We examine the efficacy of an intervention to improve word reading and reading comprehension in fourth- and fifth-grade students with significant reading problems. Using a randomized control trial design, we compare the fourth- and fifth-grade reading outcomes of students with severe reading difficulties who were provided a researcher-developed treatment with reading outcomes of students in a business-as-usual (BAU) comparison condition. A total of 280 fourth- and fifth-grade students were randomly assigned within school in a 1:1 ratio to either the BAU comparison condition (n = 139) or the treatment condition (n = 141). Treatment students were provided small-group tutoring for 30 to 45 minutes for an average of 68 lessons (mean hours of instruction = 44.4, SD = 11.2). Treatment students performed statistically significantly higher than BAU students on a word reading measure (effect size [ES] = 0. 58) and a measure of reading fluency (ES = 0.46). Though not statistically significant, effect sizes for students in the treatment condition were consistently higher than BAU students for decoding measures (ES = 0.06, 0.08), and mixed for comprehension (ES = -0.02, 0.14).
AaronP. G.JoshiM.WilliamsK. A. (1999). Not all reading disabilities are alike. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 32(2), 120–137.
2.
AdlofS. M.CattsH. W.LeeJ. (2010). Kindergarten predictors of second versus eighth grade reading comprehension impairments. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 43(4), 332–345.
3.
BoardmanA. G.VaughnS.BuckleyP.ReutebuchC.RobertsG.KlingnerJ. (2016). Collaborative strategic reading for students with learning disabilities in upper elementary classrooms. Exceptional Children, 82, 409–427. doi:0014402915625067
4.
BoulayB.GoodsonB.FryeM.BlocklinM.PriceC. (2015). Summary of research generated by Striving Readers on the effectiveness of interventions for struggling adolescent readers (NCEE 2016-4001). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance. Retrieved from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED560732.pdf
5.
BulyM. R.ValenciaS. W. (2002). Below the bar: Profiles of students who fail state reading assessments. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 24(3), 219–239.
6.
CattsH. W.AdlofS. M.WeismerS. E. (2006). Language deficits in poor comprehenders: A case for the simple view of reading. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 49(2), 278–293.
7.
CattsH. W.HoganT. P.FeyM. E. (2003). Subgrouping poor readers on the basis of individual differences in reading-related abilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 36(2), 151–164.
8.
ChallJ. S. (1996). American reading achievement: Should we worry?Research in the Teaching of English, 30(3), 303–310.
9.
ChallJ. S.JacobsV. A. (1983). Writing and reading in the elementary grades: Developmental trends among low SES children. Language Arts, 60(5), 617–626.
10.
CheungA.SlavinR. E.LakeC.KimE. (2016, March). Effective secondary science programs: A best-evidence synthesis. Presentation at the annual meeting of the Society for Research on Educational Effectiveness, Washington, DC.
11.
CirinoP. T.RomainM. A.BarthA. E.TolarT. D.FletcherJ. M.VaughnS. (2013). Reading skill components and impairments in middle school struggling readers. Reading and Writing, 26(7), 1059–1086.
12.
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(3), 277–299.
13.
FlynnL. J.ZhengX.SwansonH. L. (2012). Instructing struggling older readers: A selective meta-analysis of intervention research. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 27(1), 21–32.
14.
GoldmanS. R.SnowC.VaughnS. (2016). Common themes in teaching reading for understanding: Lessons from three projects. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 60(3), 255–264.
15.
GoughP. B.TunmerW. E. (1986). Decoding, reading, and reading disability. Remedial and Special Education, 7(1), 6–10.
16.
GwetK. (2001). Handbook of inter-rater reliability: How to estimate the level of agreement between two or multiple raters. Gaithersburg, MD: STATAXIS Publishing Company.
17.
HebertM.BohatyJ. J.NelsonJ. R.BrownJ. (2016). The effects of text structure instruction on expository reading comprehension: A meta-analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 108(5), 609–629. doi:10.1037/edu0000082
18.
