Enhanced Core Reading Instruction

Study: Fien et al. (2015); Smith et al. (2016)

1) Fien, H., Smith, J. L. M., Smolkowski, K., Baker, S. K., Nelson, N. J., & Chaparro, E. (2015). An examination of the efficacy of a multitiered intervention on early reading outcomes for first grade students at risk for reading difficulties. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 48(6), 602-621; 2) Smith, J. L. M., Nelson, N. J., Fien, H., Smolkowski, K., Kosty, D., & Baker, S. K. (2016). Examining the efficacy of a multitiered intervention for at-risk readers in grade 1. The Elementary School Journal, 116(4), 549-573.
Descriptive Information Usage Acquisition and Cost Program Specifications and Requirements Training

Enhanced Core Reading Instruction is a multi-tiered reading intervention for kindergarten, first and second grade designed to meet the learning needs of students at-risk in reading. The Enhanced Core Reading Instruction model increases the level of explicitness of core reading instruction by redesigning the core reading program to focus on critical reading content, to be clear and systematic, and to provide deliberate and frequent practice opportunities (Baker, Fien, &Baker, 2010; Carnine, Silbert, & Kame’enui, 1997; Kame’enui, Carnine, Dixon, Simmons, & Coyne, 2002). Further, through an additional daily, 30-minute, small group intervention, at-risk readers are pre-taught critical content that appears in the next day’s core reading lesson, and are provided with more practice opportunities to learn critical reading skills and concepts. In small group lessons, at-risk readers are provided highly interactive and engaging learning opportunities.

Enhanced Core Reading Instruction is intended for use in grades K-2. The program is intended for use with any student at risk of academic failure. The academic area of focus is reading (including phonological awareness, phonics/word study, comprehension, fluency, and vocabulary).

Where to obtain: UO CTL Marketplace website

Email: support@dibels.uoregon.edu

Phone: 1-888-497-4290

Website: https://dibels.uoregon.edu/market/

Cost: See website for details.

It is recommended that Enhanced Core Reading Instruction is used in small groups of three to five students.

Enhanced Core Reading Instruction takes 30 minutes per session with a recommended 5 sessions per week for 30 weeks.

The program includes a highly specified Teacher Workbook that provides the professional development necessary for implementing the program.

The program does not require technology.

Training is required for the instructor. The instruction training includes a recommended 2-to-3 days self or guided study using the Enhanced Core Reading Instruction professional development workbooks. 

Training manuals and materials are available. The Enhanced Core Reading Instruction materials include professional development workbooks for teachers and interventionists and a Leadership Guide for literacy leaders. The authors describe practical routines for enhancing core reading instruction in essential areas including foundational reading skills, vocabulary, and comprehension that are directly aligned with the Common Core State Standards. These workbooks are designed to be used as a study group, self-study or as part of a facilitated training.

The minimum qualifications of instructors are that they be paraprofessionals. The program assumes that the instructor has some experience with reading instruction.

Technical support can be obtained at:

Email: support@dibels.uoregon.edu

Phone: 1-888-497-4290

 

Participants: Convincing Evidence

Sample size: 267 (120 program, 147 control)

Risk Status: Fall scores on the reading portion of the Stanford Achievement Test, 10th edition (SAT10) were used to assign students to Tier 1, Tier 2, or Tier 3 using the 2007 normative comparison. Students that scored between the 10th and 30th percentile on the SAT10 in the fall of first grade were assigned to Tier 2. Students that scored above the 30th percentile on the SAT10 or below the 10th percentile were assigned to Tier 1 and Tier 3, respectively.

Demographics: Fien et al.

 

Program

Control

p of chi square

Number

Percentage

Number

Percentage

Grade level

  Kindergarten

 

 

 

 

 

  Grade 1

 120

100% 

 147

100% 

 

  Grade 2

 

 

 

 

 

  Grade 3

 

 

 

 

 

  Grade 4

 

 

 

 

 

  Grade 5

 

 

 

 

 

  Grade 6

 

 

 

 

 

  Grade 7

 

 

 

 

 

  Grade 8

 

 

 

 

 

  Grade 9

 

 

 

 

 

  Grade 10

 

 

 

 

 

  Grade 11

 

 

 

 

 

  Grade 12

 

 

 

 

 

Race-ethnicity

  African-American

 

1%

 

4%

 

  American Indian

 

1%

 

1%

 

  Asian/Pacific Islander

 

6%

 

6%

 

  Hispanic

 

19%

 

24%

 

