This article reviews published experimental studies from 2000 to 2012 that evaluated the effects of providing reading interventions to English learners who were at risk for experiencing academic difficulties, including students with learning disabilities. Criteria included: (a) the study was published in a peer-referred journal, (b) the study was an intervention for English learners at risk or with a learning disability in Grades K–12, (c) data were disaggregated by English learner status if all participants were not English learners, and (d) information about fidelity of implementation was reported. Twelve studies met these criteria. Results of seven studies conducted in kindergarten and first grade indicated significant moderate-to-large effect sizes (ES range, 0.58–0.91) for interventions targeting beginning reading skills. Findings in five of the 12 studies suggested significant moderate-to-large effects in reading or listening comprehension (ES range, 0.47–2.34). The interventions in these studies included explicit instruction, and 10 used published intervention programs. Moderator variables, such as group size, minutes of intervention, and type of personnel delivering the intervention, were not significant predictors of outcomes.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
ArcherA. L.GleasonM. M.VachonV. (2000). REWARDS Reading excellence: Word attack and rate development strategies. Longmont, CO: Sopris West.
2.
AugustD.HakutaK. (1997). Improving schooling for language minority children: A research agenda. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
3.
AugustD.ShanahanT. (2006). Developing literacy in second-language learners: Report of the National Literacy Panel on language-minority children and youth. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
4.
BakerD. L.KostyD. (2012, February). Effect of learning opportunities on the reading performance in Spanish of first grade English learners. Paper presented at the Pacific Coast Research Conference, San Diego, CA.
5.
BakerD. L.ParkY.BakerS. K. (2012). The reading performance of English learners in grades 1 to 3: The role of initial status and growth on reading fluency in Spanish and English. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 25, 251–281.
6.
BakerD. L.StoolmillerM.GoodR. H.BakerS. K. (2011). Effect of reading comprehension on passage fluency in Spanish and English for second-grade English learners. School Psychology Review, 40, 331–351.
7.
BakerS.LesauxN.JayanthiM.DiminoJ.ProctorC. P.MorrisJ.. . . Newman-GoncharR. (2014). Teaching academic content and literacy to English learners in elementary and middle school (NCEE 2014-4012). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. Retrieved from http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/pdf/practice_guides/english_learners_pg_040114.pdf
8.
BegenyJ. C. (2009). Helping Early Literacy With Practice Strategies (HELPS): A one-on-one program designed to improve students’ reading fluency. Raleigh, NC: HELPS Education Fund.
9.
*BegenyJ. C.RossS. G.GreeneD. J.MitchellR. C.WhitehouseM. H. (2012). Effects of the helping early literacy with practice strategies (HELPS) reading fluency program with latino english language learners: a preliminary evaluation. Journal of Behavioral Education, 21, 134-149.
10.
BiancarosaG.SnowC. E. (2004). Reading next: A vision for action and research in middle and high school literacy. A report from Carnegie Corporation of New York. Washington, DC: Alliance for Excellent Education.
11.
BryantB. R.ShihM.BryantD. P. (2009). The Gray oral reading test–fourth edition. In NaglieriJ.A.GoldsteinS. (Eds.), Practitioners guide to assessing intelligence and achievement (pp. 417-447). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley
12.
CarloM. S.AugustD.McLaughlinB.SnowC. E.DresslerC.LippmanD. N.. . . WhiteC. E. (2004). Closing the gap: Addressing the vocabulary needs of English-language learners in bilingual and mainstream classrooms. Reading Research Quarterly, 39, 188–215.
13.
CattsH. W.AdolfS. M.Ellis WeismerS. (2006). Language deficits in poor comprehenders: A case for the simple view of reading. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 49, 278–293.
14.
CattsH. W.ComptonD.TomblinJ. B.BridgesM. (2012). Prevalence and nature of late-emerging reading disabilities. Journal of Educational Psychology, 104, 166–181.
15.
