A meta-analysis of the effects of foundational skills and multicomponent reading interventions on reading comprehension for primary-grade students.

This meta-analysis examined the effects on reading comprehension of foundational reading skills and multicomponent reading interventions provided to students with or at risk for reading difficulties or disabilities (students with RDs) in kindergarten through Grade 3. The meta-analysis included studies identified by Wanzek et al. (2016) and Wanzek et al. (2018), with an updated search through August of 2019, for a total of 47 included studies (m = 112; total student N = 7446). The weighted average effect on norm-referenced reading comprehension outcomes was estimated as g = 0.37, indicating that primary-grade interventions have an educationally meaningful effect on reading comprehension for students with RDs. Effects did not differ for interventions focused only on foundational reading skills and those that provided both foundational skills and comprehension instruction. Effects were significantly moderated by the measurement timepoint, with follow-up effect sizes being, on average, 0.16 smaller than immediate posttest effect sizes.

Middle school matters: examining the effects of a schoolwide professional development model to improve reading comprehension.

Many middle school students perform below grade-level standards in reading (National Center for Education Statistics, Washington, 2019), and recent observation studies demonstrate middle school teachers' limited use of reading comprehension practices within content area instruction (e.g., science and social studies; as reported by Greenleaf (in: Hinchman (ed) Adolescent literacies: A handbook of practice-based research, Guilford Press, 2017)). In this experimental pilot study, we aimed to boost middle schoolers' reading comprehension outcomes by providing schoolwide professional development (PD) on integrating reading comprehension practices within content instruction for English language arts, social studies, and science teachers. Six schools were matched into pairs and randomized to the schoolwide PD or a business-as-usual (BAU) condition. Content area teachers in schools assigned to the PD condition received distributed PD resources to support implementation, and coaching in one reading comprehension practice in the fall (i.e., get the gist) and one in the spring (i.e., asking and answering questions). Contrary to traditional PD, this PD was implemented across three content areas, was narrow in scope but long in duration (one practice per semester), focused on practices that could feasibly be integrated into content area instruction, and included ongoing coaching in content area teams. Students in schools assigned to the PD condition significantly outperformed those in the BaU condition on a measure of main idea generation (ES = 0.29) but not on measures of asking and answering questions (ES = 0.11) and general reading comprehension (ES = - 0.09). Findings suggest promise for implementing schoolwide approaches embedded within content area instruction to improve reading comprehension performance for middle school students.

Current State of the Evidence: Examining the Effects of Orton-Gillingham Reading Interventions for Students With or at Risk for Word-Level Reading Disabilities.

Over the past decade, parent advocacy groups led a grassroots movement resulting in most states adopting dyslexia-specific legislation, with many states mandating the use of the Orton-Gillingham approach to reading instruction. Orton-Gillingham is a direct, explicit, multisensory, structured, sequential, diagnostic, and prescriptive approach to reading for students with or at risk for word-level reading disabilities (WLRD). Evidence from a prior synthesis and What Works Clearinghouse reports yielded findings lacking support for the effectiveness of Orton-Gillingham interventions. We conducted a meta-analysis to examine the effects of Orton-Gillingham reading interventions on the reading outcomes of students with or at risk for WLRD. Findings suggested Orton-Gillingham reading interventions do not statistically significantly improve foundational skill outcomes (i.e., phonological awareness, phonics, fluency, spelling; effect size [ES] = 0.22; p = .40), although the mean ES was positive in favor of Orton-Gillingham-based approaches. Similarly, there were not significant differences for vocabulary and comprehension outcomes (ES = 0.14; p = .59) for students with or at risk for WLRD. More high-quality, rigorous research with larger samples of students with WLRD is needed to fully understand the effects of Orton-Gillingham interventions on the reading outcomes for this population.

Examining Factors Affecting Reading and Math Growth and Achievement Gaps in Grades 1-5: A Cohort-Sequential Longitudinal Approach.

Despite focused efforts, achievement gaps remain a problem in the America's education system, especially those between students from higher and lower income families. Continued work on reducing these gaps benefits from an understanding of students' reading and math growth from typical school instruction and how growth differs based on initial proficiency, grade, and demographic characteristics. Data from 5,900 students in Grades 1-5 tested in math and reading at six points across two years were analyzed using cohort-sequential latent growth curve models to determine longitudinal growth patterns. Results indicated that students with low initial proficiency grew more quickly than students with higher proficiency. However, after two school years their achievement remained below average and well below that of students with higher initial proficiency. Demographic characteristics had small but significant effects on initial score and growth rates.

