Advertisement

Reading and Writing

, Volume 31, Issue 1, pp 133–153 | Cite as

A longitudinal investigation of direct and indirect links between reading skills in kindergarten and reading comprehension in tenth grade

  • Christopher T. Stanley
  • Yaacov Petscher
  • Hugh Catts
Article
First Online:

Abstract

In this study, researchers examined the extent to which several fundamental measures of reading proficiency from kindergarten students (N = 3180) were linked to reading comprehension in tenth grade while controlling for third grade vocabulary and oral reading fluency. Analyses tested the direct and indirect relations between and among kindergarten, third grade, and tenth grade measures. Results showed significant direct effects from kindergarten nonsense word fluency and letter naming fluency to tenth grade reading comprehension, along with significant indirect effects of kindergarten nonsense word fluency and vocabulary to tenth grade reading comprehension. Findings suggest that fundamental precursors maintain strong impact upon reading comprehension into the secondary school years. These findings are discussed along with implications for interventions and ideas for future research.

Keywords

Reading comprehension Reading development Early prediction Simple view 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. ACT, Inc. (2009). ACT profile report-national: Graduating class 2009 national. Iowa City, IA: Author.Google Scholar
  2. Ahmed, Y., Francis, D. J., York, M., Fletcher, J. M., Barnes, M., & Kulesz, P. (2016). Validation of the direct and indirect mediation (DIME) model of reading comprehension in grades 7 through 12. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 44–45, 68–82. doi: 10.1016/j.cedpsych.2016.02.002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Astrom, R. L., Wadsworth, S. J., & DeFries, J. C. (2007). Etiology of the stability of reading difficulties: The longitudinal twin study of reading disabilities. Twin Research and Human Genetics, 10(3), 434–439.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Barrett, P. (2007). Structural equation modelling: Adjudging model fit. Personality and Individual Differences, 42, 815–824. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2006.09.018.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Beck, I., & McKeown, M. (1991). Conditions of vocabulary acquisition. In R. Barr, M. Kamil, P. Mosenthal, & P. D. Pearson (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (Vol. 2, pp. 789–814). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  6. Blackwell, L. S., Trzesniewski, K. H., & Dweck, C. S. (2007). Implicit theories of intelligence predict achievement across an adolescent transition: A longitudinal study and an intervention. Child Development, 78, 246–263. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8624.2007.00995.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bowles, R. P., & Montroy, J. J. (2013). Latent growth curve modeling using structural equation modeling. In Y. Petscher, C. Schatschneider, & D. L. Compton (Eds.), Applied quantitative analysis in education and the social sciences (pp. 245–264). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  8. Campbell, J. M. (1998). Review of the peabody picture vocabulary test, third edition. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 16, 334–338.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Catts, H. W., Hogan, T. P., & Adlof, S. M. (2005). Developmental changes in reading and reading disabilities. In H. Catts & A. Kamhi (Eds.), Connections between language and reading disabilities (pp. 25–40). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  10. Chen, R. S., & Vellutino, F. R. (1997). Prediction of reading ability: A cross-validation study of the simple view of reading. Journal of Literacy Research, 29, 1–24. doi: 10.1080/10862969709547947.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Cole, D. A., & Maxwell, S. E. (2003). Testing mediational models with longitudinal data: Questions and tips in the use of structural equation modeling. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 112(4), 558. doi: 10.1037/0021-843X.112.4.558.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Cromley, J. G., & Azevedo, R. (2007). Testing and refining the direct and inferential mediation model of reading comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99, 311–325. doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.99.2.311.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Cunningham, A. E., & Stanovich, K. E. (1997). Early reading acquisition and its relation to reading experience and ability 10 years later. Developmental Psychology, 33, 934–945. doi: 10.1037/0012-1649.33.6.934.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Deacon, S. H., & Kirby, J. R. (2004). Morphological awareness: Just “more phonological”? The roles of morphological and phonological awareness in reading development. Applied Psycholinguistics, 25, 223–238. doi: 10.1017/S0124716404001117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Dietrich, S. E., Assel, M. A., Swank, P., Smith, K. E., & Landry, S. H. (2006). The impact of early maternal verbal scaffolding and child language abilities on later decoding and reading comprehension skills. Journal of School Psychology, 43, 481–494. doi: 10.1016/j.jsp.2005.10.003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Dixon, M. R., Carman, J., Tyler, P. A., Whiting, S. W., Enoch, M. R., & Daar, J. H. (2014). PEAK relational training system for children with autism and developmental disabilities: Correlations with PPVT and assessment reliability. Journal of Developmental and Physical Disabilities, 26, 603–614. doi: 10.1007/s10882-014-9384-2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Farrington, C. A., Roderick, M., Allensworth, E., Nagaoka, J., Keyes, T. S., Johnson, D. W., et al. (2012). Literature review: Teaching adolescents to become learners. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Consortium on School Research.Google Scholar
