WWC review of this study

Engaging struggling adolescent readers to improve reading skills.

Kim, J. S., Hemphill, L., Troyer, M., Thomson, J. M., Jones, S. M., LaRusso, M. D., & Donovan, S (2017). Reading Research Quarterly, 52(3), 357-382. Retrieved from: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1146095

  • Randomized Controlled Trial
     examining 
    402
     Students
    , grades
    6-8

Reviewed: October 2019

At least one finding shows strong evidence of effectiveness
At least one statistically significant positive finding
Meets WWC standards without reservations
Alphabetics outcomes—Statistically significant positive effects found
Outcome
measure
Comparison Period Sample Intervention
mean
Comparison
mean
Significant? Improvement
    index
ESSA
rating

Reading Inventory and Scholastic Evaluation: Word Recognition and Decoding

Strategic Adolescent Reading Intervention vs. Business as usual

1 Year

Full sample;
402 students

N/A

N/A

Yes

 
 
8
 
Comprehension outcomes—Indeterminate effects found
Outcome
measure
Comparison Period Sample Intervention
mean
Comparison
mean
Significant? Improvement
    index
ESSA
rating

Reading Inventory and Scholastic Evaluation: Efficacy of Reading for Basic Comprehension

Strategic Adolescent Reading Intervention vs. Business as usual

1 Year

Full sample;
401 students

N/A

N/A

No

--
More Outcomes

Reading Inventory and Scholastic Evaluation: Morphological Awareness

Strategic Adolescent Reading Intervention vs. Business as usual

1 Year

Full sample;
401 students

N/A

N/A

No

--

Reading Inventory and Scholastic Evaluation: Vocabulary

Strategic Adolescent Reading Intervention vs. Business as usual

1 Year

Full sample;
401 students

N/A

N/A

No

--

Reading Inventory and Scholastic Evaluation: Sentence

Strategic Adolescent Reading Intervention vs. Business as usual

1 Year

Full sample;
401 students

N/A

N/A

No

--

Reading Inventory and Scholastic Evaluation: Reading Comprehension

Strategic Adolescent Reading Intervention vs. Business as usual

1 Year

Full sample;
398 students

N/A

N/A

No

--

Characteristics of study sample as reported by study author.


  • 73% Free or reduced price lunch
  • Race
    Asian
    2%
    Black
    21%
  • Ethnicity
    Hispanic
    24%

  • Rural, Suburban, 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
    • x
    • w
    • y

    Massachusetts

Setting

The study was conducted in middle schools in the northeastern United States during the 2013-14 school year. Eight Title I schools from four school districts participated in the study, representing both urban and rural/suburban locales. The intervention occurred in school classrooms during an elective or remediation period within the school day.

Study sample

All sample members were students in Grades 6 through 8, and all had scored below proficient on the 2013 Massachusetts Comprehensive Assessment System English language arts assessment. At the time of assignment, 69.1% of intervention students were identified as low-income, 49.3% identified as European American, 19.3% identified as African American, 25.6% identified as Latino, 1.54% of the students identified as Asian, 0.5% of the students identified as Native American/Pacific Islander, and 3.9% of the students identified as Mixed/other. Additionally, 30.0% of intervention students were special education students and 13.0% were English learners, meaning at least 57.0% were general education students. At the time of assignment, 76.4% of comparison students were identified as low-income, 51.3% identified as European American, 20.0% identified as African American, 22.7% identified as Latino, 2.5% of the students identified as Asian, 0.7% of the students identified as Native American/Pacific Islander, and 2.9% of the students identified as Mixed/other. Additionally, 35.2% of intervention students were special education students and 18.5% were English learners, meaning at least 46.3% were general education students.

Intervention Group

The Strategic Adolescent Reading Intervention (STARI) is a reading intervention designed to increase reading engagement and skills among adolescents with reading difficulties. STARI focuses on essential reading skills such as decoding and fluency, while also teaching meaning-making strategies that are necessary for comprehension. STARI is primarily a reading curriculum, organized into a series of theme-based units that are chosen because they are of interest to adolescents and because they are relevant to adolescents' lives. The curriculum is composed of novels and shorter reading passages with a lexile level that is appropriate for students who have demonstrated low performance on reading achievement tests. STARI is also designed to promote social interactions that are necessary for student engagement. Specifically, STARI uses four types of peer collaboration: 1) partner-assisted fluency practice, reciprocal teaching of comprehension strategies, partner reading and responding to novels and nonfiction texts, and peer debate. Students received the intervention during an elective period or a whole-school intervention period. The intervention lasted an entire school year and was administered during an elective or remediation period between three and five class periods a week.

Comparison Group

Comparison conditions ("business as usual") varied both across and within schools. Of the comparison group students, 70% received an alternative reading intervention. Some of these alternative interventions were designed by teachers in the schools, while others were proprietary interventions. Of the comparison group students, 30% received general academic support, such as a study skills course or state test preparation.

Support for implementation

Teachers attended a three-day summer institute as an introduction to STARI. Furthermore, they received regular in-class guidance from a project literacy coach, who observed, offered feedback, modeled instructional strategies, and provided email and phone consultation. Additionally, the authors note that they evaluated the quality of the STARI implementation through data collection of both students and teachers. Implementation fidelity was operationalized using observational data from teachers' delivery of the intervention and students' engagement with the intervention.

 

Your export should download shortly as a zip archive.

This download will include data files for study and findings review data and a data dictionary.

Connect With the WWC

loading
back to top