Katlynn Dahl-Leonard

The Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation (CAEP) has seven standards that ensure educator preparation providers effectively prepare future teachers for their work with students. Sta...

This research synthesis examined the characteristics and outcome patterns of reading interventions that included language comprehension instruction for elementary-aged English learners (ELs) with or at risk for reading difficulties. Studies were included if they examined multisession, primarily English reading interventions in U.S. K–5 school settings for ELs with or at risk for reading difficulties, used experimental or quasi-experimental group designs (≥15 students per group), and reported language or reading comprehension outcomes. Nine studies met the inclusion criteria (total N = 2,008). Across studies, language comprehension instruction was most often embedded within multicomponent reading interventions rather than implemented as a standalone focus. Vocabulary instruction was the most prevalent language component, whereas morphology was less common and explicit syntax/semantic relations were rare. All interventions also included code-based instruction (e.g., decoding instruction), which complicated isolation of language-specific effects. Across outcomes, findings were mixed, with several studies reporting growth in both intervention and business-as-usual conditions. Implications are discussed for designing and studying developmentally responsive language comprehension instruction within reading intervention for ELs at risk.

This study used the Teacher Understanding of Literacy Constructs and Evidence-Based Instructional Practices (TULIP) survey to measure 93 Grade 1 teachers’ beginning-of-year knowledge within five domains (phonological awareness; phonics/decoding/encoding; reading fluency; oral language; reading comprehension) and reading performance in those domains at beginning and end of year for 205 students at risk for reading difficulties in teachers’ classrooms. Teacher knowledge to support phonological awareness development was positively associated with student gains on one of two related literacy measures; knowledge to teach phonics/decoding/encoding was positively associated with student gains on five of seven related literacy measures; knowledge related to oral language development was associated with student gains on one of four related literacy measures, and knowledge to teach reading comprehension was associated with student gains on two of two related literacy measures. The presence of statistically significant effects in over half of measured variables indicated a non-random and substantively meaningful pattern supporting the inference that teacher knowledge within specific literacy domains is systematically associated with literacy gains within related domains for students with or at risk for reading difficulties. Findings have implications for the measurement of teacher knowledge and provision of pre-service teacher education and in-service professional development to support knowledge development

Difficulties with reading development have been well documented in samples of individuals with emotional and behavioral disorders (EBD). This study utilized a state-level dataset of early literacy skills in kindergarten students with EBD ( N = 522) to investigate the development of foundational reading skills across the kindergarten year. The study employed latent profile analysis and latent transition analysis (LTA) to empirically derive profiles of readers at kindergarten entry and kindergarten exit. Results demonstrate the heterogenous nature of early reading skills in young students with EBD. Socioeconomic status significantly moderated students’ transitions from fall to spring, whereas gender did not. These findings have important implications for the early reading instruction and intervention of young students with EBD.

Within the last two decades, several states have enacted literacy-related legislation with the goal of improving national literacy outcomes for students. In alignment with this legislation, some states have undertaken a core literacy curriculum review process. These processes often involve the development and implementation of an evaluation system (e.g., rubric, checklist), resulting in a list of approved, high-quality, core literacy curricula that school systems are either required or recommended to adopt. However, little is known about the materials states use to review core literacy curricula. This study sought to identify which states engage in the review of K-2 core literacy curricula and to examine the materials they use to identify high-quality curricula. A content analysis of K-2 core literacy curriculum review materials from 24 states revealed large variability across materials. Overall, there was preliminary support of evidence-based content and pedagogy reflected in the materials. At the same time, there was potential for better alignment with some evidence-based practices. Further examination of K-2 core literacy curriculum review materials and the processes in which they are used is crucial to ensure clarity and consistency for educators, policymakers, and publishers. With sustained focus on evidence-based approaches and cross-state collaboration and alignment, there exists the potential to create meaningful and lasting improvements in literacy instruction and outcomes for all students.

There is considerable research evaluating the effects of family members implementing shared book reading interventions, especially during early childhood. However, less is known about the effects of family members providing instruction to help their school-aged children develop literacy skills, including both code-focused and meaning-focused skills that facilitate reading comprehension. The purpose of this meta-analysis was to describe and evaluate recent research examining the effects of at-home, family-implemented literacy interventions for school-aged children. A total of 25 interventions across 22 studies (12 with group designs and 10 with single-case experimental designs) were analyzed. The average effect on combined literacy outcomes was estimated as g = 0.36 (p < .01; Q = 191.83; I ² = 36.17) for group design studies and g = 1.50 (p < .01; Q = 114.58; I ² = 38.58) for single-case experimental design studies. Notably, for group design studies, effects varied by literacy outcome type. The mean effect for code-focused outcomes (i.e., PA, decoding/word reading, spelling, text reading) was g = 0.28 (p < .01) and the mean effect for meaning-focused outcomes (i.e., vocabulary, listening comprehension, reading comprehension) was g = 0.41 (p < .01). Overall, these findings support the implementation of family-delivered literacy interventions to improve literacy outcomes for school-aged children. At the same time, this meta-analysis revealed the paucity of research examining the effects of family-implemented literacy interventions, especially for older children, indicating a need for more research on this topic.

Early literacy screening tools are often a critical component of schools’ intervention frameworks. As the use of screening tools becomes more prevalent for identifying students who may be at risk for learning difficulties and in need of additional instruction, it is important to continuously evaluate teachers’ implementation of these screening tools and to improve efforts to support their implementation. Measures of name writing as a part of a screening tool can pose specific implementation challenges due to the subjectivity that rubric scoring allows. As such, this study aimed to evaluate the reliability of a rubric used by pre-kindergarten teachers to score a name writing task, as part of a larger screening tool, in the context of their own classrooms, and to examine scoring patterns between researchers and teachers on the name writing rubric. Results revealed that researchers had higher interrater reliability among themselves than the reliability between researchers and teachers. Although there was not a substantial difference between the two groups, it is worthwhile to examine the implementation of screening tool scoring systems in the field to ensure proper identification of and intervention for students who may be at risk for learning difficulties. Implications for researchers and teachers are discussed.