This study examined the effectiveness of a classroom teacher intervention, the Targeted Reading Intervention (TRI), in helping struggling readers in kindergarten and first grade. This intervention used biweekly literacy coaching in the general education classroom to help classroom teachers use diagnostic strategies with struggling readers in one-on-one 15-min sessions. Five schools in low-income rural counties were randomly assigned to the experimental or control group. Five struggling and five nonstruggling readers were randomly selected to participate in each experimental and control classroom. There were 34 classrooms and 276 children. Experimental children achieved better gains in letter-word identification than did control children. Significant interactions were found with word attack skills. Children in the experimental group with poor rapid naming and better phonological awareness skills progressed the most compared with the control group. The TRI appeared to be a promising classroom teacher intervention to help young struggling readers.
Al OtaibaS.FuchsD. (2002). Characteristics of children who are unresponsive to early literacy intervention: A review of the literature. Remedial and Special Education, 23, 300–316. doi:10.1177/0741932502023005050110.1177/07419325020230050501
2.
Al OtaibaS.FuchsD. (2006). Who are the young children for whom best practices in reading are ineffective? An experimental and longitudinal study. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 39, 414–431. doi:10.1177/0022219406039005040110.1177/00222194060390050401
3.
BearD. R.InvernizziM.TempletonS.JohnstonF. (2003). Words their way: Word study for phonics, vocabulary, and spelling instruction (3rd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
4.
BeckI. L. (2006). Making sense of phonics: The hows and whys. New York, NY: Guilford.
5.
BlairC.ScottK. G. (2002). Proportion of learning disabilities placements associated with low socioeconomic status: Evidence for a gradient?Journal of Special Education, 36, 14–22. doi:10.1177/0022466902036001020110.1177/00224669020360010201
6.
BowersP. G.Newby-ClarkE. (2002). The role of naming speed within a model of reading acquisition. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 15, 109–126. doi:10.1023/A:101382042119910.1023/A:1013820421199
ClayM. (1993). Reading recovery: A guidebook for teachers in training. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
9.
ConnorC. M.PiastaS. B.FishmanB.GlasneyS.SchatschneiderC.CroweE.MorrisonF. J. (2009). The early years: Algorithm-guided individualized reading instruction. Science, 26, 464–465.
10.
DencklaM. B.CuttingL. E. (1999). The history and significance of rapid automatized naming. Annals of Dyslexia, 49, 29–42. doi:10.1007/s11881-999-0018-910.1007/s11881-999-0018-9
11.
DentonC. A.FletcherJ. M.AnthonyJ. L.FrancisD. J. (2006). An evaluation of intensive intervention for students with persistent reading difficulties. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 39, 447–466. doi:10.1177/0022219406039005060110.1177/00222194060390050601
12.
DownerJ.Locasale-CouchL.HamreB.PiantaR. (2009). Teacher characteristics associated with responsiveness and exposure to consultation and online professional development resources. Early Education and Development, 20, 431–455. doi:10.1080/1040928080268862610.1080/10409280802688626
13.
ElbaumB.VaughnS.HughesM. T.MoodyS. W. (2000). How effective are one-to-one tutoring programs in reading for elementary students at risk of reading failure? A meta-analysis of the intervention research. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92, 605–619. doi:10.1037//0022-0663.92.4.60510.1037//0022-0663.92.4.605
14.
FoormanB. R. (Ed.). (2003). Preventing and remediating reading difficulties: Bringing science to scale. Timonium, MD: York Press.
15.
FoormanB. R.FrancisD. J.FletcherJ. M.SchatschneiderC.MehtaP. (1998). The role of instruction in learning to read: Preventing reading failure in at-risk children. Journal of Educational Psychology, 90, 37–55. doi:10.1037//0022-0663.90.1.3710.1037//0022-0663.90.1.37
16.
FoormanB. R.TorgesenJ. K. (2001). Critical elements of classroom and small-group instruction to promote reading success in all children. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 16, 202–211. doi:10.1111/0938-8982.0002010.1111/0938-8982.00020
17.
GaretM. S.CronenS.EatonM.KurkiA.LudwigM.JonesW. (2008). The impact of two professional development interventions on early reading instruction and achievement (Report prepared for the Institute of Education Sciences, NCEE 2008–4030).Washington, DC: Institute of Education Sciences.
18.
GerstenR.DiminoJ. A. (2006). RTI (Response to Intervention): Rethinking special education for students with reading difficulties (yet again). Reading Research Quarterly, 41, 99–108. doi:10.1598/RRQ.41.1.510.1598/RRQ.41.1.5
19.
GerstenR.MorvantM.BrengelmanS. (1995). Close to the classroom is close to the bone: Coaching as a means to translate research into classroom practice. Exceptional Children, 62, 52–66.
20.
GrahamJ. W.OlchowskiA. E.GilreathT. D. (2007). How many imputations are really needed? Some practical clarifications of multiple imputation theory. Prevention Science, 8, 206-213. doi:10.1007/s11121-007-0070-910.1007/s11121-007-0070-9
21.
