A synthesis of the extant research on peer-mediated reading and math interventions for students in regular or alternative education settings with academic difficulties and disabilities in Grades 6 to 12 (ages 11–18) is presented. Interventions conducted between 2001 and 2012 targeting reading and math were included if they measured effects on at least one academic outcome measure. A total of 13 intervention studies were synthesized in which 10 studies employed an experimental or quasi-experimental design and three studies used a single-case design. Findings from the 13 studies revealed mostly moderate to high effects favoring peer mediation, particularly when implementing a peer-mediated feedback component. In addition, findings suggest such interventions have social validity among adolescents and teachers. More rigorous research on secondary peer-mediated math interventions, peer-mediated interventions in alternative settings, and effective ways to pair dyads to incorporate a structured feedback component is warranted. Implications for peer-mediated instruction for academically struggling adolescents are discussed.
AllensworthE.EastonJ. (2005). The on-track indicator as a predictor of high school graduation. Chicago, IL: Consortium on Chicago School Research.
2.
ArcherA. L.HughesC. A. (2011). Explicit instruction: Effective and efficient teaching. New York, NY: Guildford.
3.
BahrC. M.RiethH. J. (1991). Effects of cooperative, competitive, and individualistic goals on student achievement using computer-based drill-and-practice. Journal of Special Education Technology, 11, 33–48.
4.
BalfanzR.HerzogL.MacIverD. J. (2007). Preventing student disengagement and keeping students on the graduation path in urban middle-grades schools: Early identification and effective interventions. Educational Psychologist, 42, 223–235.
5.
BartonE. E.WoleryM. (2008). Teaching pretend play to children with disabilities: A review of the literature. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 28, 109–125. doi:10.1177/0271121408318799
6.
BlatchfordP.BassettP.BrownP. (2011). Examining the effect of class size on classroom engagement and teacher-pupil interaction: Differences in relation to pupil prior attainment and primary vs. secondary schools. Learning and Instruction, 21, 715–730. doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2011.04.001
7.
BloombergT. G.BalesW. D.MannK.PiqueroA. R.BerkR. A. (2011). Incarceration, education, and transition from delinquency. Journal of Criminal Justice, 39, 355–365. doi:10.1016/j.jcrimjus.2011.04.003
8.
BulgrenJ. A.GranerP. S.DeshlerD. D. (2013). Literacy challenges and opportunities for students with learning disabilities in social studies and history. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 28, 17–27.
9.
*CalhoonM. B. (2005). Effects of a peer-mediated phonological skill and reading comprehension program on reading skill acquisition for middle school students with reading disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 38, 424–433.
10.
*CalhoonM. B.FuchsL. S. (2003). The effects of peer-assisted learning strategies and curriculum-based measurement on the mathematics performance of secondary students with disabilities. Remedial and Special Education, 24, 235–245.
11.
CarrM. J.GrayN. L.HolleyM. J. (2007). Shortchanging disadvantaged students: An analysis of intra-district spending patterns in Ohio. Journal of Educational Research & Policy Studies, 7, 36–53. Retrieved from http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/EJ809432.pdf
12.
CasillasA.RobbinsS.AllenJ.KuoY. L. (2012). Predicting early academic failure in high school from prior academic achievement, psychosocial characteristics, and behavior. Journal of Educational Psychology, 104, 407–420. doi:10.1037/a0027180
13.
CohenJ. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
14.
CoulterG. (2004). Using one-to-one tutoring and proven reading strategies to improve reading performance with adjudicated youth. Journal of Correctional Education, 55, 321–333.
15.
DentonC. A.WexlerJ.VaughnS.BryanD. (2008). Intervention provided to linguistically diverse middle school students with severe reading difficulties. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 23, 79–89.
16.
DocanT. N. (2006). Positive and negative incentives in the classroom: An analysis of grading systems and student motivation. Journal of Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 6, 21–40. Retrieved from http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/EJ854925.pdf
17.
