The National Reading Panel Guidepost: a Review of Reading Outcome Measures for Students with Emotional and Behavioral Disorders

Home , Reading disability

The National Reading Panel Guidepost: A Review of Reading Outcome Measures for Students With Emotional and Behavioral Disorders

Douglas E. Kostewicz University of Pittsburgh

Richard M. Kubina, Jr. The Pennsylvania State University

ABSTRACT: In 2000, the National Reading Panel compiled a definitive report of effective methods for reading instruction. As a population that generally demonstrates numerous problems with reading, students with emotional and behavioral disorders may benefit from the National Reading Panel’s published findings. This review examined and compared the number and outcomes of published reading studies for students with emotional and behavioral disorders before and after the release of the panel’s report. Results from the 21 studies meeting inclusion criteria indicated a five- fold increase in publication rate since 2000 and a shift from single to multiple reading measures as study outcomes. Additional results appear consistent with reading conclusions drawn by the National Reading Panel. This review also addresses future directions for researchers.

& Students with emotional and behavioral that students with E/BD number almost disorders (E/BD) exhibit a number of reading 500,000 nationally, the gaps in research have challenges (Levy & Chard, 2001). Although become objectionable (Ryan et al., 2004). most students with disabilities have some type Acknowledging a lack of reading research of reading difficulties (U.S. Department of with students with E/BD, Landrum, Tankersley, Education, 2006), students with E/BD not only and Kaufmann (2003) make a persuasive demonstrate low reading ability but also argument. Landrum et al. suggest that students receive some of the lowest academic grades involved in academic intervention studies, of any group (Sutherland & Singh, 2004). It reading included, exhibit some of the same seems that the lack of reading progress poses a educational and behavior problems displayed significant problem (Bos, Coleman, & Vaughn, by those with E/BD. Rather than employing 2002). For example, students with E/BD special interventions for an E/BD population, demonstrate significantly fewer gains than Landrum et al. assert that consistent imple- students with learning disabilities by the end mentation of proven methods (e.g., direct of elementary school (Anderson, Kutash, & instruction, peer tutoring, etc.; see also Tea- Duchnowski, 2001). The lack of progress in chingLD, 2007) with students with E/BD reading may contribute to the fact that many makes the intervention special. Because read- students with E/BD leave school without ing represents the most critical skill for learners graduating, affecting posteducation outcomes (e.g., increasing educational opportunities, (Anderson et al., 2001; Sutherland & Singh, promoting social adjustment, providing access 2004). Previous literature reviews (e.g., Cole- to employment, assisting lifelong learning; man & Vaughn, 2000; Lane, 2004; Levy & McCormick, 1995), E/BD researchers can refer Chard, 2001; Pierce, Reid, & Epstein, 2004; to outside sources of proven reading methods. Rivera, Al-Otaiba, & Koorland, 2006; Ruhl & Reviewing the National Reading Panel’s Berlinghoff, 1992; Ryan, Reid, & Epstein, (2000) outcomes may have compelling appli- 2004; Vaughn, Levy, Coleman, & Bos, 2002) cation for students with E/BD. examining reading and academic interventions In 1997, Congress initiated a chain of for students with E/BD report a paucity of events that culminated with the formation of research. Furthermore, the existing research the National Reading Panel (NRP). The panel lacks a clearly defined direction. Considering had the express mission to ‘‘assess the status of

