Loading…
A Meta-Analysis of Interventions for Struggling Readers in Grades 4–12: 1980–2011
This meta-analysis synthesizes the literature on interventions for struggling readers in Grades 4 through 12 published between 1980 and 2011. It updates Scammacca et al.’s analysis of studies published between 1980 and 2004. The combined corpus of 82 study-wise effect sizes was meta-analyzed to dete...
Saved in:
Published in: | Journal of learning disabilities 2015-07, Vol.48 (4), p.369-390 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , , , |
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Subjects: | |
Citations: | Items that this one cites |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
cited_by | |
---|---|
cites | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c395t-c5831ca48b31950feba0b3e51b18628a7ca0f30675d867496c69dc3ee1171fc3 |
container_end_page | 390 |
container_issue | 4 |
container_start_page | 369 |
container_title | Journal of learning disabilities |
container_volume | 48 |
creator | Scammacca, Nancy K. Roberts, Greg Vaughn, Sharon Stuebing, Karla K. |
description | This meta-analysis synthesizes the literature on interventions for struggling readers in Grades 4 through 12 published between 1980 and 2011. It updates Scammacca et al.’s analysis of studies published between 1980 and 2004. The combined corpus of 82 study-wise effect sizes was meta-analyzed to determine (a) the overall effectiveness of reading interventions studied over the past 30 years, (b) how the magnitude of the effect varies based on student, intervention, and research design characteristics, and (c) what differences in effectiveness exist between more recent interventions and older ones. The analysis yielded a mean effect of 0.49, considerably smaller than the 0.95 mean effect reported in 2007. The mean effect for standardized measures was 0.21, also much smaller than the 0.42 mean effect reported in 2007. The mean effects for reading comprehension measures were similarly diminished. Results indicated that the mean effects for the 1980–2004 and 2005–2011 groups of studies were different to a statistically significant degree. The decline in effect sizes over time is attributed at least in part to increased use of standardized measures, more rigorous and complex research designs, differences in participant characteristics, and improvements in the school’s “business-as-usual” instruction that often serves as the comparison condition in intervention studies. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1177/0022219413504995 |
format | article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_3975734</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><ericid>EJ1064370</ericid><sage_id>10.1177_0022219413504995</sage_id><sourcerecordid>3735127711</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c395t-c5831ca48b31950feba0b3e51b18628a7ca0f30675d867496c69dc3ee1171fc3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kc1KJTEQhYPMoFdn9m5mCLhx02PS-etshIv4i4Mw4z6kc6vbSN-OJt2CO9_BN_RJTHP14gizSsH56uRUFUK7lPyiVKkDQsqypJpTJgjXWmygGRWsKriqyBc0m-Ri0rfQdkq3hBBeKrmJtkpOdKmpnKGzOf4Ngy3mve0ek084NPi8HyA-QD_40CfchIj_DnFs2873Lf4DdgExYd_j05jLhPnL0zMtv6Gvje0SfH97d9D1yfH10VlxeXV6fjS_LBzTYiicqBh1llc1o1qQBmpLagaC1rSSZWWVs6RhRCqxqKTiWjqpF44B5Hlp49gOOlzZ3o31EhYup4y2M3fRL218NMF686_S-xvThgfDtBKK8Wyw_2YQw_0IaTBLnxx0ne0hjMlQWWVM54VmdO8TehvGmBc1UZpJrSTTmSIrysWQUoRmHYYSM13JfL5Sbvn5cYh1w_tZMvBjBUD0bi0fX1AiOVNTsmKlJ9vCh1T_-_AVcJeibg</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1693697639</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>A Meta-Analysis of Interventions for Struggling Readers in Grades 4–12: 1980–2011</title><source>Applied Social Sciences Index & Abstracts (ASSIA)</source><source>EBSCOhost MLA International Bibliography With Full Text</source><source>SAGE:Jisc Collections:SAGE Journals Read and Publish 2023-2024:2025 extension (reading list)</source><source>ERIC</source><creator>Scammacca, Nancy K. ; Roberts, Greg ; Vaughn, Sharon ; Stuebing, Karla K.</creator><creatorcontrib>Scammacca, Nancy K. ; Roberts, Greg ; Vaughn, Sharon ; Stuebing, Karla K.