The Critical Role of Word Reading as a Predictor of Response to Intervention.

This study examines the initial word reading performance of fourth-grade struggling readers and the extent to which differing levels of word reading performance at pretest influenced their response to reading interventions. A large group of students with significant reading comprehension difficulties (N = 481) were classified into three clusters of word reading proficiency based on their pretest performance: (a) very low, (b) low, and (c) near adequate. We examined their performance on several academic, language, and executive functioning measures at the beginning of the year and their reading comprehension performance at the beginning of year and after 1 year of reading intervention to examine how each cluster responded to instruction. Results from a discriminant function analysis indicated that performance on five pretest variables were meaningful predictors of word reading proficiency cluster membership: phonological processing, writing fluency, math calculation, math fluency, and reading efficiency and comprehension. Results also demonstrated that word reading proficiency at pretest was related to response to intervention on reading comprehension measures. Students in the very low word reading proficiency cluster showed minimal response to intervention whereas the near-adequate word reading cluster demonstrated greatest response to intervention. These results suggest word reading is a critical predictor of response to intervention for students with significant comprehension problems in the upper elementary grades and that students with the most substantial word reading problems may require more intensive and specialized treatments than students with greater word reading performance to show meaningful progress in reading.

The Relationship Between Study Quality and the Effects of Supplemental Reading Interventions: A Meta-Analysis.

Empirical studies investigating supplemental reading interventions for students with or at-risk for reading disabilities in the early elementary grades have demonstrated a range of effect sizes. Identifying the findings from high quality research can provide greater certainty of findings related to the effectiveness of supplemental reading interventions. This meta-analysis investigated how four variables of study quality (study design, statistical treatment, Type I error, and fidelity of implementation) were related to effect sizes from standardized measures of foundational reading skills and language/comprehension. The results from 88 studies indicated that year of publication was a significant predictor of effect sizes for both standardized measures of foundational reading skills and language/comprehension, with more recent studies demonstrating smaller effect sizes. Results also demonstrated that with the exception of research design predicting effect sizes on foundational reading skills measures, study quality was not related to the effects of supplemental reading interventions. Implications for research and practice are discussed.

Current Evidence on the Effects of Intensive Early Reading Interventions.

Many students at risk for or identified with reading disabilities need intensive reading interventions. This meta-analysis provides an update to the Wanzek and Vaughn synthesis on intensive early reading interventions. Effects from 25 reading intervention studies are analyzed to examine the overall effect of intensive early reading interventions as well as relationships between intervention and student characteristics related to outcomes. The weighted mean effect size (ES) estimate (ES = 0.39), with a mean effect size adjusted for publication bias (ES = 0.28), both significantly different from zero, suggested intensive early reading interventions resulted in positive outcomes for early struggling readers in kindergarten through third grades. There was no statistically significant or meaningful heterogeneity in the study-wise effect sizes. Exploratory examination of time in intervention, instructional group size, initial reading achievement, and date of publication are provided.

Causal Mediation in Educational Intervention Studies.

Understanding the factors that mediate the effect of educational or behavioral intervention is critical to advancing both research and practice. When properly implemented, mediators add depth to the results of intervention research, indicating why a program works, highlighting ways to enhance its effectiveness, and revealing the elements that are essential to successful implementation. However, many researchers find mediation a difficult topic and struggle to implement it properly in statistical models of effects from between-groups randomized studies. In an effort to bring clarity to the topic of mediation and encourage its use where appropriate, this article lays out the requirements for evidence of a causal-mediated effect. An example of a randomized trial of an intervention targeting self-regulation and student behavior is used to illustrate the process of conceptualizing and testing for mediation of treatment effects. Statistical considerations also are addressed.

Text-based Vocabulary Intervention Training Study: Supporting Fourth Graders with Low Reading Comprehension and Learning Disabilities.

This experimental study examined the effectiveness of a text-based reading and vocabulary intervention with self-regulatory supports for 4th graders with low reading comprehension. Students with standard scores on the Gates MacGinitie Reading Test between 1.0 standard deviation (SD) and 0.5 SD below the normative sample were included (N=44) and randomly assigned to treatment condition (n=25) or no treatment comparison condition (n=19). Researchers provided the intervention to students in groups of approximately 2-3 students for eight 30 minute sessions. Students in the treatment condition made statistically significant gains on a researcher-developed measure of reading and vocabulary compared with students in the comparison condition.