CenaJ.BakerD. L.Kame′enuiE. J.BakerS. K.ParkY.SmolkowskiK. (2013). The impact of a systematic and explicit vocabulary intervention in Spanish with Spanish-speaking English learners in first grade. Reading and Writing, 26, 1289–1316.
16.
ChiappeP.SiegelL. S.Wade-WoolleyL. (2002). Linguistic diversity and the development of reading skills: A longitudinal study. Scientific Studies of Reading, 6, 369–400.
17.
CuttingL. E.ScarboroughH. S. (2006). Prediction of reading comprehension: Relative contributions of word recognition, language proficiency, and other cognitive skills can depend on how comprehension is measured. Scientific Studies of Reading, 10, 277–299.
18.
De AvilaE. A.DuncanS. E. (1990). Language assessment scales-oral. Monterey, CA: CTB.
19.
*DentonC. A.AnthonyJ. L.ParkerR.HasrouckJ. E. (2004). Effects of two tutoring programs on the English reading development of Spanish-English bilingual students. Elementary School Journal, 104, 289–305.
20.
DunnL. M.DunnL. M. (1981). Manual for the Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test–Revised. Circle Pines, MN: American Guidance Service.
21.
DunnL. M.DunnD. M. (1997). The Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test (3rd ed.). Circle Pines, MN: American Guidance Services.
22.
EdmondsM. S.VaughnS.WexlerJ.ReutebuchC.CableA.TackettK. K.SchnakenbergJ. W. (2009). A synthesis of reading interventions and effects on reading comprehension outcomes for older struggling readers. Review of Educational Research, 79, 262–300.
23.
EhriL. C.NunesS. R.WillowsD. M.SchusterB. V.Yaghoub-ZadehZ.ShanahanT. (2001). Phonemic awareness instruction helps children learn to read: Evidence from the National Reading Panel’s meta-analysis. Reading Research Quarterly, 36, 250–287.
24.
ElbaumB.VaughnS.HughesM.MoodyS. W. (1999). Grouping practices and reading outcomes for students with disabilities. Exceptional Children, 65, 399–415.
FarniaF.GevaE. (2011). Cognitive correlates of vocabulary growth in English language learners. Applied Psycholinguistics, 32, 711–738.
28.
FrancisD.CarloM.AugustD.KenyonD.MalabongaV.CaglarcanS.LouguitM. (2001). Test of Phonological Processing in Spanish. Washington, DC: Center for Applied Linguistics.
29.
FuchsD.FuchsL. S.ThompsonA.Al OtaibaS.YenL.YangN. J.. . . O’ConnorR. E. (2001). Is reading important in reading-readiness programs? A randomized field trial with teachers as program implementers. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93, 251–267.
30.
GerstenR.BakerS. (2000). What we know about effective instructional practices for English-language learners. Exceptional Children, 66, 454–470.
31.
GerstenR.BakerS. K.ShanahanT.Linan-ThompsonS.CollinsP.ScarcellaR. (2007). Effective literacy and English language instruction for English learners in the elementary grades. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education.
32.
GerstenR.ComptonD.ConnorC. M.DiminoJ.SantoroL.Linan-ThompsonS.TillyW. D. (2008). Assisting students struggling with reading: Response to intervention and multi-tier intervention for reading in the primary grades. A practice guide (NCEE 2009-4045). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. Retrieved from http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/pdf/practice_guides/rti_reading_pg_021809.pdf
33.
GerstenR.JiménezR. T. (1998). Promoting learning for culturally and linguistically diverse students: Classroom applications from contemporary research. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
34.
GevaE.FarniaF. (2012). Developmental changes in the nature of language proficiency and reading fluency paint a more complex view of reading comprehension in ELL and EL1. Reading and Writing, 25, 1819–1845.
35.
GoodR. H.BankN.WatsonJ. M. (Eds.). (2003). Indicadores dinámicos del exito en la lectura. Eugene, OR: Institute for the Development of Educational Achievement.
36.
GoodR. H.KaminskiR. A. (Eds.). (2002). Dynamic indicators of basic early literacy skills (6th ed.). Eugene, OR: Institute for the Development of Education Achievement. Available at http://dibels.uoregon.edu
37.