62 / February 2008 Behavioral Disorders, 33 (2), 62–74 research-based knowledge, including the ef- The NRP’s (2000) recommendations pro- fectiveness of various approaches to teaching vide effective research-supported techniques students to read’’ (NRP, 2000, p. 1–1). for instructing reading across multiple sub- Following much debate and public input, the skills. For researchers and practitioners of E/ NRP agreed to analyze the following specific BD, these conclusions validate some tech- reading areas: alphabetics, fluency, compre- niques already in practice while offering hension, teacher education, computer tech- additional reading methods. Although very nology, and reading instruction (defined in few studies meeting criteria included students Table 1). After examining more than 115,000 with E/BD, researchers and practitioners ex- reading research articles, the NRP completed a ploring reading instruction for students with E/ review focused on each topic. BD can use the findings contained in the NRP By dividing alphabetics into two separate as a starting point based on logical arguments parts, the NRP (2000) suggested that explicitly such as those posed by Landrum et al. (2003); instructing phonemic awareness helps students methods validated by research have a great across a variety of ages to read and spell. In likelihood that they will work, even for addition, students maintained improvements students with E/BD. well after the removal of phonemic awareness Previous reviews have focused broadly on instruction. Interventions targeting phonics, academic interventions for students with E/BD the second part of alphabetics, have the across subject areas (e.g., Lane, 2004; Pierce et greatest effect on students when instructed al., 2004; Ruhl & Berlinghoff, 1992; Ryan et early in a student’s academic career. The most al., 2004) or more specifically on reading effective phonics instruction occurred explic- interventions for younger students with E/BD itly and systematically. Following an explicit (e.g., Coleman & Vaughn, 2000; Rivera et al., theme, the NRP indicated that students benefit 2006; Vaughn et al., 2002). The purpose of this the most from fluency instruction delivered literature review examines reading interven- directly and from practicing fluency with tion research for students with E/BD educated guided repeated readings. in public school settings since 1975. This The NRP (2000) divided reading compre- review addresses two specific questions: (a) hension into three distinct parts (i.e., vocabu- Have the number of studies using reading lary, text, and teacher training of comprehen- interventions for students with E/BD served in sion strategies) and presented those results public school settings differed before and after individually. Although articles meeting the the publication of the NRP’s (2000) report? and criteria were not located, summary data trends (b) How have studies focusing on reading suggest that effective vocabulary instruction interventions for students with E/BD served in can occur directly and indirectly, through public school settings differed before (1976– repetition and multiple examples, and in 2000) and after (2001–2006) the NRP findings context. However, using single methods does with regard to alphabetics (i.e., phonemic not provide students the best chance to awareness and phonics), fluency, comprehen- succeed. sion (i.e., vocabulary and text), and the use of computer technology for reading instruction? Unlike vocabulary, the panelists found many text comprehension studies that met the criteria and shared their overall findings. Method The NRP (2000) concluded that employing multiple strategies for building comprehension The present review initially located arti- increases near transfer (i.e., the student an- cles through a computerized search of the swers, creates questions, and recalls informa- PsycINFO, PsyARTICLES, and ERIC databases. tion). Data from teacher-training articles show Descriptors and all possible truncations in- that teachers can learn to teach strategies cluded reading fluency, reading achievement, effectively and proficiently, which in turn has reading attainment, reading comprehension, a positive result for their students. Once they or reading development and instruction, inter- extended their scope to overall teacher train- vention, strategy, teaching, or programming ing, the NRP found that these studies reported and emotional disturbance, behavior distur- positive yet varied results and computers. bance, emotional disorder, behavior disorder, Computer-assisted learning, although showing serious emotional disturbance,orconduct promise for instruction, will probably greatly disorder. An ancestral search of identified improve as technology advances. articles and pertinent literature reviews (Lane,

Behavioral Disorders, 33 (2), 62–74 February 2008 / 63 TABLE 1 Defined Areas Examined by the National Reading Panel (2000)

Reading Area Definition Alphabetics: phonemic awareness ‘‘… the ability to focus on and manipulate phonemes through spoken words’’ (pp. 2–10) Alphabetics: phonics Using grapheme-phoneme correspondences to decode or spell words Fluency Reading with speed, accuracy, and proper expression Comprehension: vocabulary Studies focusing on teaching word recognition and meaning Comprehension: text Reading connected text with understanding Comprehension: teacher training of Studies that train teachers to use strategy instruction for comprehension strategy instruction comprehension Teacher training of reading instruction Studies that train teachers to teach reading to students Computer technology and reading instruction The ability and efficacy of computers to actively instruct reading

