Extensive Reading Interventions for Students With Reading Difficulties After Grade 3

Abstract

This synthesis extends a report of research on extensive interventions in kinder-garten 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 intervention, or grade level of intervention.

The efficacy of Collaborative Strategic Reading in middle school science and social studies classes

“…Results show that students who were in the Full CSR condition (i.e., received CSR once a week in social studies and once a week in science across a school year) earned significantly higher reading comprehension scores on the GMRT than students in BAU classes without CSR. The modest effect size (g = 0.18) is on par with similar rigorous large scale experimental studies that have found positive effects for reading comprehension instruction on standardized measures when subject to the real-world competing demands of teaching in urban schools (e.g., Fletcher & Wagner, 2014;Vaughn et al, 2011;Wanzek et al, 2013). We found no differences in GMRT scores between students in the BAU group and students in the Partial CSR condition (i.e., received CSR only once a week), the unintended treatment group formed due to scheduling conflicts that disrupted the design of a double dosage of CSR for students.…”

Can Intelligence Testing Inform Educational Intervention for Children with Reading Disability?

“…Despite the use of multi-tiered response to intervention approaches, there continues to be a small proportion of "treatment resisters" who fail to respond sufficiently to even the most powerful evidence-based approaches [131,132]. In such circumstances, it is understandable that students, parents, teachers and clinicians will search for alternative approaches.…”

Does Training in Syllable Recognition Improve Reading Speed? A Computer-Based Trial With Poor Readers From Second and Third Grade

“…This process is in many cases slower than gaining decoding accuracy, which appears to be acquired very fast in transparent orthographies . For children with reading disabilities, problems in fluency have turned out to be very persistent Eklund, Torppa, Aro, Leppänen, & Lyytinen, 2015; and rather difficult to remediate, at least with respect to normative levels of reading Wanzek et al, 2013). Despite these facts, studies on reading fluency interventions have shown that significant increases in reading fluency can be achieved (for reviews, see Chard, Vaughn, & Tyler, 2002;Therrien, 2004;Wolf & Katzir-Cohen, 2001) and that these gains have in some studies promoted reading comprehension (Breznitz, 2006;Therrien, 2004; however, see Gellert, 2014;Scammacca et al, 2007;Soriano, Miranda, Soriano, Nievas, & Felix, 2011).…”

“…In conclusion, while naming and reading speed deficits are persistent in their nature, they seem not to be resistant to intervention. Because young children appear to benefit more from reading intervention Wanzek et al, 2013), early identification, careful planning, accurate targeting of the intervention and multifaceted training in which the unique characteristics of the individual child and the orthography are taken into account may prevent the cumulative negative effects of dysfluent reading.…”