Predicting and Evaluating Treatment Response: Evidence Toward Protracted Response Patterns for Severely Impacted Students With Dyslexia

Abstract

Great strides have been made in the development of effective methods of instruction for children with dyslexia. However, individual response to treatment varies, and weaknesses persist for some students with dyslexia despite otherwise effective instruction. Continued efforts are needed to support the prospective identification of poor response, particularly in routine intervention settings. The current study addressed whether indicators of dyslexia risk as outlined by hybrid diagnostic models predict response in children who received Tier 3 dyslexia intervention in their schools. The program’s efficacy has been previously documented in remediating reading abilities in children with dyslexia. Data were examined from 115 elementary-age children who received routine Tier 3 dyslexia intervention in their schools. Logistic regression revealed powerful effects of preintervention fluency and gender in predicting response, with weaker effects of decoding and rapid naming. Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder status also played a role in predicting response. Phonological awareness and listening-reading comprehension discrepancy did not predict response. Profile analyses indicated near- and far-transfer of skill for the adequate response group, whereas growth in the poor response group was limited to near-transfer. Findings support a continuum of severity that may be associated with less robust growth and generalization over the course of the intervention.

Keywords

intervention reading dyslexia longitudinal research method

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Allor

Fuchs

Mathes

(2001). Do students with and without lexical retrieval weaknesses respond differently to instruction? Journal of Learning Disabilities, 34(3), 264–275. https://doi.org/10.1177/002221940103400306

Allor

J. H.

Mathes

P. G.

Roberts

J. K.

Cheatham

J. P.

Champlin

T. M.

(2010). Comprehensive reading instruction for students with intellectual disabilities: Findings from the first three years of a longitudinal study. Psychology in the Schools, 47(5), 445–466. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.20482

Al Otaiba

Fuchs

(2002). Characteristics of children who are unresponsive to early literacy intervention: A review of the literature. Remedial and Special Education, 23, 300–316. https://doi.org/10.1177/07419325020230050501

Avrit

Allen

Carlsen

Gross

Peirce

Rumsey

(2006). Take Flight: A comprehensive intervention for students with dyslexia. Texas Scottish Rite Hospital for Children.

Barth

A. E.

Stuebing

K. K.

Anthony

J. L.

Denton

C. A.

Mathes

P. G.

Fletcher

J. M.

Francis

D. J.

(2008). Agreement among response to intervention criteria for identifying responder status. Learning and Individual Differences, 18, 296–307. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indif.2008.04.004

Catts

H. W.

Adlof

S. M.

Hogan

T. P.

Weismer

S. E.

(2005). Are specific language impairment and dyslexia distinct disorders? Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 48, 1378–1396. https://doi.org/10.1044/1092-4388(2005/096)

Chen

Cohen

Chen

(2010). How big is a big odds ratio? Interpreting the magnitudes of odds ratios in epidemiological studies. Communications in Statistics-Simulation and Computation, 39(4), 860–864. https://doi.org/10.1080/03610911003650383

Clarke

(2008). When can group level clustering be ignored? Multilevel models vs. single-level models with sparse data. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, 62, 752–758. https://doi.org/10.1136/jech.2007.060798

Compton

D. L.

Gilbert

J. K.

Jenkins

J. R.

Fuchs

L. S.

Cho

Barquero

L. A.

Bouton

(2012). Accelerating chronically unresponsive children to Tier 3 instruction: What level of data is necessary to ensure selection accuracy? Journal of Learning Disabilities, 45(3), 204–216. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022219412442151

10.

Compton

D. L.

Olinghouse

N. G.

Elleman

Vining

Appleton

A. C.

Vail

Summers

(2005). Putting transfer back on trial: Modeling individual differences in the transfer of decoding-skill gains to other aspects of reading acquisition. Journal of Educational Psychology, 97(1), 55–69. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.97.1.55

11.

Cox

A. R.

(1985). Alphabetic phonics: An organization and expansion of Orton-Gillingham. Annals of Dyslexia, 35(1), 187–198. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02659187

12.

Denton

C. A.

(2012). Response to intervention for reading difficulties in the primary grades: Some answers and lingering questions. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 45, 232–243. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022219412442155

13.

Farris

E. A.

Alexander

Odegard

T. N.

(2020). Assessment and identification of learning disabilities. In Martel

M. M.

(Ed.), The clinical guide to assessment and treatment of childhood learning and attention problems (pp. 3–32). Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-815755-8.00001-0

14.

Fletcher

J. M.

Lyon

G. R.

Fuchs

L. S.

Barnes

M. A.

(2018). Learning disabilities: From identification to intervention (2nd ed.). Guilford Press.

15.

Fuchs

Hendricks

Walsh

M. E.

Fuchs

L. S.

Gilbert

J. K.

Zhang

T. W.

Patton

Davis-Perkins

Kim

Elleman

A. M.

Peng

(2018). Evaluating a multidimensional reading comprehension program and reconsidering the lowly reputation of tests of near-transfer. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 33(1), 11–23. https://doi.org/10.1111/ldrp.12162

16.

