Theory & Related Research



Conclusions &  Implications





Home Page






          This study compared the reading growth of two groups of struggling first-grade readers during a twelve week period. A group of five first-graders were exposed to a modified Reading Recovery approach as an intervention, while a group of four first-graders were exposed to the Early Reading Intervention program as an intervention. The Control group received instruction only from the classroom teacher who is using the 2005 edition of the Houghton-Mifflin program to instruct reading. The modified Reading Recovery group and the Early Reading Intervention (ERI) group also received instruction from the classroom teacher. At the beginning and end of the twelve-week study, the twenty students in this first-grade class were given the Developmental Reading Assessment (DRA), and the Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills (DIBELS). Clay's Dictation subtest from the Observation Survey was given at the beginning, in the middle, and at the end of the twelve-week period to provide information on students' sound-symbol knowledge. A data sheet was used to analyze each child's Dictation subtest. An observational checklist analyzing students' attentional abilities in the classroom during the literacy block was completed on each student at the beginning, in the middle, and at the end of the twelve-week period. Anecdotal notes/observations were made during the modified Reading Recovery lessons. Running records were conducted monthly on the modified Reading Recovery group in order to help determine which strategies needed to be stressed or prompted for during lessons. At the end of the twelve week study, the modified Reading Recovery group made the greatest growth in the following areas: reading level, phoneme segmentation fluency, and attention. The ERI group made the biggest growth in nonsense word fluency.