HaagerD.KlingnerJ.VaughnS. (Eds.). (2007). Evidence-based reading practices for response to intervention. Baltimore, MD: Brookes.
22.
HospJ. L.ReschlyD. J. (2004). Disproportionate representation of minority students in special education: Academic, demographic, and economic predictors. Exceptional Children, 70, 185–199.
23.
LeeV. E.BurkhamD. T. (2002). Inequality at the starting gate: Social background differences in achievement as children begin school. Washington, DC: Economic Policy Institute.
24.
MoatsL. C. (1998). Teaching decoding. American Educator, 22(1 & 2), 42–49, 95–96.
25.
MorrisD.TynerB.PerneyJ. (2000). Early Steps: Replicating the effects of a first-grade reading intervention program. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92, 681–693. doi:10.1037//0022-0663.92.4.68110.1037//0022-0663.92.4.681
26.
MorrisonF. J.BachmanH. J.ConnorC. M. (2003). Improving literacy in America: Lessons from research. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
27.
NelsonJ. N.BennerG. J.GonzalezJ. (2003). Learner characteristics that influence the effectiveness of early literacy interventions: A meta-analytic review. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 18, 255–267.
28.
O’HareW. P. (2009). The forgotten fifth: Child poverty in rural America. Durham, NH: Carsey Institute.
29.
ProvasnikS.KewalRamaniA.ColemanM. M.GilbertsonL.HerringW.XieQ. (2007). Status of education in rural America (NCES 2007-040). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics.
30.
RutterM.CaspiA.FergussonD.HorwoodL. J.GoodmanR.MaughanB.. . . CarrollJ. (2007). Sex differences in developmental reading disability: New findings from 4 epidemiological studies. Journal of the American Medical Association, 291, 2007–2012. doi:10.1001/jama.291.16.200710.1001/jama.291.16.2007
31.
ScanlonD. M.GelzheiserL. M.VellutinoF. R.SchatschneiderC.SweeneyJ. M. (2008). Reducing the incidence of early reading difficulties: Professional development for classroom teachers versus direct interventions for children. Learning and Individual Differences, 18, 346–359. doi:10.1016/j.lindif.2008.05.00210.1016/j.lindif.2008.05.002
32.
SchwartzR. M. (2005). Literacy learning of at-risk first-grade students in the reading recovery early intervention. Journal of Educational Psychology, 97, 257–267. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.97.2.25710.1037/0022-0663.97.2.257
33.
ShaferJ. L.GrahamJ. W. (2002). Missing data: Our view of the state of the art. Psychological Methods, 7, 147–177.
34.
SpeeceD. L.CaseL. P.MolloyD. W. (2003). Responsiveness to general education instruction as the first gate to learning disabilities identification. Learning Disabilities: Research & Practice, 18, 147–156. doi:10.1111/1540-5826.0007110.1111/1540-5826.00071
35.
SRA/McGraw-Hill. (2000). Open court reading 2000. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Education.
36.
TorgesenJ. K.AlexanderA. W.WagnerR. K.RashotteC. A.VoellerK.ConwayT. (2001). Immediate and long-term outcomes from two instructional approaches. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 34, 33–58. doi:10.1177/00222194010340010410.1177/002221940103400104
37.
TorgesenJ. K.MyersD.SchirmA.StuartE.VartivarianS.MansfieldW.. . . HaanC. (2006). Closing the achievement gap: First year findings from a randomized trial of four reading interventions for striving readers. Washington, DC: Corporation for the Advancement of Policy Evaluation.
38.
VellutinoF. R.ScanlonD. M. (2002). The Interactive Strategies approach to reading intervention. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 27, 573–635. doi:10.1016/S0361-476X(02)00002-410.1016/S0361-476X(02)00002-4
39.
VellutinoF. R.ScanlonD. M.SmallS. G.FanueleD. P.SweeneyJ. (2007). Preventing early reading difficulties through kindergarten and first grade intervention: A variant of the three-tier model. In HaagerD.KlingnerJ. K.VaughnS. (Eds.), Evidence-based reading practices for response to intervention (pp. 185-219). Baltimore, MD: Brookes.
40.
Vernon-FeagansL.GallagherK. C.AmendumS.GinsbergM.KainzK.RoseJ.BurchinalM. (2010). A diagnostic teaching intervention for classroom teachers: Helping struggling readers in early elementary school. Learning Disability Research & Practice, 25, 183–193. doi:10.1111/j.1540-5826.2010.00316.x10.1111/j.1540-5826.2010.00316.x
41.
Vernon-FeagansL.GallagherK.KainzK. (2010). The transition to school in rural America: A focus on literacy. In EcclesJ.MeeceJ. (Eds.), Handbook of schooling and development (pp. 163–184). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
42.
WagnerR. K.TorgesenJ. K.RashotteC. A. (1999). Comprehensive test of phonological processing (CTOPP). Austin, TX: PRO-ED.
43.
WolfM.BowersP. G.BiddleK. (2000). Naming-speed processes, timing, and reading: A conceptual review. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 33, 387–407. doi:10.1177/00222194000330040910.1177/002221940003300409
