A meta-analysis of the RTI literature for children at risk for reading disabilities

Journal of Learning Disabilities

Volumn 44, Issue 3, 2011, Pages 283-295

  Tran, Loan ^a   Sanchez, Tori ^a   Arellano, Brenda ^a   Swanson, H Lee ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

intervention; meta analysis; reading disabilities; treatment resistance; treatment response

Indexed keywords

CHILD; HUMAN; LANGUAGE DEVELOPMENT; LANGUAGE DISABILITY; LEARNING DISORDER; META ANALYSIS; PSYCHOLOGICAL ASPECT; READING; REVIEW; RISK FACTOR; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

CHILD; CHILD LANGUAGE; HUMANS; LANGUAGE DEVELOPMENT DISORDERS; LEARNING DISORDERS; READING; RISK FACTORS; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 79955530675     PISSN: 00222194     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0022219410378447     Document Type: Review

References (36)

1. References marked with an asterisk indicate studies included in the meta-analysis.
2. Allor, J.H., Fuchs, D., & Mathes, P. (2001). Do children with or without lexical retrieval difficulties respond differently to instruction. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 34, 264-275.
3. Al Otaiba, S., & Fuchs, D. (2002). Characteristics of children who are unresponsive to early literacy intervention: A review of the literature. Remedial and Special Education, 23, 300-316.
4. Al Otaiba, S., & Fuchs, D. (2006). Who are the young children for whom best practices in reading are ineffective? An experimental and longitudinal study. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 39, 414-431.
5. Baron, R.M., & Kenny, D.A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173-1182.
6. Berninger, V.W., Abbott, R.D., Vermeulen, K., Ogier, S., Brooksher, R., Zook, D., & Lemos, Z. (2002). Comparison of faster and slower responders to early intervention in reading: Differentiating features of their language profiles. Learning Disability Quarterly, 25, 59-76.
7. Burns, M.K., Appleton, J.J., & Stehouwer, J.D. (2005). Meta-analytic review of responsiveness-to-intervention research: Examining field-based and research-implemented models. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment. Special Issue: Response to Intervention, 23, 381-394.
8. Bryk, A.S., & Raudenbush, S.W. (2002). Hierarchical linear models: Applications and data analysis methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
9. Carlson, K.D., & Schmidt, F.L. (1999). Impact of experimental design on effect size: Findings from the research literature on training. Journal of Applied Psychology, 84, 851-862.
10. Case, L.P., Speece, D.L., & Molloy, D.E. (2003). The validity of a response-to-instruction paradigm to identify reading disabilities: A longitudinal analysis of individual differences and contextual factors. School Psychology Review, 32, 557-582.
11. Chapman, J.W., Turner, W.E., & Prochnow, J.E. (2001). Does success in reading recovery program depend on developing proficiency in phonological-processing skills? A longitudinal study in whole language instructional context. Scientific Studies of Reading, 5, 141-176.
12. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
13. Compton, D.L., Fuchs, D., Fuchs, L.S., & Bryant, J.D. (2006). Selecting at-risk readers in first grade for early intervention: A two-year longitudinal study of decision rules and procedures. Journal of Educational Psychology, 98, 394-409.
14. Fuchs, D., Compton, D.L., Fuchs, L.S., Bryant, J., & Davis, G.N. (2008). Making "secondary intervention" work in a three-tier responsiveness-to-intervention model: Findings from the first-grade longitudinal reading study of the national research center on learning disabilities. Reading and Writing, 21, 413-436.
15. Glass, G., McGraw, B., & Smith, M.L. (1981). Meta-analysis in social science. Beverly Hills, CA. Sage.
16. Hedges, L.V., & Olkin, I. (1985). Statistical methods for meta-analysis. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
17. Hunter, J.E., & Schmidt, F.L. (1990). Methods of meta-analysis. New York: Russell Sage.
18. Lovett, M.W., De Palma, M., Frijters, J., Steinbach, K., Temple, M., Benson, N., & Lacerenza, L. (2008). Interventions for reading difficulties: A comparison of response to intervention by ELL and EFL struggling readers. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 41, 333-352. http://www.csa.com/.