Meta-Analyses of the Effects of Tier 2 Type Reading Interventions in Grades K-3.

This meta-analysis extends previous work on extensive Tier 3 type reading interventions (Wanzek & Vaughn, 2007; Wanzek et al., 2013) to Tier 2 type interventions by examining a non-overlapping set of studies addressing the effects of less extensive reading interventions for students with or at risk for reading difficulties in Grades K-3. We examined the overall effects of these interventions on students' foundational skills, language, and comprehension as well as the intervention features that may be associated with improved outcomes. We conducted four meta-analyses on 72 studies to examine effects on (1) standardized foundational skill measures (mean ES = 0.54), (2) not-standardized foundational skill measures (mean ES = 0.62), (3) standardized language/comprehension measures (mean ES = 0.36), and (4) not-standardized language/comprehension measures (mean ES = 1.02). There were no differences in effects related to intervention type, instructional group size, grade level, intervention implementer, or the number of intervention hours.

A Century of Progress: Reading Interventions for Students in Grades 4-12, 1914-2014.

The history of research on interventions for struggling readers in Grades 4 through 12 dates back to 19th-century case studies of seemingly intelligent children who were unable to learn to read. Physicians, psychologists, educators, and others were determined to help them. In the process, they launched a century of research on a wide variety of approaches to reading intervention. As shown in this systematic narrative review, much has changed over time in the conceptualization of reading interventions and the methods used to determine their efficacy in improving outcomes for struggling readers. Building on the knowledge gathered over the past 100 years, researchers and practitioners are well-poised to continue to make progress in developing and testing reading interventions over the next 100 years.

Benchmarks for Expected Annual Academic Growth for Students in the Bottom Quartile of the Normative Distribution.

Effect sizes are commonly reported for the results of educational interventions. However, researchers struggle with interpreting their magnitude in a way that transcends generic guidelines. Effect sizes can be interpreted in a meaningful context by benchmarking them against typical growth for students in the normative distribution. Such benchmarks are not currently available for students in the bottom quartile. This report remedies this by providing a comparative context for interventions involving these students. Annual growth effect sizes for K-12 students were computed from nationally normed assessments and a longitudinal study of students in special education. They reveal declining growth over time, especially for reading and math. These results allow researchers to better interpret the effects of their interventions and help practitioners by quantifying typical growth for struggling students. More longitudinal research is needed to show growth trajectories for students in the bottom quartile.

A Meta-Analysis of Interventions for Struggling Readers in Grades 4-12: 1980-2011.

This meta-analysis synthesizes the literature on interventions for struggling readers in Grades 4 through 12 published between 1980 and 2011. It updates Scammacca et al.'s analysis of studies published between 1980 and 2004. The combined corpus of 82 study-wise effect sizes was meta-analyzed to determine (a) the overall effectiveness of reading interventions studied over the past 30 years, (b) how the magnitude of the effect varies based on student, intervention, and research design characteristics, and (c) what differences in effectiveness exist between more recent interventions and older ones. The analysis yielded a mean effect of 0.49, considerably smaller than the 0.95 mean effect reported in 2007. The mean effect for standardized measures was 0.21, also much smaller than the 0.42 mean effect reported in 2007. The mean effects for reading comprehension measures were similarly diminished. Results indicated that the mean effects for the 1980-2004 and 2005-2011 groups of studies were different to a statistically significant degree. The decline in effect sizes over time is attributed at least in part to increased use of standardized measures, more rigorous and complex research designs, differences in participant characteristics, and improvements in the school's "business-as-usual" instruction that often serves as the comparison condition in intervention studies.

Meta-Analysis With Complex Research Designs: Dealing With Dependence From Multiple Measures and Multiple Group Comparisons.

Previous research has shown that treating dependent effect sizes as independent inflates the variance of the mean effect size and introduces bias by giving studies with more effect sizes more weight in the meta-analysis. This article summarizes the different approaches to handling dependence that have been advocated by methodologists, some of which are more feasible to implement with education research studies than others. A case study using effect sizes from a recent meta-analysis of reading interventions is presented to compare the results obtained from different approaches to dealing with dependence. Overall, mean effect sizes and variance estimates were found to be similar, but estimates of indexes of heterogeneity varied. Meta-analysts are advised to explore the effect of the method of handling dependence on the heterogeneity estimates before conducting moderator analyses and to choose the approach to dependence that is best suited to their research question and their data set.