Skip to main content
Book cover

Handbook of Response to Intervention pp 389–404Cite as

Tier 3 Primary Grade Reading Interventions: Can We Distinguish Necessary from Sufficient?

Abstract

The purpose of this chapter is to describe tier 3 reading interventions used for primary grade students (in kindergarten through third grade). Within multi-tier response-to-intervention systems, tier 3 is reserved for the very few students with the most persistent reading difficulties, having demonstrated significant difficulties in learning to read even with tier 1 and tier 2 supports. As explained in greater detail, tier 3 may be a last layer of intervention in general education that serves as part of a prereferral process or it may be special education. Following the description of the conceptual framework for the chapter, and the discussion of variability in tier 3 implementation, the literature is reviewed to learn whether it is known what is necessary and sufficient to help students who are struggling to read, including students with reading or mild-to-moderate intellectual disabilities. Implications for research are discussed and directions for future research are identified.

Keywords

  • Primary Grade Students
  • Brief Experimental Analysis (BEAs)
  • Oral Reading Fluency
  • Core Reading Program
  • English Language Learners (ELLs)

These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • DOI: 10.1007/978-1-4899-7568-3_23
  • Chapter length: 16 pages
  • Instant PDF download
  • Readable on all devices
  • Own it forever
  • Exclusive offer for individuals only
  • Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout
eBook
USD   259.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • ISBN: 978-1-4899-7568-3
  • Instant PDF download
  • Readable on all devices
  • Own it forever
  • Exclusive offer for individuals only
  • Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout
Softcover Book
USD   329.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
Hardcover Book
USD   499.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
Learn about institutional subscriptions

References

  • Adams, M. J., Bereiter, C., Brown, A., Campione, J., Carruthers, I., Case, R., et al. (2000). Open court reading. Columbus: SRA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Al Otaiba, S., & Torgesen, J. (2007). Effects from intensive standardized kindergarten and first grade interventions for the prevention of reading difficulties. In S. R. Jimerson, M. K. Burns, & A. M. VanDerHeyden (Eds.), The handbook of response to intervention: The science and practice of assessment and intervention (pp. 212–222). New York: Springer.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Al Otaiba, S., Connor, C. M., Folsom, J. S., Wanzek, J., Greulich, L., Schatschneider, C., & Wagner, R. K. (2014). To wait in tier 1 or intervene immediately: A randomized experiment examining first grade response to intervention (RTI) in reading. Exceptional Children, 81 (1) 11–27. doi:10.1177/0014402914532234.

    Google Scholar 

  • Allor, J. H., & Mathes, P. (2012). Early interventions in reading: Level K. Columbus: SRA/McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Allor, J. H., Mathes, P., Roberts, J. K., Cheatham, J. P., & Champlin, T. M. (2010a). Comprehensive reading instruction for students with intellectual disabilities: Finding from the first three years of a longitudinal study. Psychology in the Schools, 47, 445–466.

    Google Scholar 

  • Allor, J. H., Mathes, P., Roberts, J. K., Jones, F., & Champlin, T. (2010b). Teaching students with moderate intellectual disabilities to read: An Experimental examination of a comprehensive reading intervention. Education and Training in Developmental Disabilities, 45, 3–22.

    Google Scholar 

  • Allor, J. H., Champlin, T. M., Gifford, D. B., & Mathes, P. G. (2010c). Methods for increasing the intensity of reading instruction for students with intellectual disabilities. Education and Training in Autism and Developmental Disabilities, 45, 500–511.

    Google Scholar 

  • Allor, J. H., Mathes, P., Roberts, K., Cheatham, J. P., & Al Otaiba, S. (2014). Is scientifically-based reading instruction effective for students with Below-Average IQs? Exceptional Children, 80, 289–308. doi:10.1177/0014402914522208.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berkeley, S., Bender, W. N., Peaster, L., & Saunders, L. (2009). Implementation of response to intervention: A snapshot of progress. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 42, 85–95.