  18. 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. doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.90.1.37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Foorman, B. R., Petscher, Y., & Schatschneider, C. (2015). Florida assessment for instruction in reading, aligned to the Language Arts Florida standards (FAIR-FS): Grades 3-12 Technical Manual. Tallahassee, FL: Florida Center for Reading Research.Google Scholar
  20. Foorman, B. R., & Torgesen, J. (2001). Critical elements of classroom and small-group instruction promote reading success in all children. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 16, 203–212. doi: 10.1111/0938-8982.00020.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Fuchs, L. S., & Deno, S. L. (1991). Effects of curriculum within curriculum based measurement. Exceptional Children, 58, 232–243. doi: 10.1177/001440299105800306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., Hosp, M. K., & Jenkins, J. R. (2001). Oral reading fluency as an indicator of reading competence: A theoretical, empirical, and historical analysis. Scientific Studies of Reading, 5, 239–256. doi: 10.1207/S1532799XSSR0503.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., Mathes, P. G., Lipsey, M. W., & Roberts, P. H. (2002). Is “learning disability” just a fancy term for low achievement? A meta-analysis of reading differences between low achievers with and without the label. Paper written for the Office of Special Education Programs, U.S. Department of Education, and presented at the OSEPS’s LD Summit Conference, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  24. Gillett, N., Vallerand, R. J., & Lafrenière, M. K. (2011). Intrinsic and extrinsic school motivation as a function of age: The mediating role of autonomy support. Social Psychology of Education, 15, 77–95. doi: 10.1007/s11218-9170-2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Good, R. H., Kaminski, R. A., Shinn, M., Bratten, J., Shinn, M., & Laimon, L. (2008). Technical adequacy and decision making utility of DIBELS (Technical Report). Eugene, OR: University of Oregon.Google Scholar
  26. Good, R. H., Kaminski, R. A., Smith, S., Laimon, D., & Dill, S. (2001). Dynamic indicators of basic early literacy skills. Eugene, OR: University of Oregon.Google Scholar
  27. Hoover, W. A., & Gough, P. B. (1990). The simple view of reading. Reading and Writing, 2, 127–160. doi: 10.1007/BF00401799.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Hu, L. T., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indices in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multi-disciplinary Journal, 6, 1–55. doi: 10.1080/10705519909540118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Hulslander, J., Olson, R. K., Willcutt, E. G., & Wadsworth, S. J. (2010). Longitudinal stability of reading-related skills and their prediction of reading development. Scientific Studies of Reading, 14(2), 111–136. doi: 10.1080/10888431003604058.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Kaminski, R. A., & Good, R. H. (1996). Toward a technology for assessing basic early literacy skills. School Psychology Review, 25, 215–227.Google Scholar
  31. Kim, Y. S., Petscher, Y., Schatschneider, C., & Foorman, B. (2010). Does growth rate in oral reading fluency matter in predicting reading comprehension achievement? Journal of Educational Psychology, 102, 652. doi: 10.1037/a0019643.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. LARRC: Language and Reading Research Consortium. (2015). Learning to read: Should we keep things simple? Reading Research Quarterly, 50, 151–169. doi: 10.1002/rrq.99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Loehlin, J. C. (1998). Latent variable models: An introduction to factor, path, and structural analysis (3rd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  34. Lomax, R. (2013). Introduction to structural equation modeling. In Y. Petscher, C. Schatschneider, & D. L. Compton (Eds.), Applied quantitative analysis in education and the social sciences (pp. 245–264). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  35. Lyytinen, H., Erskine, J., Hämäläinen, J., Torppa, M., & Ronimus, M. (2015). Dyslexia—Early identification and prevention: Highlights from the Jyväskylä longitudinal study of dyslexia. Current Developmental Disorders Reports, 2(4), 330–338. doi: 10.1007/s40474-015-0067-1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Morken, F., Helland, T., Hugdahl, K., & Specht, K. (2017). Reading in dyslexia across literacy development: A longitudinal study of effective connectivity. NeuroImage, 144, 92–100. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2016.09.060.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (2015). Mplus user’s guide (7th ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Muthén & Muthén.Google Scholar