Good

R. H.

Kaminski

R. A.

Simmons

Kame’enui

E. J.

(2001). Using dynamic indicators of basic early literacy skills (DIBELS) in an outcomes-driven model: Steps to reading outcomes. OSSC Bulletin, 44(1), 1–26.

17.

Greulich

Al Otaiba

Schatschneider

Wanzek

Ortiz

Wagner

R. K.

(2014). Understanding inadequate response to first-grade multi-tier intervention: Nomothetic and ideographic perspectives. Learning Disability Quarterly, 37(4), 204–217. https://doi.org/10.1177/0731948714526999

18.

Haddock

Rindskopf

Shadish

(1998). Using odds ratios as effect sizes for meta-analysis of dichotomous data: A primer on methods and issues. Psychological Methods, 33(3), 339–353. https://doi.org/10.1037/1082-989X.3.3.339

19.

Harris

P. A.

Taylor

Thielke

Payne

Gonzalez

Conde

J. G.

(2009). Research electronic data capture (REDCap): A metadata-driven methodology and workflow process for providing translational research informatics support. Journal of Biomedical Informatics, 42(2), 377–381. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbi.2008.08.010

20.

Hendricks

E. L.

Fuchs

(2020). Are individual differences in response to intervention influenced by the methods and measures used to define response? Implications for identifying children with learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 53, 428–443. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022219420920379

21.

Hulleman

C. S.

Cordray

D. S.

(2009). Moving from the lab to the field: The role of fidelity and achieved relative intervention strength. Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, 21(1), 88–110. https://doi.org/10.1080/19345740802539325

22.

Johnson

E. S.

Jenkins

J. R.

Petscher

Catts

H. W.

(2009). How can we improve the accuracy of screening instruments?. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 24(4), 174–185. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5826.2009.00291.x

23.

Kaufman

A. S.

Kaufman

N. L.

(2004). Kaufman Brief Intelligence Test (2nd ed.). American Guidance Service.

24.

Kern

A. M.

Hosp

M. K.

(2018). The status of decoding tests in instructional decision-making. Assessment for Effective Intervention, 44(1), 32–44. https://doi.org/10.1177/1534508417749874

25.

Lam

E. A.

McMaster

K. L.

(2014). Predictors of responsiveness to early literacy intervention: A 10-year update. Learning Disability Quarterly, 37, 134–147. https://doi.org/10.1177/0731948714529772

26.

Larsen

Hammill

Moats

(2013). Test of written spelling (5th ed.). Pro-Ed.

27.

Liberman

Shankweiler

Liberman

(1989). The alphabetic principle and learning to read. In Shankweiler

Liberman

I. Y.

(Eds.), Phonology and reading disability: Solving the reading puzzle (pp. 1–33). University of Michigan Press. https://doi.org/10.3998/mpub.12236

28.

Lovett

M. W.

Lacerenza

Borden

S. L.

(2000). Putting struggling readers on the PHAST track: A program to integrate phonological and strategy-based remedial reading instruction and maximize outcomes. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 33(5), 458–476. https://doi.org/10.1177/002221940003300507

29.

Lovett

M. W.

Warren-Chaplin

P. M.

Ransby

M. J.

Borden

S. L.

(1990). Training the word recognition skills of reading disabled children: Treatment and transfer effects. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82(4), 769–780. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.82.4.769

30.

Lyon

G. R.

Shaywitz

S. E.

Shaywitz

B. A.

(2003). A definition of dyslexia. Annals of Dyslexia, 53(1), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11881-003-0001-9

31.

Maas

Hox

(2005). Sufficient sample sizes for multilevel modeling. Methodology, 1(3), 86–92. https://doi.org/10.1027/1614-2241.1.3.86

32.

MacCallum

R. C.

Zhang

Preacher

K. J.

Rucker

D. D.

(2002). On the practice of dichotomization of quantitative variables. Psychological Methods, 7(1), 19–40. https://doi.org/10.1037/1082-989x.7.1.19

33.

Miciak

Fletcher

J. M.

(2020). The critical role of instructional response for identifying dyslexia and other learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 53(5), 343–353. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022219420906801

34.

Miciak

Williams

J. L.

Taylor

W. P.

Cirino

P. T.

Fletcher

J. M.

Vaughn

(2016). Do processing patterns of strengths and weaknesses predict differential treatment response? Journal of Educational Psychology, 108(6), 898–909. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000096

35.

Moher

(1998). CONSORT: An evolving tool to help improve the quality of reports of randomized controlled trials. Journal of the American Medical Association, 279(18), 1489–1491. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.279.18.1489

36.

Nagelkerke

N. J.

(1991). A note on a general definition of the coefficient of determination. Biometrika, 78(3), 691–692. https://doi.org/10.1093/biomet/78.3.691

37.

National Institute of Child Health and Human Development. (2000). Report of the National Reading Panel. Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction. U.S. Government Printing Office.

38.

O’Donnell

C. L.

(2008). Defining, conceptualizing, and measuring fidelity of implementation and its relationship to outcomes in K–12 curriculum intervention research. Review of Educational Research, 78(1), 33–84. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654307313793

39.