GottardoA.MuellerJ. (2009). Are first- and second-language factors related in predicting second-language reading comprehension? A study of Spanish-speaking children acquiring English as a second language from first to second grade. Journal of Educational Psychology, 101, 330–344.
38.
*GunnB.BiglanA.SmolkowskiK.AryD. (2000). The efficacy of supplemental instruction in decoding skills for Hispanic and non-Hispanic students in early elementary school. The Journal of Special Education, 34, 90–103.
39.
IhnotC.MastoffJ.GavinJ.HendricksonL. (1992). Read naturally. St. Paul, MN: Read Naturally.
40.
JiménezR. T.GarciaG. E.PearsonP. D. (1996). The reading strategies of bilingual Latina/o student who are successful English readers: Opportunities and obstacles. Reading Research Quarterly, 31, 90–113.
41.
KiefferM. J. (2008). Catching up or falling behind? Initial English proficiency, concentrated poverty, and the reading growth of language minority learners in the United States. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100, 851–868.
42.
KiefferM. J. (2010). English proficiency, socioeconomic status, and late-emerging reading difficulties. Educational Researcher, 39, 484–486.
43.
KlingnerJ. K.ArtilesA. J.BarlettaL. M. (2012). English language learners who struggle with reading. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 39, 108–128.
44.
*LovettM. W.De PalmaM.FrijtersJ.SteinbachK.TempleM.BensonN.LacerenzaL. (2008). Interventions for reading difficulties: a comparison of response to intervention by ELL and EFL struggling readers. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 41, 333–352.
45.
MacGinitieW. H.MacGinitieR. K.MariaK.DreyerL. G.HughesK. E. (2006). Gates-MacGinitie reading tests (4th ed.). Rolling Meadows, IL: Riverside.
46.
MathesP. G.MenchettiJ. C.WahiM.GrekM. K. (2004). Proactive early intervention in reading. Columbus, OH: SRA/McGraw-Hill.
47.
National Center for Education Statistics. (2014). The nation’s report card: Reading 2013 (NCES 2012–458). Washington, DC: Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education.
48.
NoblitG. W.HareR. D. (1988). Meta-ethnography: Synthesizing qualitative studies. Qualitative Research Methods Series 11. Newbury Park, CA: SAGE.
49.
*O’ConnorR. E.BocianK.Beebe-FrankenbergerM.LinklaterD. L. (2010). Responsiveness of students with language difficulties to early intervention in reading. The Journal of Special Education, 43, 220–235.
50.
O’ConnorR. E.Notari-SyversonN.VadasyP. (2005). Ladders to literacy: A kindergarten activity book. Baltimore, MD: Brookes.
51.
OgawaR. T.MalenB. (1991). Towards rigor in reviews of multivocal literatures: applying the exploratory case study method. Review of Educational Research, 61, 265–286.
52.
ParrishT. B.MerickelA.PérezM.LinquantiR.SociasM.SpainA.. . . DelanceyD. (2006). Effects of the implementation of Proposition 227 on the education of English learners, K–12: Findings from a five-year evaluation. Final Report for AB 56 and AB 1116. Washington, DC: American Institutes for Research.
53.
PerezE. (1981). Oral language competence improves reading skills of Mexican American third graders. The Reading Teacher, 35, 24–27.
54.
Richards-TutorC.BakerD.GerstenR.BakerS.SmithJ. M. (2014). Systematic review of intervention studies for English learners that use single subject design. Los Alamitos, CA: Instructional Research Group.
55.
*SolariE. J.GerberM. M. (2008). Early comprehension instruction for Spanish-speaking English language learners: teaching text-level reading skills while maintaining effects on word-level skills. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 23, 155–168.
56.
SolisM.CiulloS.VaughnS.PyleN.HassaramB.LerouxA. (2012). Reading comprehension interventions for middle school students with learning disabilities a synthesis of 30 years of research. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 45, 327–340.
