Advertisement

Prevention Science

, Volume 12, Issue 1, pp 70–79 | Cite as

Improving Attention and Preventing Reading Difficulties among Low-Income First-Graders: A Randomized Study

  • Eric Dion
  • Catherine Roux
  • Danika Landry
  • Douglas Fuchs
  • Joseph Wehby
  • Véronique Dupéré
Article

Abstract

Students’ inattention is predictive of reading problems and of non-response to effective reading intervention. In this randomized study, 58 first-grade classrooms located in 30 schools were assigned to a control condition or to one of two intervention conditions. In these last two conditions, peer-tutoring activities were conducted to improve classroom reading instruction. In one of the intervention conditions, the Good Behavior Game was also implemented to maximize students’ attention during reading lessons. Both interventions were effective: peer-tutoring activities helped students improve their reading skills and attention was generally higher when the Good Behavior Game was implemented. Contrary to expectations however, students identified as inattentive at pretest did not become better readers when the two interventions were implemented.

Keywords

Attention Reading problems Classroom instruction Peer-tutoring Low-income 

References

  1. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 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.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Barrish, H. H., Saunders, M., & Wolf, M. M. (1969). Good Behavior Game: Effects of individual contingencies for group consequences on disruptive behavior in a classroom. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 2, 119–124.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  5. Conners, C. K. (2000). Conners rating scale-revised. Toronto: Multi-Health Systems.Google Scholar
  6. Cornfield, J. (1978). Randomization by group: A formal analysis. American Journal of Epidemiology, 108, 100–102.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Dally, K. (2006). The influence of phonological processing and inattentive behavior on reading acquisition. Journal of Educational Psychology, 98, 420–437.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Desrochers, A. (2008). The assessment of reading skills among French-speaking children: Test construction procedure and psychometric properties. Ottawa: Cognitive Psychology of Language Laboratory, University of Ottawa.Google Scholar
  9. Dion, E., Morgan, P. L., Fuchs, D., & Fuchs, L. S. (2004). The promise and limitations of reading instruction in the mainstream: The need for a multi-level approach. Exceptionality, 12, 163–173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Dion, E., Borri-Anadon, C., Vanier, N., Potvin, M.-C., & Roux, C. (2005a). Apprendre à lire à deux. Manuel de l’enseignante et matériel de lecture [Learning to read two by two: Teacher’s manual and reading material]. Montréal: Université du Québec à Montréal.Google Scholar
  11. Dion, E., Potvin, M.-C., & Roux, C. (2005b). Attention je lis! Manuel de l’enseignante [Pay Attention, I’m Reading: Teacher’s Manual]. Montréal: Université du Québec à Montréal.Google Scholar
  12. Dion, E., Potvin, M.-C., Gosselin, C., Brodeur, M., Mercier, J., & Roux, C. (2009). Teacher’s management of student’s attention in regular education classrooms: Naturalistic practices and empirically-validated strategies. In G. D. Sideridis & T. A. Citro (Eds.), Classroom management and learning strategies for struggling learners (pp. 19–32). Weston, MA: Learning Disabilities Worlwide.Google Scholar
  13. Dolan, L. J., Kellam, S. G., Brown, C. H., Werthamer-Larsson, L., Rebok, G. W., Mayer, L. S., et al. (1993). The short-term impact of two classroom-based preventive interventions on aggressive and shy behaviors and poor achievement. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 14, 317–345.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. DuPaul, G. J., Ervin, R. A., Hook, C. L., & McGoey, K. E. (1998). Peer tutoring for children with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder: Effects on classroom behavior and academic performance. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 31, 579–592.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Edwards, L., Salant, V., Howard, V. F., Brougher, J., & McLaughlin, T. F. (1995). Effectiveness of self-management on attentional behavior and reading comprehension for children with attention deficit disorder. Child & Family Behavior Therapy, 17, 1–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Fuchs, D., & Fuchs, L. S. (1986). Test procedure bias: A meta-analysis of examiner familiarity effects. Review of Educational Research, 56, 243–262.Google Scholar
  17. Fuchs, D., & Fuchs, L. S. (2005). Peer-assisted learning strategies: Promoting word recognition, fluency, and reading comprehension in young children. Journal of Special Education, 39, 34–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., & Maxwell, L. (1988). The validity of informal reading comprehension measures. Remedial and Special Education, 9, 20–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Glynn, E. L., & Thomas, J. D. (1974). Effect of cueing on self-control of classroom behavior. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 7, 299–306.