</creatorcontrib><description>This meta-analysis synthesizes the literature on interventions for struggling readers in Grades 4 through 12 published between 1980 and 2011. It updates Scammacca et al.’s analysis of studies published between 1980 and 2004. The combined corpus of 82 study-wise effect sizes was meta-analyzed to determine (a) the overall effectiveness of reading interventions studied over the past 30 years, (b) how the magnitude of the effect varies based on student, intervention, and research design characteristics, and (c) what differences in effectiveness exist between more recent interventions and older ones. The analysis yielded a mean effect of 0.49, considerably smaller than the 0.95 mean effect reported in 2007. The mean effect for standardized measures was 0.21, also much smaller than the 0.42 mean effect reported in 2007. The mean effects for reading comprehension measures were similarly diminished. Results indicated that the mean effects for the 1980–2004 and 2005–2011 groups of studies were different to a statistically significant degree. The decline in effect sizes over time is attributed at least in part to increased use of standardized measures, more rigorous and complex research designs, differences in participant characteristics, and improvements in the school’s “business-as-usual” instruction that often serves as the comparison condition in intervention studies.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0022-2194</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1538-4780</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1177/0022219413504995</identifier><identifier>PMID: 24092916</identifier><identifier>CODEN: JLDIAD</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Los Angeles, CA: SAGE Publications</publisher><subject>Adolescent ; Age differences ; Bayesian Statistics ; Child ; Corpus analysis ; Dyslexia - rehabilitation ; Early intervention ; Education, Special - statistics & numerical data ; Effect Size ; Effectiveness studies ; Elementary education ; Elementary Secondary Education ; Grade 4 ; Humans ; Instructional Improvement ; Intervention ; Learning disabilities ; Literature Reviews ; Meta Analysis ; Norm Referenced Tests ; Outcome Assessment, Health Care - statistics & numerical data ; Outcome Measures ; Participant Characteristics ; Predictor Variables ; Program Effectiveness ; Reading Comprehension ; Reading Difficulties ; Reading disabilities ; Research Design ; Secondary education ; Special education ; Standardized Tests ; Statistical Significance ; Student Characteristics ; Synthesis ; Systematic review</subject><ispartof>Journal of learning disabilities, 2015-07, Vol.48 (4), p.369-390</ispartof><rights>Hammill Institute on Disabilities 2013</rights><rights>Hammill Institute on Disabilities 2013.</rights><rights>Copyright SAGE PUBLICATIONS, INC. Jul-Aug 2015</rights><rights>Hammill Institute on Disabilities 2013 2013</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c395t-c5831ca48b31950feba0b3e51b18628a7ca0f30675d867496c69dc3ee1171fc3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>230,314,776,780,881,27901,27902,30976</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/detail?accno=EJ1064370$$DView record in ERIC$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24092916$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Scammacca, Nancy K.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Roberts, Greg</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Vaughn, Sharon</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Stuebing, Karla K.</creatorcontrib><title>A Meta-Analysis of Interventions for Struggling Readers in Grades 4–12: 1980–2011</title><title>Journal of learning disabilities</title><addtitle>J Learn Disabil</addtitle><description>This meta-analysis synthesizes the literature on interventions for struggling readers in Grades 4 through 12 published between 1980 and 2011. It updates Scammacca et al.’s analysis of studies published between 1980 and 2004. The combined corpus of 82 study-wise effect sizes was meta-analyzed to determine (a) the overall effectiveness of reading interventions studied over the past 30 years, (b) how the magnitude of the effect varies based on student, intervention, and research design characteristics, and (c) what differences in effectiveness exist between more recent interventions and older ones. The analysis yielded a mean effect of 0.49, considerably smaller than the 0.95 mean effect reported in 2007. The mean effect for standardized measures was 0.21, also much smaller than the 0.42 mean effect reported in 2007. The mean effects for reading comprehension measures were similarly diminished. Results indicated that the mean effects for the 1980–2004 and 2005–2011 groups of studies were different to a statistically significant degree. The decline in effect sizes over time is attributed at least in part to increased use of standardized measures, more rigorous and complex research designs, differences in participant characteristics, and improvements in the school’s “business-as-usual” instruction that often serves as the comparison condition in intervention studies.