Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Predictors of at-risk kindergarteners’ later reading difficulty: examining learner-by-intervention interactions

  • Published:
Reading and Writing Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This longitudinal study examined (a) the second-grade reading outcomes of 368 children who participated in either experimental or school-designed supplemental intervention in kindergarten, and (b) the influence and interactions of learner variables and type of intervention on reading achievement. Descriptive findings indicated that percentages of students identified as at risk or not at risk were statistically comparable between interventions. Entry-level letter identification scores predicted performance on all second-grade reading outcomes for students in both interventions. The influence of entry-level sound matching, receptive vocabulary knowledge, English language learner status and reading outcomes was moderated by type of intervention. Performance on a curriculum-embedded measure administered 8 weeks into intervention reliably predicted second grade reading performance.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Al Otaiba, S., Folsom, J. S., Schatschneider, C., Wanzek, J., Greulich, L., Meadows, J., et al. (2011). Predicting first-grade reading performance from kindergarten response to tier 1 instruction. Exceptional Children, 77, 453–470.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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. doi:10.1177/07419325020230050501.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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. doi:10.1177/00222194060390050401.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barth, A. E., Stuebing, K. K., Anthony, J. L., Denton, C. A., Mathes, P. G., Fletcher, J. M., et al. (2008). Agreement among response to intervention criteria for identifying responder status. Learning and Individual Differences, 18, 296–307. doi:10.1016/j.lindif.2008.04.004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carrow-Woolfolk, E. (1995). Oral and Written Language Scales: Listening comprehension and oral expression. Cedar Pines, MN: American Guidance Service.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cavanaugh, C. L., Kim, A.-H., Wanzek, J., & Vaughn, S. (2004). Kindergarten reading interventions for at-risk students: Twenty years of research. Learning Disabilities: A Contemporary Journal, 2(1), 9–21.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chard, D. J., Stoolmiller, M., Harn, B. A., Wanzek, J., Vaughn, S., Linan-Thompson, S., et al. (2008). Predicting reading success in a multilevel schoolwide reading model: A retrospective analysis. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 41, 174–188. doi:10.1177/0022219407313588.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cirino, P. T., Vaughn, S., Linan-Thompson, S., Cardenas-Hagen, E., Fletcher, J. M., & Francis, D. J. (2009). One-year follow-up outcomes of Spanish and English interventions for English language learners at risk for reading problems. American Educational Research Journal, 46, 744–781. doi:10.3102/0002831208330214.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Compton, D. L., Olinghouse, N. G., Elleman, A., Vining, J., Appleton, A. C., Vail, J., et al. (2005). Putting transfer back on trial: Modeling individual differences in the transfer of decoding-skill gains to other aspects of reading acquisition. Journal of Educational Psychology, 97, 55–69. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.97.1.55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Connor, C. M., Morrison, F. J., & Katch, E. L. (2004). Beyond the reading wars: The effect of classroom instruction by child interactions on early reading. Scientific Studies of Reading, 8, 305–336.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Connor, C. M., Piasta, S. B., Fishman, B., Glasney, S., Schatschneider, C., Crowe, E., et al. (2009). Individualizing student instruction precisely: Effects of child × instruction interactions on first graders’ literacy development. Child Development, 80, 77–100.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coyne, M. D., Kame'enui, E. J., Simmons, D. C., & Harn, B. A. (2004). Beginning reading intervention as inoculation or insulin: First-grade reading performance of strong responders to kindergarten intervention. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 37, 90–104. doi:10.1177/00222194040370020101.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coyne, M. D., Little, M., Rawlinson, D., Simmons, D., Kwok, O., Kim, M., Simmons, L., Hagan-Burke, S., & Civetelli, C. (2013). Replicating the impact of a supplemental beginning reading intervention: The role of instructional context. Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, 6, 1–23. doi:10.1080/19345747.2012.706694.

  • Denton, C. A., Kethley, C., Nimon, K., Kurz, T. B., Mathes, P. G., Shih, M., et al. (2010). Effectiveness of a supplemental early reading intervention scaled up in multiple schools. Exceptional Children, 76, 394–416.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dunn, L. M., & Dunn, L. M. (1997). Peabody picture vocabulary test—Third edition (PPVT-III). Bloomington, MN: Pearson Assessments.