  White

 

68%

 

63%

 

  Other

 

 

 

 

 

Socioeconomic status

  Subsidized lunch

 

43%

 

49%

 

  No subsidized lunch

 

 

 

 

 

Disability status

  Speech-language impairments

 

 

 

 

 

  Learning disabilities

 

 

 

 

 

  Behavior disorders

 

 

 

 

 

  Intellectual disabilities

 

 

 

 

 

  Other

 

 

 

 

 

  Not identified with a disability

 

 

 

 

 

ELL status

  English language learner

15

12.5%

17

11.6%

 

  Not English language learner

 

 

 

 

 

Gender

Female

52

43.3%

79

53.7%

 

Male

 

 

 

 

 

NOTE: Independent sample t-tests at the school level revealed no statistically significant differences between conditions for either study. Race-Ethnicity and subsidized lunch data were obtained from the NCES website. 

Training of Instructors: Not reported. 

Design: Convincing Evidence

Did the study use random assignment?: Yes

If not, was it a tenable quasi-experiment?: N/A

If the study used random assignment, at pretreatment, were the program and control groups not statistically significantly different and had a mean standardized difference that fell within 0.25 SD on measures used as covariates or on pretest measures also used as outcomes?: Yes

If not, at pretreatment, were the program and control groups not statistically significantly different and had a mean standardized difference that fell within 0.25 SD on measures central to the study (i.e., pretest measures also used as outcomes), and outcomes were analyzed to adjust for pretreatment differences?: N/A

Were the program and control groups demographically comparable at pretreatment?: Yes

Was there attrition bias1?: No

Did the unit of analysis match the unit for random assignment (for randomized studies) or the assignment strategy (for quasi-experiments)?: Yes

1 NCII follows guidance from the What Works Clearinghouse (WWC) in determining attrition bias. The WWC model for determining bias based on a combination of differential and overall attrition rates can be found on pages 13-14 of this document: http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/pdf/reference_resources/wwc_procedures_v2_1_standards_handbook.pdf

 

Fidelity of Implementation: Convincing Evidence

Describe when and how fidelity of treatment information was obtained: Observations were conducted during core reading instruction in all treatment and comparison classrooms in the fall, winter, and spring. Unless schools reported classrooms were providing less than 90 minutes of core reading instruction, all observations were scheduled for at least 90 minutes. Observations included whole group and small group instruction during the core reading block. The Quality of Explicit Instruction observation (Nelson-Walker et al., in press) was used to measure fidelity of implementation of the ECRI intervention and the quality of explicit reading instruction in first grade classrooms. 

Provide documentation (i.e., in terms of numbers) of fidelity of treatment implementation: Observations of implementation fidelity conducted by trained data collectors indicated nearly all treatment teachers used lesson maps (M = 0.90) and instructional templates (M = 0.89) during instruction, and instruction in treatment classrooms was consistent with the intent of the lesson maps and templates to improve the quality of explicit instruction (M = 0.77).

Measures Targeted: Convincing Evidence

Measures Broader: Convincing Evidence

Targeted  Measure Reliability Statistics Relevance to Program Instructional Content Exposure to Related Content Among Control Group

DIBELS NWF

0.67 to 0.80 alternate form 

Phonemic decoding is taught during ECRI Tier 1 instruction and Tier 2 intervention. 

Control condition received business-as–usual tiered reading instruction during a 90-minute reading block using a published, core reading program that addresses a wide range of reading skills and a tier 2 intervention for at-risk readers.

DIBELS ORF

0.89 to 0.94 alternate form; 0.92 to 0.97 test-retest 

Oral reading fluency is taught during ECRI Tier 1 instruction and Tier 2 intervention.      

Control condition received business-as–usual tiered reading instruction during a 90-minute reading block using a published, core reading program that addresses a wide range of reading skills and a tier 2 intervention for at-risk readers.

Woodcock Reading Mastery Test - Revised (WRMT-R)- Word ID

Internal consistency of the Word ID subtest (is 0.98 in Grade 1)

Content measured by WRMT-R is taught during ECRI Tier 1 instruction and Tier 2 intervention.

Control condition received business-as–usual tiered reading instruction during a 90-minute reading block using a published, core reading program that addresses a wide range of reading skills and a tier 2 intervention for at-risk readers.     

Woodcock Reading Mastery Test - Revised (WRMT-R)- Word Attack

Internal consistency of the basic skills cluster is 0.94 in Grade 1

Content measured by WRMT-R is taught during ECRI Tier 1 instruction and Tier 2 intervention.