    CrossRef  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Browder, D. M., Wakeman, S. Y., Spooner, F., Ahlgrim-Delzell, L., & Algozzine, B. (2006). Research on reading instruction for individuals with significant cognitive disabilities. Exceptional Children, 72, 392–408.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, A. L., Palincsar, A. S., & Purcell, L. (1986). The school achievement of minority children: New perspectives (pp. 105–143). Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers. (Poor readers: Teach, don’t label).

    Google Scholar 

  • Burns, M. K., & Wagner, D. (2008). Determining an effective intervention within a brief experimental analysis for reading: A meta-analytic review. School Psychology Review, 37, 126–136.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burns, M. K., Appleton, J. J., & Stehouwer, J. D. (2005). Meta-analytic review of responsiveness-to-intervention research: Examining field-based and research-implemented models. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 23, 381–394.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Compton, D. L., Fuchs, D., Fuchs, L. S., Bouton, B., Gilbert, J. K., Barquero, L. A., Cho, E., & Crouch, R. C. (2010). Selecting at-risk first-grade readers for early intervention: Eliminating false positives and exploring the promise of a two-stage gated screening process. Journal of Educational Psychology, 102, 327–340.

    CrossRef  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Compton, D. L., Gilbert, J. K., Jenkins, J. R., Fuchs, D., Fuchs, L. S., Cho, E., Barquero, L. A., & Bouton, B. (2012). Accelerating chronically unresponsive children to tier 3 instruction: What level of data is necessary to ensure selection accuracy? Journal of Learning Disabilities, 45, 204–216.

    CrossRef  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Daggett, W. R. (2012). Achieving reading proficiency for all. http://www.leadered.com/pdf/Reading%20White%20Paper.pdf. Accessed 1 March 2015.

  • Daly, E. J., III, & Martens, B. K. (1994). A comparison of three interventions for increasing oral reading performance: Application of the instructional hierarchy. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 27, 459–469.

    CrossRef  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Daly, E. J., III, Witt, J. C., Martens, B. K., & Dool, E. J. (1997). A model for conducting a functional analysis of academic performance problems. School Psychology Review, 26, 554–574.

    Google Scholar 

  • Daly, E. J., III, Martens, B. K., Dool, E. J., & Hintze, J. M. (1998). Using brief functional analysis to select interventions for oral reading. Journal of Behavioral Education, 8, 203–218.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Daly, E. J., III, Martens, B. K., Hamler, K. R., Dool, E. J., & Eckert, T. L. (1999). A brief experimental analysis for identifying instructional components needed to improve oral reading fluency. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 32, 83–94.

    CrossRef  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Daly, E. J., III, Andersen, M., Gortmaker, V., & Turner, A. (2006). Using experimental analysis to identify reading fluency interventions: Connecting the dots. The Behavior Analyst, 7(1), 133–150.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Deno, S. L., & Mirkin, P. K. (1977). Data-based program modification: A manual. Reston: Council for Exceptional Children.

    Google Scholar 

  • Denton, C. A. (2012). Response to Intervention for reading difficulties in the primary grades: Some answers and lingering questions. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 45, 232–243.

    CrossRef  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Denton, C. A., Fletcher, J. M., Anthony, J. L., & Frances, D. J. (2006). An evaluation of intensive intervention for students with persistent reading difficulties. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 39, 447–466.

    CrossRef  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Eckert, T. L., Ardoin, S. P., Daly, E. J., III, & Martens, B. K. (2002). Improving oral reading fluency: a brief experimental analysis of combining an antecedent intervention with consequences. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 35, 271–281.

    CrossRef  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Engelmann, S., & Bruner, E. C. (1995). Reading mastery I I/I fast cycle. Worthington, DC: SRA Macmillan/McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Francis, D. J., Shaywitz, S. E., Stuebing, K. K., Shaywitz, B. A., & Fletcher, J. M. (1996). Developmental lag versus deficit models of reading disability: A longitudinal, individual growth curves analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 88, 3–17.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Fuchs, L. S., & Fuchs, D. (1986). Linking assessment to instructional intervention: An overview. School Psychology Review, 15, 318–323.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fuchs, L. S., & Vaughn, S. (2012). Responsiveness-to-intervention: A decade later. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 45, 195–203.