Quinn

J. M.

Wagner

R. K.

(2015). Gender differences in reading impairment and in the identification of impaired readers: Results from a large-scale study of at-risk readers. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 48(4), 433–445. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022219413508323

40.

Ring

J. J.

Avrit

K. J.

Black

J. L.

(2017). Take Flight: The evolution of an Orton Gillingham-based curriculum. Annals of Dyslexia, 67, 383–400. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11881-017-0151-9

41.

Scarborough

H. S.

Sabatini

J. P.

Shore

Cutting

L. E.

Pugh

Katz

(2013). Meaningful reading gains by adult literacy learners. Reading & Writing, 26, 593–613. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-012-9385-4

42.

Shaywitz

S. E.

Shaywitz

B. A.

(2008). Paying attention to reading: The neurobiology of reading and dyslexia. Development and Psychopathology, 20(4), 1329–1349. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0954579408000631

43.

Sommet

Morselli

(2017). Keep calm and learn multilevel logistic modeling: A simplified three-step procedure using stata, R, Mplus, and SPSS. International Review of Social Psychology, 30, 203–218. https://doi.org/10.5334/irsp.90

44.

Spencer

Schatschneider

Quinn

J. M.

Lopez

Petscher

(2014). Incorporating RTI in a hybrid model of reading disability. Learning Disability Quarterly, 37(3), 161–171. https://doi.org/10.1177/07319487145300967

45.

Stanovich

K. E.

(1991). Conceptual and empirical problems with discrepancy definitions of reading disability. Learning Disability Quarterly, 14(4), 269–280. https://doi.org/10.2307/1510663

46.

Steacy

L. M.

Elleman

A. M.

Lovett

M. W.

Compton

D. L.

(2016). Exploring differential effects across two decoding treatments on item-level transfer in children with significant word reading difficulties: A new approach for testing intervention elements. Scientific Studies of Reading, 20, 283–295. https://doi.org/10.1080/10888438.2016.1178267

47.

Stuebing

Barth

Traham

Reddy

Miciak

Fletcher

(2015). Are child cognitive characteristics strong predictors of responses to intervention? A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 85, 395–429. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654314555996

48.

Torgesen

J. K.

Alexander

Wagner

Rashotte

Voeller

Conway

(2001). Intensive remedial instruction for children with severe reading disabilities: Immediate and long-term outcomes from two instructional approaches. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 34(1), 33–58. https://doi.org/10.1177/002221940103400104

49.

Vaughn

Denton

C. A.

Fletcher

J. M.

(2010). Why intensive interventions are necessary for students with severe reading difficulties. Psychology in the Schools, 47, 432–444. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.20481

50.

Wagner

R. K.

Edwards

A. A.

Malkowski

Schatschneider

Joyner

R. E.

Wood

Zirps

F. A.

(2019). Combining old and new for better understanding and predicting dyslexia. New Directions for Child and Adolescent Development, 2019(165), 11–23. https://doi.org/10.1002/cad.20289

51.

Wagner

R. K.

Torgesen

J. K.

(1987). The nature of phonological processing and its causal role in the acquisition of reading skills. Psychological Bulletin, 101(2), 192–212. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.101.2.192

52.

Wagner

R. K.

Torgesen

J. K.

Rashotte

C. A.

Pearson

N. A.

(2013). Comprehensive Test of Phonological Processing (2nd ed.). Pro-Ed. https://doi.org/10.1037/t52630-000

53.

Wagner

R. K.

Zirps

F. A.

Edwards

A. A.

Wood

S. G.

Joyner

R. E.

Becker

B. J.

Liu

Beal

(2020). The prevalence of dyslexia: A new approach to its estimation. Journal of Learning Disabilities. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022219420920377

54.

Wanzek

Stevens

E. A.

Williams

K. J.

Scammacca

Vaughn

Sargent

(2018). Current evidence on the effects of intensive early reading interventions. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 51(6), 612–624. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022219418775110

55.

Wanzek

Vaughn

(2007). Research-based implications from extensive early reading interventions. School Psychology Review, 36, 541–561. https://doi.org/10.1080/02796015.2007.12087917

56.

Wanzek

Vaughn

Scammacca

Gatlin

Walker

M. A.

Capin

(2017). Meta-analyses of the effects of Tier 2 type reading interventions in grades K-3. Education Psychology Review, 23(3), 551–576. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-015-9321-7

57.

Wiederholt

J. L.

Bryant

B. R.

(2012). GORT5: Gray Oral Reading Test. Pro-Ed.

58.

Willcutt

E. G.

DeFries

J. C.

Pennington

B. F.

Smith

S. D.

Cardon

L. R.

Olson

R. K.

(2003). Genetic etiology of comorbid reading difficulties and ADHD. In Plomin

DeFries

J. C.

Craig

I. W.

McGuffin

(Eds.), Behavioral genetics in the postgenomic era (pp. 227–246). American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/10480-013

59.

Wolf

Bowers

P. G.

(1999). The double-deficit hypothesis for the developmental dyslexias. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91(3), 415–438. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.91.3.415

60.

Woodcock

(2011). Woodcock Reading Mastery Tests (3rd ed.). Pearson. https://doi.org/10.1037/t15178-000

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.08 MB