Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-7cvxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T12:37:53.721Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Evaluation of a Two-Phase Implementation of a Tier-2 (Small Group) Reading Intervention for Young Low-Progress Readers

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 October 2014

Jennifer Buckingham ,
Kevin Wheldall  and
Robyn Beaman-Wheldall
Jennifer Buckingham*
Affiliation:
Macquarie University Special Education Centre, Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia
Kevin Wheldall
Affiliation:
Macquarie University Special Education Centre, Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia
Robyn Beaman-Wheldall
Affiliation:
Macquarie University Special Education Centre, Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia
*
Correspondence: Jennifer Buckingham, The Centre for Independent Studies, PO Box 92, St Leonards, NSW 1590, Australia. E-mail: jbuckingham@cis.org.au
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In a response to intervention (RtI) model, reading is taught in increasingly intensive tiers of instruction. The aim of the study was to examine the efficacy of a Tier-2 (small group) literacy intervention for young struggling readers. This article focuses on the second phase of a randomised control trial involving 14 students in kindergarten as participants. In Phase 1 of the randomised control trial, the experimental group (E1) received the intervention for 1 hour, 4 days per week, for 3 school terms. The control group received regular classroom instruction. Large and statistically significant mean differences between groups were evident after 3 terms on 2 of 4 measures — the Martin and Pratt Nonword Reading Test and the Burt Reading Test, which measure phonological recoding and single word reading, respectively. Very large effect sizes were found. In Phase 2, the original control group received the intervention in the same way (E2). Testing at the end of Phase 2 confirmed the intervention's large effect on phonological recoding, but the results for the 3 other tests showed no acceleration in the Phase 2 experimental group (E2). This study evaluates the efficacy of the trialled intervention, adds to the research literature on Tier-2 interventions for young struggling readers, and yields practical implications for schools that offer literacy interventions without a strong RtI framework.

Keywords

interventionreadingphonicslow progressinstructionTier 2
Type
Original Articles
Information
Australasian Journal of Special Education , Volume 38 , Issue 2 , December 2014 , pp. 169 - 185
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s) 2014 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Aikens, N.L., & Barbarin, O. (2008). Socioeconomic differences in reading trajectories: The contribution of family, neighborhood, and school contexts. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100, 235–251. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.100.2.235CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority. (2012). NAPLAN Achievement in Reading, Writing, Language Conventions and Numeracy: National Report for 2012. Sydney: ACARA.Google Scholar
Barnes, G. (n.d.). Report on the generation of the 2010 Index of Community Socio-Educational Advantage (ICSEA). Sydney: Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority. Retrieved from http://www.acara.edu.au/verve/_resources/2010_Index_of_Community_Socio-Educational_Advantage_Generation_Report.pdfGoogle Scholar
Bell, J.F. (2011). The small-study effect in educational trials. Effective Education, 3, 35–48. doi:10.1080/19415532.2011.610642Google Scholar
Brooks, G. (2007). What works for pupils with literacy difficulties? The effectiveness of intervention schemes (3rd ed.). London, UK: Department for Children, Schools and Families. Retrieved from https://www.education.gov.uk/publications/eOrderingDownload/pri_lit_what_works0068807.pdfGoogle Scholar