    CrossRef  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Fuchs, D., Compton, D. L., Fuchs, L. S., Hamlett, C. L., & Lambert, W. (in press). First-grade cognitive abilities as long-term predictors of reading comprehension and disability status. Journal of Learning Disabilities.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fuchs, D., Mock, D., Morgan, P. L., & Young, C. L. (2003). Responsiveness-to-intervention: definitions, evidence, and implications for the learning disabilities construct. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 18, 157–171.

    CrossRef  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.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Fuchs, D., Fuchs, L. S., & Stecker, P. M. (2010). The “blurring” of special education in a new continuum of general education placements and services. Exceptional Children, 76, 301–323.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Fuchs, D., Fuchs, L. S., & Compton, D. L. (2012). Smart RTI: A next-generation approach to multilevel prevention. Exceptional Children, 78, 263–279.

    CrossRef  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Gersten, R., Compton, D., Connor, C. M., Dimino, J., Santoro, L., Linan-Thompson, S., & Tilly, W. D. (2008). Assisting students struggling with reading: Response to intervention and multi-tier intervention in the primary grades. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gough, P. B., & Tunmer, W. E. (1986). Decoding, reading, and reading disability. Remedial and Special Education, 7, 6–10.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Harn, B. A., Chard, D. J., Biancarosa, G., & Kame’enui, E. J. (2011). Coordinating instructional supports to accelerate at-risk first-grade readers’ performance. Elementary School Journal, 112, 332–355.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Hoover, J. J., Eppolito, A., Klingner, J. K., & Baca, L. (2012). Collaborative decision-making in multicultural contexts. In J. B. Crockett, B. S. Billingsley, & M. L. Boscardin (Eds.), Handbook of leadership and administration for special education (pp. 191–208). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ihnot, C., Mastoff, J., Gavin, J., & Hendrickson, L. (2001). Read naturally. St. Paul: Read Naturally.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jenkins, J. R., Schiller, E., Blackorby, J., Kalb Thayer, S., & Tilly, W. D. (2013). Response to intervention in reading: architecture and practices. Learning Disabilities Quarterly, 36(1), 36–46.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Jimerson, S. R., Burns, M. K., & VanDerHeyden, A. M. (2007). Handbook of response to intervention: The science and practice of assessment and intervention. New York: Springer.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Johnston, J. M., & Pennypacker, H. S. (1993). Readings for strategies and tactics of behavioral research (2nd ed.). Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klingner, J. K., & Harry, B. (2006). The special education referral and decision-making process for english language learners: Child study team meetings and placement conferences. Teachers College Record, 108, 2247–2281.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Lemons, C. J., & Fuchs, D. (2010). Modeling response to reading intervention in children with down syndrome: An examination of predictors of differential growth. Reading Research Quarterly, 45, 134–168.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Lentz, F. E., Jr. (1988). Effective reading interventions in the regular classroom. In J. L. Graden, J. E. Zins, & M L. Curtis (Eds.), Alternative educational delivery systems: Enhancing instructional options for all students (pp. 351–370). Washington, DC: National Association of School Psychologists.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lonigan, C. J., & Shanahan, T. (2009). Developing early literacy: Report of the national early literacy panel. executive summary. A scientific synthesis of early literacy development and implications for intervention. Washington, DC: National Institute for Literacy.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maslen, B. L., & Maslen, J. R. (1987). The Bob books. West Linn: Bob Books Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mathes, P. G., & Torgesen, J. K. (2005). Early interventions in reading, Level 1. Columbus: SRA/McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mathes, P. G., Denton, C. A., Fletcher, J. M., Anthony, J. L., Francis, D. J., & Schatschneider, C. (2005). The effects of theoretically different instruction and student characteristics on the skills of struggling readers. Reading Research Quarterly, 40, 148–182.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • McGuiness, C., McGuiness, D., & McGuiness, G. (1996). Phono-Graphix: A new method for remediating reading difficulties. Annals of Dyslexia, 46, 73–96.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Mellard, D. F., McKnight, M., & Woods, K. (2009). Response to intervention screening and progress-monitoring practices in 41 local schools. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 24, 186–195.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Mellard, D., McKnight, M., & Jordan, J. (2010). RtI tier structures and instructional intensity. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 25, 217–225.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Noell, G. H., Gansle, K. A., Witt, J. C., Whitmarsh, E. L., Freeland, J. T., LaFleur, L. H., et al. (1998). Effects of contingent reward and instruction on oral reading performance at differing levels of passage difficulty. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 31, 659–663.

