Data Mountain: Self-Monitoring,Goal Setting,and Positive Attributions to Enhance the Oral Reading Fluency of Elementary Students With or At-Risk for Reading Disabilities
Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online 2021
Data Mountain: Self-Monitoring,Goal Setting,and Positive Attributions to Enhance the Oral Reading Fluency of Elementary Students With or At-Risk for Reading Disabilities
Data Mountain is a self-determination program that has shown early promise in enhancing the oral reading fluency (ORF) of students with or at-risk for reading disabilities (RD). This program supports self-determined learning behaviors through explicit teaching of self-monitoring, goal setting, and positive attributions. The present study tested the effects of Data Mountain on the ORF of 81 students with or at-risk for RD in second through fifth grades, randomly assigned to one of three conditions: Data Mountain delivered in small groups, Data Mountain delivered individually, or a comparison condition. Results from hierarchical linear modeling indicated that treatment students read an average of 31 more words per minute with a growth rate twice that of comparison students (p < .01). The transferable possibilities of Data Mountain to provide students with an opportunity to learn self-determination skills and support ORF is significant to the field of special education.
AlbersC. A.HoffmanA. (2012). Using flashcard drill methods and self-graphing procedures to improve the reading performance of English language learners. Journal of Applied School Psychology, 28(4), 367–388. https://doi.org/10/1080/15377903.2012/731365
2.
AlgozzineB.BrowderD.KarvonenM.TestD. W.WoodW. M. (2001). Effects of interventions to promote self-determination for individuals with disabilities. Review of Educational Research, 71(2), 219–277. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543011002219
3.
AlgozzineB.MarrM. B.KavelR. L.DuganK. K. (2009). Using peer coaches to build oral reading fluency. Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk, 14(3), 256–270. https://doi.org/10.1080/10824660903375735
4.
BerkeleyS.MastropieriM. A.ScruggsT. E. (2011). Reading comprehension strategy instruction and attribution retraining for secondary students with learning and other mild disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 44(1), 18–32. https://doi.org/10.177/002219410371677
5.
ChardD. J.VaughnS.TylerB. J. (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. https://doi.org/10.1177/00222194020350050101
6.
ChristT. J.ArañasY. A.KemberJ. M.KissA. J.McCarthy-TrentmanA.MonaghenB. D.WhiteM. J. (2014). Formative Assessment System for Teachers technical manual: CBMReading. Formative Assessment System for Teachers.
7.
ConnorC. M.PonitzC. C.PhillipsB. M.TravisQ. M.GlasneyS.MorrisonF. J. (2010). First graders’ literacy and self-regulation gains: The effect of individualizing student instruction. Journal of School Psychology, 48(5), 433–455. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2010.06.003
8.
De CharmsR. (2013). Personal causation: The internal affective determinants of behavior. Routledge.
9.
DeciE. L.RyanR. M. (2012). Motivation, personality, and development within embedded social contexts: An overview of self-determination theory. In RyanR. M. (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of human motivation (pp. 85–107). Oxford University Press.
10.
DenoS. L.FuchsL. S.MarstonD.ShinJ. (2001). Using curriculum-based measurements to establish growth standards for students with learning disabilities. School Psychology Review, 30(4), 507–524. https://doi.org/10.1080/02796015.2001.12086131
11.
DidionL.TosteJ. R.BenzS. A. (2020). Self-determination to increase oral reading fluency for third grade students with and at risk for reading disabilities: Pilot and replication single-case designs. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 35(4), 218–231. https://doi.org/10.1111/ldrp.12234
12.
DidionL.TosteJ. R.BenzS. A.ShogrenK. A. (2021). Components of self-determination integrated within reading interventions for elementary students with learning disabilities: A research synthesis. Learning Disabilities Quarterly. https://doi.org/10.1177/0731948721989328
13.
DisethÅ. (2011). Self-efficacy, goal orientations and learning strategies as mediators between preceding and subsequent academic achievement. Learning and Individual Differences, 21(2), 191–195. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2011.01.003
14.
EstevesK. J.WhittenE. (2011). Assisted reading with digital audiobooks for students with reading disabilities. Reading Horizons, 51(1), 21–40.
15.
FuchsL. S.FuchsD.HamlettC. L.WalzL.GermannG. (1993). Formative evaluation of academic progress: How much growth can we expect?School Psychology Review, 22, 27–27. https://doi.org/10.1080/02796015.1993.12085636
16.
GoodR. H.IIIKaminskiR. A.SimmonsD.Kame’enuiE. J. (2001). Using Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills (DIBELS)in an outcomes-driven model: Steps to reading outcomes. OSSC Bulletin, 44(1), n1.
17.
GuzmanG.GoldbergT. S.SwansonH. L. (2018). A meta-analysis of self-monitoring on reading performance of K-12 students. School Psychology Quarterly, 33(1), 160–168. https://doi.org/10.1037/spq0000199
18.
HernandezD. J. (2011). Double jeopardy: How third-grade reading skills and poverty influence high school graduation. Annie E. Casey Foundation.
19.