19. Mastropieri, M.A., & Scruggs, T.E. (2005). Feasibility and consequences of response to intervention: Examination of the issues and scientific evidence as a model for the identification of individuals with learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 38, 525-531.
20. McMaster, K.L., Fuchs, D., Fuchs, L.S., & Compton, D.L. 2005. Responding to nonresponders: An experimental field trial of identification and intervention methods. Exceptional Children, 71, 445-463.
21. Menzies, H.M., Mahdavi, J.N., & Lewis, J.L. (2008). Early intervention in reading: From research to practice. Remedial and Special Education, 29, 67-77.
22. Nelson, J.R., Benner, G.J., & Gonzalez, J. (2003). Learner characteristics that influence the treatment effectiveness of early literacy interventions: A meta-analytic review. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 18, 255-267.
23. Rosenthal, R. (1994). Parametric measures of effect size. In H. Cooper & L. V. Hedges (Eds.), The Handbook of Research Synthesis (pp. 232-260). NY: Russell Sage Foundation.
24. SAS Institute. (2008). SAS/STAT user's guide. Cary, NC: Author. Snijders, T.A., & Bosker, R.J. (2003). Multilevel analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
25. Swanson, H.L. (1999). Reading research for students with LD: A meta-analysis in intervention outcomes. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 32, 504-532. http://www.csa.com/.
26. Swanson, H.L., & Hoskyn, M. (1998). Experimental intervention research on students with learning disabilities: A meta-analysis of treatment outcomes. Review of Educational Research, 68, 277-321.
27. Swanson, H.L., Hoskyn, M., & Lee, C. (1999). Interventions for students with learning disabilities: A meta-analysis of treatment outcomes. New York: Guilford. http://www.csa.com/.
28. Swanson, H.L., & Sachse-Lee, C. (2000). A meta-analysis of single-subject-design intervention research for students with LD. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 33(2), 114-136.
29. Torgesen, J. Alexander, A.W., Wagner, R.K., Rashotte, C.A., Voeller, K.K.S., & Conway, T. (2001). Intensive remedial instruction for children with severe reading disabilities: Immediate and long-term outcomes from two instructional approaches. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 34, 33-58.
30. Ukrainetz, T.A., Ross, C.L., & Harm, H.M. (2009). An investigation of treatment scheduling for phonemic awareness with kindergartners who are at risk for reading difficulties. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 40, 86-100.
31. Vaughn, S., Linan-Thompson, S., & Hickman, P. (2003). Response to instruction as a means of identifying students with reading/ learning disabilities. Exceptional Children, 69, 391-409.
32. Vellutino, F.R., Scanlon, D.M., & Lyon, G.R. (2000). Differentiating between difficulty to remediate and readily remediated poor readers: More evidence against the IQ achievement discrepancy definition of reading disability. Journal of Learning Disability, 33, 223-238.
33. Vellutino, F.R., Scanlon, D.M., Sipay, E.R., Small, S.G., Pratt, A., Chen, R., & Denkla, M.B. (1996). Cognitive profiles of difficult-to-remediate and readily remediated poor readers: Early intervention as vehicle for distinguishing between cognitive and experiential deficits as basic causes of specific reading disability. Journal of Educational Psychology, 88, 601-638.
34. Vellutino, F.R., Scanlon, D.M., Small, S., & Fanuele, D.P. (2006). Response to intervention as a vehicle for distinguishing between children with and without reading disabilities: Evidence for the role of kindergarten and first-grade interventions. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 39, 157-169.
35. Vellutino, F.R., Scanlon, D.M., Zhang, H., & Schatschneider, C. (2008). Using response to kindergarten and first grade intervention to identify children at-risk for long-term reading difficulties. Reading and Writing, 21, 437-480.
36. Yoder, P., & Compton, D. (2004). Identifying predictors of treatment response. Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities Research Reviews, 10, 162-168.