    CrossRef  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Noell, G. H., Freeland, J. T., Witt, J. C., & Gansle, K. A. (2001). Using brief assessments to identify effective interventions for individual students. Journal of School Psychology, 39, 335–355.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • National Reading Panel. (2000). Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction. http://www.nichd.nih.gov/publications/nrp/smallbook.htm. Accessed 1 March 2015.

  • O’Connor, R. E., Harty, K. R., & Fulmer, D. (2005). Tiers of intervention in kindergarten through third grade. [RtI]. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 38, 532–538.

    CrossRef  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Orosco, M., & Klingner, J. (2010). One school’s implementation of RTI with English language learners: ‘Referring into RTI.’ Journal of Learning Disabilities, 43, 269–288.

    CrossRef  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Petursdottir, A., McMaster, K., McComas, J. J., Bradfield, T., Braganza, V., Koch-McDonald, J., Rodriguez, R., & Scharf, H. (2009). Brief experimental analysis of early reading interventions. Journal of School Psychology, 47, 215–243.

    CrossRef  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • Sidman, M. (1960). Tactics of scientific research: Evaluating experimental data in psychology. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Snow, C. E. (2002). Reading for understanding: Toward an R & D program for comprehension. Santa Monica: RAND.

    Google Scholar 

  • Snow, C. E., Burns, S. M., & Griffin, P. (1998). Preventing reading difficulties in young children. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • SRA/McGraw-Hill. (1998). Phonics mini books. Columbus: SRA/McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • SRI International. (2002). Special education elementary longitudinal study (SEELS) [Data tables and reports]. http://www.seels.net/grindex.html. Accessed 1 March 2015.

  • Swanson, H. L., Hoskyn, M., & Lee, C. (1999). Interventions for students with learning disabilities: A meta-analysis of treatment outcomes. New York: Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Texas Education Agency. (1998). Texas primary reading inventory (TPRI). Austin: Author.

    Google Scholar 

  • Torgesen, J. K. (2005). Recent discoveries on remedial interventions for children with dyslexia. Malden: Blackwell.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Torgesen, J. K., & Burgess, S. R. (1998). Consistency of reading-related phonological processes throughout early childhood: Evidence from longitudinal-correlational and instructional studies. In J. Metsala & L. Ehri (Eds.), Word recognition in beginning reading (pp. 161–188). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Torgesen, J. K., Alexander, A. W., Wagner, R. K., Rashotte, C. A., Voeller, K. S., & Conway, T. (2001). Intensive remedial instruction for children with severe reading disabilities: Immediate and long-term outcomes from two instructional approaches. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 34, 33–58.

