Informed by theories of reading comprehension and prior reviews of reading comprehension intervention, this meta-analysis uniquely contributes to the literature because it describes the relative effects of various approaches to comprehension intervention for struggling readers in Grades 3 through 12. Findings from 64 studies demonstrate significant positive effects of reading comprehension intervention on comprehension outcomes ( g = .59, p < .001, 95% confidence interval [CI] [0.47, 0.74], τ2 = .31). A metaregression model indicated significantly higher effects associated with researcher-developed measures, background knowledge instruction, and strategy instruction, and significantly lower effects associated with instructional enhancements. Grade level, metacognitive approaches, and study quality did not moderate effects. Findings support the use of background knowledge instruction and strategy instruction to support comprehension of struggling readers in upper elementary and beyond.

No abstract

We investigated whether individual differences in overall receptive vocabulary knowledge measured at the beginning of the year moderated the effects of a kindergarten vocabulary intervention that supplemented classroom vocabulary instruction. We also examined whether moderation would offset the benefits of providing Tier-2 vocabulary intervention within a multitiered-system-of-support (MTSS) or response-to-intervention framework. Participants included students from two previous studies identified as at risk for language and learning difficulties who were randomly assigned in clusters to receive small-group vocabulary intervention in addition to classroom vocabulary instruction ( n = 825) or to receive classroom vocabulary instruction only ( n = 781). A group of not-at-risk students ( n = 741) who received classroom vocabulary instruction served as a reference group. Initial vocabulary knowledge measured at pretest moderated the impact of intervention on experimenter-developed measures of expressive vocabulary learning and listening comprehension favoring students with higher initial vocabulary knowledge. Tier-2 intervention substantially counteracted the Matthew effect for target word learning. Intervention effects on listening comprehension depended on students’ initial vocabulary knowledge. Implications present benefits and challenges of supporting vocabulary learning within an MTSS framework.

Empirical evidence suggests inattention and attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) are related to reading fluency, reading comprehension, and academic failure. Students with ADHD are served in both general and special education settings, but limited research explores effective reading interventions for this population. The purpose of this synthesis is to investigate reading studies for participants identified with or at risk of ADHD. We address the following research question: What are the effects of reading interventions on the reading outcomes of students with or at risk of ADHD in Grades 4 to 12? In total, 16 studies met inclusion criteria. Intervention findings are presented in an attempt to document evidence-based practices. Although findings contribute to the evidence base of instructional practices that may be effective for students with ADHD, no interventions meet criteria outlined by the Council for Exceptional Children to be classified as evidence-based practices. However, studies in this review document evidence of positive intervention effects for study participants.

A subset of students fail to respond adequately to reading interventions. This synthesis systematically reviews studies in which students in grades K-3 responded inadequately to a Tier 2 reading intervention and were provided with a Tier 3 intervention. Descriptions of the Tier 3 reading interventions and effects are provided. To meet inclusion criteria, studies were required to (a) provide documented, multi-tiered reading interventions with at least one reading outcome measured; (b) include students in grades K-3 who previously responded inadequately to a Tier 2 intervention; (c) use experimental, quasi-experimental, or multiple-group designs; and (d) be peer reviewed and conducted in English. Twelve studies met inclusion criteria. Results demonstrate that students who responded inadequately to Tier 2 interventions can make significant growth from Tier 3 interventions compared with a control group of peers who were also inadequate responders, but often fail to catch up to their more responsive peers.