Meree Reynolds

Reading Recovery 20 Years Down the Track: Looking forward, looking back

Reading Recovery is an intensive literacy programme designed for young students who have been identified as being at‐risk of reading failure after 1 year of schooling. The intervention was developed and trialled in New Zealand over 20 years ago and is now implemented in a number of education systems. The focus of this article is on recent research into the operationalisation of the programme with an overview of what it has done well and what it has not done so well. Reading Recovery has been very successful in bringing about change on the political and teacher training levels. In terms of efficacy in remediating literacy difficulties, however, the findings are more equivocal. What we have learned from Reading Recovery may assist in the implementation of new interventions based on more contemporary research.

What Recent Reviews Tell Us About the Efficacy of Reading Interventions for Struggling Readers in the Early Years of Schooling

An analysis of large and influential published reviews of research pertaining to the reading acquisition of young struggling readers in the early years of schooling was undertaken. The reviews were selected on the basis that they either had been commissioned by federal governments or had been conducted by reputable research institutions and had been released in the past 10 years. A search of published literature pertaining to the topic found three federal reviews (from the United States, the United Kingdom and Australia), a What Works Clearinghouse Report into beginning reading programmes, a review of reading interventions by Slavin et al. and a synthesis of meta-analyses by Hattie. Analysis of these reviews indicated that there are key commonalities in findings about how to teach reading to young students. Reviews of interventions revealed some flaws and therefore provide limited information useful to programme implementation and development for young struggling readers.

Components of effective early reading interventions for young struggling readers

Although the importance of intervening to assist young struggling readers is widely accepted and many interventions have been developed to meet this need, research has not yet established that there is an effective and low-cost option for schools. Reviews of research into beginning reading provide guidance about what needs to be included in an intervention for young struggling readers but there is less available information about how to organise and implement an intervention. Recent research into the variables influencing interventions that have been used with young students provides some useful information that can be used to adapt existing programs or design and develop new ones. Ten desirable features of interventions suitable for young students who are beginning to struggle in reading after a year of schooling are identified.

The Devil is in the Detail Regarding the Efficacy of Reading Recovery: A rejoinder to Schwartz, Hobsbaum, Briggs, and Scull

This rejoinder provides comment on issues raised by Schwartz, Hobsbaum, Briggs and Scull (2009) in their article about evidence‐based practice and Reading Recovery (RR), written in response to Reynolds and Wheldall (2007). Particular attention is paid to the processes and findings of the What Works Clearinghouse evaluation of RR. The suggestion that this evaluation is flawed casts doubt about some of its findings. The authors maintain their earlier stance that RR is effective for many students but do not accept that there is evidence that initial gains are sustained through the primary grades, that RR is an efficient tier two intervention in a response to intervention approach and that significant cost benefits have been demonstrated in education systems. It is concluded that research into alternative interventions that could be implemented at lower cost is warranted.

Building the WARL: The development of the Wheldall Assessment of Reading Lists, a curriculum-based measure designed to identify young struggling readers and monitor their progress

Early years teachers are in need of efficient measures to identify young students who are not making adequate progress in learning to read. The Wheldall Assessment of Reading Lists (WARL) has been developed to meet this need. The test, a curriculum-based measure of word identification fluency, consists of a series of parallel lists of frequently used words from childrens texts and storybooks. Following a pilot study with 57 Year 1 students that satisfactorily demonstrated the equivalence of five trial word lists, 15 lists were subsequently trialled with 112 Year 1 students. The participants were also assessed on a battery of standardised and curriculum-based measures of reading. The WARL word lists were shown to inter-correlate highly with each other and also to correlate highly with other standardised measures of reading. The test appears to be both a valid and a reliable measure that can be used to identify young struggling readers and to monitor their progress following intervention.

