Effects of Tier I Differentiation and Reading Intervention on Reading Fluency, Comprehension, and High Stakes Measures

References

• Alber-Morgan, S. R., Ramp, E. M., Anderson, L. L., & Martin, C. M. (2007). Effects of repeated readings, error correction, and performance feedback on the fluency and comprehension of middle school students with behavior problems. The Journal of Special Education, 41(1), 17–30.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Allington, R. L. (2005). The other five “pillars” of effective reading instruction. Reading Today, 22(6), 3.
   Google Scholar
• Allington, R. L. (2006). Fluency: Still waiting after all these years. In S. J. Samuels & A. E. Farstrup (Eds.), What research has to say about fluency instruction (pp. 94–105). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
   Google Scholar
• Bingham, G. E., & Hall-Kenyon, K. M. (2013). Examining teachers' beliefs about and implementation of a balanced literacy framework. Journal of Research in Reading, 36(1), 14–28. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9817.2010.01483
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bitter, C., O'Day, J., Gubbins, P., & Socias, M. (2009). What works to improve student literacy achievement? An examination of instructional practices in a balanced literacy approach. Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk, 14(1), 17–44. doi:10.1080/10824660802715403
   Google Scholar
• Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
   Google Scholar
• Cohen, J. (1992). A power primer. Psychological Bulletin, 112(1), 155–159. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.112.1.155
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cohen, J. (1994). The earth is round (p < 05). American Psychologist, 49(12), 997–1003.doi:10.1037/0003-066X.49.12.997
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Connor, C. M., Alberto, P. A., Compton, D. L., & O'Connor, R. E. (2014). Improving reading outcomes for students with or at risk for reading disabilities: A synthesis of the contributions from the Institute of Educational Science Research Centers, (NCSER 2014–3000). Washington, DC: National Center for Special Education Research, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. Retrieved from http://ies.ed.gov/
   Google Scholar
• Davidson, J. (1982). The group mapping activity for instruction in reading and thinking. Journal of Reading, 26, 52–56.
   Google Scholar
• Dolan, D. J. (2006). Reading their way: A balanced approach that increases achievement. Reading & Writing Quarterly: Overcoming Learning Difficulties, 22(4), 305–323, doi:10.1080/1057356050045574510
   Google Scholar
• Engelmann, S., Meyer, L., Carnine, L., Becker, W., Eisele, J., Johnson, G., & Science Research Associates. (2002). Corrective reading. Chicago, IL: SRA Corrective Reading McGraw Hill.
   Google Scholar
• Espin, C. A., & Foegen, A. (1996). Validity of general outcome measures for predicting secondary students' performance on content-area tasks. Exceptional Children, 62(6), 497–514.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Buchner, A., & Lang, A. G. (2009). Statistical power analyses using G*Power 3.1: Tests for correlation and regression analyses. Behavior Research Methods, 41, 1149–1160.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Feingold, A. (2009). Effect sizes for growth-modeling analysis for controlled clinical trials in the same metric as for classical analysis. Psychological Methods, 14(1), 43–53. doi:10.1037/a0014699
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Feister, L. (2013). Early warning confirmed: An update on third-grade reading. Baltimore, MD: The Annie E. Casey Foundation. Available at http://www.aecf.org/m/resourcedoc/AECF-EarlyWarningConfirmed-2013.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Flanagan, D. P., Ortiz, S. O., Alfonso, V. C., & Mascolo, J. T. (2006). The Achievement Test Desk Reference (2nd ed.) Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
   Google Scholar
• Fountas, I. C., & Pinnell, G. S. (2006). Leveled books, K–8: Matching texts to readers for effective teaching. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
   Google Scholar
• Frey, N., & Fisher, D. (2010). Identifying instructional moves during guided learning. The Reading Teacher, 64(2), 84–95.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fuchs, D., Fuchs, L. S., & Vaughn, S. (2008). Response to intervention: A framework for reading educators. Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
   Google Scholar
• Gorsuch, G., & Taguchi, E. (2010). Developing reading fluency comprehension using repeated reading: Evidence from longitudinal student reports. Language Teaching Research, 14(1), 27–58.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hamilton, C., & Shinn, M. R. (2003). Characteristics of word callers: An investigation of the accuracy of teachers' judgments of reading comprehension and oral reading skills. School Psychology Review, 32, 228–240.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hernandez, D. J. (2012). Double jeopardy: How third-grade reading skills and poverty influence high school graduation. Retrieved from http://www.aecf.org/m/resourcedoc/AECF-DoubleJeopardy-2012-Full.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Hoffman, J. V., Roser, N. L., Salas, R., Patterson, E., & Pennington, J. (2001). Test leveling and “little books” in first-grade reading. Journal of Literacy Research, 33(3), 507–528. doi:10.1080/10862960109548121
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Indiana Department of Education. (2011a). Indiana Reading Evaluation And Determination (IREAD-3). Retrieved from http://www.doe.in.gov/assessment/iread-3
   Google Scholar
• Indiana Department of Education. (2011b). Indiana Statewide Testing for Educational Progress Plus (ISTEP+) Grades 3–8. Retrieved from http://www.doe.in.gov/assessment/istep-grades-3-8
   Google Scholar
• Kim, A., Vaughn, S., Wanzek, J. & Wei, S. (2004). Graphic organizers and their effects on the reading comprehension of students with LD: A synthesis of research. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 37(2), 105–118.
