Brief experimental analysis of early reading interventions

Pétursdóttir, Anna-Lind; McMaster, Kristen L.; McComas, Jennifer J.; Bradfield, Tracy A.; Braganza, Viveca; Koch, Julie M.; Rodriguez, Roxana; Scharf, Haley

doi:10.1016/j.jsp.2009.02.003

Cited by 26 publications

(26 citation statements)

References 43 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…During each 15-to 20-min instructional session, the teacher guided the student through a three-component lesson: Familiar Rereading (2-5 min), Word Study (6-10 min), and Teacher-Guided Reading (7-10 min). These lessons were extensive enough for students to make progress on a daily basis (Petursdottir et al, 2009;Savage, Carless, & Stuart, 2003) but not as lengthy as other pull-out interventions (e.g., Clay, 1993;Morris et al, 2000) because the classroom teachers had substantial responsibilities each day. For each ENRICH component, teachers learned a standard procedure; however, teachers were taught to place greater emphasis on routine student errors (K. J.…”

Section: What Teachers Learned: the Enrich Instructional Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

Embedded Professional Development and Classroom-Based Early Reading Intervention: Early Diagnostic Reading Intervention Through Coaching

Amendum

2014

Reading & Writing Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: What Teachers Learned: the Enrich Instructional Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

Embedded Professional Development and Classroom-Based Early Reading Intervention: Early Diagnostic Reading Intervention Through Coaching

Amendum

2014

Reading & Writing Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…For example, Petursdottir et al. () found large effects for early literacy measures such as letter‐sound fluency and nonsense‐word fluency, but like the studies that used CBM‐R, did not take into account SEM. Finally, the current study used one SEM, which resulted in a 68% confidence interval.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Empirical Synthesis of the Effect of Standard Error of Measurement on Decisions Made Within Brief Experimental Analyses of Reading Fluency

Burns

Taylor

Warmbold-Brann

et al. 2017

Psychology in the Schools

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Intervention researchers often use curriculum-based measurement of reading fluency (CBM-R) with a brief experimental analysis (BEA) to identify an effective intervention for individual students. The current study synthesized data from 22 studies that used CBM-R data within a BEA by computing the standard error of measure (SEM) for the median data point from the baseline and intervention data. The median CBM-R score from the intervention that the authors of each study identified as most effective fell within the SEM (68% confidence interval) of the baseline data approximately 30% of the time, but the ranges for the two author-identified most effective interventions overlapped over 75% of the time. Extended analyses were consistent with the BEA results for approximately three-fourths of the instances after considering the SEM of the baseline and intervention phases. Using matched passages did not improve the overlap of the ranges, but there was less overlap when the study used three data points per condition. Results emphasize the importance of considering SEM of CBM-R data when comparing interventions within a BEA. Further implications for practice and future research are included. C 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

show abstract

“…The dependent variable used in early reading BEA has been number of correct words or sounds read per minute on wordlists and lists of letter sounds. The number of words or sounds read correctly per minute in each condition is graphed, and visual analysis is used to systematically compare the relative effects of the various interventions (Pettursdottir et al., ). More research is needed on the application of BEA to other areas of reading, including comprehension, as well as other academic targets.…”

Section: Future Directions For Research and Practicementioning

confidence: 99%

Using Brief Experimental Analysis to Intensify Tier 3 Reading Interventions

Coolong-Chaffin

Wagner

2015

Learn Disabil Res Pract

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

As implementation of multi‐tiered systems of support becomes common practice across the nation, practitioners continue to need strategies for intensifying interventions and supports for the subset of students who fail to make adequate progress despite strong programs at Tiers 1 and 2. Experts recommend making several changes to the structure and format of instruction, however more information is needed about strategies that are individualized (i.e., matched to student need), not just intensified. One promising approach to matching student need to intervention is brief experimental analysis (BEA). This article will describe the theoretical and empirical support for BEA, provide a model for conducting a BEA, present an example of its use, and discuss implications for future research and practice.

show abstract

Brief experimental analysis of early reading interventions

Cited by 26 publications

References 43 publications

Embedded Professional Development and Classroom-Based Early Reading Intervention: Early Diagnostic Reading Intervention Through Coaching

Embedded Professional Development and Classroom-Based Early Reading Intervention: Early Diagnostic Reading Intervention Through Coaching

Empirical Synthesis of the Effect of Standard Error of Measurement on Decisions Made Within Brief Experimental Analyses of Reading Fluency

Using Brief Experimental Analysis to Intensify Tier 3 Reading Interventions

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About