Interventions for Older Struggling Interventions for Older Struggling Readers: The Challenge of Closing Readers: The Challenge of Closing

the Gapthe Gap

Dr. Joseph TorgesenDr. Joseph Torgesen

Florida State University and theFlorida State University and the

Florida Center for Reading ResearchFlorida Center for Reading Research

Society for Research in Educational Effectiveness, December 2006Society for Research in Educational Effectiveness, December 2006

Plan for talkPlan for talk

Discuss two studies of intensive interventions for older Discuss two studies of intensive interventions for older struggling readersstruggling readers

Both studies examined multiple interventions, and both Both studies examined multiple interventions, and both employed random assignment to treatment and control employed random assignment to treatment and control groupsgroups

Two different age groupsTwo different age groups: : elementary school - 3 & 5 graders, elementary school - 3 & 5 graders, high school - 9high school - 9thth graders graders

The focus will be on the pattern of outcomes as it relates The focus will be on the pattern of outcomes as it relates to our knowledge of the instructional conditions to our knowledge of the instructional conditions necessary for “closing the gap” between the reading necessary for “closing the gap” between the reading ability of older struggling readers and grade level ability of older struggling readers and grade level standards of reading proficiencystandards of reading proficiency

Institute for Education Sciences Smith Richardson FoundationAmbrose Monell FoundationBarksdale Reading InstituteGrable FoundationHaan Foundation for ChildrenHeinz EndowmentsW.K. Kellogg FoundationRaymond FoundationRockefeller FoundationInstitute for Education SciencesRockefeller Brothers FundHewlett FoundationRichard King Mellon FoundationLearning Systems Institute, FSUFlorida Center for Reading Research, FSUSeminole County Schools

ParticipantsFunders-Haan Foundation for ChildrenMathematic Policy Research

American Institutes for Research

Learning Systems Institute at FSU

Allegheny Intermediate Unit, Allegheny Intermediate Unit, Pittsburgh, PA Pittsburgh, PA

Seminole County School Seminole County School District, FloridaDistrict, Florida

Florida Center for Reading Research, FSU

““The ultimate test of the The ultimate test of the valuevalue of special of special education is that, once identified, education is that, once identified, children children close the gap with their peers.”close the gap with their peers.”President’s Commission on Special Eduation (2002)President’s Commission on Special Eduation (2002)

For children with reading difficulties, For children with reading difficulties, special education tends to special education tends to stabilize stabilize the the relative deficit in reading skill rather relative deficit in reading skill rather than than remediateremediate it. it.

Background:Background:

Study of struggling readers in 3Study of struggling readers in 3rdrd and 5 and 5thth grade: grade:

1. Corrective Reading 1. Corrective Reading

3. Spell Read P.A.T.3. Spell Read P.A.T.

4. Failure Free Reading4. Failure Free Reading

2. Wilson Reading System2. Wilson Reading System

We evaluated 4 commercially available intervention We evaluated 4 commercially available intervention methods that are widely used to remediate difficulties methods that are widely used to remediate difficulties in late elementary schoolin late elementary school

}}Used Word-level Used Word-level instructional instructional components onlycomponents only

}}Word-level plus Word-level plus comprehension and comprehension and vocabularyvocabulary

Random assignment proceduresRandom assignment procedures

Intervention methods were randomly assigned among 50 Intervention methods were randomly assigned among 50 participating schools participating schools

Within participating schools, students were randomly Within participating schools, students were randomly assigned to the experimental or control groupassigned to the experimental or control group

The control students received whatever instruction or The control students received whatever instruction or interventions they would have received had the study interventions they would have received had the study not been implementednot been implemented

It was a mix of whole class and small group instructionIt was a mix of whole class and small group instruction

The students participating in the studyThe students participating in the study

33rdrd and 5 and 5thth graders, nominated by teachers and selected graders, nominated by teachers and selected by screening measures (1576)by screening measures (1576)