HiebertE. (2003). QuickReads: A research-based fluency program. Parsippany, NJ: Pearson.
19.
HillC. J.BloomH. S.BlackA. R.LipseyM. W. (2008). Empirical benchmarks for interpreting effect sizes in research. Child Development Perspectives, 2(3), 172–177.
20.
HockM. F.BrasseurI. F.DeshlerD. D.CattsH. W.MarquisJ. G.MarkC. A.StriblingJ. W. (2009). What is the reading component skill profile of adolescent struggling readers in urban schools?Learning Disability Quarterly, 32(1), 21–38.
21.
James-BurdumyS.DekeJ.GerstenR.Lugo-GilJ.Newman-GoncharR.DiminoJ.. . . LiuA. Y. H. (2012). Effectiveness of four supplemental reading comprehension interventions. Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, 5(4), 345–383.
22.
KendeouP.van den BroekP.WhiteM. J.LynchJ. S. (2009). Predicting reading comprehension in early elementary school: The independent contributions of oral language and decoding skills. Journal of Educational Psychology, 101(4), 765–778.
23.
KlingnerJ. K.VaughnS.SchummJ. S. (1998). Collaborative strategic reading during social studies in heterogeneous fourth-grade classrooms. The Elementary School Journal, 99(1), 3–22.
24.
LawrenceJ. F.CrossonA. C.Paré-BlagoevE. J.SnowC. E. (2015). Word generation randomized trial: Discussion mediates the impact of program treatment on academic word learning. American Educational Research Journal, 52(4), 750–786.
NationK.ClarkeP.MarshallC. M.DurandM. (2004). Hidden language impairments in children: Parallels between poor reading comprehension and specific language impairment?Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 47(1), 199–211.
28.
RitcheyK. D.SilvermanR. D.MontanaroE. A.SpeeceD. L.SchatschneiderC. (2012). Effects of a tier 2 supplemental reading intervention for at-risk fourth-grade students. Exceptional Children, 78(3), 318–334.
29.
SabatiniJ. P.SawakiY.ShoreJ. R.ScarboroughH. S. (2010). Relationships among reading skills of adults with low literacy. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 43(2), 122–138.
30.
ScammaccaN. K.RobertsG. J.ChoE.WilliamsK. J.RobertsG.VaughnS. R.CarrollM. (2016). A century of progress: Reading interventions for students in grades 4–12, 1914–2014. Review of Educational Research, 86(3), 756–800. doi:10.3102/0034654316652942
31.
ScammaccaN. K.RobertsG.VaughnS.StuebingK. K. (2015). A meta-analysis of interventions for struggling readers in grades 4–12: 1980–2011. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 48(4), 369–390.
32.
ShankweilerD.LundquistE.KatzL.StuebingK. K.FletcherJ. M.BradyS.. . . ShaywitzB. A. (1999). Comprehension and decoding: Patterns of association in children with reading difficulties. Scientific Studies of Reading, 3(1), 69–94.
33.
ShinnM. R.ShinnM. M. (2002). AIMSweb training workbook: Administration and scoring of reading maze for use in general outcome measurement. Eden Prairie, MN: Edformation.
34.
StorchS. A.WhitehurstG. J. (2002). Oral language and code-related precursors to reading: Evidence from a longitudinal structural model. Developmental Psychology, 38(6), 934–947.
35.
SwansonE.WanzekJ.VaughnS.RobertsG. K.FallA. M. (2015). Improving reading comprehension and social studies knowledge among middle school students with disabilities. Exceptional Children, 81, 426–442. doi:10.1177/0014402914563704
36.
TherrienW. J.WickstromK.JonesK. (2006). Effect of a combined repeated reading and question generation intervention on reading achievement. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 21(2), 89–97.
37.
TorgesenJ. K.WagnerR. K.RashotteC. A. (1999). Test of word reading efficiency. San Antonio, TX: Pro-Ed.
38.
TorppaM.TolvanenA.PoikkeusA. M.EklundK.LerkkanenM. K.LeskinenE.LyytinenH. (2007). Reading development subtypes and their early characteristics. Annals of Dyslexia, 57(1), 3–32.
