Evaluating the Effectiveness of a Volunteer One-on-One Tutoring Model for Early Elementary Reading Intervention: A Randomized Controlled Trial Replication Study

Abstract

This study examines the impacts of two AmeriCorps programs, Minnesota Reading Corps and Wisconsin Reading Corps, where AmeriCorps volunteers provide literacy tutoring to at-risk kindergarten through third-grade (K–3) students utilizing a response-to-intervention framework. This evaluation replicates a prior randomized controlled trial evaluation of the program 4 years later and for the first time evaluates the program model replicated in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. The results of the two evaluations showed that kindergarten and first-grade students who received a single semester of Reading Corps tutoring achieved significantly higher literacy assessment scores, and demonstrated meaningful and significant effects after a full-school year of the intervention for second- and third-grade students.

Keywords

early childhood experimental methods literacy

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Aarts

A. A.

Anderson

J. E.

Anderson

C. J.

Attridge

Attwood

Axt

Babel

Bahník

Baranski

Barnett-Cowan

Bartmess

Beer

Bell

Bentley

Beyan

Binion

Borsboom

Bosch

Bosco

F. A.

. . . Zuni

(2015). Estimating the reproducibility of psychological science. Science, 349(6251), 943–950. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aac4716

Al Otaiba

Fuchs

(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

Allor

McCathren

(2004). The efficacy of an early literacy tutoring program implemented by college students. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 19(2), 116–129. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5826.2004.00095.x

Baker

Gersten

Keating

(2000). When less may be more: A 2-year longitudinal evaluation of a volunteer tutoring program requiring minimal training. Reading Research Quarterly, 35(4), 494–519. https://doi.org/10.1598/RRQ.35.4.3

Balu

Zhu

Doolittle

Schiller

Jenkins

Gersten

(2015). Evaluation of response to intervention practices for elementary school reading (Report number NCEE 2016-4000). U.S. Department of Education.

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(3), 296–307. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2008.04.004

Baye

Inns

Lake

Slavin

(2018). A synthesis of quantitative research on reading programs for secondary students. Reading Research Quarterly, 54(2), 133–166. https://doi.org/10.1002/rrq.229

Bollman

K. A.

Silberglitt

Gibbons

K. A.

(2007). The St. Croix River education district model: Incorporating systems-level organization and a multi-tiered problem-solving process for intervention delivery. In Jimerson

S. R.

Burns

M. K.

VanDerHeyden

A. M.

(Eds.), Handbook of response to intervention: The science and practice of assessment and intervention (pp. 319–330). Springer.

Buck

Torgesen

(2003). The relationship between performance on a measure of oral reading fluency and performance on the Florida Comprehensive Assessment Test (FCRR Tech. Rep. No. 1). Florida Center for Reading Research. https://www.fcrr.org/TechnicalReports/TechnicalReport1.pdf

10.

Burns

M. K.

Appleton

J. J.

Stehouwer

J. D.

(2005). Meta-analytic review of responsiveness-to-intervention research: Examining field-based and research-implemented models. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 23(4), 381–394. https://doi.org/10.1177/073428290502300406

11.

Callender

W. A.

(2007). The Idaho results-based model: Implementing response to intervention statewide. In Jimerson

S. R.

Burns

M. K.

VanDerHeyden

A. M.

(Eds.), Handbook of response to intervention: The science and practice of assessment and intervention (pp. 331–342). Springer.

12.

Catts

H. W.

Herrera

Nielsen

D. C.

Bridges

M. S.

(2015). Early prediction of reading comprehension within the simple view framework. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 28(9), 1407–1425. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-015-9576-x

13.

Chard

D. J.

Stoolmiller

Harn

B. A.

Wanzek

Vaughn

Linan-Thompson

Kame’enui

E. J.

(2008). Predicting reading success in a multilevel schoolwide reading model: A retrospective analysis. Journal of Learning disabilities, 41(2), 174–188. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022219407313588

14.

Christ

T. J.

Arañas

Y. A.

Johnson

Kember

J. M.

Kilgus

Kiss

A. J.

McCarthy Trentman

A. M.

Monaghen

B. D.

Nelson

Newell

K. W.

Van Norman

E. R.

White

M. J.

Windram

(2018). Formative assessment system for teachers technical manual. FastBridge Learning. https://www.centralriversaea.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/FAST_Technical_Manual_Version_FINAL-2018.pdf

15.

Cohen

(1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Academic Press.

16.

Cook

R. G.

(2003). The utility of DIBELS as a curriculum based measurement in relation to reading proficiency on high-stakes tests [Unpublished master’s thesis, Marshall University Graduate College, Huntington, WV].

17.

Deno

D. L.

(2003). Developments in curriculum-based measurement. Journal of Special Education, 37(3), 184–192. https://doi.org/10.1177/00224669030370030801

18.

Denton

C. A.

Hasbrouck

J. A. N.

(2009). A description of instructional coaching and its relationship to consultation. Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 19(2), 150–175. https://doi.org/10.1080/10474410802463296

19.

