This investigation examined the impact of preintervention word–reading ability on reading comprehension outcomes for ninth graders with learning disabilities, reading difficulties, and English learners in treatment and comparison conditions. Secondary data analyses were conducted for two separate but related experimental studies of intensive reading interventions. Both studies provided yearlong intensive reading interventions to ninth graders. The study included replication of a post hoc analysis employed in a previous study of ninth graders who also received 1 year of intervention. Results from both studies demonstrated that the effects of treatment were not moderated by decoding level for reading comprehension. Statistically significant effects of verbal ability were found. These findings suggest the effectiveness of intervention and that higher verbal skills improve students’ comprehension, though the effects were more pronounced for Study One than Study Two.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
ArcherA. L., GleasonM. M., & VachonV. L. (2014). REWARDS secondary (3rd ed.). Cambium Learning Group Sopris Learning.
2.
BakerS., LesauxN., JayanthiM., DiminoJ., ProctorC. P., MorrisJ., GerstenR., HaymondK., KiefferM. J., Linan–ThompsonS., & Newman–GoncharR. (2014). Teaching academic content and literacy to English learners in elementary and middle school. IES practice guide (NCEE 2014–4012). What Works Clearinghouse.
3.
Brasseur–HockI. F., HockM. F., KiefferM. J., BiancarosaG., & DeshlerD. D. (2011). Adolescent struggling readers in urban schools: Results of a latent class analysis. Learning and Individual Differences, 21(4), 438–452. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2011.01.008
4.
CervettiG. N., PearsonP. D., PalincsarA. S., AfflerbachP., KendeouP., BiancarosaG., HiggsJ., FitzgeraldM. S., BermanA. I., & BermanA. I. (2020). How the Reading for Understanding initiative's research complicates the simple view of reading invoked in the science of reading. Reading Research Quarterly, 55(1), S161–S172. doi:10.1002/rrq.343
5.
CheungA. C., & SlavinR. E. (2012). Effective reading programs for Spanish–dominant English language learners (ELLs) in the elementary grades: A synthesis of research. Review of Educational Research, 82(4), 351–395. http://doi.org/10.3102/0034654312465472
6.
ChoE., CapinP., RobertsG., RobertsG. J., & VaughnS. (2019). Examining sources and mechanisms of reading comprehension difficulties: Comparing English learners and non–English learners within the simple view of reading. Journal of Educational Psychology, 111(6), 982. doi:10.1037/edu0000332
7.
CirinoP. T., RomainM. A., BarthA. E., TolarT. D., FletcherJ. M., & VaughnS. (2013). Reading skill components and impairments in middle school struggling readers. Reading and Writing, 26(7), 1059–1086. http://doi.org/10.1007/s11145–012–9406–3
8.
ClemensN. H., OslundE., KwokO. M., FogartyM., SimmonsD., & DavisJ. L. (2019). Skill moderators of the effects of a reading comprehension intervention. Exceptional Children, 85(2), 197–211. http://doi.org/10.1177/0014402918787339
9.
CoyneM. D., CookB. G., & TherrienW. J. (2016). Recommendations for replication research in special education: A framework of systematic, conceptual replications. Remedial and Special Education, 37(4), 244–253. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741932516648463
10.
EdmondsM. S., VaughnS., WexlerJ., ReutebuchC., CableA., TackettK. K., & SchnakenbergJ. W. (2009). A synthesis of reading interventions and effects on reading comprehension outcomes for older struggling readers. Review of Educational Research, 79(1), 262–300. http://doi.org/10.3102/0034654308325998
11.
FogartyM., ClemensN., SimmonsD., AndersonL., DavisJ., SmithA., WangH., KwokO. L., SimmonsL. E., & OslundE. (2017). Impact of a technology–mediated reading intervention on adolescents’ reading comprehension. Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, 10(2), 326–353.
12.
FoormanB. R., PetscherY., & HerreraS. (2018). Unique and common effects of decoding and language factors in predicting reading comprehension in grades 1–10. Learning and Individual Differences, 63, 12–23. doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2018.02.011
13.
