This meta-analysis included experimental or quasi-experimental intervention studies conducted between 1980 and 2020 that aimed to improve reading outcomes for Grade K-5 students with or at risk for dyslexia (i.e., students with or at risk for word reading difficulties, defined as scoring at or below normreferenced screening or mean baseline performance thresholds articulated in our inclusion criteria). In all, 53 studies reported in 52 publications met inclusion criteria (m = 351; total student N = 6,053). We employed robust variance estimation to address dependent effect sizes arising from multiple outcomes and comparisons within studies. Results indicated a statistically significant main effect of instruction on norm-referenced reading outcomes (g = 0.33; p < .001). Because there was significant heterogeneity in effect sizes across studies (p < .01), we used meta-regression to identify the degree to which student characteristics (i.e., grade level), intervention characteristics (i.e., dosage, instructional components, multisensory nature, instructional group size), reading outcome domain (i.e., phonological awareness, word reading/ spelling, passage reading, or reading comprehension), or research methods (i.e., sample size, study design) influenced intervention effects. Dosage and reading outcome domain were the only variables that significantly moderated intervention effects (p = .040 and p = .024, respectively), with higher dosage studies associated with larger effects (b = 0.002) and reading comprehension outcomes associated with smaller effects than word reading/spelling outcomes (b = −0.080).
This study meta-analyzed the last four decades of reading intervention research focused on improving reading outcomes for English language (EL) students in Grades K-5 with or at risk for word reading difficulties. Experimental and quasi-experimental group design and single-case experimental design (SCED) studies were included; 10 group design and 7 SCED studies met inclusion criteria (m = 61; total student N = 2,270). Visual inspection of the effect size distribution revealed that the assumption of between-study heterogeneity was not supported; therefore, the findings were synthesized for SCED studies separately from those reported in group design studies. Implications for practice, policy, and future research are discussed.In public schools across the United States, English learners (ELs) constitute a large and fast-growing student demographic (National Center for Educational Statistics [NCES], 2020). Specifically, in the fall of 2018, more than 10% of the nation's K-12 students were classified as ELs, representing approximately 5 million students (NCES, 2020). Nationwide, the number of ELs in school grew by 28% from 2000 to 2016, with 17 states seeing a greater than 100% increase (Office of English Language Acquisition, 2020).National data demonstrate that many children who are ELs are not able to read proficiently; for example, the majority of fourth-grade EL students are not reading at a proficient level (10%; National Association of Education Progress, 2019). Complex and interrelated factors explain disparities in elementary-grade reading performance between EL and English monolingual (EM) students. Demographic data suggest that Hispanics experience systemic inequities in access to education, healthcare, and economic opportunities, and communities with large proportions of ELs experience higher poverty rates (National Center for Education Statistics, 2019). As a result, more ELs attend schools of poorer quality and with fewer resources and experienced teachers than do EM students (Cosentino de Cohen et al., 2005;Gándara et al., 2003; Office for Civil Rights, 2016). Income disparities also factor into fewer out-of-school-time (OST) opportunities available to ELs, both before and after the Requests for reprints should be sent to Emily J. Solari, University of Virginia. Electronic inquiries should be sent to
This study examined the heterogeneity of literacy profiles for adolescents with and without a specific learning disability (SLD). Student subgroups displaying common patterns of performance in word-level skills and reading comprehension were identified through latent profile analysis. Results indicate most of the total sample demonstrated below-average performance in one or both areas with word-level skill difficulties being more common than difficulties in reading comprehension alone. Changes in reading performance by profile over time (Grades 6–8) were examined through a latent transition analysis revealing consistent patterns in the SLD sample and variable patterns in the typically developing sample. Resulting profiles were utilized to predict performance on an end-of-year broad reading comprehension measure indicating very little change in performance over time. Findings suggest large numbers of adolescents with concurrent word-level and reading comprehension difficulties likely need sustained intervention in word-level skills to support their reading comprehension.
Open practices, such as preregistration, registered reports, open materials, open data, open analytic code, replication, open peer review, open access, and conflict-of-interest and funding statements, support the transparency, accessibility, and reproducibility of research and other scholarship. The purpose of this review was to examine the prevalence of these open practices in the special education literature. We reviewed a randomly selected sample of 250 articles published in special education journals in 2020. Results indicated that conflict-of-interest and funding statements were present in most articles; a small but meaningful proportion of articles provided open materials and were open access; and preregistration, registered reports, open data, open analytic code, open peer review, and replication were rarely or never observed. Recommendations for researching and supporting the use of open practices in special education scholarship are provided.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.