    Google Scholar 

  • Foorman, B. R., Breier, J. I., & Fletcher, J. M. (2003). Interventions aimed at improving reading success: An evidence-based approach. Developmental Neuropsychology, 24, 613–639.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Foorman, B. R., Francis, D. J., Fletcher, J. M., Schatschneider, C., & Mehta, P. (1998). The role of instruction in learning to read: Preventing reading failure in at risk children. Journal of Educational Psychology, 90, 37–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Foulin, J. N. (2005). Why is letter-name knowledge such a good predictor of learning to read? Reading and Writing, 18, 129–155. doi:10.1007/s11145-004-5892-2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fuchs, D., Fuchs, L. S., & Compton, D. L. (2004). Identifying reading disabilities by responsiveness-to-instruction: Specifying measures and criteria. Learning Disability Quarterly, 27, 216–228. doi:10.2307/1593674.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gersten, R., Baker, S. K., Shanahan, T., Linan-Thompson, S., Collins, P., & Scarcella, R. (2007). Effective literacy and English language instruction for English learners in the elementary grades: A practice guide (NCEE 2007-4011). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. Retrieved from http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/publications/practiceguides.

  • Gersten, R., Compton, D., Connor, C. M., Dimino, J., Santoro, L., Linan-Thompson, S., et al. (2009). Assisting students struggling with reading: Response to Intervention and multi-tier intervention in the primary grades. A practice guide (NCEE 2009-4045). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Institute of Education Sciences. Retrieved from http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/publications/practiceguides/.

  • Good, R. H., I. I. I., & Kaminski, R. A. (Eds.). (2002). Dynamic indicators of basic early literacy skills (6th ed.). Eugene, OR: Institute for the Development of Educational Achievement.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hogan, T. P., & Thomson, J. M. (2010). Epilogue to Journal of Learning Disabilities special edition, “Advances in the early detection of reading risk”: Future advances in the early detection of reading risk: Subgroups, dynamic relations, and advanced methods. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 43, 383–386. doi:10.1177/0022219410369077.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, E. S., Jenkins, J. R., Petscher, Y., & Catts, H. W. (2009). How can we improve the accuracy of screening instruments? Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 24, 174–185. doi:10.1111/j.1540-5826.2009.00291.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kieffer, M. J., & Vukovic, R. K. (2012). Components and context: Exploring sources of reading difficulties for language minority learners and native English speakers in urban schools. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 45, 433–452. doi:10.1177/0022219411432683.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lesaux, N. K., Lipka, O., & Siegel, L. S. (2006). Investigating cognitive and linguistic abilities that influence the reading comprehension skills of children from diverse linguistic backgrounds. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 19, 99–131. doi:10.1007/s11145-005-4713-6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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 and Practice, 18, 255–267. doi:10.1111/1540-5826.00080.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Connor, R. E., Bocian, K., Beebe-Frankenberger, M., & Linklater, D. L. (2010). Responsiveness of students with language difficulties to early intervention in reading. The Journal of Special Education, 43, 220–235. doi:10.1177/0022466908317789.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Connor, R. E., Fulmer, D., Harty, K. R., & Bell, K. M. (2005). Layers of reading intervention in kindergarten through third grade: Changes in teaching and student outcomes. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 38, 440–455. doi:10.1177/00222194050380050701.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oslund, E. L., Hagan-Burke, S., Taylor, A. B., Simmons, D. C., Simmons, L., Kwok, O., Johnson, C., & Coyne, M. D. (2012). Predicting kindergarteners’ response to early reading intervention: An examination of progress-monitoring measures. Reading Psychology, 33, 78–103. doi:10.1080/02702711.2012.630611.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pearson/Scott Foresman. (2004). Scott Foresman sidewalks: Early reading intervention. Glenview, IL: Pearson Education, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scammaca, N., Vaughn, S., Roberts, G., Wanzek, J., & Torgesen, J. K. (2007). Extensive reading interventions in grades K-3: From research to practice. Portsmouth, NH: RMC Research Corporation, Center on Instruction.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schatschneider, C., Fletcher, J. M., Francis, D. J., Carlson, C. D., & Foorman, B. R. (2004). Kindergarten prediction of reading skills: A longitudinal comparative analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96, 265–282. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.96.2.265.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simmons, D. C., Coyne, M. D., Kwok, O., McDonagh, S., Harn, B. A., & Kame’enui, E. J. (2008). Indexing response to intervention: A longitudinal study of reading risk from kindergarten through third grade. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 41, 158-173. doi:10.1177/0022219407313587

