We examined the efficacy of a Technology-Based Early Language Comprehension Intervention (TeLCI) designed to teach inferencing in a non-reading context. A group of Grades 1 and 2 students from 2 elementary schools in the U.S. Midwest identified as at risk of comprehension difficulties were assigned randomly to a business-as-usual control group or to use TeLCI over an 8-week period. TeLCI comprised three learning modules per week that involved (a) learning new vocabulary, (b) watching fiction or nonfiction videos, and (c) answering inferential questions. Students also engaged in small-group read-alouds with their teachers once per week. Students who experienced TeLCI improved their inferencing and benefited from scaffolding and feedback provided during the intervention. Students’ pre- to posttest inferencing gains were comparable with those of control students. Female students and those receiving special education services appeared less likely to benefit from TeLCI, whereas multilingual students were more likely to respond. Further work is needed to determine the optimal conditions under which TeLCI will benefit young children.
Al OtaibaS.FuchsD. (2002). Characteristics of children who are unresponsive to early literacy intervention: A review of the literature. Remedial and Special Education, 23(5), 300–316. https://doi.org/10.1177/07419325020230050501
2.
Al OtaibaS.FuchsD. (2006). Who are the young children for whom best practices in reading are ineffective? An experimental and longitudinal study. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 39(5), 414–431. https://doi.org/10.1177/00222194060390050401
3.
Al OtaibaS.McMasterK.WanzekJ.ZaruM. W. (2022). What we know and need to know about literacy interventions for elementary students with reading difficulties and disabilities, including dyslexia. Reading Research Quarterly, 58, 313–332. https://doi.org/10.1002/rrq.458
4.
BarthA. E.EllemanA. M. (2017). Evaluating the impact of a multistrategy inference intervention for middle-grade struggling readers. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 48(1), 31–41. https://doi.org/10.1044/2016_LSHSS-16-0041
5.
BurnsM. K.JimersonS. R.VanDerHeydenA. M.DenoS. L. (2016). Toward a unified response-to-intervention model: Multi-tiered systems of support. In JimersonS. R.BurnsM. K.VanDerHeydenA. M. (Eds.), Handbook of response to intervention: The science and practice of multi-tiered systems of support (pp. 719–732). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4899-7568-3_41
6.
ButterfussR.KendeouP. (2018). The role of executive functions in reading comprehension. Educational Psychology Review, 30(3), 801–826. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-017-9422-6
7.
CainK.OakhillJ. V. (1999). Inference making ability and its relation to comprehension failure in young children. Reading and Writing, 11(5–6), 489–503. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008084120205
8.
CainK.OakhillJ. V. (2006). Profiles of children with specific reading comprehension difficulties. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 76(4), 683–696. https://doi.org/10.1348/000709905X67610
CarnineD. W.Kame’enuiE. J.WoolfsonN. (1982). Training of textual dimensions related to text-based inferences. Journal of Reading Behavior, 14(3), 335–340. https://doi.org/10.1080/10862968209547459
11.
ChoE.RobertsG. J.CapinP.RobertsG.MiciakJ.VaughnS. (2015). Cognitive attributes, attention, and self-efficacy of adequate and inadequate responders in a fourth grade reading intervention. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 30(4), 159–170. https://doi.org/10.1111/ldrp.12088
12.
ChristT. J. (2012). Early reading assessments (earlyReading™, English version): Eleven subtests of pre-reading and basic reading skills. University of Minnesota.
13.
ChristT. J., colleagues. (2018). Formative assessment system for Teachers™ technical manual. Author and FastBridge Learning.
14.
ClemensN. H.FuchsD. (2021). Commercially developed tests of reading comprehension: Gold standard or fool’s gold?Reading Research Quarterly, 57, 385–397. https://doi.org/10.1002/rrq.415
15.
ClintonV.SepelB.van den BroekP.McMasterK.KendeouP.CarlsonS.RappD. N. (2014). Gender differences in inference generation by fourth grade students. Journal of Research in Reading, 37, 356–374. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9817.2012.01531.x
16.
