The Effects of Reading Fluency Interventions on the Reading Fluency and Reading Comprehension Performance of Elementary Students With Learning Disabilities: A Synthesis of the Research from 2001 to 2014
Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online September, 2017
The Effects of Reading Fluency Interventions on the Reading Fluency and Reading Comprehension Performance of Elementary Students With Learning Disabilities: A Synthesis of the Research from 2001 to 2014
Fluent word reading is hypothesized to facilitate reading comprehension by improving automatic word reading, thus releasing a reader’s cognitive resources to focus on meaning. Many students with learning disabilities (LD) struggle to develop reading fluency, which affects reading comprehension. This synthesis extends Chard, Vaughn, and Tyler’s (2002) review, synthesizing fluency intervention research from 2001 to 2014. The search yielded 19 studies examining reading fluency and comprehension outcomes of reading fluency interventions for students with LD in kindergarten through 5th grade. Results showed repeated reading (RR), multicomponent interventions, and assisted reading with audiobooks produced gains in reading fluency and comprehension. Providing a model of fluent reading and performance feedback, using easier level text, setting a performance criterion, and practicing RR with peers also contributed to improved outcomes. Findings suggest that RR remains the most effective intervention for improving reading fluency for students with LD. Limitations include sample size, only three group design studies, and infrequent use of standardized measures.
*ArdoinS. P.WilliamsJ. C.KlubnikC.McCallM. (2009). Three versus six rereadings of practice passages. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 42(2), 375–380.
2.
BashirA. S.HookP. E. (2009). Fluency: A key link between word identification and comprehension. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 40(2), 196–200.
3.
BurnsM. K.DeanV. J.FoleyS. (2004). Preteaching unknown key words with incremental rehearsal to improve reading fluency and comprehension with children identified as reading disabled. Journal of School Psychology, 42(4), 303–314.
4.
*ChafouleasS. M.MartensB. K.DobsonR. L.WeinsteinK. S.GardnerK. B. (2004). Fluent reading as the improvement of stimulus control: Additive effects of performance-based interventions to repeated reading on students’ reading and error rates. Journal of Behavioral Education, 13(2), 67–81.
5.
ChardD. J.Ketterlin-GellerL.BakerS. K.DoablerC.ApichatabutraC. (2009). Repeated reading interventions for students with learning disabilities: Status of the evidence. Exceptional Children, 75(3), 263–281.
6.
ChardD. J.VaughnS.TylerB. (2002). A synthesis of research on effective interventions for building reading fluency with elementary students with learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 35(5), 386–406.
7.
CohenJ. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
8.
*DalyE. J.BonfiglioC. M.MattsonT.PersampieriM.Foreman-YatesK. (2005). Refining the experimental analysis of academic skills deficits: Part I. An investigation of variables that affect generalized oral reading performance. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 38(4), 485–497.
9.
*DeckerM. M.BuggeyT. (2014). Using video self- and peer modeling to facilitate reading fluency in children with learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 47(2), 167–177.
10.
DenoS. L.DimentK.DongilK.MarstonD.RogersD. (1995). Comparison of reading intervention approaches for students with mild disabilities. Exceptional Children, 62(1), 20–37.
11.
*EstevesK. J.WhittenE. (2011). Assisted reading with digital audiobooks for students with reading disabilities. Reading Horizons, 51(1), 21–40.
12.
FuchsD.FuchsL. S.MathesP. G.SimmonsD. C. (1997). Peer-assisted learning strategies: Making classrooms more responsive to diversity. American Educational Research Journal, 34(1), 174–206.
13.
FuchsL. S.FuchsD.ComptonD. L. (2010). Rethinking response to intervention at middle and high school. School Psychology Review, 39(1), 22–28.
14.
*HapstakJ.TraceyD. H. (2007). Effects of assisted-repeated reading on students of varying reading ability: A single-subject experimental research study. Reading Horizons, 47(4), 315–334.
15.
HedgesL. V. (1985). Statistical methods for meta-analysis. Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
16.
*HitchcockC. H.PraterM. A.DowrickP. W. (2004). Reading comprehension and fluency: Examining the effects of tutoring and video self-modeling on first-grade students with reading difficulties. Learning Disability Quarterly, 27(2), 89–103. doi:10.2307/1593644
17.
IhnotC.MatsoffJ.GavinJ.HendricksonL. (2001). Read naturally. St. Paul, MN: Read Naturally.
18.
Individuals With Disabilities Education Act, 20 U.S.C. § 1400 (2004).
KennedyM. J.DeshlerD. D. (2010). Literacy instruction, technology, and students with learning disabilities: Research we have, research we need. Learning Disability Quarterly, 33(4), 289–298.
21.
*KubinaR. M.Jr.AmatoJ.SchwilkC. L.TherrienW. J. (2008). Comparing performance standards on the retention of words read correctly per minute. Journal of Behavioral Education, 17(4), 328–338.
22.
LaBergeD.SamuelsS. J. (1974). Toward a theory of automatic information processing in reading. Cognitive Psychology, 6(2), 293–323. doi:10.1016/0010-0285(74)90015-2
23.
MathesP. G.FuchsL. S. (1993). Peer-mediated reading instruction in special education resource rooms. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 8, 233–243.
24.
MorganP. L.SideridisG. D. (2006). Contrasting the effectiveness of fluency interventions for students with or at risk for learning disabilities: A multilevel random coefficient modeling meta-analysis. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 21(4), 191–210.