</description><subject>Adolescent</subject><subject>Age differences</subject><subject>Bayesian Statistics</subject><subject>Child</subject><subject>Corpus analysis</subject><subject>Dyslexia - rehabilitation</subject><subject>Early intervention</subject><subject>Education, Special - statistics & numerical data</subject><subject>Effect Size</subject><subject>Effectiveness studies</subject><subject>Elementary education</subject><subject>Elementary Secondary Education</subject><subject>Grade 4</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Instructional Improvement</subject><subject>Intervention</subject><subject>Learning disabilities</subject><subject>Literature Reviews</subject><subject>Meta Analysis</subject><subject>Norm Referenced Tests</subject><subject>Outcome Assessment, Health Care - statistics & numerical data</subject><subject>Outcome Measures</subject><subject>Participant Characteristics</subject><subject>Predictor Variables</subject><subject>Program Effectiveness</subject><subject>Reading Comprehension</subject><subject>Reading Difficulties</subject><subject>Reading disabilities</subject><subject>Research Design</subject><subject>Secondary education</subject><subject>Special education</subject><subject>Standardized Tests</subject><subject>Statistical Significance</subject><subject>Student Characteristics</subject><subject>Synthesis</subject><subject>Systematic review</subject><issn>0022-2194</issn><issn>1538-4780</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2015</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>7SW</sourceid><sourceid>7QJ</sourceid><recordid>eNp1kc1KJTEQhYPMoFdn9m5mCLhx02PS-etshIv4i4Mw4z6kc6vbSN-OJt2CO9_BN_RJTHP14gizSsH56uRUFUK7lPyiVKkDQsqypJpTJgjXWmygGRWsKriqyBc0m-Ri0rfQdkq3hBBeKrmJtkpOdKmpnKGzOf4Ngy3mve0ek084NPi8HyA-QD_40CfchIj_DnFs2873Lf4DdgExYd_j05jLhPnL0zMtv6Gvje0SfH97d9D1yfH10VlxeXV6fjS_LBzTYiicqBh1llc1o1qQBmpLagaC1rSSZWWVs6RhRCqxqKTiWjqpF44B5Hlp49gOOlzZ3o31EhYup4y2M3fRL218NMF686_S-xvThgfDtBKK8Wyw_2YQw_0IaTBLnxx0ne0hjMlQWWVM54VmdO8TehvGmBc1UZpJrSTTmSIrysWQUoRmHYYSM13JfL5Sbvn5cYh1w_tZMvBjBUD0bi0fX1AiOVNTsmKlJ9vCh1T_-_AVcJeibg</recordid><startdate>20150701</startdate><enddate>20150701</enddate><creator>Scammacca, Nancy K.</creator><creator>Roberts, Greg</creator><creator>Vaughn, Sharon</creator><creator>Stuebing, Karla K.</creator><general>SAGE Publications</general><general>SAGE Publications and Hammill Institute on Disabilities</general><general>SAGE PUBLICATIONS, INC</general><scope>7SW</scope><scope>BJH</scope><scope>BNH</scope><scope>BNI</scope><scope>BNJ</scope><scope>BNO</scope><scope>ERI</scope><scope>PET</scope><scope>REK</scope><scope>WWN</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7QJ</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20150701</creationdate><title>A Meta-Analysis of Interventions for Struggling Readers in Grades 4–12</title><author>Scammacca, Nancy K. ; Roberts, Greg ; Vaughn, Sharon ; Stuebing, Karla K.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c395t-c5831ca48b31950feba0b3e51b18628a7ca0f30675d867496c69dc3ee1171fc3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2015</creationdate><topic>Adolescent</topic><topic>Age differences</topic><topic>Bayesian Statistics</topic><topic>Child</topic><topic>Corpus analysis</topic><topic>Dyslexia - rehabilitation</topic><topic>Early intervention</topic><topic>Education, Special - statistics & numerical data</topic><topic>Effect Size</topic><topic>Effectiveness studies</topic><topic>Elementary education</topic><topic>Elementary Secondary Education</topic><topic>Grade 4</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Instructional Improvement</topic><topic>Intervention</topic><topic>Learning disabilities</topic><topic>Literature Reviews</topic><topic>Meta Analysis</topic><topic>Norm Referenced Tests</topic><topic>Outcome Assessment, Health Care - statistics & numerical data</topic><topic>Outcome Measures</topic><topic>Participant Characteristics</topic><topic>Predictor Variables</topic><topic>Program Effectiveness</topic><topic>Reading Comprehension</topic><topic>Reading Difficulties</topic><topic>Reading disabilities</topic><topic>Research Design</topic><topic>Secondary education</topic><topic>Special education</topic><topic>Standardized Tests</topic><topic>Statistical Significance</topic><topic>Student Characteristics</topic><topic>Synthesis</topic><topic>Systematic review</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Scammacca, Nancy K.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Roberts, Greg</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Vaughn, Sharon</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Stuebing, Karla K.