*DufreneB. A.ReisenerC. D.OlmiD. J.Zoder-MartellK.McNuttM. R.HornD. R. (2010). Peer tutoring for reading fluency as a feasible and effective alternative in response to intervention systems. Journal of Behavior Education, 19, 239–256. doi:10.1007/s10864-010-9111-8
18.
ElbaumB.VaughnS.HughesM.MoodyS. W. (1999). Grouping practices and reading outcomes for students with disabilities. Exceptional Children, 65, 399–415.
19.
FallA. M.RobertsG. (2012). High school dropouts: Interactions between social context, self-perceptions, school engagement, and student dropout. Journal of Adolescence, 35, 787–798. doi:10.1016/j.adolescence.2011.11.004
20.
FuchsL. S.FuchsD.ComptonD. L. (2010). Rethinking response to intervention at middle and high school. School Psychology Review, 39, 22–28.
21.
FuchsL. S.FuchsD.HamlettC. L.PhillipsN. B.KarnsK. (1995). General educators’ specialized adaptation for students with learning disabilities. Exceptional Children, 61, 440–459. doi:10.2307/1511370
22.
FuchsL. S.FuchsD.HamletC. L.PhillipsN. B.KarnsK.DutkaS. (1997). Enhancing students helping behaviors during peer-mediated instruction with conceptual mathematical explanations. Elementary School Journal, 101, 495–510. doi:10.1086/461863
23.
Georgetown Law Human Rights Institute. (2012). Kept out: Barriers to meaningful education in the school-to-prison pipeline. Washington, DC: Author.
24.
*GerstenR.BakerS.Smith-JohnsonJ.DiminoJ.PetersonA. (2006). Eyes on the prize: Teaching complex historical content to middle school students with learning disabilities. Exceptional Children, 72, 264–280.
25.
GerstenR.FuchsL. S.ComptonD.CoyneM.GreenwoodC.InnocentiM. S. (2005). Quality indicators for group experimental and quasi-experimental research in special education. Exceptional Children, 71, 149–164.
26.
GlennieE.BonneauK.VandellenM.DodgeK. A. (2012). Addition by subtraction: The relationship between dropout rates and school-level academic achievement. Teachers College Record, 114, 1–26.
HattieJ.TimperleyH. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77, 81–112. doi:10.3102/003465430298487
29.
HedgesL. V. (1981). Distribution theory for Glass’s estimator of effect size and related estimators. Journal of Educational Statistics, 6, 107–128.
30.
HeronT. E.WelschR. G.GoddardY. L. (2003). Applications of tutoring systems in specialized subject areas. Remedial and Special Education, 24, 288–300.
31.
HornerR. H.CarrE. G.HalleJ.McGeeG.OdomS. L.WoleryM. (2005). The use of single-subject research to identify evidence-based practices in special education. Exceptional Children, 71, 165–179.
32.
*HughesT. A.FredrickL. D. (2006). Teaching vocabulary with students with learning disabilities using classwide peer tutoring and constant time delay. Journal of Behavior Education, 15, 1–23.
33.
KamilM. L.BormanG. D.DoleJ.KralC. C.SalingerT.TorgesenJ. (2008). Improving adolescent literacy: Effective classroom and intervention practices: A practice guide (NCEE 2008-4027). 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
34.
KazdinA. E. (1982). Single-case experimental designs in clinical research and practice. New Directions for Methodology of Social and Behavioral Science, 13, 33–47.
35.
*KimA. H.VaughnS.KlingnerJ. K.WoodruffA. L.KleinC.KouzekananiK. (2006). Improving the reading comprehension of middle school students with disabilities through computer-assisted collaborative strategic reading (CACSR). Remedial and Special Education, 27, 235–248.
36.
KlingnerJ. K.VaughnS. (1996). Reciprocal teaching of reading comprehension strategies for students with learning disabilities who use English as a second language. Elementary School Journal, 96, 275–293.
KratochwillT. R.HitchcockJ.HornerR. H.LevinJ. R.OdomS. L.RindskopfD. M.ShadishW. R. (2011). Single case designs technical documentation. In What Works Clearinghouse: Procedures and standards handbook (Version 2.0). Retrieved from http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/pdf/wwc_procedures_v2_standards_handbook.pdf
39.