Buckingham, J., Wheldall, K., & Beaman, R. (2012). A randomised control trial of a Tier-2 small-group intervention (‘MiniLit’) for young struggling readers. Australian Journal of Learning Difficulties, 17, 79–99. doi:10.1080/19404158.2012.717537CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carnine, D.W., Silbert, J., Kame’enui, E.J., & Tarver, S.G. (2010). Direct instruction reading (5th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.Google Scholar
Carnine, D.W., Silbert, J., Kame’enui, E.J., Tarver, S.G., & Jungjohann, K. (2006). Teaching struggling and at-risk readers: A direct instruction approach. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.Google Scholar
Department of Education, Science and Training (DEST). (2005). National Inquiry into the Teaching of Literacy (NITL). Teaching reading: Report and recommendations. Barton, ACT: Commonwealth of Australia.Google Scholar
Dodd, B., & Carr, A. (2003). Young children's letter-sound knowledge. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 34, 128–137. doi:10.1044/0161-1461(2003/011)Google Scholar
Eamon, M.K. (2005). Social-demographic, school, neighborhood, and parenting influences on the academic achievement of Latino young adolescents. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 34, 163–174. doi:10.1007/s10964-005-3214-xGoogle Scholar
Ellis, L.A., Wheldall, K., & Beaman, R. (2007). The research locus and conceptual basis for MULTILIT: Why we do what we do. Australian Journal of Learning Disabilities, 12, 61–65. doi:10.1080/19404150709546831Google Scholar
Fuchs, D., & Fuchs, L.S. (2006). Introduction to response to intervention: What, why, and how valid is it? Reading Research Quarterly, 41, 93–99. doi:10.1598/RRQ.41.1.4Google Scholar
Gersten, R., Compton, D., Connor, C.M., Dimino, J., Santoro, L., Linan-Thompson, S., & Tilly, W.D. (2009). Assisting students struggling with reading: Response to intervention (RtI) and multi-tier interventions in the primary grades. A practice guide (NCEE 2009-4045). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. Retrieved from http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/publications/practiceguides/Google Scholar
Gersten, R., & Dimino, J.A. (2006). RTI (response to intervention): Rethinking special education for students with reading difficulties (yet again). Reading Research Quarterly, 41, 99–108. doi:10.1598/RRQ.41.1.5Google Scholar
Gilmore, A., Croft, C., & Reid, N. (1981). Burt Word Reading Test – New Zealand revision. Wellington, NZ: New Zealand Council for Educational Research.Google Scholar
Hart, B., & Risley, T.R. (2003). The early catastrophe: The 30 million word gap by age 3. American Educator, 27 (1). Retrieved from http://www.aft.org/pdfs/americaneducator/spring2003/TheEarlyCatastrophe.pdfGoogle Scholar
Hatcher, P.J., Hulme, C., Miles, J.N.V., Carroll, J.M., Hatcher, J., Gibbs, S., . . . Snowling, M.J. (2006). Efficacy of small group reading intervention for beginning readers with reading-delay: A randomised control trial. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 47, 820–827. doi:10.1111/j.1469-7610.2005.01559.xGoogle Scholar
Hempenstall, K. (2009). Research-driven reading assessment: Drilling to the core. Australian Journal of Learning Difficulties, 14, 17–52. doi:10.1080/19404150902783419Google Scholar
Howell, D. (2008). Fundamental statistics for the behavioral sciences (6th ed.). Belmont, CA: Thomson Wadsworth.Google Scholar
IBM Corp. (2012). IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, Version 21.0 [Computer software]. Armonk, NY: Author.Google Scholar
Louden, B., Chan, L.K.S., Elkins, J., Greaves, D., House, H., Milton, M., . . . van Kraayenoord, C. (2000). Mapping the territory: Primary students with learning difficulties: Literacy and numeracy. Canberra, Australia: Commonwealth Department of Education, Training and Youth Affairs.Google Scholar
Marks, G. (2009). Accounting for school-sector differences in university entrance performance. Australian Journal of Education, 53, 19–38. Retrieved from doi:10.1177/000494410905300103Google Scholar
Martin, F., & Pratt, C. (2001). The Martin and Pratt Nonword Reading Test. Melbourne, Australia: ACER.Google Scholar
Merrett, F., & Wheldall, K. (1990). Positive teaching in the primary school. London, UK: Chapman.Google Scholar
MultiLit. (2011). MiniLit early literacy intervention program. Sydney, Australia: MultiLit Pty Ltd.Google Scholar