  38. Ouelette, G., & Beers, A. (2010). A not-so-simple view of reading: How oral vocabulary and visual-word recognition complicate the story. Reading and Writing, 23, 189–208. doi: 10.1007/s11145-008-9159-1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Petscher, Y. (2010). Meta-analysis of the relationship between attitudes towards reading and achievement in reading. Journal of Research in Reading, 33, 335–355. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9817.2009.01418.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Riedel, B. W. (2007). The relation between DIBELS, reading comprehension, and vocabulary in urban first-grade students. Reading Research Quarterly, 42, 546–567. doi: 10.1598/RRQ.42.4.5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Roehrig, A. D., Petscher, Y., Nettles, S. M., Hudson, R. F., & Torgesen, J. K. (2008). Accuracy of the DIBELS oral reading fluency measure for predicting third grade reading comprehension outcomes. Journal of School Psychology, 46, 343–366. doi: 10.1016/j.jsp.2007.06.006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Schafer, J. L., & Graham, J. W. (2002). Missing data: Our view of the state of the art. Psychological Methods, 7(2), 147. doi: 10.1037//1082-989X.7.2.147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Senechal, M. (2006). Testing the home literacy model: Parent involvement in kindergarten is differentially related to grade 3 reading comprehension, fluency, spelling, and reading for pleasure. Scientific Studies of Reading, 10, 59–87. doi: 10.1207/s1532799xssr10001_4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Share, D. L., & Stanovich, K. E. (1995). Cognitive processes in early reading development: Accommodating individual differences into a model of acquisition. Issues in Education, 1, 1–57.Google Scholar
  45. Shaywitz, S. E., Fletcher, J. M., Holahan, J. M., Shneider, A. E., Marchione, K. E., Stuebing, K. K., et al. (1999). Persistence of dyslexia: The Connecticut longitudinal study at adolescence. Pediatrics, 104(6), 1351–1359. doi: 10.1542/peds.104.6.1351.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Skibbe, L. E., Grimm, K. J., Stanton-Chapman, T. L., Justice, L. M., Pence, K. L., & Bowles, R. P. (2008). Reading trajectories of children with language difficulties from preschool through fifth grade. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 39(4), 475–486. doi: 10.1044/1061-1461(2008/07-0016).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Soden, B., Christopher, M. E., Hulslander, J., Olson, R. K., Cutting, L., Keenan, J. M., et al. (2015). Longitudinal stability in reading comprehension is largely heritable from grades 1 to 6. PLoS ONE, 10, e0113807. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0113807.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Sparks, R. L., Patton, J., & Murdoch, A. (2014). Early reading success and its relationship to reading achievement and reading volume: replication of ‘10 years later’. Reading and Writing, 27, 189–211. doi: 10.1007/s11145-013-9439-2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Spencer, M., Wagner, R. K., Schatschneider, C., Quinn, J. M., Lopez, D., & Petscher, Y. (2014). Incorporating RTI in a hybrid model of reading disability. Learning Disability Quarterly, 37, 1–11. doi: 10.1177/0731948714530967.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Sticht, T. G., & James, J. H. (1984). Listening and reading. Handbook of Reading Research, 1, 293–317.Google Scholar
  51. Tighe, E. L., Wagner, R. K., & Schatschneide, C. (2015). Applying a multiple group causal indicator modeling framework to the reading comprehension skills of third, seventh, and tenth grade students. Reading and Writing, 28, 439–466. doi: 10.1007/s11145-014-9532-1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Tilstra, J., McMaster, K., Van den Broek, P., Kendeou, P., & Rapp, D. (2009). Simple but complex: Components of the simple view of reading across grade levels. Journal of Research in Reading, 32, 383–401. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9817.2009.01401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Tucker, L. R., & Lewis, C. (1973). A reliability coefficient for maximum likelihood factor analysis. Psychometrika, 38, 1–10. doi: 10.1007/BF02291170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Wadsworth, S. J., Corley, R. P., Hewitt, J. K., & DeFries, J. C. (2001). Stability of genetic and environmental influences on reading performance at 7, 12, and 16 years of age in the Colorado Adoption Project. Behavior Genetics, 31(4), 353–359.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Williams, K. T., & Wang, J. J. (1997). Technical reference to the Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test-Third Edition (PPVT-III). Circle Pines, MN: American Guidance Service.Google Scholar
  56. Yeager, D. S., & Dweck, C. S. (2012). Mindsets that promote resilience: When students believe that personal characteristics can be developed. Educational Psychologist, 47, 302–314. doi: 10.1080/00461520.2012.722805.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Christopher T. Stanley
    • 1
  • Yaacov Petscher
    • 1
  • Hugh Catts
    • 2
  1. 1.Florida Center for Reading ResearchFlorida State UniversityTallahasseeUSA
  2. 2.Florida State UniversityTallahasseeUSA

Personalised recommendations

Cite article

Buy options