Denton

C. A.

Vaughn

Fletcher

J. M.

(2003). Bringing research-based practice in reading intervention to scale. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 18(3), 201–211. https://doi.org/10.1111/1540-5826.00075

20.

Edmonds

M. S.

Vaughn

Wexler

Reutebuch

C. K.

Cable

Tackett

K. K.

Schnakenberg

J. W.

(2009). A synthesis of reading interventions and effects on reading comprehension outcomes for older struggling readers. Review of Educational Research, 79(1), 262–300. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654308325998

21.

Ehri

L. C.

(2020). The science of learning to read words: A case for systematic phonics instruction. Reading Research Quarterly, 55(S1), S45–S60. https://doi.org/10.1002/rrq.334

22.

Elbaum

Vaughn

Tejero Hughes

Watson Moody

(2000). How effective are one-to-one tutoring programs in reading for elementary students at risk for reading failure? A meta-analysis of the intervention research. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92(4), 605–619. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.92.4.605

23.

Fastbridge Learning. (2017). Curriculum-based measures (CBM). http://www.fastbridge.org/

24.

Fitzgerald

(2001). Can minimally trained college student volunteers help young at-risk children to read better? Reading Research Quarterly, 36(1), 28–47. https://doi.org/10.1598/RRQ.36.1.2

25.

Fixsen

Naoom

Blase

Wallace

(2007). Implementation: The missing link between research and practice. The APSAC Advisor, 41(1–2), 4–10. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED507422.pdf

26.

Fuchs

Deshler

D. D.

(2007). What we need to know about responsiveness to intervention (and shouldn’t be afraid to ask). Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 22(2), 129–136. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5826.2007.00237.x

27.

Fuchs

L. S.

(2017). Critique of the national evaluation of response-to-intervention: A case for simpler frameworks. Exceptional Children, 83(3), 255–268. https://doi.org/10.1177/0014402917693580

28.

Fuchs

L. S.

Fuchs

(1998). Treatment validity: A unifying concept for reconceptualizing the identification of learning disabilities. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 13(4), 204–219. https://doi.org/10.2307/1511189

29.

Fuchs

L. S.

Fuchs

Hosp

M. K.

Jenkins

J. R.

(2001). Oral reading fluency as an indicator of reading competence: A theoretical, empirical, and historical analysis. Scientific Studies of Reading, 5(3), 239–256. https://doi.org/10.1207/S1532799XSSR0503_3

30.

Gamse

B. C.

Jacob

R. T.

Horst

Boulay

Unlu

(2008). Reading first impact study: final report (NCEE 2009-4038). National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Institute for Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education.

31.

Gentry

J. R.

Ouellette

(2019). Brian words: How the science of reading informs teaching. Stenhouse.

32.

Good

R. H.

Simmons

D. C.

Kame’enui

E. J.

(2001). The importance and decision making utility of a continuum of fluency-based indicators of foundational reading skills for third-grade high stakes outcomes. Scientific Studies of Reading, 5(3), 257–288. https://doi.org/10.1207/S1532799XSSR0503_4

33.

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

34.

Hafford

Markovitz

Hernandez

Diaconis

Estrera

Muyskens

(2013, February). Process Assessment of the Minnesota Reading Corps Program. (Prepared under contract to the Corporation for National and Community Service). Chicago, IL: NORC at the University of Chicago.

35.

Hill

C. J.

Bloom

H. S.

Black

A. R.

Lipsey

M. W.

(2008). Empirical benchmarks for interpreting effect sizes in research. Child Development Perspectives, 2(3), 172–177. https://doi.org/1111/j.1750-8606.2008.00061.x

36.

Jenkins

J. R.

Hudson

R. F.

Johnson

E. S.

(2007). Screening for service delivery in an RTI framework: Candidate measures. School Psychology Review, 36(4), 582–600. https://doi.org/10.1080/02796015.2007.12087919

37.

Jimerson

S. R.

Burns

M. K.

VanDerHeyden

A. M.

(2016). From response to intervention to mulit-tiered systems of support: Advances in the science and practice of assessment and intervention. In Jimerson

S. R.

Burns

M. K.

VanDerHeyden

A. M.

(Eds.), Handbook of response to intervention: The science and practice of multi-tiered systems of support (2nd ed., pp. 1–6). Springer.

38.

Kame’enui

E. J.

Simmons

D. C.

(1998). Beyond effective practice to schools as host environments: Building and sustaining a school-wide intervention model in beginning reading. Oregon School Study Council, 41(3), 3–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/1030011990230204

39.

Kim

Y. S.

Petscher

Schatschneider

Foorman

(2010). Does growth rate in oral reading fluency matter in predicting reading comprehension achievement? Journal of Educational Psychology, 102(3), 652–667. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0019643

40.

Maxwell

Connolly

Demack

O’Hare

Stevens

Clague

(2014). TextNow Transition Programme: Evaluation report and executive summary. Education Endowment Foundation.

41.

Markovitz

Hernandez

Hedberg

Silberglitt

(2014). Impact evaluation of the Minnesota Reading Corps K-3 Program. NORC at the University of Chicago.