National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD). (2000). Report of the National Reading Panel. Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction (NIH Publication No. 00-4769). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office. Retrieved from http://www.nationalreadingpanel.org/publications/publications.htmGoogle Scholar
New South Wales Department of Education and Communities (NSW DEC). (2011a). Language, learning and literacy: Guidelines. Sydney, Australia: NSW Curriculum and Innovation Centre.Google Scholar
New South Wales Department of Education and Communities (NSW DEC). (2011b). Language, learning and literacy: Information for parents. Sydney, Australia: NSW Curriculum and Innovation Centre. Retrieved February 12, 2012, from http://www.curriculumsupport.education.nsw.gov.au/beststart/lll/general/index.htmGoogle Scholar
New South Wales Department of Education and Communities (NSW DEC). (2011c). Language, learning and literacy: Information for the kindergarten team. Sydney, Australia: NSW Curriculum and Innovation Centre. Retrieved February 12, 2012, from http://www.curriculumsupport.education.nsw.gov.au/beststart/lll/general/index.htmGoogle Scholar
New South Wales Department of Education and Communities (NSW DEC). (2012). Reading Recovery: A research-based early intervention program. What happens in a Reading Recovery lesson? Retrieved June 26, 2012, from http://www.curriculumsupport.education.nsw.gov.au/earlyyears/reading_recovery/lesson.htmGoogle Scholar
Reading Recovery Council of North America. (2007). Phonemic awareness. Retrieved from http://www.readingrecovery.org/reading_recovery/federal/Essential/phonemic.aspGoogle Scholar
Reynolds, M., & Wheldall, K. (2007). Reading Recovery 20 years down the track: Looking forward, looking back. International Journal of Disability, Development and Education, 54, 199–223. doi:10.1080/10349120701330503CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reynolds, M., Wheldall, K., & Madelaine, A. (2007). Meeting Initial Needs In Literacy (MINILIT): Why we need it, how it works, and the results of pilot studies. Australasian Journal of Special Education, 31, 147–158. doi:10.1080/10300110701716188Google Scholar
Reynolds, M., Wheldall, K., & Madelaine, A. (2009). Building the WARL: The development of the Wheldall Assessment of Reading Lists, a curriculum-based measure designed to identify young struggling readers and monitor their progress. Australian Journal of Learning Difficulties, 14, 89–111. doi:10.1080/19404150902783443Google Scholar
Reynolds, M., Wheldall, K., & Madelaine, A. (2010). An experimental evaluation of an intervention for young struggling readers in Year One. Special Education Perspectives, 19 (2), 35–57.Google Scholar
Reynolds, M., Wheldall, K., & Madelaine, A. (2011). What recent reviews tell us about the efficacy of reading interventions for struggling readers in the early years of schooling. International Journal of Disability, Development and Education, 58, 257–286. doi:10.1080/1034912X.2011.598406Google Scholar
Rose, J. (2006). Independent review of the teaching of early reading: Final report. Retrieved from https://www.education.gov.uk/publications/standard/publicationdetail/page1/DFES-0201-2006Google Scholar
Rothman, S. (2002). Achievement in literacy and numeracy by Australian 14-year-olds, 1975–1998 (Longitudinal Surveys of Australian Youth Research Report no. 29). Melbourne: Australian Council for Educational Research. Retrieved from http://research.acer.edu.au/lsay_research/33/Google Scholar
Rothman, S., & McMillan, J. (2003). Influences on achievement in literacy and numeracy (Longitudinal Surveys of Australian Youth Research Report no. 36). Melbourne: Australian Council for Educational Research. Retrieved from http://research.acer.edu.au/lsay_research/40/Google Scholar
Slavin, R.E., Lake, C., Davis, S., & Madden, N.A. (2011). Effective programs for struggling readers: A best-evidence synthesis. Educational Research Review, 6, 1–26. doi:10.1016/j.edurev.2010.07.002Google Scholar
Slavin, R.E., & Smith, D. (2009). The relationship between sample sizes and effect sizes in systematic reviews in education. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 31, 500–506. doi:10.3102/0162373709352369Google Scholar