FoormanB. R., WuY. C., QuinnJ. M., & PetscherY. (2020). How do latent decoding and language predict latent reading comprehension: Across two years in grades 5, 7, and 9?Reading and Writing, 33(9), 2281–2309. http://doi.org/10.1007/s11145–020–10043–3
HallC., RobertsG. J., ChoE., McCulleyL. V., CarrollM., & VaughnS. (2017). Reading instruction for English learners in the middle grades: A meta–analysis. Educational Psychology Review, 29(4), 763–794. http://doi.org/10.1007/s10648–016–9372–4
16.
HarrisM. L., SchumakerJ. B., & DeshlerD. D. (2011). The effects of strategic morphological analysis instruction on the vocabulary performance of secondary students with and without disabilities. Learning Disability Quarterly, 34(1), 17–33. http://doi.org/10.1177/073194871103400102
HerreraS., TruckenmillerA. J., FoormanB. R. (2016). Summary of 20 years of research on the effectiveness of adolescent literacy programs and practices. U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Regional Educational Laboratory Southeast. Retrieved from http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/edlabs
19.
HockM. F., BrasseurI. F., DeshlerD. D., CattsH. W., MarquisJ. G., MarkC. A., & StriblingJ. W. (2009). What is the reading component skill profile of adolescent struggling readers in urban schools?Learning Disability Quarterly, 32(1), 21–38. http://doi.org/10.2307/25474660
HooverW. A., & TunmerW. E. (2018). The simple view of reading: Three assessments of its adequacy. Remedial and Special Education, 39(5), 304–312. http://doi.org/10.1177/0741932518773154
22.
KaufmanA. S., & KaufmanN. L. (2004). Kaufman brief intelligence test (2nd ed., K–BIT–2). Pearson Assessment.
23.
KendeouP., Van den BroekP., WhiteM. J., & LynchJ. S. (2009). Predicting reading comprehension in early elementary school: The independent contributions of oral language and decoding skills. Journal of Educational Psychology, 101(4), 765. http://doi.org/10.1037/a0015956
24.
KimY.S.G. (2017). Why the simple view of reading is not simplistic: Unpacking component skills of reading using a direct and indirect effect model of reading (DIER). Scientific Studies of Reading, 21(4), 310–333. doi:10.1080/10888438.2017.1291643
LangL., TorgesenJ., VogelW., ChanterC., LefskyE., & PetscherY. (2009). Exploring the relative effectiveness of reading interventions for high school students. Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, 2(2), 149–175. http://doi.org/10.1080/19345740802641535
27.
LefskyE. B. (2004). The effect of text set use in the secondary content classroom on adolescent literacy achievement and self–efficacy. In Annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Diego, CA.
28.
LiM., GevaE., D'AngeloN., KohP. W., ChenX., & GottardoA. (2021). Exploring sources of poor reading comprehension in English language learners. Annals of Dyslexia, 71(2), 299–321. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11881–021–00214–4
29.
LoniganC. J., & BurgessS. R. (2017). Dimensionality of reading skills with elementary–school–age children. Scientific Studies of Reading, 21(3), 239–253. https://doi.org/10.1080/10888.438.2017.1285918
30.
LoniganC. J., BurgessS. R., & SchatschneiderC. (2018). Examining the simple view of reading with elementary school children: Still simple after all these years. Remedial and Special Education, 39(5), 260–273. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741932518764833
31.
MacGinitieW. H., MacGinitieR. K., MariaK., DreyerL., & HughesK. E. (2000). GMRT manual for scoring and interpretation. Riverside Publishing.
32.