Control condition received business-as–usual tiered reading instruction during a 90-minute reading block using a published, core reading program that addresses a wide range of reading skills and a tier 2 intervention for at-risk readers.     

Woodcock Reading Mastery Test - Revised (WRMT-R)- Basic Skills Cluster

Internal consistency of the basic skills cluster is 0.98 in Grade 1 Content measured by WRMT-R is taught during ECRI Tier 1 instruction and Tier 2 intervention. Control condition received business-as–usual tiered reading instruction during a 90-minute reading block using a published, core reading program that addresses a wide range of reading skills and a tier 2 intervention for at-risk readers.     

 

Broader Measure Reliability Statistics Relevance to Program Instructional Content Exposure to Related Content Among Control Group

SAT10     

0.94-0.97 K-R 20

Content measured by the SAT10 is highly relevant to the ECRI Tier 1 and Tier 2 intervention.

Control condition received business-as–usual tiered reading instruction during a 90-minute reading block using a published, core reading program that addresses a wide range of reading skills and a tier 2 intervention for at-risk readers.

Woodcock Reading Mastery Test - Revised (WRMT-R)- Total Reading

Internal consistency of the Total Reading is 0.98 in Grade 1

Content measured by WRMT-R is highly relevant to the ECRI Tier 1 and Tier 2 intervention.

Control condition received business-as–usual tiered reading instruction during a 90-minute reading block using a published, core reading program that addresses a wide range of reading skills and a tier 2 intervention for at-risk readers.     

 

Number of Outcome Measures: 10 Reading

Mean ES - Targeted: 0.43*

Mean ES - Broader: 0.44*

Effect Size:

Targeted Measures: Sub-sample of wave 1 schools 

Construct Measure Effect Size
Reading NWF - Correct Letter Sounds 0.22
Reading NWF - Words Read Correct 0.38*
Reading DIBELS ORF 0.69***

Broader Measures: Sub-sample of wave 1 schools 

Construct Measure Effect Size
Reading SAT 10 Total Reading 0.43**
Reading WRMT - Basic Skills Cluster 0.45**
Reading WRMT - Total Reading 0.43**
Key
*       p ≤ 0.05
**     p ≤ 0.01
***   p ≤ 0.001
–      Developer was unable to provide necessary data for NCRTI to calculate effect sizes
u      Effect size is based on unadjusted means
†      Effect size based on unadjusted means not reported due to lack of pretest group equivalency, and effect size based on adjusted means is not available

 

Visual Analysis (Single Subject Design): N/A

Disaggregated Data for Demographic Subgroups: No

Disaggregated Data for <20th Percentile: Yes

Targeted Measures: <20th Percentile 

Construct Measure Effect Size
Reading NWF - Correct Letter Sounds 0.14
Reading NWF - Words Read Correct 0.19**
Reading DIBELS ORF 0.12

Broader Measures: <20th Percentile 

Construct Measure Effect Size
Reading WRMT - Word Identification 0.23**
Reading WRMT - Word Attack 0.32***
Reading SAT 10 Total Reading 0.21*
Reading SAT 10 Word Reading 0.24**
Reading SAT 10 Sentence Reading 0.18*

 

Key
*       p ≤ 0.05
**     p ≤ 0.01
***   p ≤ 0.001
–      Developer was unable to provide necessary data for NCRTI to calculate effect sizes
u      Effect size is based on unadjusted means
†      Effect size based on unadjusted means not reported due to lack of pretest group equivalency, and effect size based on adjusted means is not available

 

Administration Group Size: Small Group, (n=3-5)

Duration of Intervention: 30 minutes, 5 times a week, 30 weeks

Minimum Interventionist Requirements: Paraprofessional, 2-3 days of training

Reviewed by WWC or E-ESSA: E-ESSA

What Works Clearinghouse Review

This program was not reviewed by What Works Clearinghouse.

 

Evidence for ESSA

Program Outcomes: A study in Oregon and Massachusetts compared first graders taught in Enhanced Core Reading Instruction to those taught in a control group. Differences on Woodcock Johnson and SAT-10 scales favored the Enhanced Core Reading Instruction group, and these were significant for Woodcock-Johnson Word Attack and SAT-10 Word Reading, qualifying Enhanced Core Reading Instruction for the ESSA "Strong" category.

Number of Studies: 1

Average Effect Size: 0.24

Full Report

Other Research: Potentially Eligible for NCII Review: 0 studies