KunschC. A.JitendraA. K.SoodS. (2007). The effects of peer-mediated instruction in mathematics for students with learning problems: A research synthesis. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 22, 1–12.
40.
MagginD. M.ChafouleasS. M. (2011). Protocol for applying the What Works Clearinghouse single-case standards. Unpublished research instrument.
41.
MagginD. M.ChafouleasS. M.MoselyK. M.JohnsonA. J. (2011). A systematic evaluation of token economies as a classroom management tool for students with challenging behavior. Journal of School Psychology, 49, 529–544.
42.
MagginD. M.JohnsonA. H.ChafouleasS. M.RubertoL. M.BerggrenM. (2012). A systematic evidence review of school-based group contingency interventions for students with challenging behavior. Journal of School Psychology, 50, 625–654.
43.
MaheadyL.HarperG. F.SaccaM. K. (1988). Peer-mediated instruction: A promising approach to meeting the diverse needs of LD adolescents. Learning Disability Quarterly, 11, 108–113.
44.
MalmgrenK. W.LeoneP. E. (2000). Effects of a short-term auxiliary reading program on the reading skills of incarcerated youth. Education and Treatment of Children, 23, 239–247.
45.
*MastropieriM. A.ScruggsT. E.MohlerL.BeranekM.SpencerV.BoonR. T.TalbottE. (2001). Can middle school students with serious reading difficulties help each other learn anything?Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 16, 18–27.
46.
*MastropieriM. A.ScruggsT. E.SpencerV.FontanaJ. (2003). Promoting success in high school history: Peer tutoring versus guided notes. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 18, 52–65.
47.
MattoE. C.VercellottiT. (2012). Methodological lessons learned from conducting civic education research in high schools. PS: Political Science & Politics, 45, 728–735. doi:10.1017/S1049096512000820
48.
McCulleyL. V.KatzS.VaughnS. (2013). Reading instruction and students with learning disabilities. In BakkenJ. P.ObiakorF. E.RotatoriA. F. (Eds.), Learning disabilities: Practice concerns and students with LD. Advances in special education (Vol. 25, pp. 19–43). Bingley, UK: Emerald.
49.
MolS. E.BusA. G. (2011). To read or not to read: A meta-analysis of print exposure from infancy to early adulthood. Psychological Bulletin, 137, 267–296. doi:10.1037/a0021890
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics (Vol. 1). Reston, VA: Author. Retrieved from http://www.nctm.org/standards
52.
National Governors Association Center for Best Practices & Council of Chief State School Officers. (2010). Common Core State Standards. Retrieved from http://www.corestandards.org/the-standards
53.
OkilwaN. S. A.ShelbyL. (2010). The effects of peer tutoring on academic performance of students with disabilities in Grades 6 through 12: A synthesis of the literature. Remedial and Special Education, 31, 450–463. doi:10.1177/0741932509355991
54.
PashlerH.BainP.BottgeB.GraesserA.KoedingerK.McDanielM.MetcalfeJ. (2007). Organizing instruction and study to improve student learning (NCER 2007-2004). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Research, Institute of Education Sciences. Retrieved from http://ncer.ed.gov.
55.
RaudenbushS. W. (2005). Learning from attempts to improve schooling: The contribution of methodology. Educational Researcher, 34(5), 25–31.
56.
ReedD. K.SorrellsA. M.ColeH. A.TakakawaN. N. (2013). The ecological and population validity of reading interventions for adolescents: Can effectiveness be generalized?Learning Disability Quarterly, 36, 131–144. doi: 10.1177/0731948712451976.
57.
ReeveJ.JangH. (2006). What teachers say and do to support students’ autonomy during a learning activity. Journal of Educational Psychology, 98, 209–218. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.98.1.209
58.
RidlonC. L. (2009). Learning mathematics via a problem-centered approach: A two-year study. Mathematical Teaching and Learning, 11, 188–225. doi:10.1080/10986060903225614
59.