2004; Mooney, Epstein, Reid, & Nelson, 2003; difficulties meeting criteria for ED or BD Mooney, Ryan, Uhing, Reid, & Epstein, 2005; (Mooney et al., 2003). Pierce et al., 2004; Rivera et al., 2006; Ruhl & 4. Use an experimental or quasi-experimental Berlinghoff, 1992; Ryan et al., 2004) followed design. Exclusion criteria included group the computerized search. An additional step designs that included multiple participant involved a hand search of two journals categories that did not disaggregate data for focusing on students with E/BD, the Journal students meeting BD, ED, SED, or E/BD of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders and criteria (e.g., Scruggs & Osguthorpe, 1986). Behavioral Disorders. 5. Based on this review’s question, the study Articles had to meet all of the following had to occur in a public school setting (i.e., criteria for acceptance in this review: self-contained classroom, resource room, or general education classroom). Excluded 1. Appear in a peer-reviewed journal article articles included those that had students in published after the passage of Public Law a residential school (e.g., Gable & Shores, 94–142 in 1975. 1980), private laboratory school (e.g., 2. Directly measure the effects of at least one McCurdy, Cundari, & Lentz, 1990), or a independent variable (i.e., instruction or university laboratory or affiliated school enhancement of a reading skill) on a (e.g., Skinner & Shapiro, 1989). primary dependent variable of a specific reading behavior (e.g., increase in words The computerized search generated 477 read). Therefore, the review’s focus re- articles, 14 of which met inclusion criteria. An mained solely on the effect of reading ancestral search of these articles and pertinent interventions on specific reading behaviors. literature reviews resulted in identification of 5 Articles met exclusion criteria if researchers additional articles meeting criteria. The hand reported nondescript reading-dependent search produced 1 additional article. The variables (e.g., Ayllon, Kuhlman, & Warzak, qualifying 20 articles, noted with an asterisk 1982), did not dissagregate reading scores in the reference section, meeting review (e.g., Maher, 1984), or examined curricu- criteria contained 21 studies published in 11 lar modifications only (e.g., McLaughlin, journals. 1992). Initial coding for the review resulted in a 3. Include participants who attended kinder- division of identified studies into two groups garten through 12th grade at the time of the (pre-2000 and 2001–2006) based on publica- study and had a sole identification of a tion date. Then, each study received a code behavioral disorder (BD), emotional disor- based on the reported outcomes of the NRP der (ED), serious emotional disturbance (2000). Groups of studies included alphabetics, (SED), or E/BD according to state educa- fluency, comprehension, and computer instructional guidelines. In the absence of explicit tion. Studies reporting multiple outcomes (e.g., verification status, the review considered alphabetics and fluency) received a multiple- participants served in a self-contained outcome grouping. Once separated, informa- classroom for emotional or behavioral tion gathered from each study became the

64 / February 2008 Behavioral Disorders, 33 (2), 62–74 setting/demographics, specific interventions, Daly, Martens, Kilmer, & Massie, 1996; dependent measures, and study outcomes. Dawson, Venn, & Gunter, 2000; Polsgrove, Reith, Friend, & Cohen, 1980; Reith, Pols- Results grove, Raia, Patterson, & Buchman, 1977; Reith, Polsgrove, Semmel, & Cohen, 1980; This review organizes the results into two Rose, 1984; Schuster, Stevens, & Doak, 1990) sections. The first section addresses the publi- appeared between the time of the authoriza- cation rate of reading studies targeting students tion of PL 94–142 in 1975 and when the NRP with E/BD in public school settings before and (2000) disseminated its results. Researchers after the NRP (2000). The second section centers published approximately one study that met on comparing identified articles along each of inclusion criteria for this review every 30 the aforementioned outcome categories. months during this time. Since 2000, researchers have generated 11 articles (Barton-Arwood, Publication Rate Before and After 2000 Wehby, & Falk, 2005; Blankenship, Ayres, & Langone, 2005; Daly, Garbacz, Olson, Per- Figure 1 displays the frequency of studies sampieri, & Ni, 2006; Falk & Wehby, 2001; per year and cumulative frequency of studies Hale et al., 2005; Lingo, Slaton, & Jolivette, pre- and post-2000. Dots represent the number 2006; Scott & Shearer-Lingo, 2002; Staubitz, of studies published per year. The open circles Cartledge, Yurick, & Lo, 2005; Strong, Wehby, connected by dashed lines represent cumula- Falk, & Lane, 2004; Wehby, Falk, Barton- tive numbers of studies published before and Arwood, Lane, & Cooley, 2003; Wehby, Lane, after 2000, with the line distinguishing the & Falk, 2005) focused on reading for students release of NRP (2000) report. with E/BD. The rate of journal articles meeting Examining the 21 research studies, 10 criteria for this review increased to almost one studies (Babyak, Koorland, & Mathes, 2000; study every 6 months, a substantial increase in Cochran, Feng, Cartledge, & Hamilton, 1993; the publication rate.