    Google Scholar 

  • Simmons, D. C., Coyne, M. D., Hagan-Burke, S., Kwok, O., Simmons, L. E., Johnson, C., Zou, Y., Taylor, A. B., McAlenney, A. L., Ruby, M., & Crevecoeur, Y. C. (2011). Effects of supplemental reading interventions in authentic contexts: A comparison of kindergarteners’ response. Exceptional Children, 77, 207–228.

    Google Scholar 

  • Torgesen, J. K. (2000). Individual differences in response to early interventions in reading. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 15, 55–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Torgesen, J. K., Wagner, R. K., & Rashotte, C. A. (1999). Test of word reading efficiency. Austin, TX: Pro-Ed.

    Google Scholar 

  • University of Oregon Center on Teaching and Learning. (2002). Assessment committee: Analysis of reading assessment measures. Retrieved from https://dibels.uoregon.edu/techreports/dibels_5th_ed.pdf.

  • Vadasy, P. F., Sanders, E. A., & Abbott, R. D. (2008). Effects of supplemental early reading intervention at 2-year follow up: Reading skill growth patterns and predictors. Scientific Studies of Reading, 12, 51–89. doi:10.1080/10888430701746906.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vadasy, P. F., Sanders, E. A., & Peyton, J. A. (2006). Code-oriented instruction for kindergarten students at risk for reading difficulties: A randomized field trial with paraeducator implementers. Journal of Educational Psychology, 98, 508–528. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.98.3.508.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vellutino, F. R., Scanlon, D. M., Sipay, E. R., Small, S. G., Pratt, A., Chen, R. S., et al. (1996). Cognitive profiles of difficult-to-remediate and readily remediated poor readers: Early intervention as a vehicle for distinguishing between cognitive and experiential deficits as basic causes of specific reading disability. Journal of Educational Psychology, 88, 601–638. doi:10.1037//0022-0663.88.4.601.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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. doi:10.1177/00222194060390020401.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wagner, R. K., Torgesen, J. K., & Rashotte, C. A. (1999). Comprehensive test of phonological processing. Austin, TX: Pro-Ed.

    Google Scholar 

  • Woodcock, R. W. (1987, 1998). Woodcock reading mastery tests—Revised/Normative Update. Bloomington, MN: Pearson Assessments.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Educational Psychology, Texas A&M University, 4225 TAMU, 704 Harrington Tower, College Station, TX, 77843-4225, USA

    Deborah C. Simmons, Leslie E. Simmons, Shanna Hagan-Burke, Oi-man Kwok & Minjung Kim

  2. Department of Psychology, Texas A&M University, 4235 TAMU, College Station, TX, 77843-4235, USA

    Aaron B. Taylor

  3. Department of Educational Psychology, Neag School of Education, University of Connecticut, 249 Glenbrook Road, Unit 3064, Storrs, CT, 06269-3064, USA

    Michael D. Coyne

  4. Department of Child, Family and Community Sciences, University of Central Florida, P.O. Box 161250, Orlando, FL, 32816-1250, USA

    Mary E. Little

  5. University of Central Florida, 4000 Central Florida Boulevard TA 93 Room 403, Orlando, FL, 32816, USA

    D’Ann M. Rawlinson

  6. Meadows Center for Preventing Educational Risk, The University of Texas at Austin, 1912 Speedway, D4900, Austin, TX, 78712, USA

    Eric L. Oslund

Authors
  1. Deborah C. Simmons
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Aaron B. Taylor
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Eric L. Oslund
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Leslie E. Simmons
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Michael D. Coyne
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Mary E. Little
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. D’Ann M. Rawlinson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Shanna Hagan-Burke
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Oi-man Kwok
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Minjung Kim
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Deborah C. Simmons.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Simmons, D.C., Taylor, A.B., Oslund, E.L. et al. Predictors of at-risk kindergarteners’ later reading difficulty: examining learner-by-intervention interactions. Read Writ 27, 451–479 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-013-9452-5

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-013-9452-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation