Study: 82917

Practice Guide

Review Details

Reviewed: February 2023

At least one finding shows promising evidence of effectiveness

At least one statistically significant positive finding

Meets WWC standards without reservations

For:

Practice Guide (findings for Individualized, intensive Tier 3 reading intervention—Denton et al. (2013))

Using:

Rating:

Meets WWC standards without reservations because it is a randomized controlled trial with low attrition.

This review may not reflect the full body of research evidence for this intervention.

Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.

Findings

Oral reading fluency outcomes—Indeterminate effect found for the domain
Outcome measure	Comparison	Period	Sample	Intervention mean	Comparison mean	Significant?	Improvement index	Evidence tier
DIBELS Oral Reading Fluency	Individualized, intensive Tier 3 reading intervention—Denton et al. (2013) vs. Business as usual	0 Days	Full sample; 71 students	48.75	47.32	No	--

Reading Comprehension outcomes—Indeterminate effect found for the domain
Outcome measure	Comparison	Period	Sample	Intervention mean	Comparison mean	Significant?	Improvement index	Evidence tier
Gates Passage Comprehension	Individualized, intensive Tier 3 reading intervention—Denton et al. (2013) vs. Business as usual	0 Days	Full sample; 71 students	18.86	13.80	No	--
WJ III Passage Comprehension	Individualized, intensive Tier 3 reading intervention—Denton et al. (2013) vs. Business as usual	0 Days	Full sample; 72 students	89.85	86.92	No	--

Word reading outcomes—Statistically significant positive effect found for the domain
Outcome measure	Comparison	Period	Sample	Intervention mean	Comparison mean	Significant?	Improvement index	Evidence tier
WJ III Basic Reading	Individualized, intensive Tier 3 reading intervention—Denton et al. (2013) vs. Business as usual	0 Days	Full sample; 72 students	95.72	90.32	Yes	22
TOWRE - Test of Word Reading Efficiency	Individualized, intensive Tier 3 reading intervention—Denton et al. (2013) vs. Business as usual	0 Days	Full sample; 72 students	90.45	85.60	No	--

Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.

Sample Characteristics

Characteristics of study sample as reported by study author.

Urban
- B
- A
- C
- D
- E
- F
- G
- I
- H
- J
- K
- L
- P
- M
- N
- O
- Q
- R
- S
- V
- U
- T
- W
- X
- Z
- Y
- a
- h
- i
- b
- d
- e
- f
- c
- g
- j
- k
- l
- m
- n
- o
- p
- q
- r
- s
- t
- u
- v
- x
- w
- y
West

Study Details

Setting

This study was conducted in 10 elementary schools (52 classrooms) in the southwest region of the United States. Four of those schools were near a small city, and the remainder were in a large urban school district. The areas were separated by approximately 150 miles. 103 students across these 10 schools were randomized within schools to either the intervention or comparison group, though only 72 students remained in the study.

Study sample

The sample characteristics were reported separately for the intervention and comparison group, who had a mean age of 7.8 and 7.7 years respectively. Following are additional details about each group. The analytic intervention sample included 47 students; 51% were female, 28% African American, 57% were Hispanic, 13% were white, and 2% were American Indian. Of students in the analytic intervention sample, 79% were eligible for Free and Reduced Price Lunch; 31% were in special education (though data were missing for two students); 30% were classified as limited English proficiency, 21% were repeating first grade; and 43% were in the urban school district. Among those assigned to the comparison group, 44% were female, 48% were African American, 36% were Hispanic, 16% were white, and no students were American Indian. 84% of students in the comparison condition were eligible for Free and Reduced Price Lunch, 35% were in special education, 28% were classified as having limited English proficiency, 4% were repeating first grade, and 48% were in the urban school district.

Intervention Group

Over the course of 24-26 weeks students in the intervention group met in groups of two or three for daily sessions, with each session lasting 45 minutes, in addition to their regular in-class reading instruction. The intervention was primarily based on "Responsive Reading Instruction," a flexible toolkit of supplemental reading activities for early grades. To this program activities were added that targeted spelling and reading multi-syllable words. For students who required additional fluency assistance, an adaptation of "Read Naturally" was also used. Those administering the intervention had a wide range of activities to choose from. Their choices were guided by results from the DIBELS ORF exam, administered every four weeks to all students in the study, and from daily assessments administered to a subset of intervention students. Teachers were taught to use assessment results to guide instruction, and received ongoing coaching to assist in this. Eight students in the intervention group also received supplemental reading instruction from their schools, though these weren't "comprehensive" supplemental reading services. This supplemental instruction was considered "typical school practice" (p. 12).

Comparison Group

The comparison group condition was the business-as-usual condition. Comparison group students, like intervention students, received regular classroom learning instruction. DIBELS ORF results were provided to regular classroom teachers for all students, and teachers were taught how to interpret the results. As part of regular school practice, 16 students in the comparison group received supplemental reading instruction, such as tutoring and small-group lessons.

Support for implementation

Researcher selected interventionists participated in 18 hours of training prior to the intervention, 6 hours of training half way through the year, weekly professional development early in the intervention followed by bi-weekly professional development that in sum was approximately 22 hours.

Effects of tier 3 intervention for students with persistent reading difficulties and characteristics of inadequate responders.