A Comparison of Two Reading Interventions for Children with Reading Disabilities

Abstract

This study compared the effectiveness of two reading interventions in a public school setting. Forty-five second-grade children with reading disabilities were randomly assigned to a 6-week phonological awareness, word analogy, or math-training program. The two reading interventions differed from each other in (a) the unit of word analysis (phoneme versus onset-rime), (b) the approach to intervention (contextualized versus decontextualized), and (c) the primary domain of reading instruction (oral versus written language). Results indicate that children in both reading programs achieved significant gains in beginning reading skills, learning the specific skills taught in their respective programs, and applying what they had learned to uninstructed material on several transfer-of-learning measures, in comparison to children in the control group. For children in both reading intervention groups, the most significant mediator of growth in oral reading fluency was a child's initial level of word identification skill. Implications of these findings are that systematic, high quality reading intervention can occur in a small group, public school setting and that there are several different paths to the remediation of children with reading disabilities.