The Critical Role of Word Reading as a Predictor of Response to Intervention

Abstract

This study examines the initial word reading performance of fourth-grade struggling readers and the extent to which differing levels of word reading performance at pretest influenced their response to reading interventions. A large group of students with significant reading comprehension difficulties ( N = 481) were classified into three clusters of word reading proficiency based on their pretest performance: (a) very low, (b) low, and (c) near adequate. We examined their performance on several academic, language, and executive functioning measures at the beginning of the year and their reading comprehension performance at the beginning of year and after 1 year of reading intervention to examine how each cluster responded to instruction. Results from a discriminant function analysis indicated that performance on five pretest variables were meaningful predictors of word reading proficiency cluster membership: phonological processing, writing fluency, math calculation, math fluency, and reading efficiency and comprehension. Results also demonstrated that word reading proficiency at pretest was related to response to intervention on reading comprehension measures. Students in the very low word reading proficiency cluster showed minimal response to intervention whereas the near-adequate word reading cluster demonstrated greatest response to intervention. These results suggest word reading is a critical predictor of response to intervention for students with significant comprehension problems in the upper elementary grades and that students with the most substantial word reading problems may require more intensive and specialized treatments than students with greater word reading performance to show meaningful progress in reading.

The Importance of Baseline Word Reading Skills in Examining Student Response to a Multicomponent Reading Intervention

“…Wanzek and colleagues (2017) reported that fourth-grade students with reading difficulties’ baseline word recognition scores moderated the association between treatment assignment and posttest reading comprehension scores; treatment group students who began the intervention with higher word recognition scores made greater gains in reading comprehension compared to peers with lower word recognition scores at baseline. Other recent studies have also corroborated these findings (Vaughn et al, 2019, 2020). In their study, the authors (Vaughn et al, 2020) reported that students identified as very low word readers (Standard score < 80) made significantly less growth compared to adequate word readers (Standard score > 90) on three end-of-year standardized reading comprehension measures.…”

“…Other recent studies have also corroborated these findings (Vaughn et al, 2019, 2020). In their study, the authors (Vaughn et al, 2020) reported that students identified as very low word readers (Standard score < 80) made significantly less growth compared to adequate word readers (Standard score > 90) on three end-of-year standardized reading comprehension measures.…”

“…Evidence from past studies align with these theoretical frameworks (Gough & Tunmer, 1986; Perfetti, 1992) and suggest that students’ performance on word reading measures in early grades predicts their reading comprehension in later grades (e.g., Stanley et al, 2018; Tighe et al, 2015). Similarly, results from intervention studies demonstrate that students’ relative performance on word reading measures may be the best predictor of their response to MCRIs (e.g., Vaughn et al, 2019, 2020; Wanzek et al, 2017).…”

Promoting understanding of measurement and statistical investigation among second-grade students with mathematics difficulties.

“…However, recent explorations into initial skill status and intervention response have shown incongruous results. For example, some studies have found students with lower initial skills benefit most from academic interventions (Clarke et al, 2019), whereas others have shown differential response benefiting students with higher pretest achievement (Vaughn et al, 2019). Conversely, findings from other research point to no moderation effects by initial skill levels (Fuchs et al, 2019).…”

How you read affects what you gain: Individual differences in the functional organization of the reading system predict intervention gains in children with reading disabilities.

“…The second category tied response to intervention to well-established linguistic correlates of reading, such as performance in tasks measuring phonological awareness (e.g., Torgesen et al, 1999); vocabulary skills (e.g., Lovett et al, 2017); and rapid naming (e.g., Scheltinga et al, 2010). Finally, some studies examined the predictive power of basic early reading skills (reflecting severity of reading difficulties at baseline), including preintervention word reading skills (e.g., Vaughn et al, 2020). Generally speaking, meta-analyses and systematic reviews of predictors of individual-level responsiveness have likewise focused on these three categories of measures (e.g., Al Otaiba & Fuchs, 2002; Stuebing et al, 2015).…”