Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Individual and group sensitivity to remedial reading program design: examining reading gains across three middle school reading projects

  • Published:
Reading and Writing Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The purpose of this project was to examine group- and individual-level responses by struggling adolescents readers (6th–8th grades; N = 155) to three different modalities of the same reading program, Reading Achievement Multi-Component Program. The three modalities differ in the combination of reading components (phonological decoding, spelling, fluency, comprehension) that are taught and their organization. Latent change scores were used to examine changes in phonological decoding, fluency, and comprehension for each modality at the group level. In addition, individual students were classified as gainers versus non-gainers (a reading level increase of a year or more vs. less than 1 year) so that characteristics of gainers and differential sensitivity to instructional modality could be investigated. Findings from both group and individual analyses indicated that reading outcomes were related to modalities of reading instruction. Furthermore, differences in reading gains were seen between students who began treatment with higher reading scores than those with lower reading scores; dependent on modality of treatment. Results, examining group and individual analyses similarities and differences, and the effect the different modalities have on reading outcomes for older struggling readers will be discussed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84(2), 191–215.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bear, D. R., & Templeton, S. (1998). Explorations in developmental spelling: Foundations for learning and teaching phonics, spelling, and vocabulary. The Reading Teacher, 52(3), 222–242.

    Google Scholar 

  • Benjamini, Y., & Hochberg, Y. (1995). Controlling the false discovery rate: A practical and powerful approach to multiple testing. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, 57(1), 289–300. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/2346101.

  • Bentler, P. M. (1990). Comparative fit indexes in structural models. Psychological Bulletin, 107, 238–246.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bentler, P. M., & Bonnet, D. C. (1980). Significance tests and goodness of fit in the analysis of covariance structures. Psychological Bulletin, 88, 588–606.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Biancarosa, G., & Snow, C. E. (2004). Reading next: A vision for action and research in middle and high school literacy. A report to the Carnegie Corporation of New York. Washington, DC: Alliance for Excellent Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Browne, M. W., & Cudeck, R. (1992). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. Sociological Methods and Research, 21, 230–258.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Calhoon, M. B. (2003). Reading Achievement Multi-Component Program (RAMP-UP). Unpublished adolescent remedial reading program.

  • Calhoon, M. B. (2005). Effects of a peer-mediated phonological skill and reading comprehension program on reading skill acquisition of middle school students with reading disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 38, 424–433.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Calhoon, M. B. (2006). Rethinking adolescent literacy instruction. Perspectives on Language and Literacy, 32(3), 31–35.

    Google Scholar 

  • Calhoon, M. B. (2013). Delivering reading instruction to adolescent struggling readers using two versions of the Reading Achievement Multi-component Program (RAMP-UP): Does modality matter. Manuscript is progress.

