Predicting Intervention Effects With Preintervention Measures of Decoding: Evidence for a Skill-by-Treatment Interaction With Kindergarten and First-Grade Students

Abstract

A skill-by-treatment interaction (STI) isolates skill deficits and manipulates conditions to match them to student needs. Based on the learning hierarchy, preintervention scores can help predict which intervention will be most successful for an individual student. This study compared the efficacy of a modeling and practice-based decoding intervention for 29 kindergarten and first-grade students. Results suggested that grade was not a significant predictor of which intervention was more effective, but preintervention accuracy in nonsense word fluency was a significant predictor of the more effective intervention, accounted for 68% of the variance, and correctly identified the more effective intervention 88% of the time.

Keywords

reading assessment

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Ardoin

S. P.

Daly

E. J.

(2007). Introduction to the special series: Close encounters of the instructional kind—How the instructional hierarchy is shaping instructional research 30 years later. Journal of Behavioral Education, 16(1), 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10864-006-9027-5

Beck

(1989). Reading today and tomorrow: Teachers’ editions for grades 1 and 2. Holt.

Berninger

V. W.

Abbott

R. D.

Vermeulen

Fulton

C. M.

(2006). Paths to reading comprehension in at-risk second-grade readers. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 39(4), 334–351. https://doi.org/10.1177/00222194060390040701

Blachman

B. A.

Ball

E. W.

Black

Tangel

D. M.

(2000). Road to the code: A phonological awareness program for young children. Paul H. Brookes.

Burns

M. K.

(2004). Empirical analysis of drill ratio research: Refining the instructional level for drill tasks. Remedial and Special Education, 25(3), 167–173. https://doi.org/10.1177/07419325040250030401

Burns

M. K.

Codding

R. S.

Boice

C. H.

Lukito

(2010). Meta-analysis of acquisition and fluency math interventions with instructional and frustration level skills: Evidence for a skill by treatment interaction. School Psychology Review, 39(1), 69–83. https://doi.org/10.1080/02796015.2010.12087791

Burns

M. K.

Petersen-Brown

Haegele

Rodriguez

Schmitt

Braum

Clayton

Hutcheson

Conner

Hosp

J. L.

Van Der Heyden

A. M.

(2016). Meta-analysis of academic interventions derived from neuropsychological data. School Psychology Quarterly, 31(1), 28–42. https://doi.org/10.1037/spq0000117

Cohen

(1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Lawrence Earlbaum.

Connor

C. M.

Morrison

F. J.

Katch

L. E.

(2004). Beyond the reading wars: Exploring the effect of child-instruction interactions on growth in early reading. Scientific Studies of Reading, 8(4), 305–336. https://doi.org/10.1207/s1532799xssr0804_1

10.

Faul

Erdfelder

Lang

A. G.

Buchner

(2014). G* Power [Software].

11.

Feifer

S. G.

(2008). Integrating response to intervention (RTI) with neuropsychology: A scientific approach to reading. Psychology in the Schools, 45(9), 812–825. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.20328

12.

Fuchs

L. S.

Fuchs

Malone

A. S.

(2017). The taxonomy of intervention intensity. Teaching Exceptional Children, 50(1), 35–43. https://doi.org/10.1177/0040059917703962

13.

García

J. R.

Cain

(2014). Decoding and reading comprehension: A meta-analysis to identify which reader and assessment characteristics influence the strength of the relationship in English. Review of Educational Research, 84(1), 74–111. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654313499616

14.

Good

R. H.

III Baker

S. K.

Peyton

J. A.

(2008). Making sense of nonsense word fluency: Determining adequate progress in early first–grade reading. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 25(1), 33–56. https://doi.org/10.1080/10573560802491224

15.

Good

R. H.

III Kaminski

R. A.

Shinn

Bratten

Shinn

Laimon

Flindt

(2004). Technical adequacy of DIBELS: Results of the early Childhood Research Institute on measuring growth and development. University of Oregon.

16.

Gough

P. B.

Tunmer

W. E.

(1986). Decoding, reading, and reading disability. Remedial and Special Education, 7(1), 6–10. https://doi.org/10.1177/074193258600700104

17.

Hall

M. S.

Burns

M. K.

(2018). Meta-analysis of targeted small-group reading interventions. Journal of School Psychology, 66, 54–66. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2017.11.002

18.

Haring

N. G.

Eaton

M. D.

(1978). Systematic instructional technology: An instructional hierarchy. In Haring

N. G.

Lovitt

T. C.

Eaton

M. D.

Hansen

C. L.

(Eds.), The fourth R: Research in the classroom (pp. 23–40). Merrill.

19.

Hoien-Tengesdal

Tonnessen

F.-E.

(2011). The relationship between phonological skills and word decoding. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 52, 93–103. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9450.2010.00856.x

20.

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

21.

Kirby

J. R.

Deacon

S. H.

Bowers

P. N.

Izenberg

Wade-Woolley

Parrila

(2012). Children’s morphological awareness and reading ability. Reading and Writing, 25, 389–410. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-010-9276-5

22.

Lane

Pullen

P. C.

(2015). Blending wheels: Tools for decoding practice. Teaching Exceptional Children, 48(2), 86–92. https://doi.org/10.1177/0040059915594791

23.

Lervåg

Aukrust

V. G.

(2010). Vocabulary knowledge is a critical determinant of the difference in reading comprehension growth between first and second language learners. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 51(5), 612–620. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-7610.2009.02185.x

24.

