Reading Intervention After Grade 1:
Serving Maximum Numbers of
Struggling Readers Effectively
1
University of Utah Reading Clinic
Appalachian State University
Kathleen J. Brown, Darrell Morris, Matt
Fields, Stacey Lowe, Debbie Skidmore,
Debbie Van Gorder,Connie Weinstein
2
Theoretical Framework

Virginia Model of Intervention:
Early Steps = effective for at-risk G1 students in
embedded, implicit, and explicit code
classrooms
Next Steps = effective for struggling G2-3
students when delivered by volunteers
(Brown et al., 2000; Morris, Shaw, & Perney, 1990;
Morris, Tyner, & Perney, 2000; Santa & Hoien, 1999)
3
Theoretical Framework

Virginia Model of Intervention:
– guided reading @ instructional level
– systematic, isolated code instruction
– fluency instruction
– 1-on-1 format
(Brown et al., 2000; Morris, Shaw, & Perney, 1990;
Morris, Tyner, & Perney, 2000; Santa & Hoien, 1999
4
Research Questions:

Replication of Morris et al., (1990)
Is Next Steps effective for struggling readers
above G1?

Extension of Morris et al., (1990)
Can Next Steps be delivered effectively by
non-certified educators, who are supervised
by an intervention specialist?
5
Method

N = 81 G2-G6 students from 8 Title 1
schools

39% ethnic minority; 46% free or
reduced lunch; 23.5% ELL

NS and Control students equivalent at
baseline; reading level = “primer”
6
Method

Next Steps Intervention
–
–
–
–

(Tx)
1-on-1
45 min.
2x per week
guided reading at instructional level
word study
fluency training (rate + accuracy)
Title 1 Intervention
(Control)
– 30-45 min. daily small group,
– reinforce Open Court
7
Method

Assessment Data Sources
– NSSI Passage Reading & Word Recognition
• 90% accuracy, grade level rate, comprehension
– WRMT (Woodcock Reading Mastery Test)

ANCOVA
– Pretest scores used as covariates
– Analyses:
• Next Steps Treatment vs. Control
• Certified vs. Non-Certified Instructor
• Non-Certified Instructor vs. Control
8
Research Questions:

Replication:
Is Next Steps effective for struggling
readers above G1?
9
Results: Treatment vs. Control
Next
Steps
Control
F
P
Effect
size
NSSI Passage
M
Reading
(SD)
4.1a
(1.2)
3.3b
(1.2)
17.7
<.01*
.72
NSSI Word
Recognition
M
(SD)
31.8
(3.3)
28.7
(4.8)
17.75
<.01*
.93
WRMT
Word Attack
M
(SD)
25.6
(6.8)
21.4
(5.9)
5.27
< .05*
.51
WRMT
M
Comprehension(SD)
29.3
(4.3)
24.4
(4.2)
28.24
<.01*
1.18
a
early G2+
b
late G1+
10
Passage Reading Level Coding
Code #
1
2
3
4
5
6
Reading Level
Pre-Primer
Primer
1.2 (late G1)
2.1 (early G2)
2.2 (late G2)
3.0
11
Results: WRMT Percentiles
WRMT Word Attack
Next Steps
Control
Average
Raw
Percentile
Grade Score Equivalent
Average
Raw
Percentile
Grade Score Equivalent
2
25.8
77th
2
23.4
71st
3
27.3
67th
3
18.8
40th
12
Results: WRMT Percentiles
WRMT Passage Comprehension
Next Steps
Control
Average
Raw
Percentile
Grade Score Equivalent
Average
Raw
Percentile
Grade Score Equivalent
2
28.4
52nd
2
24.3
38th
3
30.1
39th
3
23.9
20th
13
Discussion

Next Steps is effective at helping struggling
readers above G1--even in Open Court
classrooms

Next Steps students gained approximately
1 year’s’ growth in reading ability in only 45
sessions

Contrast this with control students who
gained approximately 1/2 year’s growth in
over 100 sessions
14
Research Questions:

Extension:
Can Next Steps be delivered effectively
by non-certified educators, who are
supervised by an intervention
specialist?
15
Results: Non-Certified vs. Control
NonControl
Certified
F
P
Effect
size
NSSI Passage
Reading
M
(SD)
3.9a
(1.1)
3.3b
(1.5)
4.3
< .05*
.55
NSSI Word
Recognition
M
(SD)
31.2
(3.2)
28.7
(4.8)
8.6
< .01**
.78
WRMT
Word Attack
M
(SD)
23.5
(6.1)
21.4
(5.9)
.1
.7457
n.s.
WRMT
M
Comprehension (SD)
28.6
(4.5)
24.4
(4.2)
14.3
< .01**
1.01
a
almost early G2
b
late G1+
16
Results: Non-Certified vs. Teachers
NonTeachers
certified
F
P
NSSI Passage
Reading
M
(SD)
3.9a
(1.1)
4.4b
(1.2)
1.8
n.s.
NSSI Word
Recognition
M
(SD)
31.2
(3.2)
32.4
(3.5)
1.5
n.s.
WRMT
M
Word Attack
(SD)
WRMT
M
Comprehension (SD)
23.5
(6.1)
28.6
(4.5)
27.9
(6.0)
30.2
(4.3)
11.3 < .01**
a
almost early G2
b
middle G2
1.0
Effect
Size
1.10
n.s.
17
Discussion

Next Steps can be delivered effectively by
non-certified educators
– with supervision from intervention specialist

Next Steps students tutored by non-certified
educators outperformed control students on
all measures--except word attack

Only significant difference between certified &
non-certified NS students = word attack
– exception may be due to teacher expertise &
Open Court phonics strand
18
Discussion

What makes Virginia model effective?
– 1-on-1
– targets reading instructional level
– systematic, isolated decoding instruction
– fluency work
– pacing: “raise the bar” asap
– time on task (packed 45 min.)
19
Discussion

What accounts for effectiveness of
non-certified personnel?
– all participants supervised by IS
– high experience level
– practicum model = ongoing mentoring
• modeling
• observation
• feedback
20