  • Calhoon, M. B., Sandow, A., & Hunter, V. (2010). Re-organizing the instructional reading components: Could there be a better way to modality remedial reading programs to maximize middle school students with reading disabilities’ response to treatment? Annals of Dyslexia, 60, 57–85.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carnine, D. W., Silbert, J., & Kameenui, E. J. (1997). Direct instruction reading (3rd ed.). Colombus, OH: Merrill Publishing Co.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chard, D. J., & Osborn, J. (1999). Phonics and word recognition and instruction in early reading programs: Guidelines for accessibility. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 14(2), 107–117. doi:10.1207/sldrp1402_4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Curtis, M. (2004). Adolescents who struggle with word identification: Research and practice. In T. Jetton & J. Dole (Eds.), Adolescent literacy research and practice. New York: Guilford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Curtis, M. E., & Longo, A. M. (1999). When adolescents can’t read: Methods and materials that work. Cambridge, MA: Brookline Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cutting, L. E., & Scarborough, H. S. (2006). Prediction of reading comprehension: Relative contributions of word recognition, language proficiency, and other cognitive skills can depend on how comprehension is measured. Scientific Studies of Reading, 10(3), 277–299.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dole, J. A., Duffy, G. G., Roehler, L. R., & Pearson, P. D. (1991). Moving from the old to the new: Research on reading comprehension instruction. Review of Educational Research, 61(2), 239–264. doi:10.3102/00346543061002239.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dowhower, S. L. (1994). Repeated reading revisited: Research into practice. Reading and Writing Quarterly: Overcoming Learning Disabilities, 10, 343–358.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Edmonds, M. S., Vaughn, S., Wexler, J., Reutebuch, C., Cable, A., Tackett, K. K., et al. (2009). A synthesis of reading interventions and effects on reading comprehension outcomes for older struggling readers. Review of Educational Research, 79, 262–300.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ehri, L. C. (1992). Reconceptualizing the development of sight word reading and its relationship to recoding. In P. B. Gough, L. C. Ehri, & R. Treiman (Eds.), Reading acquisition (pp. 107–143). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ehri, L. C. (2000). Learning to read and learning to spell: Two sides of a coin. Topics in Language Disorders, 20(3), 19036.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Enders, C. K. (2010). Applied missing data analysis. New York: Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fletcher, J. M., Denton, C. A., Fuchs, L. S., & Vaughn, S. R. (2005). Multi-tiered reading instruction: Linking general education and special education. In J. Gilger & S. Richardson (Eds.), Research-based education and intervention: What we need to know. Baltimore, MD: International Dyslexia Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fletcher, J. M., Shaywitz, S. E., Shankweiler, D. P., Katz, L., Lieberman, L. Y., Stuebing, K. K., et al. (1994). Cognitive profiles of reading disabilities: Comparisons of discrepancy and low achievement definitions. Journal of Educational Psychology, 86, 6–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., & Kazdan, S. (1999). Effects of peer-assisted learning strategies on high school students with serious reading problems. Remedial and Special Education, 20(5), 309–318.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hasselbring, T. S., & Goin, L. I. (2004). Literacy instruction for older struggling readers: What is the role of technology? Reading &Writing Quarterly, 20(2), 123–144.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hock, M. F., Brasseur, I. F., Deshler, D. D., Catts, H. W., Marquis, J., Mark, C. A., et al. (2009). What is the reading component skill profile of adolescent struggling readers in urban schools? Learning Disability Quarterly, 32, 21–38.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jaffe, L. E. (2009). Development, interpretation, and application of the W score and the relative proficiency index (Woodcock-Johnson III Assessment Service Bulletin No. 11). Rolling Meadows, IL: Riverside Publishing.

  • Juel, C., & Roper/Schneider, D. (1985). The influence of basal readers on first grade reading. Reading Research Quarterly, 20(2), 134–152.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kelman, M. E., & Apel, K. (2004). Effects of a multiple linguistic and prescriptive approach to spelling instruction: A case study. Communication Disorders Quarterly, 25(2), 56–66.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • King, L. A., King, D. W., McArdle, J. J., Saxe, G. N., Doron-LaMarca, S., & Orazem, R. J. (2006). Latent difference score approach to longitudinal trauma research. Journal of Traumatic Stress, 19, 771–785.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • LaBerge, D., & Samuels, S. J. (1974). Toward a theory of automatic processing in reading. Cognitive Psychology, 6, 293–323.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lovett, M. W., Borden, S. L., DeLuca, T., Lacerenza, L., Benson, N. J., & Brackstone, D. (1994). Treating the core deficits of developmental dyslexia: Evidence of transfer of learning after phononlogically- and strategy- based reading training programs. Developmental Psychology, 30(6), 805–822.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lovett, M. W., Lacerenza, L., Borden, S. L., Frijters, J. C., Steinbach, K. A., & De Palma, M. (2000a). Components of effective remediation for developmental reading disabilities: Combining phonological and strategy-based instruction to improve outcomes. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92(2), 263–283. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.92.2.263.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lovett, M. W., & Steinbach, K. A. (1997). The effectiveness of remedial programs for reading disabled children of different ages: Does the benefit decrease for older children? Learning Disability Quarterly, 20, 189–210.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lovett, M. W., Steinbach, K. A., & Frijters, J. C. (2000b). Remediating the core deficits of developmental reading disability: A double-deficit perspective. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 33(4), 334–358. doi:10.1177/002221940003300406.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MacCallum, R. C., Browne, M. W., & Sugawara, H. M. (1996). Power analysis and determination of sample size for covariance structure modeling. Psychological Methods, 1, 130–149.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Masterson, J. J., & Crede, L. A. (1999). Learning to spell: Implications for assessment and intervention. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 30, 243–254.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mastropieri, M. A., Scruggs, T. E., Bakken, J. P., & Whedon, C. (1996). Reading comprehension: A synthesis of research in learning disabilities. In T. E. Scruggs & M. A. Mastropieri (Eds.), Advances in learning and behavioral disabilities (pp. 277–303). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mastropieri, M. A., Scruggs, T. E., Mohler, L. J., Beranek, M. L., Spencer, V., Boon, R. T., et al. (2001). Can middle school students with serious reading difficulties help each other and learn anything? Learning Disabilities: Research and Practice, 16(1), 18–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mathes, P. G., Howard, J. K., Allen, S. H., & Fuchs, D. (1998). Peer-assisted learning strategies for first-grade readers: Responding to the needs of diverse learners. Reading Research Quarterly, 33(1), 62–94. doi:10.1598/RRQ.33.1.4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McArdle, J. J. (2001). A latent difference score approach to longitudinal dynamic structural analyses. In R. Cudeck, S. du Toit, & D. Sorbom (Eds.), Structural equation modeling: Present and future (pp. 342–380). Lincolnwood, IL: Scientific Software International.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mehta, P. D., Foorman, B. R., Branum-Martin, L., & Taylor, W. P. (2005). Literacy as a unidimensional multilevel construct: Validation, sources of influence, and implications in a longitudinal study in grades 1–4. Scientific Study of Reading, 9(2), 85–116.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meichenbaum, D. (1977). Cognitive behaviour modification. Scandinavian Journal Behaviour Therapy, 6(4), 185–192. doi:10.1080/16506073.1977.9626708.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nation, K., Snowling, J. J., & Clarke, P. (2007). Dissecting the relationship between language skills and learning to read: Semantic and phonological contribution to new vocabulary learning children with poor reading comprehension. Advances in Speech-Language Pathology, 9, 131–139.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • National Reading Panel (NRP)—Report of the Subgroups. (2000). Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction. Washington, DC: National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NIH Pub. No. 004754).