KentS.WanzekJ.PetscherY.Al OtaibaS.KimY. S. (2014). Writing fluency and quality in kindergarten and first grade: The role of attention, reading, transcription, and oral language. Reading and Writing, 27(7), 1163–1188. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5826.2012.00351.x
20.
KonradM.FowlerC. G.WalkerA. R.TestD. W.WoodW. M. (2007). Effects of self-determination interventions on the academic skills of students with learning disabilities. Learning Disability Quarterly, 30(2), 89–113. https://doi.org/10.2307/30035545
21.
LeClairC.DollB.OsbornA.JonesK. (2009). English language learners’ and non–English language learners’ perceptions of the classroom environment. Psychology in the Schools, 46(6), 568–577. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.20398
22.
LenzB. K.EllisE.ScanlonD. (1996). Teaching learning strategies to adolescents and adults with learning disabilities. Pro-Ed.
23.
MargolisH.McCabeP. P. (2006). Motivating struggling readers in an era of mandated instructional practices. Reading Psychology, 27(5), 435–455. https://doi.org/10.1080/02702710600848023
24.
MorganP. L.FarkasG.HibelJ. (2008). Matthew effects for whom?Learning Disability Quarterly, 31(4), 187–198. https://doi.org/10.2307/25474651
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. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022466910398016
26.
MurrayM. S.MungerK. A.ClonanS. M. (2012). Assessment as a strategy to increase oral reading fluency. Intervention in School and Clinic, 47(3), 144–151. https://doi.org/10.1177/1053451211423812
27.
National Assessment of Educational Progress. (2019). The nation’s report card: 2017 mathematics and reading assessments. http://www.nationsreportcard
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 (National Institute of Health Pub. No. 00-4769). National Institute of Child Health and Human Development.
30.
NelsonJ. M.Manset-WilliamsonG. (2006). The impact of explicit, self-regulatory reading comprehension strategy instruction on the reading-specific self-efficacy, attributions, and affect of students with reading disabilities. Learning Disability Quarterly, 29, 213–230. https://doi.org/10.2307/30035507
31.
PikulskiJ. J.ChardD. J. (2005). Fluency: Bridge between decoding and reading comprehension. The Reading Teacher, 58(6), 510–519. https://doi.org/10.1598/RT.58.6.2
32.
PintrichP. R.SchunckD. H. (2002). Motivation in education. Merrill Prentice Hall.
33.
RaudenbushS. W.BloomH.SpybrookJ.MartinezA. (2011). Optimal design software for multi-level and longitudinal research (Version 3.01) [Software]. www.wtgrantfoundation.org
34.
RaudenbushS. W.BrykA. S. (2002). Hierarchical linear models: Applications and data analysis methods (Vol. 1). SAGE.
35.
ReidR. (1996). Research in self-monitoring with students with learning disabilities: The present, the prospects, the pitfalls. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 29(3), 317–331. https://doi.org/10.1177/002221949602900311
36.
ReschlyA. L.BuschT. W.BettsJ.DenoS. L.LongJ. D. (2009). Curriculum-based measurement oral reading as an indicator of reading achievement: A meta-analysis of the correlational evidence. Journal of School Psychology, 47(6), 427–469. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2009.07.001
37.
RyanR. M.DeciE. L. (2017). Self-determination theory: Basic psychological needs in motivation, development, and wellness. Guilford Press.
38.
SamuelsS. J. (1979). The method of repeated readings. The Reading Teacher, 32(4), 403–408.
39.
ShellD.ColvinC.BruningR. (1995). Self-efficacy, attribution and outcome expectancy mechanisms in reading and writing achievement: Grade-level and achievement-level differences. Journal of Educational Psychology, 87, 386–398.
40.
ShinJ.McMasterK. (2019). Relations between CBM (oral reading and maze) and reading comprehension on state achievement tests: A meta-analysis. Journal of School Psychology, 73, 131–149. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2019.03.005
41.
ShogrenK. A.Faggella-LubyM. N.BaeS. J.WehmeyerM. L. (2004). The effect of choice-making as an intervention for problem behavior: A meta-analysis. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 6(4), 228–237. https://doi.org/10.1177/10983007040060040401
42.
ShogrenK. A.LittleT. D.WehmeyerM. L. (2017). Human agentic theories and the development of self-determination. In WehmeyerM. L.ShogrenK. A.LittleT. D.LopezS. J. (Eds.), Development of self-determination through the life course (pp. 17–26). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-024-1042-6
43.
ShogrenK. A.WehmeyerM. L.PalmerS. B.Forber-PrattA. J.LittleT. J.LopezS. (2015). Causal agency theory: Reconceptualizing a functional model of self-determination. Education and Training in Autism and Developmental Disabilities, 50, 251–263.
44.
SolariE. J.PetscherY.FolsomJ. S. (2014). Differentiating literacy growth of ELL students with LD from other high-risk subgroups and general education peers: Evidence from grades 3–10. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 47(4), 329–348. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022219412463435
45.
