Formulating Secondary-Level Reading Interventions

Abstract

Recent advances concerning emerging/beginning reading skills, positive behavioral support (PBS), and three-tiered schoolwide prevention models combined with federal mandates (i.e., IDEA and No Child Left Behind) have stimulated interest in providing early and intensive instructional intervention services to children at risk for reading and behavior problems. New measures for identifying students as early as kindergarten who are not acquiring early basic literacy skills make this possible. However, questions regarding exactly how to formulate, deliver, sustain, and manage secondary-level interventions remain to be addressed. This paper describes first-year, first-grade findings for students participating in secondary-level interventions (i.e., small-group reading instruction) in a randomized trial of the efficacy of secondary and tertiary reading and behavior interventions under way at the Center for Early Intervention in Reading and Behavior, University of Kansas. The formulation of the experimental secondary-level intervention was guided by evidence supporting the efficacy of (a) small groups of 3 to 6 participating students and low student—teacher ratio combined with (b) explicit, phonics-based instruction. Selected curricula were Reading Mastery, Proactive Reading, Programmed Reading, and Read Well, use of which varied by choice across experimental-group schools. PBS was an additional intervention context in experimental schools. Comparison schools and first-grade teachers did not employ the three-tiered model, early screening, or PBS; most students were taught using conventional whole-group instruction, little or no individualization, and curricula with weak scientific evidence. Initial results indicate significantly larger growth for experimental secondary-level at-risk students than for comparisons. Experimental-group first graders not showing growth were those identified with disabilities or behavioral risks and English language learners. Implications are discussed.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Abbott, M. , Walton, C. , & Greenwood, C.R. (2001). Research to practice: Phonemic awareness in kindergarten and first grade. Teaching Exceptional Children, 34, 20—26.

Abbott, M. , Walton, C. , Tapia, Y. , & Greenwood, C.R. (1999). Research to practice: A “blueprint” for closing the gap in local schools. Exceptional Children , 83, 339—362.

Adams, M. (1990). Beginning to read: Thinking and learning about print. Cambridge, MA: NUT Press .

Al Otaiba, S. , & Fuchs, D. (2001). Characteristics of children who are unresponsive to early literacy intervention: A review of the literature. Remedial and Special Education, 23, 300—316.

Byrne, B. , & Fielding-Barnsley, R. (1993). Evaluation of a program to teach phonemic awareness to young children: A 1-year follow-up. Journal of Educational Psychology, 85, 104—111.

Chard, D.J. , & Kame'enui, E.J. (2000). Struggling first-grade readers: The frequency and progress of their reading. The Journal of Special Education, 34, 28—38.

Coyne, M.D. , Kame'enui, E.J. , & Simmons, D.C. (2001). Prevention and intervention in beginning reading: Two complex systems. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 16, 62—73.

Ehri, L. (1991). Development of the ability to read words. In R. Bard , M. Kamil , P. Moosenthal , & P. Pearson (Eds.), Handbook of Reading Research (Vol. 2, pp. 383— 417). New York: Longman.

Ehri, L. , & Soffer, A. (1999). Graphophonemic awareness: Development in elementary students. Scientific Studies of Reading, 3, 1—30.

10.

Engelmann, S. (1997). Theory of mastery and acceleration. In J. W. Lloyd , E. Kame'enui , & D. Chard (Eds.), Issues in Educating Students with Disabilities (pp. 117— 195). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

11.

Felton, R. , & Pepper, P. (1995). Early identification and intervention of phonological deficiencies in kindergarten and early elementary children at risk for reading disability. School Psychology Review, 24, 405— 414.

12.

Foorman, B. , Francis, D. , Fletcher, J. , Schatschneider, C. , & Mehta, P. (1998). The role of instruction in learning to read: Preventing reading failure in at-risk children. Journal of Educational Psychology, 90, 37—55.

13.

Gersten, R. , Carnine, D. , & Woodward, J. (1987). Direct instruction research: The third decade . Remedial and Special Education, 8, 48—56.

14.

Good, R.H. , & Kaminski, R.A. (1996). Assessment for instructional decisions: Toward a proactive/prevention model of decision-making for early literacy skills. School Psychology Quarterly, 11, 326—336.

15.

Good, R. H. , & Kaminski, R. A. (Eds.) (2002). Dynamic indicators of early literacy skills (6th ed.). Eugene, OR: Institute for the Development of Education Achievement. Available: http://dibels.uoregon.edu/

16.

Good, R. , Simmons, D. , & Smith, S. (1998). Effective academic interventions in the United States: Evaluating and enhancing the acquisition of early reading skills. School Psychology Review, 27, 45—56.

17.

Greenwood, D. , Terry, B. , Arreaga-Mayer, C. , & Finney, R. (1992). The classwide peer tutoring program: Implementation factors moderating students' achievement. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 24, 101—116.

18.

Kame'enui, E. , Good, R. , Simmons, D. , & Chard, D. (2003, April). Project CIRCUITS: Toward a primary, secondary, and tertiary prevention system in schools. Paper presented at the annual convention of the Council for Exceptional Children , New York.

19.

Kamps, D. , Wills, H. , Greenwood, C. , Thorne, S. , Lazo, J. , Crockett, J. , et al. (2003). Curriculum influences on growth in early reading fluency for students with academic and behavioral risks: A descriptive study. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 11, 211—224.

20.

Juel, C. Learning to read and write: A longitudinal study of 54 children from first through fourth grades. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80, 437—447.

21.

McMaster, K.N. , Fuchs, D. , Fuchs, L.S. , & Compton, D.L. (in press). Monitoring the academic progress of children who are unresponsive to generally effective early reading intervention. Assessment for Effective Intervention.

22.

O'Connor, R.E. (2000). Increasing the intensity of intervention in kindergarten and first grade. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice , 15, 43—54.

23.

O'Connor, R. , Notari-Syverson, A. , & Vadasy, P. (1996). Ladders to literacy: The effects of teacher-led phonological activities for kindergarten children with and without learning disabilities. Exceptional Children, 63, 117—130.

24.

Torgesen, J. , Alexander, A.W. , Wagneer, R.K. , Rashotte, C.A. , Voeller, K. , & Contay, T. (2001). Intensive remedial instruction for children with severe reading disabilities: Immediate and long-term outcomes for two instructional approaches. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 34, 33—58, 78.

25.

U.S. Department of Education. (2002). No Child Left Behind: A desktop reference. Washington, DC: Author.

26.

Walker, H.M. , & Severson, H.H. (1992). Systematic screening for behavior disorders (SSBD): Technical manual. Longmont, CO: Sopris West.

27.

Walker, H.M. , Severson, H.H. , & Feil, E.G. (1995). Early screening project (ESP): A proven child find process. Longmont, CO: Sopris West.

28.

Wehby, J.H. , Symons, F.J. , & Shores, R.E. (1995). A descriptive analysis of aggressive behavior in classrooms for children with emotional and behavioral disorders. Behavioral Disorders, 20, 87—105.