An Experimental Evaluation of Guided Reading and Explicit Interventions for Primary-Grade Students At-Risk for Reading Difficulties

Autor/inn/en	Denton, Carolyn A.; Fletcher, Jack M.; Taylor, W. Pat; Barth, Amy E.; Vaughn, Sharon
Titel	An Experimental Evaluation of Guided Reading and Explicit Interventions for Primary-Grade Students At-Risk for Reading Difficulties
Quelle	In: Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, 7 (2014) 3, S.268-293 (26 Seiten)Infoseite zur Zeitschrift PDF als Volltext Verfügbarkeit
Sprache	englisch
Dokumenttyp	gedruckt; online; Zeitschriftenaufsatz
ISSN	1934-5747
DOI	10.1080/19345747.2014.906010
Schlagwörter	Elementary School Students; At Risk Students; Reading Difficulties; Intervention; Reading Instruction; Grade 1; Instructional Effectiveness; Direct Instruction; Small Group Instruction; Conventional Instruction; Word Recognition; Decoding (Reading); Reading Comprehension; Statistical Analysis; Gates MacGinitie Reading Tests; Woodcock Johnson Tests of Achievement + Suchen Sie Ihr Suchwort? Reading difficulty; Leseschwierigkeit; Leseunterricht; School year 01; 1. Schuljahr; Schuljahr 01; Unterrichtserfolg; Direct instructional procedues; Direct instructional approach; Unterrichtsverfahren; Worterkennung; Dekodierung; Leseverstehen; Statistische Analyse
Abstract	Considerable research evidence supports the provision of explicit instruction for students at risk for reading difficulties; however, one of the most widely implemented approaches to early reading instruction is Guided Reading (GR; Fountas & Pinnel, 1996), which deemphasizes explicit instruction and practice of reading skills in favor of extended time reading text. This study evaluated the two approaches in the context of supplemental intervention for at-risk readers at the end of Grade 1. Students (n = 218) were randomly assigned to receive GR intervention, explicit intervention (EX), or typical school instruction (TSI). Both intervention groups performed significantly better than TSI on untimed word identification. Significant effects favored EX over TSI on phonemic decoding and one measure of comprehension. Outcomes for the intervention groups did not differ significantly from each other; however, an analysis of the added value of providing each intervention relative to expected growth with typical instruction indicated that EX is more likely to substantially accelerate student progress in phonemic decoding, text reading fluency, and reading comprehension than GR. Implications for selection of Tier 2 interventions within a response-to-intervention format are discussed. (As Provided).
Anmerkungen	Routledge. Available from: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. 325 Chestnut Street Suite 800, Philadelphia, PA 19106. Tel: 800-354-1420; Fax: 215-625-2940; Web site: http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals
Erfasst von	ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), Washington, DC
Update	2017/4/10