   Google Scholar
• Klingbeil, D. A., McComas, J. J., Burns, M. K., & Helman, L. (2015). Comparison of predictive validity and diagnostic accuracy of screening measures of reading skills. Psychology In The Schools, 52(5), 500–514. doi:10.1002/pits.21839
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kuhn, M. (2005). Helping students become accurate, expressive readers: Fluency instruction for small groups. The Reading Teacher, 58(4), 338–344.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kuhn, M. R., & Stahl, S. A. (2003). Fluency: A review of developmental and remedial practices. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95(1), 3–21. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.95.1.3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lu, A. (2013). States insist on third grade reading proficiency. Stateline. Retrieved from www.pewstates.org/projects/stateline/headlines/states-insist-on-third-grade-reading-proficiency-85899520263
   Google Scholar
• Manoli, P., & Papadopoulou, M. (2012). Graphic organizers as a reading strategy: Research findings and issues. Creative Education, 3(3), 348–356. Doi.org/10.4236/ce.2012.33055
   Google Scholar
• Margosein, C. M., Pascarella, E. T., & Pflaum, S. W. (1982). The effects of instruction using semantic mapping on vocabulary and comprehension. The Journal of Early Adolescence, 2, 185–194.
   Google Scholar
• Mason, L. H. (2013). Teaching students who struggle with learning to think before, while, and after reading: Effects of self-regulated strategy development instruction. Reading & Writing Quarterly: Overcoming Learning Difficulties, 29(2), 124–144.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Meisinger, E. B., Bradley, B. A., Schwanenflugel, P. J., Kuhn, M., & Morris, R. (2009). Myth and reality of the word caller: The relationship between teacher nominations and prevalence among elementary school children. School Psychology Quarterly, 24, 147–159.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Miura-Wayman, M., Wallace, T., Ives-Wiley, H., Tichá, R., & Espin, C. A. (2007). Literature synthesis on curriculum-based measurement in reading. Journal of Special Education, 41, 85–120.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• National Institute of Child Health and Human Development. (2000). National Reading Panel report: Teaching children to read: An evidence based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction. Washington, DC: National Institutes of Health, National Institute of Child Health and Human Development.
   Google Scholar
• Nichols, W., Rupley, W., & Rasinski, T. (2009). Fluency in learning to read for meaning: Going beyond repeated readings. Literacy Research & Instruction, 48(1), 1–13. Doi:10.1080/19388070802161906
   Google Scholar
• O'Connor, R. E., Swanson, H. L., & Geraghty, C. (2010). Improvement in reading rate under independent and difficult test levels: Influences on word and comprehension skills. Journal of Educational Psychology, 102, 1–19.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Paris, S. G., & Flukes, J. (2005). Assessing children's metacognition about strategic reading. In S. Israel, C. C. Block, K. Bauserman, & K. Kinnucan-Welsch (Eds.), Metacognition in literacy learning: Theory, assessment, instruction, and professional development (pp. 121–139). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
   Google Scholar
• Peugh, J. L. (2010). A practical guide to multilevel modeling. Journal of School Psychology, 48(1), 85–112. doi:10.1016/j.jsp.2009.09.002
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rasinski, T. V. (2012). Why reading fluency should be hot! The Reading Teacher, 65(8), 516–522.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rush, C. B., Dobbins, N., & Kurtts, S. A. (2010). Response to intervention: Right on track. Electronic Journal for Inclusive Education, 2(6). Retrieved from http://corescholar.libraries.wright.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1120&context=ejie
   Google Scholar
• Samuels, S. (1979). The method of repeated reading. The Reading Teacher Journal, 32(4), 403–408.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Samuels, S. J., Shanahan, T., & Shaywitz, S. E. (2000). Fluency. National Reading Panel, Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction, reports of the subgroups (Sections 3.1–3.43). Washington, DC: National Institutes of Health.
   Google Scholar
• Schorzman, E., & Cheek, E. (2004). Structured strategy instruction: Investigating an intervention for improving sixth graders' reading comprehension. Reading Psychology, 25(1), 37–60.
   Google Scholar
• Stahl, S. A., & Kuhn, M. R. (2002). Making it sound like language: Developing fluency. The Reading Teacher, 55, 582–584.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Valencia, S., Smith, A., Reece, A., Li, M., Wisxon, K., & Newman, H. (2010). Oral reading fluency assessment: Issues of construct, criterion, and consequential validity. Reading Research Quarterly, 45(3), 270–291. doi:10.1598/RRW.45.3.1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vaughan-Jensen, J., Adame, C., McLean, L., & Gámez, B. (2011). Test review of Wechsler Individual Achievement Test (3rd ed.). Journal Of Psychoeducational Assessment, 29(3), 286–291. doi:10.1177/0734282910385645
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wechsler, D. (2009). Wechsler Individual Achievement Test (3rd ed. [WIAT III]). San Antonio, TX: Pearson.
   Google Scholar
• What Works Clearinghouse Intervention Reports. (2007, March 19). Intervention: reading recovery. United States Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences. Retrieved from: www.whatworks.ed.gov/PDF/Intervention/WWC_Reading_Recovery_031907.html
   Google Scholar
• Winters, M. A., Wagner, D., Trivitt, J. R., & Greene, J. P. (2008). Building on the basics: The impact of high-stakes testing on student proficiency in low-stakes subjects. Civic Report No. 54. Center for Civic Innovation, Manhattan Institute for Policy Research. Retrieved from https://www.manhattan-institute.org/html/building-basics-impact-high-stakes-testing-student-proficiency-low-stakes-subjects-5836.html
   Google Scholar