Common Core State Standards Initiative. (2010). Common core state standards for English language arts and literacy in history/social studies, science, and technical subjects. http://www.corestandards.org/
17.
DawesE.LeitãoS.ClaessenM.KaneR. (2019). A randomized controlled trial of an oral inferential comprehension intervention for young children with developmental language disorder. Child Language Teaching and Therapy, 35(1), 39–54. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265659018815736
18.
DentonC. A.FletcherJ. M.AnthonyJ. L.FrancisD. J. (2006). An evaluation of intensive intervention for students with persistent reading difficulties. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 39(5), 447–466. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265659018815736
19.
DentonC. A.YorkM. J.FrancisD. J.HaringC.AhmedY.BidulescuA. (2017). An investigation of an intervention to promote inference generation by adolescent poor comprehenders. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 32(2), 85–98. https://doi.org/10.1111/ldrp.12134
20.
DesmaraisC.NadeauL.TrudeauN.Filiatrault-VeilleuxP.Maxès-FournierC. (2013). Intervention for improving comprehension in 4–6 year old children with specific language impairment: Practicing inferencing is a good thing. Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics, 27(6–7), 540–552. https://doi.org/10.3109/02699206.2013.791880
21.
EllemanA. M. (2017). Examining the impact of inference instruction on the literal and inferential comprehension of skilled and less skilled readers: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Educational Psychology, 109(6), 761–781. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000180
FuchsD.FuchsL. S. (2006). Introduction to response to intervention: What, why, and how valid is it?Reading Research Quarterly, 41(1), 93–99. https://doi.org/10.1598/rrq.41.1.4
25.
FuchsD.FuchsL. S.VaughnS. (2014). What is intensive instruction and why is it important?Teaching Exceptional Children, 46(4), 13–18. https://doi.org/10.1177/0040059914522966
26.
GrossY. (Producer). (1993). Blinky Bill [Television series]. Australian Broadcasting Corporation.
27.
HallC. S. (2016). Inference instruction for struggling readers: A synthesis of intervention research. Educational Psychology Review, 28(1), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-014-9295-x
28.
HallC. S.VaughnS.BarnesM. A.StewartA. A.AustinC. R.RobertsG. (2020). The effects of inference instruction on the reading comprehension of English learners with reading comprehension difficulties. Remedial and Special Education, 41(5), 259–270. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741932518824983
29.
HendricksE. L.FuchsD. (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(6), 428–443. http://doi.org/10.1177/0022219420920379
30.
KendeouP.Bohn-GettlerC.WhiteM. J.Van Den BroekP. (2008). Children’s inference generation across different media. Journal of Research in Reading, 31(3), 259–272. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9817.2008.00370.x
31.
KendeouP.McMasterK.ButterfussR.KimJ.BresinaB.WagnerK. (2020). The inferential language comprehension (iLC) framework. Topics in Cognitive Science, 12, 256–273. https://doi.org/10.1111/tops.12457
32.
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. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0015956
LamE. A.McMasterK. L. (2014). Predictors of responsiveness to early literacy intervention: A 10-year update. Learning Disability Quarterly, 37(3), 134–147. https://doi.org/10.1177/0731948714529772
35.
Language and Reading Research Consortium, JiangH.LoganJ. (2019). Improving reading comprehension in the primary grades: Mediated effects of a language-focused classroom intervention. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 62, 2812–2828. https://doi.org/10.1044/2019_JSLHR-L-19-0015
36.
MaglianoJ. P.LoschkyL. C.ClintonJ.LarsonA. M. (2013). Is reading the same as viewing? An exploration of the similarities and differences between processing text- and visually based narratives. In MillerB.CuttingL.McCardleP. (Eds.), Unraveling the behavioral, neurobiological, & genetic components of reading comprehension (pp. 78–90). Brookes.
37.