McCallumR. S., KrohnK. R., SkinnerC. H., Hilton–PrillhartA., HopkinsM., WallerS., & PoliteF. (2011). Improving reading comprehension of at–risk high–school students: The ART of reading program. Psychology in the Schools, 48(1), 78–86. http://doi.org/10.1002/pits.20541
Richards–TutorC., BakerD. L., GerstenR., BakerS. K., & SmithJ. M. (2016). The effectiveness of reading interventions for English learners: A research synthesis. Exceptional Children, 82(2), 144–169. http://doi.org/10.1177/0014402915585483
ScammaccaN. K., RobertsG. J., ChoE., WilliamsK. J., RobertsG., VaughnS. R., & CarrollM. (2016). A century of progress: Reading interventions for students in grades 4–12, 1914–2014. Review of Educational Research, 86(3), 756–800.
37.
ScammaccaN. K., RobertsG., VaughnS., & StuebingK. K. (2015). A meta–analysis of interventions for struggling readers in grades 4–12: 1980–2011. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 48(4), 369–390. http://doi.org/10.1177/0022219413504995
38.
SolisM., VaughnS., & ScammaccaN. (2015). The effects of an intensive reading intervention for ninth graders with very low reading comprehension. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 30, 104–113. https://doi.org/10.1111/ldrp.12061
39.
SolisM., VaughnS., Stillman–SpisakS., & ChoE. (2018). Effects of reading comprehension and vocabulary intervention on comprehension related outcomes for ninth graders with low reading comprehension. Reading and Writing Quarterly, 34(6) 537–553. http://doi.org/10.1080/10573569.2018.1499059
40.
TherrienW. J., MathewsH. M., HirschS. E., & SolisM. (2016). Progeny review: An alternative approach for examining the replication of intervention studies in special education. Remedial and Special Education, 37(4), 235–243. doi:10.1177/0741932516646081
41.
TorgesenJ. K., WagnerR. K., & RashotteC. A. (2012). Test of word reading efficiency. Pro–Ed.
42.
VaughnS., & FletcherJ. M. (2012). Response to intervention with secondary school students with reading difficulties. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 45(3), 244–256. http://doi.org/10.1177/0022219412442157
43.
VaughnS., CapinP., ScammaccaN., RobertsG., CirinoP., & FletcherJ. M. (2020). The critical role of word reading as a predictor of response to intervention. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 53(6), 415–427. http://doi.org/10.1177/0022219419891412
44.
VaughnS., MartinezL. R., WilliamsK. J., MiciakJ., FallA. M., & RobertsG. (2019). Efficacy of a high school extensive reading intervention for English learners with reading difficulties. Journal of Educational Psychology, 111(3), 373. http://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000289
45.
VaughnS., RobertsG., CapinP., MiciakJ., ChoE., & FletcherJ. M. (2019). How initial word reading and language skills affect reading comprehension outcomes for students with reading difficulties. Exceptional Children, 85(2), 180–196. http://doi.org/10.1177/0014402918782618
46.
VaughnS., RobertsG., WexlerJ., VaughnM. G., FallA. M., & SchnakenbergJ. B. (2015). High school students with reading comprehension difficulties: Results of a randomized control trial of a two–year reading intervention. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 48(5), 546–558. http://doi.org/10.1177/0022219413515511
47.
VellutinoF. R., TunmerW. E., JaccardJ. J., & ChenR. (2007). Components of reading ability: Multivariate evidence for a convergent skills model of reading development. Scientific Studies of Reading, 11(1), 3–32. https://doi.org/10.1080/10888430709336632
48.
WagnerR. K., TorgesenJ. K., RashotteC. A., & PearsonN. A. (2010). Test of silent reading efficiency and comprehension. Pro–Ed.
49.
WangZ., SabatiniJ., O'ReillyT., & WeeksJ. (2019). Relation between decoding and reading comprehension: A test of the decoding threshold hypothesis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 111(3), 387–401. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/edu0000302
50.
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. http://doi.org/10.3102/0034654313477212
51.
WilliamsK. J., & VaughnS. (2020). Effects of an intensive reading intervention for ninth–grade English learners with learning disabilities. Learning Disability Quarterly, 43(3), 154–166. http://doi.org/10.1177/0731948719851745
52.
WoodcockR. W., McGrewK. S., SchrankF. A., & MatherN. (2007). Woodcock–Johnson tests of cognitive abilities—Third edition normative Update. Riverside.
