The purpose of this study was to determine whether an early intervention program based on the Reading Recovery (RR) format could be developed for pairs of struggling readers that would allow them to make accelerated progress similar to that experienced in the 1-to-1 RR tutorial. A preliminary pilot study showed that the RR lesson format could be adapted for teaching pairs of struggling readers without compromising the integrity of the lesson content, provided that the average length of the lesson was increased to 41 min. An experimental study comparing the effectiveness of 1-to-1 RR instruction with RR instruction in pairs showed that although RR instruction in pairs required somewhat longer lessons (42 min vs. 33 min), there were no major differences between the two groups on any measures at discontinuation and at the end of the year, nor was there a significant difference between the groups in mean number of lessons to discontinuation. The results further indicated that by discontinuation, the children in the treatment groups were performing within the average range on all measures, and that these positive effects were maintained on end-of-year measures. Thus, by increasing instructional time by about a quarter, RR teachers can double the number of students served without making any sacrifices in outcomes.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Bryant, P., Bradley, L., MacLean, M., & Crossland, J. (1989). Nursery rhymes, phonological skills, and reading . Journal of Child Language, 16, 407—428.
2.
Center, Y., Wheldall, K., Freeman, L., Outhred, L., & McNaught, M. (1995). An evaluation of Reading Recovery. Reading Research Quarterly, 30, 240—263.
3.
Chapman, J.W., Tunmer, W.E., & Prochnow, J.E. (2001). Does success in the Reading Recovery program depend on developing proficiency in phonological processing skills? A longitudinal study in a whole language instructional context. Scientific Studies of Reading, 5, 141—176.
4.
Clay, M.M. (1985). The early detection of reading difficulties. Auckland, New Zealand: Heinemann.
5.
Clay, M.M. (1991). Becoming literate: The construction of inner control. Auckland, New Zealand: Heinemann.
6.
Clay, M.M. (1993a). An observation survey of early literacy achievement. Auckland, New Zealand: Heinemann.
7.
Clay, M.M. (1993b). Reading recovery. Auckland, New Zealand: Heinemann.
8.
Clay, M.M. (1998). An observation survey of early literacy achievement. Auckland, New Zealand: Heinemann.
9.
Dolch, E.W. (1939) A manual for remedial reading. Urbana-Champaign, IL: Geranol.
10.
Ehri, L., & McCormick, S. (1998). Phases of word learning: Implications for instruction with delayed and disabled readers. Reading and Writing Quarterly , 14, 135—163.
11.
Elbaum, B., Vaughn, S., Hughes, M., & Moody, S. (2000). How effective are one-to-one tutoring programs in reading for elementary students at risk for reading failure? A meta-analysis of the intervention research. Journal of Educational Psychology , 92, 605—619.
12.
Foorman, B. R. (Ed.). (2003). Preventing and remediating reading difficulties: Bringing science to scale . Baltimore: York Press.
13.
Goswami, U., & Bryant, P.E. (1990). Phonological skills and learning to read. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
14.
Greaney, K., & Tunmer, W. (1996). Onset/ rime sensitivity and orthographic analogies in normal and poor readers. Applied Psycholinguistics, 17, 15—40.
15.
Greaney, K., Tunmer, W., & Chapman, J. (1997). The effects of rime-based orthographic analogy training on the word recognition skills of children with reading disability . Journal of Educational Psychology, 89, 645—651.
16.
Iversen, S.A., & Tunmer, W.E. (1993). Phonological processing skills and the Reading Recovery program. Journal of Educational Psychology, 85, 112—125.
17.
Lyon, G.R., & Moats, L.C. (1997). Critical conceptual and methodological considerations in reading intervention research. Journal of Learning Disabilities , 30, 578—588.
18.
Lyons, C.A., Pinnell, G.S., & DeFord, D. (1993). Partners in learning: Teachers and children in Reading Recovery. New York: Teachers College Press.
19.
Papanicolaou, A.C., Simos, P.G., Fletcher, J.M., Francis, D.J., Foorman, B., Castillo, E.M., et al. (2003) Development and plasticity of neurophysiological processes involved in reading. In B. Foorman (Ed.), Preventing and remediating reading difficulties: Bringing science to scale (pp. 3—21). Baltimore: York Press.
20.
Pinnell, G.S., Lyons, C.A., De Ford, D.E., Bryk, A., & Seltzer, M. (1994). Comparing instructional models for the literacy education of high at-risk first graders. Reading Research Quarterly, 29, 8—39.
21.
Pinnell, G.S., Lyons, C.A., & Jones, N. (1995, Winter). Response to Hiebert: What difference does Reading Recovery make? Network News, Reading Recovery Council ofAmerica, pp. 18—22.
22.
Pressley, M. (2002). Reading instruction that works: The case for balanced teaching. New York: Guilford Press .
Rasinski, T.V. (1995). Commentary on the effect of Reading Recovery: A response to Pinnell, Lyons, De Ford, Bryk, and Seltzer. Reading Research Quarterly, 30, 264— 270.
25.
Richardson, E., & DiBenedetto, B. (1985). Decoding skills test. Parkton, MD: York Press.
26.
Share, D.L. (1995). Phonological recoding and self-teaching: Sine qua non of reading acquisition. Cognition, 55, 151—218.
27.
Stanovich, K.E. (1996). Toward a more inclusive definition of dyslexia . Dyslexia (Chichester, UK), 2, 154—166.
28.
Tunmer, W.E., & Chapman, J.W. (1998). Language prediction skill, phonological recoding ability, and beginning reading. In C. Hulme & R. M. Joshi (Eds.), Reading and spelling: Development and disorders (pp. 33—67). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
29.
Tunmer, W.E., & Chapman, J.W. (2003). The Reading Recovery approach to preventative early intervention: As good as it gets?Reading Psychology , 24, 337—360.
30.
Tunmer, W.E., & Chapman, J.W. (in press). The relation of metalinguistic abilities, phonological recoding skills and the use of sentence context to beginning reading development: A longitudinal study. In R. M. Joshi & P. G. Aaron (Eds.), Handbook of orthography and literacy. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
31.
Vaughn, S., & Linan-Thompson, S. (2003). Group size and time allotted to intervention: Effects for students with reading difficulties. In B. Foorman (Ed.), Preventing and remediating reading difficulties: Bringing science to scale (pp. 299—324). Baltimore: York Press.
32.
Wasik, B.A., & Slavin, R.E. (1993). Preventing early reading failure with one-to-one tutoring: A review of five programs. Reading Research Quarterly , 28, 179—200.
33.
Yopp, H. (1988). The validity and reliability of phonemic awareness tests. Reading Research Quarterly, 23, 159—177.