Lovett

M. W.

Frijters

J. C.

Wolf

Steinbach

K. A.

Sevcik

R. A.

Morris

R. D.

(2017). Early intervention for children at risk for reading disabilities: The impact of grade at intervention and individual differences on intervention outcomes. Journal of Educational Psychology, 109(7), 889–914. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000181

25.

Mather

Wendling

B. J.

(2018). Linking cognitive abilities to academic interventions for students with specific learning disabilities. In Flanagan

D. P.

McDonough

E. M.

(Eds.), Contemporary intellectual assessment: Theories, tests, and issues (pp. 777–809). The Guilford Press.

26.

McCandliss

Beck

I. L.

Sandak

Perfetti

(2003). Focusing attention on decoding for children with poor reading skills: Design and preliminary tests of the word building intervention. Scientific Studies of Reading, 7(1), 75–104. https://doi.org/10.1207/S1532799XSSR0701_05

27.

McMaster

K. L.

Van den Broek

Espin

C. A.

White

M. J.

Rapp

D. N.

Kendeou

Bohn-Gettler

C. M.

Carlson

(2012). Making the right connections: Differential effects of reading intervention for subgroups of comprehenders. Learning and Individual Differences, 22(1), 100–111. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2011.11.017

28.

McNamara

J. K.

Scissons

Gutknecth

(2011). A longitudinal study of kindergarten children at risk for reading disabilities: The poor really are getting poorer. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 44(5), 421–430. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0022219411410040

29.

Mercer

C. D.

Campbell

K. U.

(1998). Great Leaps reading program, Kindergarten-2nd grade. Diarmuid.

30.

O’Connor

R. E.

(2011). Phoneme awareness and the alphabetic principle. In O’Connor

R. E.

Vadasy

P. F.

(Eds.), Handbook of reading interventions (pp. 9–26). Guilford.

31.

Parker

D. C.

Burns

M. K.

(2014). Using the instructional level as a criterion to target reading interventions. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 30(1), 79–94. https://doi.org/10.1080/10573569.2012.702047

32.

Partanen

Siegel

L. S.

(2014). Long-term outcome of the early identification intervention of reading disabilities. Reading Writing, 27, 665–684. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-013-9472-1

33.

Reschly

D. J.

Ysseldyke

J. E.

(2002). Paradigm shift: The past is not the future. In Thomas

Grimes

(Eds.), Best practices in school psychology IV (pp. 3–20). National Association of School Psychologists.

34.

Scholin

Burns

M. K.

(2012). Relationship between pre-intervention data and post-intervention reading fluency and growth: A meta-analysis of assessment data for individual students. Psychology in the Schools, 49(2), 385–398. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.21599

35.

Squires

K. E.

(2018). Decoding: It’s not all about the letters. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 49(3), 395–408. https://doi.org/10.1044/2018_LSHSS-17-0104

36.

Sticht

T. G.

James

J. H.

(1984). Listening and reading. In Pearson

P. D.

Barr

Kamil

M. L.

Mosenthal

(Eds.), Handbook of reading research (pp. 293–317). Longman.

37.

Stuebing

K. K.

Barth

A. E.

Mofese

P. J.

Weiss

Fletcher

J. M.

(2009). IQ is not strongly related to response to reading instruction: A meta-analytic interpretation. Exceptional Children, 76(1), 31–51. https://doi.org/10.1177/001440290907600102

38.

Stuebing

K. K.

Barth

A. E.

Trahan

L. T.

Radhika

R. R.

Miciak

Fletcher

J. M.

(2015). Are child cognitive characteristics strong predictors of responses to intervention? A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 85(3), 395–429. https://doi.org/10.3102/2F0034654314555996

39.

Swanson

H. L.

Trainin

Necoechea

D. M.

Hammill

D. D.

(2003). Rapid naming, phonological awareness, and reading: A meta-analysis of the correlation evidence. Review of Educational Research, 73(4), 407–440. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543073004407

40.

Szadokierski

Burns

M. K.

McComas

J. J.

(2017). Predicting intervention effectiveness from reading accuracy and rate measures through the instructional hierarchy: Evidence for a skill-by-treatment interaction. School Psychology Review, 46(2), 190–200. https://doi.org/10.17105/SPR-2017-0013.V46-2

41.

Taylor

B. M.

Peterson

Rodriguez

M. C.

Pearson

P. D.

(2002). The CIERA school change project: Supporting schools as they implement home-grown reading reform. Center for the Improvement of Early Reading Achievement. http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.124.9047&rep=rep1&type=pdf

42.

Torgesen

J. K.

(2018). Phonologically based reading disabilities: Toward a coherent theory of one kind of learning disability. In Sternberg

Spears-Swerling

(Eds.), Perspectives on learning disabilities (pp. 106–135). Routledge.

43.

University of Oregon. (2018). DIBELS 8th edition preliminary benchmark goals. Center on Teaching and Learning.

44.

Vadasy

P. F.

Sanders

E. A.

Peyton

J. A.

(2006). Code-oriented instruction for kindergarten students at risk for reading difficulties: A randomized field trial with paraeducator implementers. Journal of Educational Psychology, 98(3), 508–528. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.98.3.508

45.

Vaughn

Wanzek

Murray

C. S.

Scammacca

Linan-Thompson

Woodruff

A. L.

(2009). Response to early reading intervention examining higher and lower responders. Exceptional Children, 75(2), 165–183. https://doi.org/10.1177/001440290907500203