Effects of Targeted Intervention on Early Literacy Skills of At-Risk Students

Wang, Chuang; Algozzine, Bob

doi:10.1080/02568540809594637

Cited by 25 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…While some have focused on gender differences in phonological awareness (Moura et al, 2008), for example, others have measured gender differences in decoding or reading comprehension (Lepola, 2004;Prior et al, 1995). These findings are consistent with existing research that indicates few, if any, differential gains between boys and girls (Below et al, 2010;Chard et al, 2008;Wang & Algozzine, 2008). In this study, we advance existing research by examining whether boys and girls vary in different skills required for reading.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 80%

“…For instance, within the existing literature on early schooling, a number of studies have addressed specific areas of reading, such as oral reading fluency (Below et al, 2010;Wang & Algozzine, 2008), phonological awareness (Moura et al, 2008;Papadopoulos et al, 2009;Savage & Carless, 2004;Savage, Carless, & Ferraro, 2007) or sight words and decoding (Galletly et al, 2009). For instance, within the existing literature on early schooling, a number of studies have addressed specific areas of reading, such as oral reading fluency (Below et al, 2010;Wang & Algozzine, 2008), phonological awareness (Moura et al, 2008;Papadopoulos et al, 2009;Savage & Carless, 2004;Savage, Carless, & Ferraro, 2007) or sight words and decoding (Galletly et al, 2009).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Reading and Related Skills in the Early School Years: Are boys really more likely to struggle?

Limbrick

Wheldall

Madelaine

2012

International Journal of Disability, Development and Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study examined whether boys and girls in the early school years differed in reading and related skills, and their rates of progress. Gender ratios were calculated to ascertain whether there were more boys than girls who struggle with different facets of reading, and whether the variability of boys' scores resulted in more boys being identified as poor readers, as evidenced by previous studies. A sample of 335 students in Years 1 and 2 were administered six reading and related assessments. Boys and girls did not significantly differ on any of the measures, and differences in gains were negligible. Boys did not consistently demonstrate significantly greater variability in scores (with the exception of single-word reading and spelling in Year 1 only). These differences, however, did not affect gender ratios for poor performance. Gender ratios were relatively low across measures, but increased with years of schooling. Implications of the results are discussed.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 80%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reading and Related Skills in the Early School Years: Are boys really more likely to struggle?

Limbrick

Wheldall

Madelaine

2012

International Journal of Disability, Development and Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…When calculating study-level effect sizes, if there was more than one measure within a given outcome domain (i.e., more than one measure of PA, decoding/encoding, connected-text reading, or reading comprehension), we calculated a mean effect size using a random effects model that employed a restricted maximum likelihood approach to estimate variance. All analyses were conducted with the metafor package (Viechtbauer, 2010) and the clubSandwich package (Pustejovsky, 2019) for the R statistical computing environment (R Core Team, 2019).…”

Section: Effect Size Calculation and Meta-analytic Proceduresmentioning

confidence: 99%

Forty Years of Reading Intervention Research for Elementary Students with or at Risk for Dyslexia: A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis

Hall

Dahl-Leonard

Cho

et al. 2022

Reading Research Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

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).

show abstract

“…(3) The support offered was targeted at pupils who had an identified problem in basic attainments, either early literacy skills (Grek, Mathes, and Torgesen 2003;Miller 2003;Savage, Carless, and Stuart 2003;Carless 2005, 2008;O'Shaughnessy and Swanson 2000;Wang and Algozzine 2008;Vadasy, Sanders, and Peyton 2006;Vadasy, Sanders, and Tudor 2007), literacy and numeracy (Welch et al 1995), numeracy (Muijs and Reynolds 2003) or a more general language delay (Boyle et al 2007). (4) The size of intervention and comparison/control groups varied from 15 (O'Shaughnessy and Swanson 2000) to approximately 180 (Muijs and Reynolds 2003) with the majority ranging from 17 to 33 in each group.…”

Section: Targeted Intervention Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

The impact of teaching assistants on improving pupils’ academic achievement in mainstream schools: a review of the literature

et al. 2010

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper discusses key findings from one aspect of a systematic review of the literature carried out by the Inclusion Review Group at Manchester University, on behalf of the Evidence for Policy and Practice Information (EPPI) Centre. The specific focus of this element of the review was on the impact of teaching assistants (TAs) (or their equivalent) on improving pupils' academic achievement that had been measured in some way before and after a period of intervention/ support from a TA. The synthesis of findings from the review indicates that the academic achievements of primary aged pupils with identified difficulties in learning, typically in literacy, improve significantly following a period of targeted intervention from TAs. However findings from studies, where support is of a more general nature and not directed at pupils with identified difficulties, are more equivocal suggesting that the presence of TAs in mainstream classes may not have a positive impact on the achievements of all pupils. These findings have major implications for the ongoing training, management, support and deployment of TAs in mainstream schools.

show abstract

Effects of Targeted Intervention on Early Literacy Skills of At-Risk Students

Cited by 25 publications

References 31 publications

Reading and Related Skills in the Early School Years: Are boys really more likely to struggle?

Reading and Related Skills in the Early School Years: Are boys really more likely to struggle?

Forty Years of Reading Intervention Research for Elementary Students with or at Risk for Dyslexia: A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis

The impact of teaching assistants on improving pupils’ academic achievement in mainstream schools: a review of the literature

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About