2013
DOI: 10.1177/0022219413504995
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A Meta-Analysis of Interventions for Struggling Readers in Grades 4–12

Abstract: 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) wh… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

31
294
7
8

Year Published

2015
2015
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
6
2

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 322 publications
(340 citation statements)
references
References 71 publications
31
294
7
8
Order By: Relevance
“…The best evidence is for intensive interventions involving instruction on phonics, word analysis, and reading fluency and comprehension. 40 Professional bodies recommend only routine vision checks and advise that children with SRI should have appropriate non-vision-based support. 41,42 However, many organizations and Web sites continue to recommend vision-based treatments.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The best evidence is for intensive interventions involving instruction on phonics, word analysis, and reading fluency and comprehension. 40 Professional bodies recommend only routine vision checks and advise that children with SRI should have appropriate non-vision-based support. 41,42 However, many organizations and Web sites continue to recommend vision-based treatments.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Comme premier constat, toutes les recensions antérieures consultées montrent que les stratégies d'enseignement éprouvées ou recommandées valent pour tous les types d'élèves, typiques et atypiques, mais démontrent un effet plus marqué chez ceux qui sont en difficulté ou qui présentent un trouble d'apprentissage (Datchuk et Kubina, 2012;Edmonds et al, 2009;Gillespie et Graham, 2014;Graham et Harris, 2009;Hongli, 2014;Kaldenberg et al, 2015;Rouhani et al, 2016;Scammacca et al, 2015). Plusieurs auteurs soulignent les difficultés rencontrées lorsqu'ils tentent d'analyser des résultats de recherches tantôt relatifs à des évaluations construites par les chercheurs, tantôt à des évaluations normatives (Kaldenberg et al, 2015;Scammacca et al, 2015;Wansek et al, 2010).…”
Section: L'analyse De Recensions Antérieures Période De 2012 à 2016unclassified
“…Plusieurs auteurs soulignent les difficultés rencontrées lorsqu'ils tentent d'analyser des résultats de recherches tantôt relatifs à des évaluations construites par les chercheurs, tantôt à des évaluations normatives (Kaldenberg et al, 2015;Scammacca et al, 2015;Wansek et al, 2010). Cela rend difficile la comparaison entre les études ; il s'avère laborieux de préciser les interventions utiles à l'élève et leur incidence sur l'apprentissage.…”
Section: L'analyse De Recensions Antérieures Période De 2012 à 2016unclassified
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…It is difficult for adolescent literacy interventions to achieve large effects on standardized assessments (Scammacca, Roberts, Vaughn, & Stuebing, 2013). Because literacy coaching is hypothesized to directly affect instruction, which then affects student learning, some research suggests that this complex process may result in effects on standardized student outcomes that are too small to detect (e.g., Garet et al, 2008).…”
Section: The Present Studymentioning
confidence: 99%