Symons, A., & Greaves, D. (2006). The use of THRASS program with younger children with literacy difficulties. Australian Journal of Dyslexia and Specific Learning Difficulties, 1 (July), 31–36.Google Scholar
Thomson, S., de Bortoli, L., Nicholas, M., Hillman, K., & Buckley, S. (2010). Challenges for Australian education: Results from PISA 2009: The PISA 2009 assessment of students’ reading, mathematical and scientific literacy. Melbourne: Australian Council for Educational Research. Retrieved from http://research.acer.edu.au/ozpisa/9/Google Scholar
The THRASS® Institute. (2014). For parents THRASS®. Retrieved from http://www.thrass.com.au/for-parents/Google Scholar
Torgesen, J.K. (2000). Individual differences in response to early interventions in reading: The lingering problem of treatment resisters. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 15, 55–64. doi:10.1207/SLDRP1501_6Google Scholar
van Kraayenoord, C.E. (2010). Response to intervention: New ways and wariness. Reading Research Quarterly, 45, 363–376. doi:10.1598/RRQ.45.3.5Google Scholar
Wanzek, J., & Vaughn, S. (2007). Research-based implications from extensive early reading interventions. School Psychology Review, 36, 541–561. Retrieved from http://www.nasponline.org/publications/spr/index.aspx?vol=36&issue=4Google Scholar
Westwood, P. (2005). Spelling: Approaches to teaching and assessment (2nd ed.). Camberwell: Australian Council for Educational Research Press.Google Scholar
What Works Clearinghouse (WWC). (2007). SpellRead™ (WWC Intervention Report, July 9, 2007). Washington, DC: Institute of Education Sciences. Retrieved from http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/pdf/intervention_reports/WWC_Kaplan_Spellread_070907.pdfGoogle Scholar
What Works Clearinghouse (WWC). (2008a). Early Intervention in Reading® (WWC Intervention Report, November 2008). Washington, DC: Institute of Education Sciences. Retrieved from http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/pdf/intervention_reports/wwc_eir_112508.pdfGoogle Scholar
What Works Clearinghouse (WWC). (2008b). Lindamood Phonemic Sequencing® (WWC Intervention Report, December 2008). Washington, DC: Institute of Education Sciences. Retrieved from http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/pdf/intervention_reports/wwc_lindamood_121608.pdfGoogle Scholar
What Works Clearinghouse (WWC). (2009). Success For All® (WWC Intervention Report, August 2009). Washington, DC: Institute of Education Sciences. Retrieved from http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/pdf/intervention_reports/wwc_sfa_081109.pdfGoogle Scholar
What Works Clearinghouse (WWC). (2010). Lindamood Phoneme Sequencing® (WWC Intervention Report, March 2010). Washington, DC: Institute of Education Sciences. Retrieved from http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/pdf/intervention_reports/wwc_lindamood_031610.pdfGoogle Scholar
What Works Clearinghouse (WWC). (2012). Peer-Assisted Learning Strategies (WWC Intervention Report, May 2012). Washington, DC: Institute of Education Sciences. Retrieved from http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/pdf/intervention_reports/wwc_pals_050112.pdfGoogle Scholar
Wheldall, K. (2009). Effective instruction for socially disadvantaged low-progress readers: The Schoolwise Program. Australian Journal of Learning Difficulties, 14, 151–170. doi:10.1080/19404150903264294Google Scholar
Wheldall, K., Beaman, R., Madelaine, A., & McMurtry, S. (2012). Evaluations of the efficacy of MultiLit and MiniLit programs provided by the Exodus Foundation, 2009–2011. Unpublished research report submitted to the Exodus Foundation. Sydney, Australia: MultiLit Research Unit, Macquarie University.Google Scholar
Wyatt-Smith, C., Elkins, J., Colbert, P., Gunn, S., & Muspratt, S. (2007). Changing the nature of support provision: Students with learning difficulties: Interventions in literacy and numeracy project (InLaN). Volume 1: Design, methodology and findings. Canberra, Australia: Commonwealth Department of Education, Science and Training.Google Scholar