Search Results

Reading Recovery® is an intervention that provides one-on-one tutoring to students in grade 1 with low literacy achievement. This supplemental program aims to improve student reading and writing skills by providing one-on-one tutoring, tailoring the content of each lesson to each student based on observations and analyses of the student strengths and weaknesses from prior lessons. Trained Reading Recovery® teachers deliver tutoring daily in 30-minute one-on-one sessions over the course of 12 to 20 weeks. Reading Recovery® teachers incorporate instruction in topics such as phonemic awareness, phonics, vocabulary, fluency, comprehension, writing, oral language, and motivation depending on student needs.

Reading Recovery® is an intervention that provides one-on-one tutoring to students in grade 1 with low literacy achievement. This supplemental program aims to improve student reading and writing skills by providing one-on-one tutoring, tailoring the content of each lesson to each student based on observations and analyses of the student strengths and weaknesses from prior lessons. Trained Reading Recovery® teachers deliver tutoring daily in 30-minute one-on-one sessions over the course of 12 to 20 weeks. Reading Recovery® teachers incorporate instruction in topics such as phonemic awareness, phonics, vocabulary, fluency, comprehension, writing, oral language, and motivation depending on student needs.

Reading Recovery® is an intervention that provides one-on-one tutoring to students in grade 1 with low literacy achievement. This supplemental program aims to improve student reading and writing skills by providing one-on-one tutoring, tailoring the content of each lesson to each student based on observations and analyses of the student strengths and weaknesses from prior lessons. Trained Reading Recovery® teachers deliver tutoring daily in 30-minute one-on-one sessions over the course of 12 to 20 weeks. Reading Recovery® teachers incorporate instruction in topics such as phonemic awareness, phonics, vocabulary, fluency, comprehension, writing, oral language, and motivation depending on student needs.

Reading Recovery is an example of a widely used early literacy intervention for struggling first-grade readers, with a research base demonstrating evidence of impact. With funding from the U.S. Department of Education's i3 program, researchers conducted a 4-year evaluation of the national scale-up of Reading Recovery. The evaluation included an implementation study and a multisite randomized controlled trial with 6,888 participating students in 1,222 schools. The goal of this study was to understand whether the impacts identified in prior rigorous studies of Reading Recovery could be replicated in the context of a national scale-up. The findings of this study reaffirm prior evidence of Reading Recovery's immediate impacts on student literacy and support the feasibility of successfully scaling up an effective intervention.

Reading Recovery (RR) is a short-term, one-to-one intervention designed to help the lowest achieving readers in first grade. This article presents first-year results from the multisite randomized controlled trial (RCT) and implementation study under the $55 million Investing in Innovation (i3) Scale-Up Project. For the 2011-2012 school year, the estimated standardized effect of RR on students' Iowa Tests of Basic Skills (ITBS) Total Reading Scores was 0.69 standard deviations relative to the population of struggling readers eligible for RR under the i3 scale-up and 0.47 standard deviations relative to the nationwide population of all first graders. School-level implementation of RR was, in most respects, faithful to the RR "Standards and Guidelines," and the intensive training provided to new RR teachers was viewed as critical to successful implementation.

Reading Recovery (RR) is a short-term early intervention designed to help the lowest-achieving readers in first grade reach average levels of classroom performance in literacy. Students identified to receive Reading Recovery meet individually with a specially trained Reading Recovery (RR) teacher every school day for 30-minute lessons over a period of 12 to 20 weeks. The purpose of these lessons is to support rapid acceleration of each child's literacy learning. In 2010, The Ohio State University received a Scaling Up What Works grant from the U.S. Department of Education's Investing in Innovation (i3) Fund to expand the use of Reading Recovery across the country. The award was intended to fund the scale-up of Reading Recovery by training 3,675 new RR Teachers in U.S. schools, thereby expanding capacity to allow service to an additional 88,200 students. The Consortium for Policy Research in Education (CPRE) was contracted to conduct an independent evaluation of the i3 scale up of Reading Recovery over the course of five years. The evaluation includes parallel rigorous experimental and quasi-experimental designs for estimating program impacts, coupled with a large-scale mixed-methods study of program implementation under the i3 scale-up. This report presents findings through the second year of the evaluation. The primary goals of this evaluation were: (1) to assess the success of the scale-up in meeting the i3 grant's expansion goals; (2) to document the implementation of scale-up and fidelity to program standards; and (3) to provide experimental evidence of the impacts of Reading Recovery on student learning under this scale-up effort. This document is the first in a series of three annual reports produced based on our external evaluation of the Reading Recovery i3 Scale-Up. This report presents early results from the experimental impact and implementation studies conducted over the 2010-11 and 2011-12 school years. An appendix includes: Statistical Model for Impacts of Reading Scores. [For "WWC Review of the Report 'Evaluation of the i3 Scale-up of Reading Recovery Year One Report, 2011-12.' What Works Clearinghouse Single Study Review," see ED547670.]

This study examined the effects of Reading Recovery on children's motivational levels, and how motivation may contribute to the effect of the intervention on literacy achievement. Prior studies concluded that Reading Recovery was positively associated with increased student motivation levels, but most of those studies were limited methodologically. The achievement and motivation levels before and after the intervention of Reading Recovery students and similarly low-performing first-grade students were compared using structural equation modeling. It was found that Reading Recovery had a 0.31 treatment effect on achievement after controlling for baseline achievement and motivational differences among the treatment and comparison students. Reading Recovery also was associated with greater average levels of posttest motivation, and motivation was found to mediate the treatment-achievement relationship. This study highlights how important it is for early reading interventions to consider the role motivation plays in literacy acquisition.

