Results of an early intervention program for first grade children at risk for reading disability

McCarthy, Patricia; Newby, Robert F.; Recht, Donna R.

doi:10.1080/19388079509558187

Cited by 8 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Considering the importance of word reading development in first grade, and the fact that an estimated 20 percent of all children in the United States will experience significant difficulties learning to read (Shaywitz et al 1990), it is not surprising that there has been increasing interest in programs aimed at improving the basic reading skills of first grade children at risk of developing reading problems. Results from various intervention studies support the general conclusion that intensive early intervention programs can significantly improve the reading skills of at-risk and reading disabled (RD) children (e.g., Abbott et al 1997;Berninger et al 1999;Blachman et al 1999;Felton 1993;Felton and Pepper 1995;Foorman et al 1997b;Foorman et al 1998;Hatcher, Hulme, and Ellis 1994;Invernizzi et al 1997;Iversen and Tunmer 1993;Marston et al 1995;Lovett et al 1994;McCarthy, Newby, and Recht 1995;Olson et al 1997;Pikulski 1994;Santa and Hoien 1999;Shanahan and Barr 1995;Torgesen, Wagner, and Rashotte 1997;Torgesen et al 1999;Vellutino et al 1996). Nevertheless, results from these intervention studies, with the possible exception of the Toregsen et al (1999) study, have generally failed to demonstrate robust and long lasting treatment effects based on specific components of various intervention programs.…”

mentioning

confidence: 84%

Modeling the response of normally achieving and at-risk first grade children to word reading instruction

Compton

2000

Annals of Dyslexia

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of this study was to identify important subject characteristics that predicted individual differences in responsiveness to word reading instruction in normally achieving and at-risk first grade children. This was accomplished by modeling individual word and nonword reading growth, and the correlates of change in these skills, in first grade students during two different phases of the school year. In the first phase of the study (October-January), word and nonword reading skill was modeled in normally achieving and at-risk children. Results of growth modeling indicated significant group differences in word and nonword reading growth parameters. A combination of phonemic awareness skill, advanced graphophoneme knowledge, and initial word/nonword reading skill predicted word and nonword reading growth in the control group, whereas, a combination of rapid naming speed, letter sound knowledge, and phonemic awareness skill predicted word and nonword reading growth in the at-risk group. In the second phase of the study (January-April), a subgroup of the at-risk subjects who exhibited limited growth in word reading skills during the first phase of the study was enrolled in 12 weeks of small group reading intervention designed to improve reading skills. Results of growth modeling indicated significant increases in word and nonword reading growth rates in this group during the intervention phase. Only rapid naming speed uniquely predicted word and nonword reading growth in the group of subjects receiving intervention.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 84%

Modeling the response of normally achieving and at-risk first grade children to word reading instruction

Compton

2000

Annals of Dyslexia

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…After several Downloaded by [The Aga Khan University] at 03:15 02 December 2014 unsuccessful attempts to contract with Reading Recovery to bring the program to Florida, the University of South Florida and Chapter I programs from two counties decided to collaborate on the development and implementation of their own program. Although Clay's work (1987Clay's work ( , 1991, served as a primary influence, the work of Johnston and Allington (1990), Juel (1990), Wasik (1993), McCarthy, Newby, andRecht (1995), Pinnell, Fried, and Estice (1991), Slavin, Madden, Karweit, Dolan, and Wasik, (1994), Stanovich (1986), Sulzby and Teale (1990), Taylor, Short, Frye, and Shearer (1992), and Wasik and Slavin (1993), also greatly impacted our ongoing planning. We found that designing our own program allowed for more flexibility and input from the trainers and teachers as we made revisions and improvements.…”

Section: Accelerated Literacy Learning Backgroundmentioning

confidence: 97%

Connecting classrooms and early interventions

Short

Frye

King

et al. 1999

Reading Research and Instruction

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Text Types and Their Relation to Efficacy in Beginning Reading Interventions

Pugh

Kearns

Hiebert³

2023

Reading Research Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Researchers disagree about the value of controlling the decodability of texts for students with reading difficulty, specifically what type of text they should read: decodable texts (words limited to taught patterns), nondecodable texts (those not limited by instruction), or both. We analyzed the effects of reading intervention for elementary‐age students with reading difficulty (k = 119) to determine whether effects varied by the type of texts students read—decodable, nondecodable, or both—compared with interventions without text reading. Inadequate information was available to code text type for 22 interventions including text reading; effect sizes were calculated for 97 studies. Effects for interventions with decodable or nondecodable reading did not differ from no‐text interventions. For both types of interventions, the effect (g = 0.28) approached significance versus no‐text, 95% CI [−0.09, 0.65]. Disaggregating effects by whether the measures were standardized or researcher‐designed showed a significant both‐types effect, g = 0.45, 95% CI [0.02, 0.89] relative to no‐text. Disaggregating by whether outcomes were for word recognition or reading comprehension showed a positive both‐types effect for word recognition outcomes; data were inadequate to examine comprehension. A possible confounding effect of time spent reading was tested but was uncorrelated with the intervention effect. The both‐types finding suggests the possible value of varied reading experiences in intervention, but this analysis did not account for other factors that might be correlated with text type and the intervention effect. Furthermore, more comprehensive reporting about text types is important for replication and meta‐analytic review.

show abstract

Results of an early intervention program for first grade children at risk for reading disability

Cited by 8 publications

References 12 publications

Modeling the response of normally achieving and at-risk first grade children to word reading instruction

Modeling the response of normally achieving and at-risk first grade children to word reading instruction

Connecting classrooms and early interventions

Text Types and Their Relation to Efficacy in Beginning Reading Interventions

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About