SwansonH. L. (1999). Reading research for students with LD: A meta-analysis of intervention outcomes. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 32, 504–532.
59.
TorgesenJ. K.AlexanderA. W.WagnerR. K.RashotteC. A.VoellerK. K. S.ConwayT. (2001). Intensive remedial instruction for children with severe reading disabilities: Immediate and long-term outcomes from two instructional approaches. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 34, 33–58.
60.
TorgesenJ.WagnerR.RashotteC. (1999). Test of word reading efficiency. Austin, TX: PRO-ED.
*VadasyP. F.SandersE. A. (2010). Efficacy of supplemental phonics-based instruction for low-skilled kindergarteners in the context of language minority status and classroom phonics instruction. Journal of Educational Psychology, 102, 786–803.
63.
*VaughnS.CirinoP. T.Linan-ThompsonS.MathesP. G.CarlsonC. D.HaganE. C.. . . FrancisD. J. (2006). Effectiveness of a Spanish intervention and an English intervention for English-language learners at risk for reading problems. American Educational Research Journal, 43, 449–487.
64.
VaughnS.Linan-ThompsonS.KouzekananiK.BryantD. P.DicksonS.BlozisS. A. (2003). Reading instruction grouping for students with reading difficulties. Remedial and Special Education, 24, 301–315.
65.
*VaughnS.Linan-ThompsonS.MathesP. G.CirinoP. T.CarlsonC. D.Pollard-DurodolaS. D.. . . FrancisD. J. (2006). Effectiveness of Spanish intervention for first-grade English language learners at risk for reading difficulties. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 39, 56–73.
66.
*VaughnS.MathesP. G.Linan-ThompsonS.CirinoP. T.CarlsonC. D.Pollard-DurodolaS. D.. . . FrancisD. (2006). Effectiveness of an English intervention for first grade English language learners at risk for reading problems. Elementary School Journal, 107, 153–180.
67.
VaughnS.WanzekJ.WoodruffA. L.Linan-ThompsonS. (2007). Prevention and early identification of students with reading disabilities. In HaagerD.KlingnerJ.VaughnS. (Eds.), Evidence-based reading practices for response to intervention (pp. 11–27). Baltimore, MD: Brookes.
68.
*VaughnS.WexlerJ.RobertsG.BarthA.CirinoP.RomainM.. . . DentonC. (2011). Effects of individualized and standardized interventions on middle school students with reading disabilities. Exceptional Children, 77, 391–407.
69.
Vaughn-ShavuoF. (1990). Using story grammar and language experience for improving recall and comprehension in the teaching of ESL to Spanish dominant first graders. Hempstead, NY: Hofstra University.
70.
WagnerR. K.TorgesenJ. K.RashotteC. A. (1999). Comprehensive Test of Phonological Processing. Austin, TX: PRO-ED.
71.
*WanzekJ.RobertsG. (2012). Reading interventions with varying instructional emphases for fourth graders with reading difficulties. Learning Disability Quarterly, 35, 90–101. doi:10.1177/0731948711434047
72.
WanzekJ.VaughnS. (2007). Research-based implications from extensive early reading interventions. School Psychology Review, 36, 541–561.
73.
WexlerJ.VaughnS.RobertsG.DentonC. A. (2010). The efficacy of repeated reading and wide reading practice for high school students with severe reading disabilities. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 25, 2–10.
WilkinsonG. S. (1993). Wide range achievement test-3. Wilmington, DE: Jastak Associates.
76.
WilsonB. A. (2002). Wilson Reading System. Oxford, MA: Wilson Language Training Corporation.
77.
WoodcockR. W. (1987). Woodcock Reading Mastery Tests-Revised. Circle Pines, MN: American Guidance Service
78.
WoodcockR. W. (1991). Woodcock Language Proficiency Battery-Revised. Chicago: Riverside.
79.
WoodcockR. W.McGrewK. S.MatherN. (2001). Woodcook-Johnson III. Itasca, IL: Riverside.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