    CrossRef  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • VanDerHeyden, A. M., Witt, J. C., & Gilbertson, D. (2007). A multi-year evaluation of the effects of a response to intervention (RTI) model on identification of children for special education. Journal of School Psychology, 45, 225–256.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Vaughn, S., Linan-Thompson, S., & Hickman, P. (2003). Response to instruction as a means of identifying students with reading/learning disabilities. Exceptional Children, 69, 391–409.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vaughn, S., Wanzek, J., Linan-Thompson, S., & Murray, C. S. (2007). Monitoring response to supplemental services for students at risk for reading difficulties: High and low responders. In S. R. Jimerson, M. K. Burns, & A. M. VanDerHeyden (Eds.), Handbook of response to intervention: The science and practice of assessment and intervention (pp. 234–243). New York: Springer.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Vaughn, S., Linan-Thompson, S., Woodruff, T., Murray, C., Wanzek, J., Scammaca, N., et al. (2008). Effects of professional development on improving at-risk students’ performance in reading. In C. R. Greenwood, R. R. Kratochwill, & M. Clements (Eds.), Schoolwide prevention models: Lessons learned in elementary schools (pp. 115–142). New York: Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vaughn, S., Wanzek, J., Murray, C. S., Scammacca, N., Linan-Thompson, S., & Woodruff, A. L. (2009). Response to early reading intervention: Examining higher and lower responders. Exceptional Children, 75, 165–183.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vellutino, F. R., Scanlon, D. M., Small, S. G., & Fanuele, D. P. (2006). Response to Intervention as a vehicle for distinguishing between reading disabled and non-reading disabled children: Evidence for the role of kindergarten and first grade intervention. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 39, 157–169.

    CrossRef  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wanzek, J., & Vaughn, S. (2007). Research-based implications from extensive early reading interventions. School Psychology Review, 36, 541–561.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wanzek, J., & Vaughn, S. (2008). Response to varying amounts of time in reading intervention for students demonstrating insufficient response to intervention. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 41, 126–142.

    CrossRef  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wanzek, J., & Vaughn, S. (2010). Tier 3 interventions for students with significant reading problems. Theory into Practice, 49, 305–314.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Wanzek, J., & Vaughn, S. (2011). Is a three-tier reading intervention model associated with reduced placement in special education? Remedial and Special Education, 32, 167–175.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Wei, X., Blackorby, J., & Schiller, E. (2011). Growth in reading achievement of students with disabilities, ages 7 to 17. Exceptional Children, 78, 89–106.

    Google Scholar 

  • Werts, M., Lambert, M., & Carpenter, E. (2009). What special education directors say about RTI. Learning Disability Quarterly, 32, 245–254.

    Google Scholar 

  • Whitehurst, G. J., & Lonigan, C. J. (1998). Child development and emergent literacy. Child Development, 69, 848–872.

    CrossRef  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wiederholt, J. L., & Bryant, D. R. (2002). Gray oral reading test (4th ed.). Austin: PRO-ED.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wigfield, A., & Guthrie, J. T. (1997). Relations of children’s motivation for reading to the amount and breadth of their reading. Journal of Educational Psychology, 89, 420–432.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Witt, J. C., Daly, E. M., & Noell, G. (2000). Functional assessments: A step by step guide to solving academic and behavior problems. Longmont: Sopris West.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zirkel, P. A., & Thomas, L. B. (2010). State laws and guidelines for implementing RTI. Teaching Exceptional Children, 43(1), 60–73.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Southern Methodist University, Dallas, USA

    Stephanie Al Otaiba, Jill Allor & Miriam Ortiz

  2. Andrews University, Berrien Springs, USA

    Luana Greulich

  3. Florida Center for Reading Research, Florida State University, Tallahassee, USA

    Jeanie Wanzek & Joseph Torgesen

Authors
  1. Stephanie Al Otaiba
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jill Allor
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Miriam Ortiz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Luana Greulich
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Jeanie Wanzek
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Joseph Torgesen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Stephanie Al Otaiba .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. University of California, Santa Barbara Gevirtz Graduate School of Education, Santa Barbara, California, USA

    Shane R. Jimerson

  2. University of Missouri, Columbia, Missouri, USA

    Matthew K. Burns

  3. Education Research & Consulting, Inc., FAIRHOPE, Alabama, USA

    Amanda M. VanDerHeyden

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Springer Science+Business Media New York

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Al Otaiba, S., Allor, J., Ortiz, M., Greulich, L., Wanzek, J., Torgesen, J. (2016). Tier 3 Primary Grade Reading Interventions: Can We Distinguish Necessary from Sufficient?. In: Jimerson, S., Burns, M., VanDerHeyden, A. (eds) Handbook of Response to Intervention. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4899-7568-3_23

Download citation