This report presents the final results of a four-year independent external evaluation of the impacts and implementation of the scale-up of Reading Recovery, a literacy intervention targeting struggling 1st-grade students. The evaluation of Reading Recovery includes parallel rigorous experimental and quasi-experimental designs for estimating program impacts, coupled with a large-scale, mixed-methods study of program implementation under the Investing in Innovation (i3) scale-up. The primary goals of the evaluation are to: (1) Provide experimental evidence of the short- and long-term impacts of Reading Recovery on student learning in schools that are part of the i3 scale-up; and (2) Assess the implementation of Reading Recovery under the i3 grant, including fidelity to the program model and progress toward the scale-up goals. The impact evaluation includes a multi-site randomized controlled trial (RCT) for estimating immediate impacts, a regression discontinuity study (RD) for estimating longterm impacts, and an implementation study for assessing fidelity of implementation and exploring program implementation in depth. The RCT includes nearly 7,000 randomized students in more than 1,200 schools over four years. The RD study measures Reading Recovery's impacts at the end of first grade and in third grade, and replicates the RCT's immediate post-treatment findings in a separate sample of students. The implementation study involves a combination of qualitative and quantitative research executed on a large scale over the same four-year timeframe. The evaluation's key findings pertain to the following topics: (1) Scale-Up Processes, Challenges, and Outcomes; (2) Immediate Impacts of Reading Recovery; (3) Sustained Impacts of Reading Recovery; and (4) Implementation Fidelity. The authors' analysis revealed strong fidelity to the program model in all of these areas and all years of the scale-up. This suggests that the intervention was delivered as designed to the students in the scale-up, and that teachers delivering Reading Recovery lessons were properly trained. In total, the results of the fidelity analysis support the validity of their impact findings. Three appendices are included. [To view the brief for this report, "Evidence for Early Literacy Intervention: The Impacts of Reading Recovery," see ED586802.]

This naturalistic inquiry evaluated the impact of early literacy intervention on children in London schools. The progress, in the 2005-06 school year, was compared for 234 of the lowest-achieving children in 42 schools serving disadvantaged urban areas. The children, aged around 6 years who received Reading Recovery in their schools, were compared with those in schools which provided them with a range of other interventions. Both groups started the year with literacy levels below that of a 5-year-old. Comparison between the groups was made for reading and writing and phonic knowledge as well as oracy, work habits, social skills, and attitudes to learning. Those children who received Reading Recovery achieved significant gains in all assessments compared with those who did not. At the end of the year the children who had received Reading Recovery had an average reading age of 6 years 7 months, in line with their chronological age. The comparison group was 14 months behind, with an average reading age of 5 years 5 months. The study also evaluated classroom literacy. A word recognition and phonic skills measure was used with all children in the sample Year 1 (age 5-6) classroom in schools with Reading Recovery (605 children) and without Reading Recovery (566 children). Children in sample classrooms, with Reading Recovery available to the lowest group, ended the year with an average reading age 4 months above that of children in comparison classrooms. (Contains 9 figures, 9 tables, and 2 footnotes.)

This study investigated the effectiveness and efficiency of the Reading Recovery early intervention. At-risk 1st-grade students were randomly assigned to receive the intervention during the 1st or 2nd half of the school year. High-average and low-average students from the same classrooms provided additional comparisons. Thirty-seven teachers from across the United States used a Web-based system to register participants (n = 148), received random assignment of the at-risk students from this system, and submitted complete data sets. Performance levels were measured at 3 points across the year on M. M. Clay's (1993a) observation survey tasks, 2 standardized reading measures, and 2 phonemic awareness measures. The intervention group showed significantly higher performance compared with the random control group and no differences compared with average groups. Further analyses explored the efficiency of Reading Recovery to identify children for early intervention service and subsequent long-term literacy support.

Examines the effectiveness of Reading Recovery as compared to a one-on-one skills practice model, group treatment taught by trained Reading Recovery teachers, and a treatment modeled on Reading Recovery provided by teachers trained in a shortened program. Finds that Reading Recovery children performed significantly better than any other treatments and the comparison group. (RS)

This monograph presents information about Reading Recovery, describes the latest research concerning the program, and summarizes practical experience concerning the implementation of this innovation in reading instruction. Chapter 1 presents a general description of Reading Recovery instructional procedures. Chapter 2 contains three case studies that provide a more concrete look at how the program works with individual children and teachers. Chapter 3 discusses a longitudinal study conducted in the Columbus Public Schools to determine both the short-range and the long-range effects of Reading Recovery on a group of at-risk students. Chapter 4 describes the studies of Reading Recovery at sites throughout the state of Ohio during the years of 1985-86, 1986-87, and 198-88. Chapter 5 describes the Reading Recovery staff development component, along with studies of teacher training and development in program techniques. Chapter 6 presents suggestions for school districts or state agencies that wish to implement Reading Recovery. Thirty-three references and three appendixes containing a list of books used in Reading Recovery, a description of the alternative intervention program employed during the first year of the longitudinal study, and measures used to assess children in the Reading Recovery Program are attached. (MS)