|Title:||Responsiveness-To-Instruction to Strengthen the Academic Performance of Students with Reading and Math Disabilities|
|Principal Investigator:||Fuchs, Douglas||Awardee:||Vanderbilt University|
|Program:||Systems, Policy, and Finance [Program Details]|
|Award Period:||06/01/2009 – 05/31/2013||Award Amount:||$2,983,337.00|
|Type:||Efficacy and Replication||Award Number:||R324A090052|
Purpose: The academic needs of students who have concurrent reading and mathematics disabilities are not frequently addressed by practitioners or researchers. When they are addressed, an additive approach is frequently implemented. In this approach, reading interventions and math interventions are provided separately as if students had only a reading disability or only a math disability. This additive instructional approach can represent a major allocation of school resources, and it can consume a large portion of a student's instructional time. Preliminary evidence suggests that a systemic approach that integrates reading and math interventions may be more efficient and more effective. This study is addressing this question. It is evaluating whether an intervention that integrates reading and math instruction is more effective than an additive intervention for preventing or mitigating disability among students with or at risk for disabilities in both reading and math.
Project Activities: Over 500 first grade students who are at risk for concurrent reading and math disabilities will participate in this study. They will be randomly assigned to an integrated reading and math intervention condition, an additive reading and math intervention condition, or a services-as-usual comparison group. Students in the integrated approach will receive intervention that combines both reading and math instruction. Activities targeting skills such as decoding, fluency, comprehension, and number combinations will be conducted using stories or word-problem narratives. Students receiving the additive intervention will participate in activities that focus on reading deficits alone or math deficits alone. Students will be assessed at multiple time points during and after receiving the intervention. A series of analytic procedures, including hierarchical linear modeling, will be used to determine the efficacy of the interventions. In addition, researchers will explore how child characteristics may moderate intervention efficacy.
Products: The products of this project include published reports and presentations on the efficacy of the integrated approach for providing intervention for students with or at risk for both reading and math disabilities.
Setting: The research will occur in an urban district in Tennessee.
Population: Over 500 first grade students who are at risk for concurrent reading and math disabilities will participate in this study. These students will have reading and math scores below the 25th percentile on the Wide Range Achievement Test–3 and scores above the 70th percentile on the Vocabulary and Matrix Reasoning subtests of the Wechsler Abbreviated Scale of Intelligence.
Intervention: Two interventions are being evaluated: an integrated intervention approach and an additive intervention approach. For both interventions, students will receive instruction in groups of three for 17 weeks, four days per week. Each intervention session will be 45 minutes long. Students in the integrated approach will receive intervention that combines both reading and math instruction. Activities targeting skills such as decoding, fluency, comprehension, and number combinations will be conducted using stories or word-problem narratives. Students receiving the additive intervention will receive activities that focus on reading deficits alone or math deficits alone.
Research Design and Methods: A randomized cohort design will be used to evaluate the efficacy of the intervention. Students will be recruited in four yearly cohorts. There will be 150 children in each cohort. Students will be randomly assigned to the integrated intervention condition, the additive intervention condition, or a services-as-usual comparison group. Children will be assessed at multiple time points during and after receiving the intervention until the end of the project period.
Control Condition: Students will continue to receive reading and math instruction typically provided by the school.
Key Measures: Data on students' reading, mathematics, and cognitive skills will be collected. In addition, researchers will collect data on intervention fidelity.
Data Analytic Strategy: A series of analytic procedures, including hierarchical linear modeling, will be used to determine the efficacy of the interventions. In addition, researchers will explore how child characteristics may moderate the efficacy of the interventions.
Fuchs, D., McMaster, K.L., and Kearns, D.M. (2017). Evidence-Based Interventions for Reading Disabilities in Children and Adolescents. Handbook of Evidence-Based Interventions for Children and Adolescents (pp. 85–97). Springer Publishing Co.
