Sylvia Linan-Thompson

Response to Instruction as a Means of Identifying Students with Reading/Learning Disabilities

To examine a response to treatment model as a means for identifying students with reading/learning disabilities, 45 second-grade students at risk for reading problems were provided daily supplemental reading instruction and assessed after 10 weeks to determine if they met a prior criteria for exit. Students who met criteria no longer received supplemental instruction. Those who did not were regrouped and supplemental instruction was continued for another 10 weeks. After 20 weeks of supplemental instruction, students who still had not met criteria were provided another 10 weeks of supplemental instruction. Students who never met criteria were classified as no exit. Pretest scores on fluency, passage comprehension, and rapid naming were the significant predictors of students who did not meet exit criteria.

Reading Instruction Grouping for Students with Reading Difficulties

The effects of three grouping formats—1:1 (one teacher with 1 student), 1:3 (one teacher with 3 students), and 1:10 (one teacher with 10 students)—on the reading outcomes of second-grade struggling readers was studied. Students in all groups were given the same supplemental reading intervention for the same number of sessions, thus holding intervention type and intensity constant and varying group size. Students made significant gains in phoneme segmentation, fluency, and comprehension following the intervention, and these gains were maintained at follow-up (4—5 weeks after intervention). Based on effect sizes, both 1:1 and 1:3 were highly effective intervention group sizes for supplemental reading instruction. Although the 1:1 grouping format yielded significantly higher scores for phoneme segmentation, fluency, and comprehension than the 1:10, it was not superior to the 1:3 on any outcome measure.

Effectiveness of an English Intervention for First‐Grade English Language Learners at Risk for Reading Problems

A first‐grade reading and language development intervention for English language learners (Spanish/English) at risk for reading difficulties was examined. The intervention was conducted in the same language as students’ core reading instruction (English). Two hundred sixteen first‐grade students from 14 classrooms in 4 schools from 2 districts were screened in both English and Spanish. Forty‐eight students (22%) did not pass the screening in both languages and were randomly assigned within schools to an intervention or contrast group; after 7 months, 41 students remained in the study. Intervention groups of 3 to 5 students met daily (50 minutes) and were provided systematic and explicit instruction in oral language and reading by trained bilingual reading intervention teachers. Students assigned to the contrast condition received their school’s existing intervention for struggling readers. Intervention students significantly outperformed contrast students on multiple measures of English letter naming, phonological awareness and other language skills, and reading and academic achievement. Differences were less significant for Spanish measures of these domains, though the strongest effects favoring the intervention students were in the areas of phonological awareness and related reading skills.

The Response to Intervention of English Language Learners at Risk for Reading Problems

The response to intervention (RTI) of English language learners identified as at risk for reading difficulties in the fall of first grade was examined at the end of first grade and at the end of second grade. Students at risk for reading problems were randomly assigned to intervention or control groups. Intervention students received supplemental reading intervention daily for 50 minutes in small groups from October to April. Students in the comparison condition received the schools existing instructional program for struggling readers. Criteria were established to determine adequate RTI at the end of first grade and at the end of second grade. The results indicated that more students who participated in the first-grade intervention in either Spanish or English met the established RTI standards than students who did not, and this finding was maintained through the end of second grade.

What Is Special About Special Education for Students with Learning Disabilities

In this article, the ways in which special education for students with learning disabilities was perceived as “special” historically and what we know about effective special education instructional practices for students with learning disabilities currently are summarized. The influence of monitoring progress, providing explicit and systematic instruction, understanding the critical factors associated with progress in academic areas such as reading and math, and teaching students in small groups with many opportunities to practice and obtain feedback are essential features of special education for students with learning disabilities. A model for providing integrated services between general and special education for students with learning disabilities is described.

Fluency and Comprehension Interventions for Third-Grade Students

Eight third-grade teachers and their 111 students participated in this 12-week study that was conducted within regular classroom settings. Sixteen of the students demonstrated significant reading problems and qualified for special education or were identified by the school district as dyslexic. This study addressed the differential effects of fluency and comprehension instruction on fluency and comprehension outcomes in two groups of students: those with significant reading problems and those who are low- to average-achieving students. Eight classrooms of third graders and their teachers were assigned to one of two interventions : partner reading, designed to enhance fluency, or collaborative strategic reading, designed to enhance comprehension. Results indicated no statistically significant main effects or group-by-time interaction effects; however, over time (pre- to posttest), there were statistically significant effects for rate of reading and correct words read per minute (but not accuracy or comprehension) for both partner reading and collaborative strategic reading for both low- to average-achieving students and students with reading disabilities.

