Tier 3 interventions are necessary for improving the reading performance of students who fail to respond adequately to Tier 1 general education instruction and Tier 2 supplemental reading intervention. In this pilot study, we identified 8 students in 3rd and 4th grade who had demonstrated slow response to Tier 2 reading interventions for three years. Students participated in a researcher–developed Tier 3 intervention for 8 weeks that focused on skill development in word analysis, word identification, and reading rate. In the 6 months prior to Tier 3, students were making minimal growth in reading; however, during Tier 3, the 8 students demonstrated strong growth on measures of word identification and reading rate. Although results are promising for poor readers who are difficult to remediate, several aspects of the Tier 3 intervention need further testing.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Al OtaibaS., ConnorS.M., FolsomJ.S., WanzekJ., GreulichL., SchatschneiderC., & WagnerR. (2014). To wait in Tier 1 or intervene immediately: A randomized experiment examining first–grade response to intervention in reading. Exceptional Children, 81, 11–27. doi: 10.1177/0014402914532234.
2.
BeachK.D., & O'ConnorR.E. (2014). Developing and strengthening reading fluency and comprehension of poor readers in elementary school: A focused review of research. Perspectives on Language and Literacy. Summer 2014, 17–19.
3.
BeckI., & HamiltonR. (2000). Beginning reading module. Washington, DC: American Federation of Teachers.
4.
ChallJ.S. (1983). Stages of reading development. New York: McGraw–Hill.
5.
ComptonD.L., FuchsD., FuchsL. & BryantJ. (2006). Selecting at–risk readers in first grade for early intervention: A two–year longitudinal study of decision rules and procedures. Journal of Educational Psychology, 98(2), 394–409. doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.98.2.394
6.
ComptonD.L., GilbertJ.K., JenkinsJ.R., FuchsD., FuchsL.S., ChoE.,... BoutonB. (2012). Accelerating chronically unresponsive children to Tier 3 instruction: What level of data is necessary to ensure selection accuracy?Journal of Learning Disabilities, 45, 204–216. doi: 10.1177/0022219412442151
7.
CoyneM.D., Kame'enuiE.J., SimmonsD.C., & HarnB.A. (2004). Beginning reading intervention as inoculation or insulin: First–grade reading performance of strong responders to kindergarten intervention. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 37, 90–104. doi: 10.1177/00222194040370020101
8.
DentonC. A. (2012). Response to intervention for reading difficulties in the primary grades: Some answers and lingering questions. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 45(3), 232–243. doi: 10.1177/0022219412442155
9.
DentonC. A., TolarT. D., FletcherJ. M., BarthA. E., VaughnS., & FrancisD. J. (2013). Effects of Tier 3 intervention for students with persistent reading difficulties and characteristics of inadequate responders. Journal of Educational Psychology, 105(3), 633–648. doi: 10.1037/a0032581
10.
DunnL., & DunnL. (1997). Peabody picture vocabulary test (3rd ed.). Circle Pines, MN: American Guidance Services.
11.
ElbaumB., VaughnS., HughesM., & MoodyS. (1999). Grouping practices and reading outcomes for students with disabilities. Exceptional Children, 65, 399–415.
12.
ElbaumB., VaughnS., HughesM., & MoodyS. (2000). How effective are one–to–one peer tutoring programs in reading for elementary students at risk for reading failure? A meta–analysis of the intervention research. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92, 605–619. doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.92.4.605
13.
FuchsL. S., FuchsD., & ComptonD. L. (2004). Monitoring early reading development in first grade: Word identification fluency versus nonsense word fluency. Exceptional Children, 71, 7–21. doi: 10.1177/001440290407100101
14.
FuchsD., FuchsL.S., & ComptonD.L. (2004). Identifying reading disabilities by responsiveness to instruction: Specifying measures and criteria. Learning Disability Quarterly, 27, 216–228.
15.
GaskinsI.W., DownerM. A., AndersonR. C., CunninghamP. M., GaskinsR. W., SchommerM. (1988). A metacognitive approach to phonics: Using what you know to decode what you don't know. Remedial and Special Education, 9, 36–41. doi: 10.1177/074193258800900107
16.
GlassG. G. (1973). Teaching decoding as separate from reading: Freeing reading from non–reading to the advantage of both. Garden City, NY: Adelphi University Press.
