In this study, we examine the effect of an intervention on decoding strategies of monolingual Spanish-speaking, first-grade students in Spain. Participants were first-grade Spanish-speaking monolingual students assigned to one of three conditions based on their reading risk in Spain. The first group comprised normally developing readers; the second group comprised students at risk for a reading disability who received an empirically derived intervention; the third group comprised students at risk for a reading disability who received business as usual instruction. Findings suggest that students at risk for a reading disability who received the intervention scored significantly higher than students at risk who did not receive the intervention at the end of first grade. Moreover, students at risk who received the intervention moved from a sound-by-sound decoding strategy to being able to blend sounds to read a pseudoword as effectively as normally developing students. Implications for practice and future research on Spanish decoding and word automaticity are discussed.
AdamsM. J. (1990). Beginning to read: Thinking and learning about print. MIT Press.
2.
BakerD. L.CrespoP.MonzalveM.GarciaI.GutiérrezM. (2022a). Relation between the essential components of reading and reading comprehension in monolingual Spanish-speaking students: A meta-analysis. Educational Psychology Review, 34(4), 2661–2696. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-022-09694-1
3.
BakerD. L.CummingsK.SmolkowskiK. (2022b). Diagnostic accuracy of Spanish and English screeners with Spanish and English criterion measures for bilingual students in grades 1 and 2. Journal of School Psychology, 92, 299–323. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2022.04.001
4.
BakerD. L.ParkY.BakerS. K. (2010). Effect of initial status and growth in pseudoword reading on Spanish reading comprehension at the end of first grade. Psicothema, 22(4), 955–962. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-010-9261-z
5.
BakerD. L.ParkY.BakerS. K. (2012). The reading performance of English learners in grades 1–3: The role of initial status and growth on reading fluency in Spanish and English. Reading and Writing, 25(1), 251–281. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-010-9261-z
6.
Bravo-ValdiviesoL. (1995). A four-year follow-up study of low socioeconomic status, Latin American students with reading difficulties. International Journal of Disability, Development and Education, 42(3), 189–202. https://doi.org/10.1080/0156655950420302
7.
CaravolasM. (2005). Learning to spell in different languages: How orthographic variables might affect early literacy. In JoshiR. M.AaronP. G. (Eds.), Handbook of orthography and literacy (pp. 497–511). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203448526
8.
Cardoso-MartinsC. (2001). The reading abilities of beginning readers of Brazilian Portuguese: Implications for a theory of reading acquisition. Scientific Studies of Reading, 5(4), 289–317. https://doi.org/10.1207/s1532799xssr0504_01
9.
CarnineD. W.SilbertJ.Kame’enuiE. J.TarverS. G. (2004). Direct reading instruction. Merrill Prentice Hall.
10.
ChanD. W.HoC. S. H.TsangS. M.LeeS. H.ChungK. K. H. (2004). Reading-related behavioral characteristics of Chinese children with dyslexia: The use of the teachers’ behavior checklist in Hong Kong. Annals of Dyslexia, 53(1), 300–323. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11881-003-0014-4
11.
CrespoP.JiménezJ. E.RodríguezC.BakerD.ParkY. (2018). Differences in growth reading patterns for at-risk Spanish-monolingual children as a function of a Tier 2 Intervention. The Spanish Journal of Psychology, 21, Article E4. https://doi.org/10.1017/sjp.2018.3
12.
DefiorS.MartosF.CaryL. (2002). Differences in reading acquisition development in two shallow orthographies: Portuguese and Spanish. Applied Psycholinguistics, 23(1), 135–148. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0142716402000073
13.
DenoS. L.FuchsL. S.MarstonD.ShinJ. (2001). Using curriculum-based measurement to establish growth standards for students with learning disabilities. School Psychology Review, 30(4), 507–524. https://doi.org/10.1080/02796015.2001.12086131
EhriL. C. (2020). The science of learning to read words: A case for systematic phonics instruction. Reading Research Quarterly, 55(1), 45–60. https://doi.org/10.1002/rrq.334
17.
EngelmannS.CarnineD. (1982). Theory of instruction: Principles and applications. Irvington.
18.
FienH.BakerS. K.SmolkowskiK.SmithJ. L. M.Kame’enuiE. J.BeckC. T. (2008). Using nonsense word fluency to predict reading proficiency in kindergarten through second grade for English learners and native English speakers. School Psychology Review, 37(3), 391–408. https://doi.org/10.1080/02796015.2008.12087885
19.
FienH.ParkY.BakerS. K.Mercier SmithJ. L.StoolmillerM.Kame’enuiE. J. (2010). An examination of the relation of nonsense word fluency initial status and gains to reading outcomes for beginning readers. School Psychology Review, 39(4), 631–653. https://doi.org/10.1080/02796015.2010.12087747
20.
FrithU. (1985). Beneath the surface of developmental dyslexia. In PattersonK.MarshalJ. C.ColthearM. (Eds.), Surface dyslexia (pp. 301–330). Lawrence Erlbaum.
21.
FuchsL. S.FuchsD.ComptonD. L.BryantJ. D.HamlettC. L.SeethalerP. M. (2007). Mathematics screening and progress monitoring at first grade: Implications for responsiveness to intervention. Exceptional Children, 73(3), 311–330. https://doi.org/10.1177/001440290707300303
22.
GenardN.AlegríaJ.LeybaertJ.MoustyP.CitolerS. A. D. (2005). La adquisición de la lectura y la escritura: comparación translingüística [The acquisition of reading and writing: a cross-linguistic comparison].Iberpsicología: Revista Electrónica de la Federación Española de Asociaciones de Psicología, 10(3), Article 17.
