Socioeconomic status and response to a reading intervention: A quantile regression approach

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cynthia Ulysse Norris ◽  
Jeffrey Samuel Angelo Shero ◽  
Rasheda Haughbrook ◽  
LaTasha R Holden ◽  
Wilhelmina van Dijk ◽  
...  

In response to inadequate response to instruction in reading, interventions are often implemented to address deficiencies in component skills associated with reading performance. However, there are factors that influence how children respond to these interventions. Specifically, socioeconomic status (SES) is a well-known correlate of academic achievement, and we hypothesized that family-SES would be associated with response to reading intervention. We explored the estimated associations between SES (free and reduced lunch status) and the distribution of response to intervention (residualized gain scores on the decoding and expressive vocabulary subtests of the Woodcock-Johnson Tests of Achievement) using the quantile regression approach in a diverse sample of elementary students (N = 1,651). Results indicated that higher family-SES was more strongly associated with greater responsiveness to intervention for both the decoding and expressive vocabulary skills measured. We conclude with a call to more thoroughly consider predictors of individual differences in response to intervention.

2017 ◽  
Vol 83 (3) ◽  
pp. 244-254 ◽  
Author(s):  
Russell Gersten ◽  
Madhavi Jayanthi ◽  
Joseph Dimino

The report of the national response to intervention (RTI) evaluation study, conducted during 2011–2012, was released in November 2015. Anyone who has read the lengthy report can attest to its complexity and the design used in the study. Both these factors can influence the interpretation of the results from this evaluation. In this commentary, we (a) explain what the national RTI evaluation examined and highlight the strengths and weaknesses of the design, (b) clarify the results of the evaluation and highlight some key implementation issues, (c) describe how rigorous efficacy trials on reading interventions can supplement several issues left unanswered by the national evaluation, and (d) discuss implications for future research and practice based on the findings of the national evaluation and reading intervention research.


2011 ◽  
Vol 45 (6) ◽  
pp. 515-525 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sharon Vaughn ◽  
Jade Wexler ◽  
Audrey Leroux ◽  
Greg Roberts ◽  
Carolyn Denton ◽  
...  

The authors report the effects of a yearlong, very small-group, intensive reading intervention for eighth-grade students with serious reading difficulties who had demonstrated low response to intervention (RTI) in both Grades 6 and 7. At the beginning of Grade 6, a cohort of students identified as having reading difficulties were randomized to treatment or comparison conditions. Treatment group students received researcher-provided reading intervention in Grade 6, which continued in Grade 7 for those with low response to intervention; comparison students received no researcher-provided intervention. Participants in the Grade 8 study were members of the original treatment ( N = 28) and comparison ( N = 13) conditions who had failed to pass a state-mandated reading comprehension test in both Grades 6 and 7. In Grade 8, treatment group students received a 50-minute, daily, individualized, intensive reading intervention in groups of two to four students per teacher. The results showed that students in the treatment condition demonstrated significantly higher scores than comparison students on standardized measures of comprehension (effect size = 1.20) and word identification (effect size = 0.49), although most continued to lack grade-level proficiency in reading despite 3 years of intervention. Findings from this study provide a rationale for intensive intervention for middle school students with severe reading difficulties.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document