17.
GoodR. H., KaminskiR. A., & DillS. (2002). DIBELS oral reading fluency. In GoodR. H. & KaminskiR. A. (Eds.), Dynamic indicators of basic early literacy skills (6th ed.), 30–38. Eugene, OR: Institute for the Development of Educational Achievement.
18.
HernandezD.J. (2011). Double jeopardy: How third–grade reading skills and poverty influence high school graduation. Baltimore, MD: The Annie E. Casey Foundation.
19.
KeenanJ.M., & BetjemannR.S. (2006). Comprehending the Gray Oral Reading Test without reading it: Why comprehension tests should not include passage–independent items. Scientific Studies of Reading, 10, 363–380. doi: 10.1207/s1532799xssr1004_2
20.
KeenanJ.M., BetjemannR.S., & OlsonR.K. (2008). Reading comprehension tests vary in the skills they assess: Differential dependence on decoding and oral comprehension. Scientific Studies of Reading, 12, 281–300.doi: 10.1080/10888430802132279
21.
LenzB. K., & HughesC. A. (1990). A word identification strategy for adolescents with learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 23, 149–158. doi: 10.1177/002221949002300304
22.
Linan–ThompsonS., CirinoP.T. & VaughnS. (2007). Determining English language learners’ response to intervention: Questions and some answers. Learning Disability Quarterly, 30, 185–195. doi: 10.2307/30035563
23.
LloydJ.W., FornessS.R., & KavaleK.A. (1998). Some methods are more effective than others. Intervention in School and Clinic, 33, 195–200. doi: 10.1177/105345129803300401
24.
LovettM.W., LacerenzaL., & BordenS.L. (2000). Putting struggling readers on the PHAST track: A program to integrate phonological and strategy–based remedial reading instruction and maximize outcomes. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 33, 458–476. doi: 10.1177/002221940003300507
25.
MarkellM.A., & DenoS.L. (1997). Effects of increasing oral reading: Generalization across reading tasks. Journal of Special Education, 31, 233–250. doi: 10.1177/002246699703100205
26.
McMasterK. L., FuchsD., FuchsL.S., ComptonD. L. (2005). Responding to nonresponders: An experimental field trial of identification and intervention methods. Exceptional Children, 71(4), 445–463. doi: 10.1177/001440290507100404
27.
No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, P.L. 107–110, 20 U.S.C. (2002). O'ConnorR.E. (2000). Increasing the intensity of intervention in kindergarten and first grade. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 15, 43–54. doi: 10.1207/SLDRP1501_5
28.
O'ConnorR. E. (2007). Teaching word recognition: Effective strategies for students with learning difficulties. New Yo rk, NY: The Guilford Press.
29.
O'ConnorR.E., BocianK.M., BeachK.D., SanchezV., & FlynnL.J. (2013). Special education in a four–year response to intervention (RtI) environment: Characteristics of students with learning disability and grade of identification. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 28, 98–112. doi: 10.1111/ldrp.12013
30.
O'ConnorR. E., BocianK., Beebe–FrankenbergerM., & LinklaterD. (2010). Responsiveness of students with language difficulties to early intervention in reading. Journal of Special Education, 43(4), 220–235. doi: 10.1177/0022466908317789
31.
O'ConnorR.E., BocianK., SanchezV. & BeachK. (2014). Access to a Responsiveness to Intervention model: Does beginning intervention in kindergarten matter?Journal of Learning Disabilities, 47, 307–328. doi: 10.1177/0022219412459354
32.
O'ConnorR.E., FulmerD., HartyK., & BellK. (2005). Layers of reading intervention in kindergarten through third Grade: Changes in teaching and child outcomes. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 38, 440–455. doi: 10.1177/00222194050380050701
33.
O'ConnorR.E., & KlingnerJ. (2010). Poor responders in RTI. Theory Into Practice, 49, 297–304. doi: 10.1080/00405841.2010.510758
34.
O'ConnorR.E., & SanchezV. (2011). Issues in assessment for intervention in implementation of responsiveness to intervention. In ScruggsT. & MastropieriM. (Eds.), Advances in learning and behavioral disabilities, Vol. 24: Assessment and Intervention (pp. 149–170). UK: Emerald.
35.
