Extensive Reading Interventions for Grades K - 3: From Research to Practice A Webinar Sponsored by the Center on Instruction--Special Education Strand Vaughn Gross Center for Reading and Language Arts The University of Texas at Austin October 24,

1
Extensive Reading Interventions for Grades K -
3 From Research to PracticeA Webinar
Sponsored by the Center on Instruction--Special
Education Strand Vaughn Gross Center for
Reading and Language ArtsThe University of Texas
at AustinOctober 24, 2007Featured
PresentersDr. Sharon Vaughn, The University of
Texas at AustinDr. Jeannie Wanzek, Florida State
University
2
The Center on Instruction is operated by RMC
Research Corporation in partnership with the
Florida Center for Reading Research at Florida
State University RG Research Group Horizon
Research, Inc., the Texas Institute for
Measurement, Evaluation, and Statistics at the
University of Houston and the Vaughn Gross
Center for Reading and Language Arts at the
University of Texas at Austin.The contents of
this PowerPoint were developed under cooperative
agreement S283B050034 withthe U.S. Department of
Education. However, these contents do not
necessarilyrepresent the policy of the
Department of Education, and you should
notassume endorsement by the Federal
Government.2007 The Center on Instruction
requests that no changes be made to the content
or appearance of this product. To download a
copy of this document, visit www.centeroninstructi
on.org
3
Todays Agenda

• Introduction (Dr. Nancy Scammacca)
• Overview of the synthesis (Dr. Sharon Vaughn)
• Study Findings (Dr. Jeanne Wanzek)
• Implications (Dr. Sharon Vaughn)
• Question and Answer Session
• Evaluation

4
Extensive Reading Interventions in Grades K - 3
From Research to PracticeScammacca, Vaughn,
Roberts, Wanzek, Torgesen (2007)
5
Introduction

• While the goals of adopting an RTI framework are
  often clear, the costs and methods of effective
  implementation are not always as clear.
• These decisions should be based on evidence.
• Intervention implementation decisions are often
  the hardest.

6
Purpose of The Synthesis

• To increase the knowledge of those working with
  or in state departments of education and local
  education agencies on reading-related issues for
  primary-grade students at risk for reading
  difficulties and learning disabilities

7
Caveat

• This report is not intended as a comprehensive
  review of all aspects of the research on early
  literacy instruction for struggling readers or
  students with learning disabilities (LD).
• It presents and discusses a set of studies that
  met specific inclusion criteria.
• The findings represent one data source for
  decision-making about instruction for struggling
  early readers.

8
RTI Goals

• Early Identification
• Targeted Interventions
• Ongoing Progress Monitoring
• Use of Increasingly Intensive Tiers
• Improved Confidence in Identification

9
Types of Interventions

• Educators are challenged to know the types of
  interventions and their efficacy
• Standardized
• Problem solving
• More individualized

10
Questions?
11
Studies Reviewed

• Studies published in peer reviewed journals
  (1995-2005)
• Students in grades K-3
• Students with learning disabilities or identified
  as at-risk for reading difficulties
• Interventions
• Early literacy
• 100 sessions or more
• Not part of general education curriculum
• Reading outcomes measured

12
Findings Related to Duration of Intervention

• All interventions were provided 4-5 times per
  week (generally around 30 minutes)
• Few differences in the magnitude of effects for
  participants based on length of intervention, but
  further information on the number of hours of
  intervention would extend our understanding

13
Findings Related to Instructional Group Size

• Most studies were delivered with one-on-one
  grouping format with high effects
• Limited information on small group instruction
  positive outcomes demonstrated

14
Findings Related to Grade Level

• Most studies identified students for intervention
  in K-1 high effects demonstrated
• Limited information on 2nd-3rd grade

15
Example 1 Santa Hoien (2000)

• Grade 1 at-risk readers who scored in lowest 20
  on screener
• 11 intervention
• Implemented by general ed teacher, Title I
  tutors, other educators
• 30 minutes/5 days per week/35 weeks

16
Example 1 Santa Hoien (2000), cont.

• Components
• Re-reading of books at progressive reading levels
• Word study
• Instruction in meta-cognitive strategies
• Sentence writing
• Guided reading of a new book at a slightly higher
  reading level that is re-read at the start of the
  next session

17
Example 1 Santa Hoien (2000), cont.

• Results
• Intervention significantly higher than comparison
  on all posttest measures (spelling, word
  recognition, and passage reading)
• 52 of the intervention reading at or above grade
  level at posttest 24 of comparison