42.

Morris

Shaw

Perney

(1990). Helping low readers in Grades 2 and 3: An after-school volunteer tutoring program. Elementary School Journal, 91(2), 132–150. http://www.jstor.org/stable/1001747

43.

National Science Foundation, & Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education, I. for E. S. (2018). Companion guidelines on replication and reproducibility in education research: A supplement to the common guidelines for education research and development. https://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2019/nsf19022/nsf19022.pdf

44.

Rennie

(2001). CONSORT revised—Improving the reporting of randomized trials. Journal of the American Medical Association, 285(15), 2006–2007. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.285.15.2006

45.

Reschly

D. J.

(2008). School psychology RTI paradigm shift and beyond. In Thomas

Grimes

(Eds.) Best practices in school psychology V (5th ed., pp. 3–15). National Association of School Psychologists.

46.

Ritchey

K. D.

Speece

D. L.

(2006). From letter names to word reading: The nascent role of sublexical fluency. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 31(3), 301–327. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2005.10.001

47.

Ritter

G. W.

Barnett

J. H.

Denny

G. S.

Albin

G. R.

(2009). The effectiveness of volunteer tutoring programs for elementary and middle school students: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 79(1), 3–38. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654308325690

48.

Roberts

Good

Corcoran

(2005). Story retell: A fluency-based indicator of reading comprehension. School Psychology Quarterly, 20(3), 304–317. https://doi.org/10.1521/scpq.2005.20.3.304

49.

Roehrig

A. D.

Petscher

Nettles

S. M.

Hudson

R. F.

Torgesen

J. K.

(2008). Accuracy of the DIBELS oral reading fluency measure for predicting high-stakes third grade reading comprehension outcomes. Journal of School Psychology, 46(3), 343–366. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2007.06.006

50.

Rubin

D. B.

(2005). Causal inference using potential outcomes: Design, modeling, decisions. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 100(469), 322–331. https://doi.org/10.1198/016214504000001880

51.

Shanahan

(1998). On the effectiveness and limitations of tutoring in reading. Review of Research in Education, 23(1998), 217–234. https://doi.org/10.2307/1167291

52.

Shanahan

(2020). What constitutes a science of reading instruction? Reading Research Quarterly, 55(S1), S235–S247. https://doi.org/10.1002/rrq.349

53.

Shanahan

Cunningham

Escamilla

K. C.

Fischel

Landry

Lonigan

C. J.

Molfese

V. J.

Schatschneider

Strickland

(2008). Developing early literacy: Report of the national early literacy panel. National Institute for Literacy. https://lincs.ed.gov/publications/pdf/NELPReport09.pdf

54.

Slavin

R. E.

Lake

Davis

Madden

N. A.

(2011). Effective programs for struggling readers: A best-evidence synthesis. Educational Research Review, 6(1), 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2010.07.002

55.

Snow

C. E.

Burns

S. M.

Griffin

(Eds.). (1998). Preventing reading difficulties in young children. National Academy Press.

56.

Snyder

P. A.

Hemmeter

M. L.

Fox

(2015). Supporting implementation of evidence-based practices through practice-based coaching. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 35(3), 133–143. https://doi.org/10.1177/0271121415594925

57.

Stanley

C. T.

Petscher

Catts

H. W.

(2018). A longitudinal investigation of direct and indirect links between reading skills in kindergarten and reading comprehension in tenth grade. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 31(1), 133–153. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-017-9777-6

58.

Steiner

P. M.

Wong

V. C.

Anglin

K. L.

(2019). A causal replication framework for designing and assessing replication efforts. Zeitschrift für Psychologie/Journal of Psychology, 227(4), 280–292. https://doi.org/10.1027/2151-2604/a000385

59.

Stuart

E. A.

(2010). Matching methods for causal inference: A review and a look forward. Statistical science: A review. Journal of the Institute of Mathematical Statistics, 25(1), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1214/09-STS313

60.

Sugai

Horner

Gresham

(2002). Behaviorally effective school environments. In Shinn

Walker

Stoner

(Eds.), Interventions for academic and behavior problems II: Preventive and remedial approach (pp. 315–350). National Association of School Psychologists.

61.

Thompson

J. A.

Sonnenschein

(2016). Full-day kindergarten and children’s later reading: The role of early word reading. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 42(January-February), 58–70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appdev.2015.11.005

62.

Torgesen

J. K.

(2000). Individual differences in response to early interventions in reading: The lingering problem of treatment resisters. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 15(1), 55–64. https://doi.org/10.1207/SLDRP1501_6

63.

U.S. Department of Education. (2021). EDFacts data files. https://www2.ed.gov/about/inits/ed/edfacts/data-files/index.html

64.

Wasik

(1998). Volunteer tutoring programs in reading: A review. Reading Research Quarterly, 33(3), 266–291. https://doi.org/10.1598/RRQ.33.3.2

65.

Wong

V. C.

Anglin

Steiner

P. M.

(2021). Design-based approaches to causal replication studies. Prevention Science. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11121-021-01234-7

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

0.38 MB