McGeeA.JohnsonH. (2003). The effect of inference training on skilled and less skilled comprehenders. Educational Psychology, 23(1), 49–59. https://doi.org/10.1080/01443410303220
38.
McMasterK. L.EspinC. A. (2017). Reading comprehension instruction and intervention: Promoting inference making. In CainK.ComptonD.ParrilaR. (Eds.), Theories of reading comprehension (pp. 463–488). John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/swll.15.25mcm
39.
McMasterK. L.EspinC. A.van Den BroekP. (2014). Making connections: Linking cognitive psychology and intervention research to improve comprehension of struggling readers. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 29(1), 17–24. https://doi.org/10.1111/ldrp.12026
40.
McMasterK. L.FuchsD.FuchsL. S.ComptonD. L. (2005). Responding to nonresponders: An experimental field trial of identification and intervention methods. Exceptional Children, 71(4), 445–463. https://doi.org/10.1177/001440290507100404
41.
McMasterK. L.KendeouP.BresinaB.SlaterS.WagnerK.WhiteM. J.ButterfussR.KimJ.UmanaC. (2019). Developing an interactive software application to support young children’s inference-making. L1-Educational Studies in Languages and Literature, 19, 1–30. https://doi.org/10.17239/L1ESLL-2019.19.04.04
42.
McMasterK. L.van den BroekP.EspinC. A.PintoV.JandaB.LamE.van BoekelM. (2015). Developing a reading comprehension intervention: Translating cognitive theory to educational practice. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 40, 28–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2014.04.001
43.
McNamaraD. S.MaglianoJ. P. (2009). Towards a comprehensive model of comprehension. In RossB. (Ed.), The psychology of learning and motivation (Vol. 51, pp. 297–384). Elsevier Science. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0079-7421(09)51009-2
44.
MiciakJ.CirinoP. T.AhmedY.ReidE.VaughnS. (2019). Executive functions and response to intervention: Identification of students struggling with reading comprehension. Learning Disability Quarterly, 42(1), 17–31. https://doi.org/10.1177/0731948717749935
NelsonJ. R.BennerG. J.GonzalezJ. (2003). Learner characteristics that influence the treatment effectiveness of early literacy interventions: A meta-analytic review. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 18(4), 255–267. https://doi.org/10.1111/1540-5826.00080
47.
O’BrienE. J.CookA. E. (2016). Coherence threshold and the continuity of processing. The RI-Val model of comprehension. Discourse Processes, 53, 326–338. https://doi.org/10.1080/0163853X.2015.1123341
48.
ReedD. K.LynnD. (2016). The effects of an inference-making strategy taught with and without goal setting. Learning Disability Quarterly, 39(3), 133–145. https://doi.org/10.1177/0731948715615557
van den BroekP.LorchE. P.ThurlowR. (1996). Children’s and adults’ memory for television stories: The role of causal factors, story-grammar categories, and hierarchical level. Child Development, 67, 3010–3028. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.1996.tb01900.x
52.
van KleeckA.Vander WoudeJ.HammettL. (2006). Fostering literal and inferential language skills in Head Start preschoolers with language impairment using scripted book-sharing discussions. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 15, 85–95. https://doi.org/10.1044/1058-0360(2006/009)
53.
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
54.
WiigE. H.SemelE. M.SecordW. (2013). CELF 5: Clinical evaluation of language fundamentals. Pearson/PsychCorp.
55.
YuillN.JoscelynT. (1988). Effect of organizational cues and strategies on good and poor comprehenders’ story understanding. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80, 152–158. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.80.2.152
56.
YuillN.OakhillJ. (1988). Effects of inference awareness training on poor reading comprehension. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 2(1), 33–45. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.2350020105
57.
ZevenbergenA. A.WhitehurstG. J. (2003). Dialogic reading: A shared picture book reading intervention for preschoolers. In van KleeckA.StahlS. A.BauerE. B. (Eds.), On reading books to children: Parents and teachers (pp. 177–200). Erlbaum.
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.
