Evaluation of a two-phase experimental study of a small group ("MultiLit") reading intervention for older low-progress readers

Jennifer Buckingham, Robyn Beaman-Wheldall, Kevin Wheldall

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

2 Citations (Scopus)
257 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

The study reported here examined the efficacy of a small group (Tier 2 in a three-tier Response to Intervention model) literacy intervention for older low-progress readers (in Years 3-6). This article focuses on the second phase of a two-phase, crossover randomized control trial involving 26 students. In Phase 1, the experimental group (E1) received the 1 h literacy intervention daily for three school terms. The control group received regular classroom instruction. In Phase 2, the original control group received the intervention (E2). At the end of Phase 1, there was a statistically significant difference between groups and a large treatment effect on one of five measures - the Martin and Pratt Non-word Reading Test of phonological recoding. At the end of Phase 2, the large effect on phonological recoding was confirmed for the second experimental group, and there were also statistically significant differences with moderate or large effect sizes on four other measures - single word reading, fluency, passage reading accuracy, and comprehension.
Original languageEnglish
Article number962786
Pages (from-to)1-11
Number of pages11
JournalCogent education
Volume1
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2014

Bibliographical note

Copyright the Author(s) 2014. Version archived for private and non-commercial use with the permission of the author/s and according to publisher conditions. For further rights please contact the publisher.

Keywords

  • intervention
  • reading
  • low progress
  • instruction
  • Tier 2
  • phonics
  • socioeconomic status
  • randomised control trial

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Evaluation of a two-phase experimental study of a small group ("MultiLit") reading intervention for older low-progress readers'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this