  • Olson, R. K., Wise, B., Ring, J., & Johnson, M. (1997). Computer-based remedial training in phoneme awareness and phonological decoding: Effects on the posttraining development of word recognition. Scientific Studies of Reading, 1(3), 235–254.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • RAND Reading Study Group. (2002). Reading for understanding; Toward an R&D program in reading comprehension. Santa Monica, CA: RAND. Retrieved August, 2007, from http://www.rand.org/multi/achievementforall/reading/readreport.html.

  • Reynolds, R. E. (2000). Attentional resource emancipation: Toward understanding the interaction of word identification and comprehension processes in reading. Scientific Studies of Reading, 4(3), 169–195.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roberts, G., Torgesen, J. K., Boardman, A., & Scammacca, N. (2008). Evidence-based strategies for reading instruction of older students with learning disabilities. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 23(2), 63–69.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sabatini, J. P. (2002). Efficiency in word reading of adults: Ability group comparisons. Scientific Studies of Reading, 6(3), 267–298.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Samuels, S. J., & Kamil, M. L. (1984). Models of the reading process. In P. D. Pearson, R. Barr, M. L. Kamil, & P. Mosenthal (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (pp. 185–224). New York: Longman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Savage, J. (2006). Sound it out! Phonics in a comprehensive reading system. Columbus, OH: Open University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scarborough, H., Sabatini, J. P., Shore, J., Cutting, L. E., Pugh, K., & Katz, L. (this issue), Meaningful Reading Gains by Adult Literacy Learner.

  • Shankweiler, D., & Lundquist, E. (1992). On the relations between learning to spell and learning to read. In R. Frost & L. Katz (Eds.), Orthography, phonology, morphology, and meaning (pp. 179–192). North Holland: Elsevier Science Publishers.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Shinn. M. M., & Shinn, M. R. (2002). AIMSweb training workbook: Administration and scoring of reading curriculum-based measurement (R-CBM) for use in general outcome measurement. NCS Pearson Assessment.

  • Stanovich, K. E., & Siegel, L. S. (1994). Phenotypic performance profile of children with reading disabilities: A regression-based test of the phonological-core variable-difference model. Journal of Educational Psychology, 86, 24–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Suggate, S. P. (2010). Why what we teach depends on when: Grade and reading intervention modality moderate effect size. Developmental Psychology, 46, 1556–1579.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Swanson, H. L. (1999a). Instructional components that predict treatment outcomes for students with learning disabilities: Support for a combined strategy and direct instruction model. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 14(3), 129–140.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Swanson, H. L. (1999b). Reading research for students with LD: A meta-analysis of intervention outcomes. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 32, 504–532.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Swanson, H. L. (2001). Research on interventions for adolescents with learning disabilities: A meta-analysis of outcomes related to higher-order processing. The Elementary School Journal, 101(3), 331–348.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Swanson, H. L., & Hoskyn, M. (1998). Experimental intervention research on students with learning disabilities: A meta-analysis of treatment outcomes. Review of Educational Research, 68(3), 277–321.