23.
GoodR. H.BakerS. K.PeytonJ. A. (2009). Making sense of nonsense word fluency: Determining adequate progress in early first–grade reading. Reading and Writing Quarterly, 25(1), 33–56. https://doi.org/10.1080/10573560802491224
24.
HarnB. A.StoolmillerM.ChardD. J. (2008). Measuring the dimensions of alphabetic principle on the reading development of first graders. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 41(2), 143–157. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022219407313585
25.
HogaboamT. W.PerfettiC. A. (1975). Lexical ambiguity and sentence comprehension. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 14(3), 265–274. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0022-5371(75)80070-3
JiménezJ. E. (2010). Adaptación al español del Test The Hong Kong Specific Learning Difficulties Behavior Checklist [Spanish adaptation of The Hong Kong Specific Learning Difficulties Behavior Checklist]. Consejería de Educación, Universidades, Cultura y Deportes del Gobierno de Canarias.
28.
JiménezJ. E.GutiérrezN.de LeónS. C. (2020). Universal screening for prevention of reading, writing, and math disabilities in Spanish. Journal of Visualized Experiments, 161, Article 60217. https://doi.org/10.3791/60217
29.
JiménezJ. E.O’ShanahanI. (2008). Enseñanza de la lectura: de la teoría y la investigación a la práctica educativa [Teaching Reading: From Theory and Research to Educational Practice]. Revista Iberoamericana de Educación, 45(5), 5–22. https://doi.org/10.35362/rie4552032
30.
JiménezJ. E.RodríguezC.CrespoP.GonzálezD.ArtilesC.AlfonsoM. (2010). Implementation of response to intervention (RtI)model in Spain: An example of a collaboration between Canarias universities and the Department of Education of the Canary Islands. Psicothema, 22(4), 935–942. https://doi.org/10.5231/psy.writ.2011.1207
31.
JiménezJ. E.ValleI. H. (2000). Word identification and reading disorders in the Spanish language. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 33(1), 44–60. https://doi.org/10.1177/002221940003300108
32.
Kame’enuiE. J.SimmonsD. C. (1990). Designing instructional strategies: The prevention of academic learning problems. Merrill.
33.
MathesP. G.Linan-ThompsonS.Pollard-DuradolaS. D.HaganE. C.VaughnS. (2003). Lectura proactiva para principiantes: Intensive small group instruction for Spanish speaking readers (Developed with funds provided by the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (#HD-99-012), Development of English Literacy in Spanish Speaking Students). National Institute of Child Health and Human Development.
34.
MoatsL. C. (2020a). Speech to Print.Language essentials for teachers (3rd ed.). Brooks.
35.
MoatsL. C. (2020b). Teaching reading “is” rocket science: What expert teachers of reading should know and be able to do. American Educator, 44(2), Article 4. https://www.aft.org/ae/summer2020/moats
36.
National Reading Panel (US), National Institute of Child Health, & Human Development (US). (2000). Report of the National Reading Panel: Teaching students to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction: Reports of the subgroups. National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, National Institutes of Health.
37.
Plasencia-PeinadoJ.BakerD. L.GoodR. H.PeinadoR. (2006). Fluidez en las palabras sin sentido [No Sense Word Fluency]. In BakerD. L.GoodR.KnutsonN.WatsonJ. (Eds.), Indicadores Dinámicos del Éxito en la Lectura (7th ed., pp. 20–30). Dynamic Measurement Group.
38.
SeymourP. H.AroM.ErskineJ. M. (2003). Foundation literacy acquisition in European orthographies. British Journal of Psychology, 94(2), 143–174. https://doi.org/10.1348/000712603321661859
39.
SeymourP. H. K. (1997). Foundations of orthographic development. In PerfettiC.RiebenL.FayolM. (Eds.), Learning to spell (pp. 319–337). Lawrence Erlbaum. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781410604583
40.
SignoriniA. (1997). Word reading in Spanish: A comparison between skilled and less skilled beginning readers. Applied Psycholinguistics, 18, 319–344. https://doi.org/10.1017/s014271640001050x
41.
StanovichK. (2000). Progress in understanding reading: Scientific foundations and new Frontiers. Choice Reviews Online, 38(4), Article 38-2284. https://doi.org/10.5860/choice.38-2284
42.
TorgesenJ. K.RashotteC. A.AlexanderA. (2001). Principles of fluency instruction in reading: Relationships with established empirical outcomes. In WolfM. (Ed.), Dyslexia, fluency, and the brain (pp. 333–355). York Press.
43.
VaughnS.Linan-ThompsonS.MathesP. G.CirinoP. T.CarlsonC. D.Pollard-DurodolaS. D.. . .FrancisD. J. (2006a). Effectiveness of Spanish intervention for first-grade English language learners at risk for reading difficulties. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 39(1), 56–73. https://doi.org/10.1177/00222194060390010601
44.
VaughnS.MathesP.Linan-ThompsonS.CirinoP.CarlsonC.Pollard-DurodolaS.FrancisD. (2006b). Effectiveness of an English intervention for first-grade English language learners at risk for reading problems. The Elementary School Journal, 107(2), 153–180. https://doi.org/10.1086/510653
45.
WimmerH.HummerP. (1990). How German-speaking first graders read and spell: Doubts on the importance of the logographic stage. Applied Psycholinguistics, 11(4), 349–368. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0142716400009620
