Effects of the Reread-Adapt and Answer-Comprehend and goal setting intervention on decoding and reading comprehension skills of young adults with intellectual disabilities

Abstract

We did not find a functional relation between the intervention and student reading performance.

A Synthesis of Reading Comprehension Interventions for Persons With Mild Intellectual Disability

“…Baseline data points for two of Grünke et al's (2013) and all of Bilgi and Özmen's (2018) participants were fewer than five, which can threaten the validity of the data (Kratochwill et al, 2010). In five studies, more than one assessor measured the dependent variable (Bilgi & Özmen, 2018;Hua et al, 2012;Hua et al, 2013;Hua et al, 2018;Özmen, 2011). Four of these studies met the 80% IOA requirement on at least 20% of data points (Bilgi & Özmen, 2018;Hua et al, 2012;Hua et al, 2013;Özmen, 2011).…”

“…There were six SCD studies included in the present synthesis (Bilgi & Özmen, 2018;Grünke et al, 2013;Hua et al, 2012;Hua et al, 2018;Hua, Woods-Groves, Kaldenberg, & Scheidecker, 2013;Özmen, 2011). The WWC's quality indicators for SCD studies are (a) the independent variable is systematically manipulated, (b) the dependent variable is systematically measured over time and by more than one assessor, (c) interobserver agreement (IOA) is measured for at least 20% of the data points, (d) there is at least 80% IOA, (e) there are at least three attempts to demonstrate a treatment effect, and (e) there is an appropriate number of phases and data points within each phase.…”

“…Hua et al (2013) employed an alternating treatments design with four participants (three with mild ID) wherein participants received the intervention with a focus on either health care or money management. Hua et al (2018) employed a response-guided, randomized concurrent multiple baseline design across five participants with mild ID. Özmen (2011) employed an alternating treatments design with five participants with mild ID.…”

“…The SCD studies all had fewer than 10 participants (n = 3-6; M = 4.33), and the group-design studies had sample sizes of at least 10 participants (n = 10-59; M = 32.63). Seven studies assessed participants in Grades 4 through 12 (Allor et al, 2010;Bilgi & Özmen, 2018;Grünke et al, 2013;Lundberg & Reichenberg, 2013;Mastropieri et al, 2001;Miller et al, 2011;Özmen, 2011), and seven studies had postsecondary adult participants (Cohen et al, 2006;Hua et al, 2012;Hua et al, 2013;Hua et al, 2014;Hua et al, 2018;Van den Bos et al, 2007). Additionally, five of the studies explicitly stated that participants were required to meet certain reading standards (e.g., oral reading fluency at first-grade level; Bilgi & Özmen, 2018;Miller et al, 2011;Özmen, 2011;Van den Bos et al, 2007).…”

“…Two multicomponent intervention studies tested the effects of the Reread-Adapt and Answer-Comprehend (RAAC) intervention (Hua et al, 2012;Hua et al, 2018). Specifically, students read aloud four generic questions related to narrative texts (e.g., "How did the main character feel?"…”