Below the 30Below the 30thth percentile on a combined measure of word percentile on a combined measure of word reading efficiency, and above the 5reading efficiency, and above the 5 thth percentile in broad percentile in broad verbal ability (PPVT) (1,042 – 772 gave permission to verbal ability (PPVT) (1,042 – 772 gave permission to participate)participate)

45 % FR lunch, 27% Min., 33% had L.D. or other school 45 % FR lunch, 27% Min., 33% had L.D. or other school diagnosisdiagnosis

Average reading levels – Phonemic decoding – 32Average reading levels – Phonemic decoding – 32ndnd % %Oral reading fluency – 17Oral reading fluency – 17thth % %Reading Comprehension – 23Reading Comprehension – 23rdrd

%%

Recruitment and Training of TeachersRecruitment and Training of Teachers

Teachers were nominated by principal and chosen Teachers were nominated by principal and chosen through interviewthrough interview

Came from regular classroom, special education, Title 1 Came from regular classroom, special education, Title 1 resourceresource

Receive 5 days of direct training (approx. 30 hours) before Receive 5 days of direct training (approx. 30 hours) before school startedschool started

Had 8 weeks of supervised practice with 4Had 8 weeks of supervised practice with 4 thth grade grade students while study participants were being selected students while study participants were being selected and pre-testedand pre-tested

Received monthly on-site supervision and consultation Received monthly on-site supervision and consultation with instructional expertswith instructional experts

Total of approximately 70 hours of professional Total of approximately 70 hours of professional development on method useddevelopment on method used

Delivery of InstructionDelivery of Instruction

All children were taught in small groups of 3All children were taught in small groups of 3Instructional sessions approx. 50 minutes – goal was Instructional sessions approx. 50 minutes – goal was

to provide 100 hours of instruction-average was 93 to provide 100 hours of instruction-average was 93 (3(3rdrd) and 88 (5) and 88 (5thth) hrs.) hrs.

Instruction was provided 5 days a weekInstruction was provided 5 days a week

Instruction was provided outside of the regular Instruction was provided outside of the regular classroomclassroom

80 or more – 92.3%80 or more – 92.3%40 to 80 -- 4.5%40 to 80 -- 4.5%Less than 40 – 3.2%Less than 40 – 3.2%

Time by activity analysisTime by activity analysis

Min

utes

per

ses

sion

Minutes per session devoted to instruction on Word level vs. Minutes per session devoted to instruction on Word level vs. comprehension/vocabularycomprehension/vocabulary

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

FF Wilson

Word level

Comp/Voc

Failure Spell Wilson Corrective Free Read

Outcomes from approximately 90 Hours of Small Group Intervention-3rd Grade

80

85

95

Sta

nd

ard

Sco

re

90

Phonemic Decoding

Word Reading Accuracy

Reading Comp.

92.6

88.786.2

100 99.4

90.7

87.5

ControlWord LevelFailure Free

Outcomes from approximately 90 Hours of Small Group Intervention-5th Grade

80

85

95

Sta

nd

ard

Sco

re

90

Phonemic Decoding

Word Reading Accuracy

Reading Comp.

93.1

88.7

91.5

100 99.4

92.4 92.6

ControlWord LevelFailure Free

Outcomes relevant to purposes of this presentationOutcomes relevant to purposes of this presentation

The word level interventions in 3The word level interventions in 3rdrd grade produced grade produced significant impacts on phonemic decoding, reading significant impacts on phonemic decoding, reading accuracy, and comprehension-significant “gap closing” accuracy, and comprehension-significant “gap closing” occurred only for phonemic decodingoccurred only for phonemic decoding

The only significant impact for fifth grade was on The only significant impact for fifth grade was on phonemic decoding, but the amount of by which the phonemic decoding, but the amount of by which the absolute performance gap was closed was very similar absolute performance gap was closed was very similar to the third grade – large for P.D., quite small for to the third grade – large for P.D., quite small for reading comprehension reading comprehension

There was no significant impact of the interventions at 3There was no significant impact of the interventions at 3 rdrd or 5or 5thth grade on the Pennsylvania System of School grade on the Pennsylvania System of School Assessment (PSSA)Assessment (PSSA)