25.
MorganP. L.SideridisG.HuaY. (2012). Initial and over-time effects of fluency interventions for students with or at risk for disabilities. The Journal of Special Education, 46(2), 94–116.
26.
*Musti-RaoS.HawkinsR. O.BarkleyB. A. (2009). Effects of repeated readings on the oral reading fluency of urban fourth-grade students: Implications for practice. Preventing School Failure, 54(1), 12–23.
27.
National Center for Education Statistics. (2013). The nation’s report card: Trends in academic progress 2012 (NCES 2013-456). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education.
28.
National Reading Panel. (2000). Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
29.
*NelsonJ. S.AlberS. R.GordyA. (2004). Effects of systematic error correction and repeated readings on the reading accuracy and proficiency of second graders with disabilities. Education & Treatment of Children, 27(3), 186–198.
30.
No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, Pub. L. No. 107-110, § 115, Stat. 1425 (2002).
31.
*O’ConnorR. E.WhiteA.SwansonH. L. (2007). Repeated reading versus continuous reading: Influences on reading fluency and comprehension. Exceptional Children, 74(1), 31–46.
32.
*OddoM.BarnettD. W.HawkinsR. O.Musti-RaoS. (2010). Reciprocal peer tutoring and repeated reading: Increasing practicality using student groups. Psychology in the Schools, 47(8), 842–858.
33.
PerfettiC. A. (1980). Verbal coding efficiency, conceptually guided reading, and reading failure. Bulletin of the Orton Society, 30(1), 197–208.
34.
PerfettiC. A. (1985). Reading ability. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
35.
RasinskiT.HomanS.BiggsM. (2009). Teaching reading fluency to struggling readers: Method, materials, and evidence. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 25(2/3), 192–204.
36.
*SáenzL. M.FuchsL. S.FuchsD. (2005). Peer-assisted learning strategies for English language learners with learning disabilities. Exceptional Children, 71(3), 231–247.
37.
ScruggsT. E.MastropieriM. A. (1998). Summarizing single-subject research issues and applications. Behavior Modification, 22(3), 221–242. doi:10.1177/01454455980223001
38.
ScruggsT. E.MastropieriM. A.CastoG. (1987). The quantitative synthesis of single-subject research methodology and validation. Remedial and Special Education, 8(2), 24–33.
39.
SimmonsD. C.FuchsL. S.FuchsD.MathesP.HodgeJ. P. (1995). Effects of explicit teaching and peer tutoring on the reading achievement of learning-disabled and low-performing students in regular classrooms. Elementary School Journal, 95(5), 387–408.
40.
*StaubitzJ. E.CartledgeG.YurickA. L.LoY. (2005). Repeated reading for students with emotional or behavioral disorders: Peer- and trainer-mediated instruction. Behavioral Disorders, 31(1), 51–64.
41.
StebbinsM. S.StormontM.LembkeE. S.WilsonD. J.ClippardD. (2012). Monitoring the effectiveness of the Wilson Reading System for students with disabilities: One district’s example. Exceptionality, 20(1), 58–70.
42.
StricklandW. D.BoonR. T.SpencerV. G. (2013). The effects of repeated reading on the fluency and comprehension skills of elementary-age students with learning disabilities (LD), 2001–2011: A review of research and practice. Learning Disabilities—A Contemporary Journal, 11(1), 1–33.
43.
SwansonE. A. (2008). Observing reading instruction for students with learning disabilities: A synthesis. Learning Disability Quarterly, 31(3), 115–133.
44.
*TamK. Y.HewardW. L.HengM. A. (2006). A reading instruction intervention program for English-language learners who are struggling readers. The Journal of Special Education, 40(2), 79–93.
45.
TherrienW. J. (2004). Fluency and comprehension gains as a result of repeated reading: A meta-analysis. Remedial and Special Education, 25(4), 252–261.
46.
TherrienW. J.KubinaR. M.Jr. (2007). The importance of context in repeated reading. Reading Improvement, 44(4), 179–188.
47.
VaughnS.ElbaumB. E.WanzekJ.ScammaccaN.WalkerM. A. (2014). Code sheet and guide for education-related intervention study syntheses. Austin, TX: Meadows Center for Preventing Educational Risk.
48.
VaughnS.WanzekJ. (2014). Intensive interventions in reading for students with reading disabilities: Meaningful impacts. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 29(2), 46–53.
49.
*WatsonM.ForeC.BoonR. T. (2009). Corrective feedback of oral decoding errors for diverse learners with reading disabilities: The effects of two methods on reading fluency. International Journal of Special Education, 24(1), 20–31.
50.
WelschR. G. (2006). 20 ways to … increase oral reading fluency. Intervention in School & Clinic, 41(3), 180–183.
51.
*WelschR. G. (2007). Using experimental analysis to determine interventions for reading fluency and recalls of students with learning disabilities. Learning Disability Quarterly, 30(2), 115–129.
52.
WolfM.Katzir-CohenT. (2001). Reading fluency and its intervention. Scientific Studies of Reading, 5(3), 211–239.
53.
*YurickA. L.RobinsonP. D.CartledgeG.LoY.EvansT. L. (2006). Using peer-mediated repeated readings as a fluency-building activity for urban learners. Education & Treatment of Children, 29(3), 469–506.