Fuchs, D., Patton, S. III, Fuchs, L.S., Gilbert, J.K., Walsh, M., Lute, N., Haga, L., Peng, P., & Elleman, A. (in press). Combining reading comprehension instruction with cognitive training to provide intensive instruction to at-risk students. In M. Kennedy and P. Pullen (Eds.), Handbook on RTI and MTSS. Boston: Routledge.
Kearns, D.M., Lemons, C., Fuchs, D., and Fuchs, L.S. (2014). Essentials of a Tiered Intervention System to Support Unique Learners: Recommendations From Research and Practice. In J.T. Mascolo, V.C. Alfonso, and D.P. Flanagan (Eds.), Essentials of Planning, Selecting, and Tailoring Interventions for Unique Learners (pp. 56–91). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
Miller, A., Toste, J., Fuchs, D., and Fuchs, L.S. (2013). RTI: Timely Support for Struggling Learners: Response to Intervention. In D.R. Reutzel (Ed.), Handbook of Research-Based Practice in Early Childhood Education (pp. 161–174). New York: Guilford.
Book chapter, edition specified
Fuchs, D., McMaster, K.L., Fuchs, L.S., and Al Otaiba, S. (2013). Data-Based Individualization as a Means of Providing Intensive Instruction to Students With Serious Learning Disorders. In L. Swanson, K.R. Harris, and S. Graham (Eds.), Handbook of Learning Disabilities (2nd ed., pp. 526–549). New York: Guilford.
Journal article, monograph, or newsletter
Fuchs, D., & Fuchs, L.S. (2016). Responsiveness-To-Intervention. Glaedur Fagtimarit Felads Islenskra Serkennara, 26, 23–70.
Fuchs, D., and Fuchs, L.S. (2016). Responsiveness-To-Intervention: A “Systems” Approach to Instructional Adaptation. Theory Into Practice, Special Issue: Adaptive Teaching: Theoretical Implications for Practice, 55(3): 225–233. doi:10.1080/00405841.2016.1184536
Fuchs, D., Compton, D.L., Fuchs, L.S., Bouton, B., and Caffrey, E. (2011). The Construct and Predictive Validity of a Dynamic Assessment of Young Children Learning to Read: Implications for RTI Frameworks. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 44(4): 339–347. doi:10.1177/0022219411407864
Fuchs, D., Fuchs, L.S., and Compton, D.L. (2012). Smart RTI: A Next-Generation Approach to Multi-Level Prevention. Exceptional Children, 78(3): 263–279.
Fuchs, L.S., Fuchs, D., and Compton, D.L. (2013). Intervention Effects for Students With Comorbid Forms of Learning Disability: Understanding the Needs of Nonresponders. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 46(6): 534–548. doi:10.1177/0022219412468889
Gilbert, J.K., Compton, D.L., Fuchs, D., and Fuchs, L.S. (2012). Early Screening for Risk of Reading Disabilities: Recommendations for a Four-Step Screening System. Assessment for Effective Intervention, 38(1): 6–14. doi:10.1177/1534508412451491
Miller, A.C., Fuchs, D., Fuchs, L.S., Compton, D.L., Kearns, D., Zhang, W., Yen, L., Patton, S., and Kirchner, D.P. (2014). Behavioral Attention: A Longitudinal Study of Whether and how it Influences the Development of Word Reading and Reading Comprehension Among At-Risk Readers. Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, 7(3): 232–249. doi:10.1080/19345747.2014.906691
Peng, P., and Fuchs, D. (2016). A Meta-Analysis of Working Memory Deficits in Children With Learning Difficulties: Is There a Difference Between Verbal Domain and Numerical Domain?. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 49(1): 3–20. doi:10.1177/0022219414521667
Toste, J.R., Compton, D.L., Fuchs, D., Fuchs, L.S., Gilbert, J.K., Cho, E., Barquero, L.A., and Bouton, B. (2014). Understanding Unresponsiveness to Tier 2 Reading Intervention: Exploring the Classification and Profiles of Adequate and Inadequate Responders in First Grade. Learning Disability Quarterly, 37(4): 192–203. doi:10.1177/0731948713518336