39.
VaughnS.ChardD. J.BryantD. P.ColemanM.TylerB. J.Linan-ThompsonS.KouzekananiK. (2000). Fluency and comprehension interventions for third-grade students. Remedial and Special Education, 21(6), 325–335.
40.
VaughnS.CirinoP. T.WanzekJ.WexlerJ.FletcherJ. M.DentonC. D.. . . FrancisD. J. (2010). Response to intervention for middle school students with reading difficulties: Effects of a primary and secondary intervention. School Psychology Review, 39(1), 3–21.
41.
VaughnS.MartinezL. R.Linan-ThompsonS.ReutebuchC. K.CarlsonC. D.FrancisD. J. (2009). Enhancing social studies vocabulary and comprehension for seventh-grade English language learners: Findings from two experimental studies. Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, 2(4), 297–324.
42.
VaughnS.MartinezL. R.WanzekJ.RobertsG.SwansonE.FallA. M. (2017). Improving content knowledge and comprehension for English language learners: Findings from a randomized control trial. Journal of Educational Psychology, 109(1), 22–34.
43.
VaughnS.RobertsG.SchnakenbergJ. B.FallA. M.VaughnM. G.WexlerJ. (2015). Improving reading comprehension for high school students with disabilities: Effects for comprehension and school retention. Exceptional Children, 82(1), 117–131. doi:10.1177/0014402915585478
44.
VaughnS.SolísM.MiciakJ.TaylorW. P.FletcherJ. M. (2016). Effects from a randomized control trial comparing researcher- and school-implemented treatments with fourth-graders with significant reading difficulties. Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, 9(Suppl. 1), 23–44.
45.
VaughnS.SwansonE. A.RobertsG.WanzekJ.Stillman-SpisakS. J.SolisM.SimmonsD. (2013). Improving reading comprehension and social studies knowledge in middle school. Reading Research Quarterly, 48(1), 77–93.
46.
VaughnS.WanzekJ.WexlerJ.BarthA.CirinoP. T.FletcherJ.. . . FrancisD. (2010). The relative effects of group size on reading progress of older students with reading difficulties. Reading and Writing, 23(8), 931–956.
47.
VaughnS.WexlerJ.LerouxA.RobertsG.DentonC.BarthA.FletcherJ. (2012). Effects of intensive reading intervention for eighth-grade students with persistently inadequate response to intervention. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 45(6), 515–525.
48.
VaughnS.WexlerJ.RobertsG.BarthA. A.CirinoP. T.RomainM. A.. . . DentonC. A. (2011). Effects of individualized and standardized interventions on middle school students with reading disabilities. Exceptional Children, 77(4), 391–407.
49.
WagnerR. K.TorgesenJ. K.RashotteC. A.PearsonN. A. (2010). TOSREC: Test of sentence reading efficiency and comprehension. Austin, TX: Pro-Ed.
50.
WanzekJ.VaughnS.RobertsG.FletcherJ. M. (2011). Efficacy of a reading intervention for middle school students with learning disabilities. Exceptional Children, 78(1), 73–87.
51.
WanzekJ.VaughnS.ScammaccaN. K.MetzK.MurrayC. S.RobertsG.DanielsonL. (2013). Extensive reading interventions for students with reading difficulties after grade 3. Review of Educational Research, 83(2), 163–195. doi:10.3102/0034654313477212
52.
WanzekJ.WexlerJ.VaughnS.CiulloS. (2010). Reading interventions for struggling readers in the upper elementary grades: A synthesis of 20 years of research. Reading and Writing, 23(8), 889–912. doi:10.1007/s11145-009-9179-5
53.
What Works Clearinghouse. (2014). Procedures and standards handbook (Version 3.0). Washington, DC: US Department of Education.
54.
WoodcockR. W.McGrewK. S.MatherN. (2001). Woodcock-Johnson III tests of achievement. Itasca, IL: Riverside.