Study of struggling readers in 9Study of struggling readers in 9thth gradegrade

All groups received 90 min. instruction per day in All groups received 90 min. instruction per day in groups of 20, 5 days a week for the school yeargroups of 20, 5 days a week for the school year

Students were selected because they performed Students were selected because they performed below grade level (Levels 1 and 2) on 8below grade level (Levels 1 and 2) on 8thth grade grade FCATFCAT592 students were formed into quartets 592 students were formed into quartets within 5 high within 5 high schoolsschools on basis of 8 on basis of 8thth grade FCAT. Within grade FCAT. Within quartets in each school, students randomly quartets in each school, students randomly assigned to assigned to one of three treatments or a control one of three treatments or a control treatmenttreatmentAverage reading levels – Phonemic decoding – 45Average reading levels – Phonemic decoding – 45thth %%

Oral reading fluency – 35Oral reading fluency – 35thth %%

Reading Comprehension – Reading Comprehension – 2121stst % %

Post-testing on FCAT took place in MarchPost-testing on FCAT took place in March

Study of struggling readers in 9Study of struggling readers in 9thth gradegrade

Students randomly assigned to one of four groups: Students randomly assigned to one of four groups:

ControlControl-instruction as usual-reading, discussion, written -instruction as usual-reading, discussion, written assignmentsassignments

Read 180Read 180 – technology based intervention-individualized – technology based intervention-individualized instruction in word level, comprehension, and vocabularyinstruction in word level, comprehension, and vocabulary

ReachReach – scripted instruction in word level, comprehension, – scripted instruction in word level, comprehension, critical reading and writingcritical reading and writing

RISERISE (locally developed intervention involving lots of reading (locally developed intervention involving lots of reading with leveled text, discussion, vocabulary, responsive help with with leveled text, discussion, vocabulary, responsive help with decoding)decoding)

Initial outcomes from Seminole County Initial outcomes from Seminole County StudyStudyTeachers had a range of experienceTeachers had a range of experience

All intervention teachers received PD prior to All intervention teachers received PD prior to beginning, and periodic visits through the beginning, and periodic visits through the yearyear

Outcomes from the interventions were Outcomes from the interventions were assessed in terms of change in the assessed in terms of change in the Developmental Scale Score on the Florida Developmental Scale Score on the Florida Comprehensive Assessment Test.Comprehensive Assessment Test.

99110

154 149

104 102

95

97

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

Level 1 Level 2

ControlRead 180ReachRise

Performance Level on Previous Year’s FCAT

Ch

ang

e in

Dev

elo

pm

en

tal S

core

on

FC

AT

9th Grade Students

Level 1 intervention studentsLevel 1 intervention students

99thth Grade Students Grade Students

Gap to Level 2 in 8Gap to Level 2 in 8thth grade = 128 DSS points grade = 128 DSS points

Gap to Level 2 in 9Gap to Level 2 in 9thth grade = 66 DSS points grade = 66 DSS points

Level 2 intervention studentsLevel 2 intervention students

Gap to grade level in 8Gap to grade level in 8thth grade = 102 DSS points grade = 102 DSS points

Gap to grade level in 9Gap to grade level in 9thth grade = 91 DSS points grade = 91 DSS points

General recommendations for intervention General recommendations for intervention research with older studentsresearch with older students

1.In order to provide useful information for schools, 1.In order to provide useful information for schools, studies need to employ realistic and ecologically valid studies need to employ realistic and ecologically valid outcome measuresoutcome measures

2. In order to learn more about the conditions required to 2. In order to learn more about the conditions required to substantially “close the gap” studies need to provide substantially “close the gap” studies need to provide larger amounts of instruction than is typical.larger amounts of instruction than is typical.

3. In addition to examining “impact” in relative to a control 3. In addition to examining “impact” in relative to a control group, we need to examine the extent to which the gap group, we need to examine the extent to which the gap with grade level expectations has been closed under with grade level expectations has been closed under different intervention conditions.different intervention conditions.

Thank You