    Google Scholar 

  • Swanson, H. L., Hoskyn, M., & Lee, C. (1999). Interventions for students with learning disabilities: A meta-analysis of treatment outcome. New York, NY: The Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Swanson, H. L., Trainin, G., Necoechea, D. M., & Hammill, D. D. (2003). Rapid naming, phonological awareness, and reading: A meta-analysis of the correlation evidence. Review of Educational Research, 73(4), 407–440.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Talbott, E., Lloyd, J. W., & Tankersley, M. (1994). Effects of reading comprehension interventions for students with learning disabilities. Learning Disability Quarterly, 17, 223–232.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Templeton, S. (1983). Using the spelling/meaning connection to develop word knowledge in older students. Journal of Reading, 27(1), 8–14.

    Google Scholar 

  • Torgesen, J. K., Houston, D. D., Rissman, L. M., Decker, S. M., Roberts, G., Vaughn, S., et al. (2007). Academic literacy instruction for adolescents: A guidance document form the center on instruction. Portsmouth, NH: RMC Research Corporation, Center on Instruction.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vaughn, S., & Bos, C. S. (2012). Strategies for teaching students with learning and behavior problems. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vaughn, S., Chard, D. J., Bryant, D. P., Coleman, M., Tyler, B.-J., Linan-Thompson, S., et al. (2000). Fluency and comprehension interventions for third-grade students. Remedial and Special Education, 21(6), 321–335.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vaughn, S., Crinio, P. T., Wanzek, J., Wexler, J., Fletcher, J. M., Denton, C. D., et al. (2010a). Response to intervention for middle school struggling readers: Effects of a primary and secondary intervention. School Psychology Review, 31, 2–21.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vaughn, S., Denton, C. A., & Fletcher, J. M. (2010b). Why intensive interventions are necessary for students with severe reading difficulties. Psychology for the Schools, 47(5), 432–444. doi:10.1002/pits.20481.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vaughn, S., Wexler, J., Roberts, G., Bart, A., Cirino, P. T., Romain, M. A., et al. (2011). Effect of individualized and standardized interventions on middles school students with reading disabilities. Exceptional Children, 77(4), 391–407.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vaughn, S., Wexler, J., Leroux, A., Roberts, G., Denton, C., Barth, A., et al. (2012). Effects of intensive reading intervention for eighth-grade students with persistently inadequate response to intervention. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 45(6), 515–525.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vellutino, F. R., Tunmer, W. E., Jaccard, J. J., & Chen, R. (2007). Components of reading ability: Multivariate evidence for a convergent skills model of reading development. Scientific Studies of Reading, 11, 3–32. doi:10.1080/10888430709336632.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiederholt, J. L., & Blalock, G. (2000). Gray silent reading test. Austin: Pro-Ed.

    Google Scholar 

  • Woodcock, R. W., McGrew, K. S., & Mather, N. (2001). Woodcock-Johnson tests of achievement (3rd ed.). Itasca, IL: Riverside.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

Preparation of this manuscript was supported in part by grants from the National Institute of Children’s Health and Human Development, R03HD048988 and P50HD52120; as well as in part by the Institute of Education Sciences’ Reading for Understanding Consortium via awards to Florida State University (R305F100005).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Lehigh University, 111 Research Drive, Bethlehem, PA, 18015-4794, USA

    Mary Beth Calhoon

  2. Florida Center for Reading Research, Florida State University, 2010 Levy Ave, Suite 100, Tallahassee, FL, 32310, USA

    Yaacov Petscher

Authors
  1. Mary Beth Calhoon
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Yaacov Petscher
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mary Beth Calhoon.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Calhoon, M.B., Petscher, Y. Individual and group sensitivity to remedial reading program design: examining reading gains across three middle school reading projects. Read Writ 26, 565–592 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-013-9426-7

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-013-9426-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation