This meta-analysis included experimental or quasi-experimental intervention studies conducted between 1980 and 2020 that aimed to improve reading outcomes for Grade K-5 students with or at risk for dyslexia (i.e., students with or at risk for word reading difficulties, defined as scoring at or below normreferenced screening or mean baseline performance thresholds articulated in our inclusion criteria). In all, 53 studies reported in 52 publications met inclusion criteria (m = 351; total student N = 6,053). We employed robust variance estimation to address dependent effect sizes arising from multiple outcomes and comparisons within studies. Results indicated a statistically significant main effect of instruction on norm-referenced reading outcomes (g = 0.33; p < .001). Because there was significant heterogeneity in effect sizes across studies (p < .01), we used meta-regression to identify the degree to which student characteristics (i.e., grade level), intervention characteristics (i.e., dosage, instructional components, multisensory nature, instructional group size), reading outcome domain (i.e., phonological awareness, word reading/ spelling, passage reading, or reading comprehension), or research methods (i.e., sample size, study design) influenced intervention effects. Dosage and reading outcome domain were the only variables that significantly moderated intervention effects (p = .040 and p = .024, respectively), with higher dosage studies associated with larger effects (b = 0.002) and reading comprehension outcomes associated with smaller effects than word reading/spelling outcomes (b = −0.080).

This study meta-analyzed the last four decades of reading intervention research focused on improving reading outcomes for English language (EL) students in Grades K-5 with or at risk for word reading difficulties. Experimental and quasi-experimental group design and single-case experimental design (SCED) studies were included; 10 group design and 7 SCED studies met inclusion criteria (m = 61; total student N = 2,270). Visual inspection of the effect size distribution revealed that the assumption of between-study heterogeneity was not supported; therefore, the findings were synthesized for SCED studies separately from those reported in group design studies. Implications for practice, policy, and future research are discussed.In public schools across the United States, English learners (ELs) constitute a large and fast-growing student demographic (National Center for Educational Statistics [NCES], 2020). Specifically, in the fall of 2018, more than 10% of the nation's K-12 students were classified as ELs, representing approximately 5 million students (NCES, 2020). Nationwide, the number of ELs in school grew by 28% from 2000 to 2016, with 17 states seeing a greater than 100% increase (Office of English Language Acquisition, 2020).National data demonstrate that many children who are ELs are not able to read proficiently; for example, the majority of fourth-grade EL students are not reading at a proficient level (10%; National Association of Education Progress, 2019). Complex and interrelated factors explain disparities in elementary-grade reading performance between EL and English monolingual (EM) students. Demographic data suggest that Hispanics experience systemic inequities in access to education, healthcare, and economic opportunities, and communities with large proportions of ELs experience higher poverty rates (National Center for Education Statistics, 2019). As a result, more ELs attend schools of poorer quality and with fewer resources and experienced teachers than do EM students (Cosentino de Cohen et al., 2005;Gándara et al., 2003; Office for Civil Rights, 2016). Income disparities also factor into fewer out-of-school-time (OST) opportunities available to ELs, both before and after the Requests for reprints should be sent to Emily J. Solari, University of Virginia. Electronic inquiries should be sent to

No abstract

The contribution of self-regulation to academic achievement is supported by robust research evidence. Incorporating practices to enhance self-regulation during small-group reading instruction is associated with improved outcomes for upper-elementary students with learning disabilities in reading. Two evidence-based self-regulation practices are (a) recognizing negative thoughts and (b) using positive self-talk. However, there are challenges with effectively teaching these self-regulation strategies during reading instruction. In particular, special education or reading intervention teachers may find it difficult to incorporate this kind of self-regulation instruction during reading lessons in a way that does not overburden student working memory or take too much time from explicit, systematic instruction in reading skills. This article defines self-regulation, describes how to support students in recognizing negative thoughts and using positive self-talk, and provides guidance to enable teachers to implement self-regulation strategy instruction in a way that complements reading instruction.

The purposes of this study were to (a) describe the extent to which motivational practices are incorporated in foundational reading interventions for students with or at risk for dyslexia in kindergarten through Grade 5 (K-5) and (b) explore whether the presence and type of motivational practices (i.e., supports vs. strategies) within foundational reading interventions influenced the magnitude of the intervention effects on reading outcomes. We analyzed the same set of studies as Hall et al. ( 2022), who meta-analyzed experimental and quasi-experimental research of reading interventions implemented with K-5 students with or at risk for dyslexia from 1980 to 2020. Results of the current study show that only 44% of the interventions included motivational practices. The majority (84%) of those interventions addressed student motivation and engagement through motivational supports, such as game-like activities, paired work, and setting improvement goals. A much smaller percentage (16%) provided explicit motivational strategy instruction. Results indicated that reading interventions that include direct motivational strategy instruction tend to have larger effects on reading outcomes than both interventions without any motivational practices and those that include motivational supports only. The positive effect of motivational strategy instruction was stronger on measures of word reading than overall reading or reading comprehension outcomes. These findings highlight the need to address motivational challenges of students with reading difficulties and lend insight into how foundational reading skills interventions can be bolstered through incorporating motivational strategy instruction.