O'ConnorR.E., WhiteA., & SwansonH. L. (2007). Repeated reading versus continuous reading: Influences on reading fluency and comprehension. Exceptional Children, 74(1), 31–46. doi: 10.1177/001440290707400102
36.
PollowayE.A., CroninM.F., & PattonJ.R. (1986). The efficacy of group versus one–to–one instruction: A review. Remedial and Special Education, 7(1), 22–30. doi: 10.1177/074193258600700106
37.
RackJ. P., SnowlingM. J., & OlsonR. K. (1992). The nonword reading deficit in developmental dyslexia: A review. Reading Research Quarterly, 27, 29–53.doi: 10.2307/747832
38.
ShawR., & ShawD. (2002). DIBELS oral reading fluency–based indicators of third grade reading skills for Colorado State Assessment Program (CSAP) (Technical Report). Eugene, OR: University of Oregon.
39.
SimmonsD.C., CoyneM.D., KwokO., McDonaghS., HarnB.A., & Kame'enuiE.J. (2008). Indexing response to intervention: A longitudinal study of reading risk from kindergarten through third grade. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 41, 158–173. doi: 10.1177/0022219407313587
40.
SpeeceD.L., & CaseL.P. (2001). Classification in context: An alternative approach to identifying early reading disability. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93(4), 735–749.doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.93.4.735
41.
SwansonH.L., HoskynM., & LeeC. (1999). Interventions for students with learning disabilities: A meta–analysis of treatment outcomes. New York: Guilford.
42.
TherrienW.J. (2004). Fluency and comprehension gains as a result of repeated reading: A meta–analysis. Remedial and Special Education, 25(4), 252–261.doi:0.1177/07419325040250040801
43.
ThurlowM.L., YsseldykeJ.F., WotrubaJ.W., & AlgozzineB. (1993). Instruction in special education classrooms under varying student–teacher ratios. The Elementary School Journal, 93, 305–320.
44.
TorgesenJ.K. (2000). Individual differences in response to early interventions in reading: The lingering problem of treatment resisters. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 15, 55–64.doi: 10.1207/SLDRP1501_6
45.
TorgesenJ.K., AlexanderA.W., & WagnerR.K. (2001). Intensive remedial instruction for children with severe reading disabilities: Immediate and long–term outcomes from two instructional approaches. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 34, 33–58. doi: 10.1177/002221940103400104
46.
TosteJ.R., ComptonD.L., FuchsD., FuchsL.S., GilbertJ.K., ChoE., & BoutonB.D. (2014). Understanding unresponsiveness to Tier 2 reading intervention: Exploring the classification and profiles of adequate and inadequate responders in first grade. Learning Disability Quarterly, 37, 192–203. doi: 10.1177/0731948713518336
47.
VaughnS., GerstenR., & ChardD. (2000). The underlying message in LD intervention research: Findings from research syntheses. Exceptional Children, 67, 99–114. doi: 10.1177/001440290006700107
48.
VaughnS., HughesM.T., MoodyS.W., & ElbaumB. (2001). Instructional grouping for reading for students with learning disabilities: Implications for practice. Intervention in School and Clinic, 36(3), 131–137. doi: 10.1177/105345120103600301
49.
VaughnS. & WanzekJ. (2014). Intensive interventions in reading for students with reading disabilities: Meaningful impacts. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 29, 46–53.
50.
WanzekJ., & VaughnS. (2007). Research–based implications from extensive early reading interventions. School Psychology Review, 36, 541–561.
51.
WanzekJ. & VaughnS. (2010). Tier 3 interventions for students with significant reading problems. Theory Into Practice, 49, 305–314. doi: 10.1080/00405841.2010.510759
52.
WanzekJ., VaughnS., ScammaccaN. K., MetzK., MurrayC. S., RobertsG., & DanielsonL. (2013). Extensive reading interventions for students with reading difficulties after grade 3. Review of Educational Research, 83(2), 163–195. doi: 10.3102/0034654313477212
53.
WanzekJ., WexlerJ., VaughnS., & CiulloS. (2010). Reading interventions for struggling readers in the upper elementary grades: A synthesis of 20 years of research. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 23(8), 889–912. doi: 10.1007/s11145-009-9179-5
54.
WechslerD. (2011). Wechsler Abbreviated Scale of Intelligence. San An tonio, TX: Harcourt Assessment Inc.
