poor. We report (1) an empirical examination of final status (postintervention benchmarks) and dual-discrepancy growth methods based on growth during the intervention and final status for assessing response to intervention and (2) a statistical simulation of psychometric issues that may explain low agreement. Methods: After a Tier 2 intervention, final status benchmark criteria were used to identify 104 inadequate and 85 adequate responders to intervention, with comparisons of agreement and coverage for these methods and a dual-discrepancy method. Factors affecting agreement were investigated using computer simulation to manipulate reliability, the intercorrelation between measures, cutoff points, normative samples, and sample size. Results: Identification of inadequate responders based on individual measures showed that single measures tended not to identify many members of the pool of 104 inadequate responders. Poor to fair levels of agreement for identifying inadequate responders were apparent between pairs of measures. In the simulation, comparisons across 2 simulated measures generated indices of agreement (κ) that were generally low because of multiple psychometric issues inherent in any test. Conclusions: Expecting excellent agreement between 2 correlated tests with even small amounts of unreliability may not be realistic. Assessing outcomes based on multiple measures, such as level of curriculum-based measure performance and short norm-referenced assessments of fluency, may improve the reliability of diagnostic decisions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article describes a randomized controlled trial conducted to evaluate the effects of an intensive, individualized, Tier 3 reading intervention for second grade students who had previously experienced inadequate response to quality first grade classroom reading instruction (Tier 1) and supplemental small-group intervention (Tier 2). Also evaluated were cognitive characteristics of students with inadequate response to intensive Tier 3 intervention. Students were randomized to receive the research intervention (N = 47) or the instruction and intervention typically provided in their schools (N = 25). Results indicated that students who received the research intervention made significantly better growth than those who received typical school instruction on measures of word identification, phonemic decoding, and word reading fluency and on a measure of sentence- and paragraph-level reading comprehension. Treatment effects were smaller and not statistically significant on phonemic decoding efficiency, text reading fluency, and reading comprehension in extended text. Effect sizes for all outcomes except oral reading fluency met criteria for substantive importance; however, many of the students in the intervention continued to struggle. An evaluation of cognitive profiles of adequate and inadequate responders was consistent with a continuum of severity (as opposed to qualitative differences), showing greater language and reading impairment prior to the intervention in students who were inadequate responders. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Addressing the literacy needs of secondary school students involves efforts to raise the achievement levels of all students and to address specifically the needs of struggling readers. One approach to this problem is to consider the application of a Response to Intervention (RTI) model with older students. We describe an approach to enhanced literacy instruction for middle school students that includes the essential components of any RTI model: universal screening, progress monitoring, and multi-tiered instructional service delivery. We use screening and progress-monitoring tools specifically tied to state accountability tests and a multi-tiered instructional framework that addresses the literacy needs of all middle school students, including struggling readers. Presently a large-scale, multi-site randomized trial is under way to evaluate the feasibility and effectiveness of this RTI model for middle school students. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]