Meeting Initial Needs In Literacy (MINILIT): Why we Need it, How it Works, and the Results of Pilot Studies

As students who have difficulty in acquiring the basic processes in reading are significantly disadvantaged in later schooling, there is a need for effective interventions for young at‐risk students. Reading Recovery is the most widely known and extensively promoted intervention for young struggling readers. However, serious reservations have been expressed about both its efficacy and its cost‐effectiveness. An alternative intervention (MINILIT), that incorporates findings and recommendations of recent reviews of research about effective instruction in early literacy, has been developed. This intervention features small‐group instruction by tutors. The results of three pilot studies of MINILIT are presented. These studies were carried out with Year 1 and Year 2 students in a variety of settings. The students, who were identified as struggling readers by teachers in their schools, attended tutoring sessions for one hour a day, four days a week, for 15 weeks. Pre‐testing of individual students on standardis...

‘Meeting initial needs in literacy’ (MINILIT): A ramp to MULTILIT for younger low‐progress readers

Abstract In spite of serious reservations expressed by reading scientists regarding both its efficacy and its cost effectiveness, for over 20 years Reading Recovery has been promoted internationally as the intervention of choice for young struggling readers. Following a brief review of research on Reading Recovery, several suggestions for improvement are suggested. An alternative small group‐based instructional model (MINILIT) is then described. This provides additional focus on phonemic awareness and allows access to the MULTILIT program for younger struggling readers. The results from two preliminary pilot studies are presented.

Efficacy of an evidence-based literacy preparation program for young children beginning school

Abstract This study aimed to provide evidence regarding the efficacy of an early literacy preparation program, PreLit, designed to improve the skills of young Australian children. Participants comprised 240 children in eight schools attending their first year of schooling. Children in the four experimental group schools received instruction in the program while children in the four comparison group schools continued with typical literacy activities in their classrooms. All children were assessed on measures of emergent literacy and language skills prior to and following intervention. It was found that 91% of students were in the bottom quartile for phonological awareness at pre-test. While neither the children nor their schools were randomly allocated to groups, the mean scores for the two groups were very similar at pre-test on all measures. Analyses showed that although the means for the two groups were not statistically different on any of the measures at post-test, significantly fewer students in experimental schools remained in the bottom quartile and more moved into the top quartile for phonological awareness skills, compared with students in the comparison schools. Fine grain analyses, taking into account additional qualitative data about the schools, helped to clarify these findings.

Further evidence for the efficacy of an evidence-based, small group, literacy intervention program for young struggling readers

Abstract An earlier series of pilot studies and small-scale experimental studies had previously provided some evidence for the efficacy of a small group early literacy intervention program for young struggling readers. The present paper provides further evidence for efficacy based on a much larger sample of young, socially disadvantaged, at-risk readers. The participants comprised 14 successive intakes of Year 1 and Year 2 students into small group remedial literacy intervention programs hosted by two charitably run tutorial centres. In each semester, over the years 2005–2011, eight students (on average) attended each centre for one hour, for four days per week, for 15 weeks. Pre- and post-test assessment data on eight measures of early literacy performance were available on up to 194 students who completed the program. Substantial and statistically significant gains were evident on all literacy measures with large effect sizes. These results provide further evidence for the efficacy of the small group literacy intervention program.

Early identification of young struggling readers: Preliminary benchmarks for intervention for students in years one and two in schools in New South Wales

It is now widely acknowledged that early intervention programs should be provided for young students who are experiencing difficulty in learning to read. It is important, therefore, to have efficient ways of identifying students who are most in need of intervention. The aim of this study was to establish preliminary performance benchmarks to identify the bottom 25% of year 1 and year 2 students in NSW schools at two key points in the school year. Students from grades 1 and 2 (n = 335) at two schools nominated as performing at state average levels were assessed on a battery of tests assessing various aspects of reading and related skills at the beginning and in the middle of the school year. Preliminary estimates of benchmarks for determining the bottom quartile of students were thereby obtained together with estimates of average performance at these two points in the school year to serve as performance goals for intervention.