18
Example 2 Mathes et al. (2005)

• Grade 1 at-risk readers who met risk criteria on
  multiple screeners
• 13 intervention
• Implemented by teachers
• 40 minutes/5 days per week/40 weeks
• 2 intervention groups proactive reading (PR) and
  responsive reading (RR)
• Comparison group received enhanced classroom
  instruction (EC)

19
Example 2 Mathes et al. (2005), cont.

• Components
• Phonemic awareness and alphabetic skills
• Using skills in reading and comprehending text
• Teachers modeled concepts and strategies guided
  practice scaffolding
• PR group had pre-determined scope and sequence
• RR group teachers followed menus

20
Example 2 Mathes et al. (2005), cont.

• Results
• PR and RR groups grew more rapidly in
  reading-related skills during intervention
• End-of-year outcomes near grade level norms on
  standardized measures of word attack, word
  identification, passage comprehension, reading
  fluency, and spelling

21
Example 3 Vadasy et al. (2002)

• Grade 1 2 at-risk readers who scored lt 90 on
  WRAT-R reading
• 11 intervention
• Implemented by community tutors (trained)
• 30 minutes/4 days per week/35 weeks
• Compared 1st grade only (SP) 2nd grade only
  (TP) both 1st 2nd grades (SPTP) no
  intervention comparison group

22
Example 3 Vadasy et al. (2002), cont.

• Components
• Sound Partners/grade 1
• Emphasis on letter sounds, decoding, spelling,
  fluency
• Thinking Partners/grade 2
• Emphasis on comprehension strategies

23
Example 3 Vadasy et al. (2002), cont.

• Results
• Students receiving 2nd grade intervention only
  (Thinking Partners) did not perform significantly
  better than control group
• After first grade intervention (Sound Partners)
  student gains averaged 17 standard score points
  on measure of word identification, word attack,
  and spelling.
• Additional intervention in 2nd grade (Sound
  Partners Thinking Partners) did not
  significantly improve outcomes for students

24
Summary of Findings

• Generally positive outcomes found for students
  with reading difficulties and disabilities
  participating in extensive interventions
• Few differences in duration of intervention
  though number of hours of intervention was not
  possible to calculate from information in studies
• 11 instruction yielded high effects few studies
  implementing small group instruction
• K-1 intervention demonstrated high effects few
  studies examining 2nd-3rd grade extensive
  interventions
• Most interventions implemented by school
  personnel, indicating feasibility in practice
  (about half provided by paraprofessionals)

25
Questions?
26
Implications for Practice Considerations

• Preliminary and in need of further validation
• Use caution when directly comparing effect sizes
  among different studies
• Implications relate best to students judged to be
  among the 20 to 25 most at risk for reading
  problems in grades K-2

27
Intervention Implementation

• Extensive interventions can be effective when
  provided by relatively low-cost implementers
  (paraprofessionals)

28
Interventionist Training

• A range of training was provided to
  interventionists

29
Gains from Intervention

• Gains from early extensive interventions appear
  to be maintained over time, at least into second
  grade.

30
No one right way

• Findings from these studies do not identify any
  particular method as the one right way to
  provide early extensive interventions to students
  at risk for reading problems in the early grades.
• Note All effective interventions in these
  studies shared some essential elements
• Training in PA, decoding and word study
• Guided and independent reading of progressively
  difficult texts
• Writing exercises
• Engaging students in using comprehension
  strategies while reading

31
Elements Possibly Related to Success

• Group size (one-on-one, small group)
• Daily or near-daily frequency of intervention
  sessions
• Early identification of students in need of
  intervention in K or 1st grade

32
More Knowledge About Early Interventions

• We know considerably more about the effectiveness
  of early interventions than we do about
  interventions provided at later stages of
  development.
• More studies addressing K and 1st grade than 2nd
  and 3rd grade.

33
More Research Needed

• More research is needed on students whose
  response to treatment is relatively low.

34
Limitations

• Experimental groups often smaller than control
  groups.
• Not possible to determine if impacts were result
  of more intensive instruction or a specific type
  of instruction.
• Effect sizes do not communicate what proportion
  of students responded weakly or not at all to the
  intervention.

35
Estimating Costs for Extensive Interventions

• Per Hour Cost of Teacher x Hours of Intervention
• _____________________________________
• Number of Students in Group
• Cost of certified teacher 50/hour
• Cost of paraprofessional 25/hour

Vaughn et al. (2007)
36
Estimated Personnel Cost Per Student
37
Question and Answer Session