SolísM.ScammaccaN.BarthA. E.RobertsG. J. (2017). Text-based vocabulary intervention training study: Supporting fourth graders with low reading comprehension and learning disabilities. Learning Disabilities, 15(1), 103–115.
46.
StangK. K.CarterE. W.LaneK. L.PiersonM. R. (2009). Perspectives of general and special educators on fostering self-determination in elementary and middle schools. The Journal of Special Education, 43, 94–106. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022466907313452
47.
SteckerP. M.FuchsD.FuchsL. S. (2008). Progress monitoring as essential practice within response to intervention. Rural Special Education Quarterly, 27(4), 10–17.
48.
StevensE. A.WalkerM. A.VaughnS. (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. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 50(5), 576–590. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022219416638028
49.
StipekD. J.WeiszJ. R. (1981). Perceived personal control and academic achievement. Review of Educational Research, 51(1), 101–137. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543051001101
50.
SwansonE. A. (2008). Observing reading instruction for students with learning disabilities: A synthesis. Learning Disability Quarterly, 31(3), 115–133. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.20484
51.
SwansonE. A.VaughnS. (2010). An observation study of reading instruction provided to elementary students with learning disabilities in the resource room. Psychology in the Schools, 47(5), 481–492. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.20484
TosteJ. R.CapinP.VaughnS.RobertsG. J.KearnsD. M. (2017). Multisyllabic word-reading instruction with and without motivational beliefs training for struggling readers in the upper elementary grades: A pilot investigation. The Elementary School Journal, 117(4), 593–615. https://doi.org/10.1086/691684
54.
TosteJ. R.CapinP.WilliamsK. J.ChoE.VaughnS. (2019). Replication of an experimental study investigating the efficacy of a multisyllabic word reading intervention with and without motivational beliefs training for struggling readers. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 52(1), 45–58. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022219418775114
55.
TosteJ. R.DidionL.PengP.FildermanM. J.McClellandA. M. (2020). A meta-analytic review of the relations between motivation and reading achievement for K–12 students. Review of Educational Research, 90(3), 420–456. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654320919352
56.
ValåsH. (2001). Learned helplessness and psychological adjustment II: Effects of learning disabilities and low achievement. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 45(2), 101–114.
57.
VaughnS.LevyS.ColemanM.BosC. S. (2002). Reading instruction for students with LD and EBD: A synthesis of observation studies. The Journal of Special Education, 36(1), 2–13. https://doi.org/10.1177/00224669020360010101
58.
VaughnS.WanzekJ. (2014). Intensive interventions in reading for students with reading disabilities: Meaningful impacts. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 29(2), 46–53. https://doi.org/10.1111/ldrp.12031
59.
WagnerR. K.TorgesenJ. K.RashotteC. A.PearsonN. A. (2010). Test of silent reading efficiency and comprehension. Pro-Ed.
60.
WatsonM.ForeC.IIIBoonR. 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.
61.
WaymanM.WallaceT.WileyH. I.TicháR.EspinC. A. (2007). Literature synthesis on curriculum-based measurement in reading. The Journal of Special Education, 41(2), 85–120. https://doi.org/10.1177/00224669070410020401
62.
WebberJ.ScheuermannB.McCallC.ColemanM. (1993). Research on self-monitoring as a behavior management technique in special education classrooms: A descriptive review. Remedial and Special Education, 14(2), 38–56. https://doi.org/10.1177/074193259301400206
63.
WehmeyerM. L.SandsD. J.DollB.PalmerS. (1997). The development of self-determination and implications for educational interventions with students with disabilities. International Journal of Disability, Development and Education, 44(4), 305–332. https://doi.org/10.1080/0156655970440403
64.
WehmeyerM. L.ShogrenK. A.TosteJ. R.MahalS. (2017). Self-determined learning to motivate struggling learners in reading and writing. Intervention in School and Clinic, 52(5), 295–303. https://doi.org/10.1177/1053451216676800
WigfieldA.GuthrieJ. T. (1997). Relations of children’s motivation for reading to the amount and breadth or their reading. Journal of Educational Psychology, 89(3), 420–432. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.89.3.420
67.
WigfieldA.GuthrieJ. T.McGoughK. (1996). A questionnaire measure of children’s motivations for reading (Instructional Resource No. 22). National Reading Research Center, University of Georgia and University of Maryland.
68.
WoodW. M.FowlerC. H.UpholdN.TestD. W. (2005). A review of self-determination interventions with individuals with severe disabilities. Research and Practice for Persons With Severe Disabilities, 30(3), 121–146. https://doi.org/10.2511/rpsd.30.3.12
69.
YeagerD. S.WaltonG. M. (2011). Social-psychological interventions in education: They’re not magic. Review of Educational Research, 81(2), 267–301. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654311405999
70.
YeoS. (2010). Predicting performance on state achievement tests using curriculum-based measurement in reading: A multilevel meta-analysis. Remedial and Special Education, 31(6), 412–422. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741932508327463
71.
ZhengC.Gaumer EricksonA.KingstonN. M.NoonanP. M. (2014). The relationship among self-determination, self-concept, and academic achievement for students with learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 47(5), 462–474. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022219412469688