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Harris, K. R., Graham, S., Reid, R., McElroy, K., & Hamby, R. S. (1994). Self-monitoring of attention versus self-monitoring of performance: Replication and cross-task comparison studies. Learning Disability Quarterly, 17, 121–139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Harris, K. R., Reid, R. R., & Graham, S. (2004). Self-regulation among students with LD and ADHD. In B. Y. L. Wong (Ed.), Learning about learning disabilities (3rd ed., pp. 167–195). San Diego, CA: Elsevier Academic Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Ialongo, N. S., Werthamer, L., Kellam, S. G., Brown, C. H., Wang, S., & Lin, Y. (1999). Proximal impact of two first-grade preventive interventions on the early risk behaviors for later substance abuse, depression, and antisocial behavior. American Journal of Community Psychology, 27, 599–641.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Loe, I. M., Balestrino, M. D., Phelps, R. A., Kurs-Lasky, M., Chaves-Gnecco, D., Paradise, J. L., et al. (2008). Early histories of school-aged children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder. Child Development, 79, 1853–1868.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Martinussen, R., Hayden, J., Hogg-Johnson, S., & Tannock, R. (2005). A meta-analysis of working memory impairments in children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder. Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 44, 377–384.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Mathes, P. G., Howard, J. K., Allen, S. H., & Fuchs, D. (1998). Peer-assisted learning strategies: Responding to the needs of diverse learners. Reading Research Quarterly, 33, 62–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. McMaster, K. N., 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.Google Scholar
  27. Medland, M. B., & Stachhnik, T. J. (1972). Good Behavior Game: A replication and analysis. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 5, 45–51.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Early Child Care Research Network. (2002). The relation of global first-grade environment to structural classroom features and teacher and student behaviors. Elementary School Journal, 102, 367–387.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Nye, B., Konstantopoulos, S., & Hedges, L. V. (2004). How large are teacher effects? Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 26, 237–257.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Rabiner, D. L., Malone, P. S., & the Conduct Problems Prevention Research Group. (2004). The impact of tutoring on early reading achievement for children with and without attention problems. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 32, 273–284.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Raudenbush, S. W., & Bryk, A. S. (2002). Hierarchical linear models: Applications and data analysis methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  32. Raudenbush, S. W., Bryk, A. S., Cheong, Y. F., Congdon, R., & du Toit, M. (2004). HLM 6: Hierarchical linear and nonlinear modeling. Lincolnwood, IL: Scientific Software International.Google Scholar
  33. Reid, R., & Harris, K. R. (1993). Self-monitoring of attention versus self-monitoring of performance: Effects on attention and academic performance. Exceptional Children, 60, 29–40.Google Scholar
  34. Ritchey, K. D., & Speece, D. L. (2006). From letter names to word reading: The nascent role of sublexical fluency. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 31, 301–327.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Rooney, K. J., Hallahan, D. P., & Lloyd, J. W. (1984). Self-recording of attention by learning disabled students in the regular classroom. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 17, 360–364.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. Stage, S. A., Abbott, R. D., Jenkins, J. R., & Berninger, V. W. (2003). Predicting response to early reading intervention from verbal IQ, reading-related language abilities, attention ratings, and verbal IQ-word readings discrepancy: Failure to validate discrepancy method. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 36, 24–33.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. Stoolmiller, M., Eddy, J. M., & Reid, J. B. (2000). Detecting and describing preventive intervention effects in a universal school-based randomized trial targeting delinquent and violent behavior. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 68, 296–306.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. Torgesen, J. K. (2002). The prevention of reading difficulties. Journal of School Psychology, 40, 7–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Torgesen, J. K., Wagner, R. K., Rashotte, C. A., Rose, E., Lindamood, P., Conway, T., et al. (1999). Preventing reading failure in young children with phonological processing disabilities: Group and individual responses to instruction. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91, 579–593.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. U.S. Department of Education Institute of Education Sciences What Works Clearinghouse. (July 2007). Peer-assisted learning strategies. Retrieved January 2, 2008, from http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/reports/beginning_reading/pals/

Copyright information

© Society for Prevention Research 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Eric Dion
    • 1
  • Catherine Roux
    • 1
  • Danika Landry
    • 1
  • Douglas Fuchs
    • 2
  • Joseph Wehby
    • 2
  • Véronique Dupéré
    • 3
  1. 1.Département d’éducation et formation spécialiséesUniversité du Québec à MontréalMontrealCanada
  2. 2.Department of Special EducationVanderbilt UniversityNashvilleUSA
  3. 3.Department of Child DevelopmentTufts UniversityMedfordUSA

Personalised recommendations