Effectiveness of Spanish Intervention for First-Grade English Language Learners at Risk for Reading Difficulties

The effectiveness of an explicit, systematic reading intervention for first-grade students whose home language was Spanish and who were at risk for reading difficulties was examined. Participants were 69 students in 20 classrooms in 7 schools from 3 districts who initially did not pass the screening in Spanish and were randomly assigned within schools to a treatment or comparison group; after 7 months, 64 students remained in the study. The intervention matched the language of instruction of their core reading program (Spanish). Treatment groups of 3 to 5 students met daily for 50 min and were provided systematic and explicit instruction in oral language and reading by trained bilingual intervention teachers. Comparison students received the schools standard intervention for struggling readers. Observations during core reading instruction provided information about the reading instruction and language use of the teachers. There were no differences between the treatment and comparison groups in either Spanish or English on any measures at pretest, but there were significant posttest differences in favor of the treatment group for the following outcomes in Spanish: Letter-Sound Identification (d = 0.72), Phonological Awareness composite (d = 0.73), Woodcock Language Proficiency Battery—Revised Oral Language composite (d = 0.35), Word Attack (d = 0.85), Passage Comprehension (d = 0.55), and two measures of reading fluency (d = 0.58—0.75).

READING OUTCOMES FOR STUDENTS WITH AND WITHOUT READING DISABILITIES IN GENERAL EDUCATION MIDDLE-SCHOOL CONTENT AREA CLASSES

Ten sixth-grade middle-school teachers and their 60 targeted students (14 students with reading disabilities, 17 low-achieving students, and 29 average-achieving students) participated in a four-month professional development and intervention program to enhance reading outcomes. The multicomponent reading intervention included three reading strategies: word identification, fluency, and content area comprehension. All three groups improved in accuracy of oral reading and fluency. Although many students made significant gains in word identification, fluency, and comprehension, a subgroup of very poor readers made little or no gains. Implications for enhancing outcomes for students with severe reading disabilities by providing intensive reading instruction (i.e., small-group explicit instruction) are provided.

Effectiveness of a Spanish Intervention and an English Intervention for English-Language Learners at Risk for Reading Problems

Two studies of Grade 1 reading interventions for English-language (EL) learners at risk for reading problems were conducted. Two samples of EL students were randomly assigned to a treatment or untreated comparison group on the basis of their language of instruction for core reading (i.e., Spanish or English). In all, 91 students completed the English study (43 treatment and 48 comparison), and 80 students completed the Spanish study (35 treatment and 45 comparison). Treatment students received approximately 115 sessions of supplemental reading daily for 50 minutes in groups of 3 to 5. Findings from the English study revealed statistically significant differences in favor of treatment students on English measures of phonological awareness, word attack, word reading, and spelling (effect sizes of 0.35–0.42). Findings from the Spanish study revealed significant differences in favor of treatment students on Spanish measures of phonological awareness, letter-sound and letter-word identification, verbal analogies, word reading fluency, and spelling (effect sizes of 0.33–0.81).

Enhancing Social Studies Vocabulary and Comprehension for Seventh-Grade English Language Learners: Findings From Two Experimental Studies

Abstract Two experimental studies to improve vocabulary knowledge and comprehension were conducted in 7th-grade social studies classes with English language learners (ELLs). Two different nonoverlapping samples of classes of 7th-grade students (N = 381 and N = 507) were randomly assigned at the classroom (i.e., section) level to a social studies intervention or to business as usual comparison groups. The number of sections assigned to treatment was 7 and 9 in Experiments 1 and 2, respectively. Eight sections were assigned to comparison in each experiment. In addition, students were randomly assigned to sections prior to assignment of sections to treatment and control. Treatment students received a multicomponent social studies instruction including explicit vocabulary instruction, use of structured pairing, strategic use of video to build concepts and promote discussion, and use of graphic organizers for approximately 12 weeks daily during social studies class. Findings indicated significant differences in favor of the treatment students on curriculum-based vocabulary and comprehension measures for both experimental studies for all students including students who were ELLs.