</creatorcontrib><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC (Ovid)</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC (Legacy Platform)</collection><collection>ERIC( SilverPlatter )</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC PlusText (Legacy Platform)</collection><collection>Education Resources Information Center (ERIC)</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Applied Social Sciences Index & Abstracts (ASSIA)</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>Journal of learning disabilities</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Scammacca, Nancy K.</au><au>Roberts, Greg</au><au>Vaughn, Sharon</au><au>Stuebing, Karla K.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><ericid>EJ1064370</ericid><atitle>A Meta-Analysis of Interventions for Struggling Readers in Grades 4–12: 1980–2011</atitle><jtitle>Journal of learning disabilities</jtitle><addtitle>J Learn Disabil</addtitle><date>2015-07-01</date><risdate>2015</risdate><volume>48</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>369</spage><epage>390</epage><pages>369-390</pages><issn>0022-2194</issn><eissn>1538-4780</eissn><coden>JLDIAD</coden><abstract>This meta-analysis synthesizes the literature on interventions for struggling readers in Grades 4 through 12 published between 1980 and 2011. It updates Scammacca et al.’s analysis of studies published between 1980 and 2004. The combined corpus of 82 study-wise effect sizes was meta-analyzed to determine (a) the overall effectiveness of reading interventions studied over the past 30 years, (b) how the magnitude of the effect varies based on student, intervention, and research design characteristics, and (c) what differences in effectiveness exist between more recent interventions and older ones. The analysis yielded a mean effect of 0.49, considerably smaller than the 0.95 mean effect reported in 2007. The mean effect for standardized measures was 0.21, also much smaller than the 0.42 mean effect reported in 2007. The mean effects for reading comprehension measures were similarly diminished. Results indicated that the mean effects for the 1980–2004 and 2005–2011 groups of studies were different to a statistically significant degree. The decline in effect sizes over time is attributed at least in part to increased use of standardized measures, more rigorous and complex research designs, differences in participant characteristics, and improvements in the school’s “business-as-usual” instruction that often serves as the comparison condition in intervention studies.</abstract><cop>Los Angeles, CA</cop><pub>SAGE Publications</pub><pmid>24092916</pmid><doi>10.1177/0022219413504995</doi><tpages>22</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0022-2194 |
ispartof | Journal of learning disabilities, 2015-07, Vol.48 (4), p.369-390 |
issn | 0022-2194 1538-4780 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_3975734 |
source | Applied Social Sciences Index & Abstracts (ASSIA); EBSCOhost MLA International Bibliography With Full Text; SAGE:Jisc Collections:SAGE Journals Read and Publish 2023-2024:2025 extension (reading list); ERIC |
subjects | Adolescent Age differences Bayesian Statistics Child Corpus analysis Dyslexia - rehabilitation Early intervention Education, Special - statistics & numerical data Effect Size Effectiveness studies Elementary education Elementary Secondary Education Grade 4 Humans Instructional Improvement Intervention Learning disabilities Literature Reviews Meta Analysis Norm Referenced Tests Outcome Assessment, Health Care - statistics & numerical data Outcome Measures Participant Characteristics Predictor Variables Program Effectiveness Reading Comprehension Reading Difficulties Reading disabilities Research Design Secondary education Special education Standardized Tests Statistical Significance Student Characteristics Synthesis Systematic review |
title | A Meta-Analysis of Interventions for Struggling Readers in Grades 4–12: 1980–2011 |
url | http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-31T04%3A55%3A36IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=A%20Meta-Analysis%20of%20Interventions%20for%20Struggling%20Readers%20in%20Grades%204%E2%80%9312:%201980%E2%80%932011&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20learning%20disabilities&rft.au=Scammacca,%20Nancy%20K.&rft.date=2015-07-01&rft.volume=48&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=369&rft.epage=390&rft.pages=369-390&rft.issn=0022-2194&rft.eissn=1538-4780&rft.coden=JLDIAD&rft_id=info:doi/10.1177/0022219413504995&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E3735127711%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c395t-c5831ca48b31950feba0b3e51b18628a7ca0f30675d867496c69dc3ee1171fc3%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1693697639&rft_id=info:pmid/24092916&rft_ericid=EJ1064370&rft_sage_id=10.1177_0022219413504995&rfr_iscdi=true |