RoachJ. C.Paolucci-WhitcombP.MeyersH. W.DuncanD. A. (1983). The comparative effects of peer tutoring in math by and for secondary special needs students. Pointer, 27, 20–24.
60.
RohrbeckC. A.Ginsburg-BlockM. D.FantuzzoJ. W.MillerT. R. (2003). Peer-assisted learning interventions with elementary school students: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95, 240–257. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.95.2.240
61.
RupleyW. H.BlairT. R.NicholsW. D. (2009). Effective reading instruction for struggling readers: The role of direct/explicit teaching. Reading and Writing Quarterly, 25, 125–138. doi:10.1080/10573560802683523
62.
RyanJ. B.ReidR.EpsteinM. H. (2004). Peer-mediated intervention studies on academic achievement for student with EBD. Remedial and Special Education, 25, 330–341.
63.
ScammaccaN.RobertsG.VaughnS.EdmondsM.WexlerJ.ReutebuchC. K.TorgesenJ. K. (2007). Intervention for adolescent struggling readers: A meta-analysis with implication for practice. Portsmouth, NH: RMC Research Corporation, Center on Instruction.
64.
ScruggsT. E.MastropieriM. A.CastoG. (1987). The quantitative synthesis of single subject research. Remedial and Special Education, 8, 24–33.
65.
*ScruggsT.MastropieriM. A.MarshakL. (2012). Peer-mediated instruction in inclusive secondary social studies learning: Direct and indirect learning effects. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 27, 12–20.
66.
ShadishW. R. (2002). Revisiting field experimentation: Field notes for the future. Psychological Methods, 7, 3–18. doi:10.1037/1082-989x.7.1.3
67.
SiebertD.DraperR. (2008). Why content area literacy messages do not speak to mathematics teachers: A critical content analysis. Literacy Research and Instruction, 47, 229–245.
68.
SieglerR.CarpenterT.FennellF.GearyD.LewisJ.OkamotoY.. . . WrayJ. (2010). Developing effective fractions instruction for kindergarten through 8th grade: A practice guide (NCEE #2010–4039). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Institute of Education Sciences. Retrieved from http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc
69.
*SpencerV. G.ScruggsT. E.MastropieriM. A. (2003). Content area learning in middle school social studies classrooms and students with emotional or behavioral disorders: A comparison of strategies. Behavioral Disorders, 28, 77–93.
70.
StenhoffD. M.Lignugaris/KraftB. (2007). A review of the effects of peer tutoring on students with mild disabilities in secondary settings. Exceptional Children, 74, 8–30.
71.
SwansonH. L.HoskynM.LeeC. (1999). Intervention for students with learning disabilities: A meta-analysis of treatment outcomes. New York, NY: Guilford.
72.
*VaughnS.KlingnerJ. K.SwansonE. A.BoardmanA. G.RobertsG.MohammedS. S.Stillman-SpisakS. J. (2011). Efficacy of collaborative strategic reading with middle school students. American Educational Research Journal, 48, 938–964.
73.
VaughnS.WanzekJ.MurrayC. S.RobertsG. (2012). Intensive interventions for students struggling in reading and mathematics: A practice guide. Portsmouth, NH: RMC Research Corporation, Center on Instruction.
74.
VaughnS.WexlerJ.LerouxA.RobertsG.DentonC. A.BarthA.FletcherJ. (2012). Effects of an intensive reading intervention for eighth grade students with persistently inadequate response to intervention. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 45, 515–525.
75.
*VeerkampM. B.KampsD. M.CooperL. (2007). The effects of classwide peer tutoring on the reading achievement of urban middle school students. Education and Treatment of Children, 30(2), 21–51. doi:10.1353/etc.2007.0010
76.
WexlerJ.PyleN.FlowerA.WilliamsJ.ColeH. (2013). A synthesis of academic interventions for incarcerated adolescents. Review of Educational Research. Advance online publication. doi:10.3102/0034654313499410
77.
*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 and Practice, 25, 2–10.
WoleryM.BusickM.ReichowB. R.BartonE. E. (2010). Comparison of overlap methods for quantitatively synthesizing single subject data. Journal of Special Education, 44, 18–28.