Figure 1. Number of emotional and behavioral disorders reading studies published per year and the cumulative number of studies published before and after National Reading Panel (2000).

Behavioral Disorders, 33 (2), 62–74 February 2008 / 65 Figure 2. Overall reading outcomes by study divided before and after National Reading Panel (2000).

Reading Intervention Outcomes computer instruction did not appear in any study. An extended bar graph, Figure 2, illus- trates E/BD reading research articles by out- Alphabetics come from 1976 to 2006. Each bar represents the total number of studies meeting criteria for Phonics instruction each outcome. Partly shaded areas of each bar show the number of studies occurring prior to All three phonics instruction studies (Fig- 2000, with fully shaded areas reflecting ure 2) had publication dates prior to the NRP published research after 2000. report (2000; Cochran et al., 1993; Reith et al., An analysis of Figure 2 shows that eight 1977; Reith et al., 1980). These studies cover studies (Barton-Arwood et al., 2005; Falk & 30% of the research predating 2000. Each Wehby, 2001; Polsgrove et al., 1980; Reith et study assessed unknown sight-word acquistion al., 1977; Staubitz et al., 2005; Strong et al., with either one student in a self-contained 2004; Wehby et al., 2003; Wehby et al., 2005) classroom (Reith et al., 1977; Reith et al., reported investigating reading instruction 1980) or with eight pairs of students in a based on multiple outcomes. Remaining bars pullout setting (Cochran et al., 1993) aged 7 to show that six studies (Daly et al., 1996; Daly et 15 years. al., 2006; Dawson et al., 2000; Lingo et al., The three studies applied different exper- 2006; Rose, 1984; Scott & Shearer-Lingo, imental approaches to sight-word learning. In 2002) monitored fluency, three studies (Coch- the first study, Reith et al. (1977) calculated the ran et al., 1993; Reith et al., 1977; Reith et al., effect of earning free time on new words 1980) phonics, three studies (Babyak et al., learned during one 20-min session per day for 2000; Blankenship et al., 2005; Hale et al., 16 weeks. Without changing any instructional 2005) text comprehension, and one study approach, one student read four more words (Schuster et al., 1990) vocabulary instruction. per week when able to earn free time as Although phonemic awareness was included compared with baseline. In the second study, in some multiple-outcome studies, the identi- Reith et al. (1980) reported that by adding fied research base did not report phonemic 5 min of instruction time per session during the awareness measures in isolation. In addition, intervention, another student corretly identi-

66 / February 2008 Behavioral Disorders, 33 (2), 62–74 fied eight more words per day when compared Child to Read in 100 Easy Lessons and Great with baseline. The student also increased Leaps 10 to 15 min per day for 50 consecutive correct responses from 17 to 40 on a 75-point school days. In both studies, students’ oral weekly review test. Sessions lasted between 5 reading fluency increased. Lingo et al. also and 10 min across the 23 days of the study. included generalized reading passages during As an alternative to using teachers to which students read approximately 20 more deliver instruction, Cochran et al. (1993) had words per minute with five fewer errors older students tutor younger students. Tutoring compared with their baseline performance. sessions occurred during thirty-two 30-min The remaining two fluency studies, one sessions over 8 weeks. Tutor responsibilities prior (Daly et al., 1996) and one following included teaching (i.e., model, prompt, (Daly et al., 2006) the NRP (2000), tested the check), testing, and charting tutees responses. effect of phonic instruction on reading fluency. Following instruction and matched with com- Daly et al. (1996) used approximately 80 min parison peers, tutees increased correct sight- across eight sessions for phonics instruction word responses by an average of 22.25% and with one student. Following each session, the tutors by an average of 11.75%. student read four assessment passages across matched, single-consonant/short-vowel words Fluency and unmatched, single-consonant/long-vowel words and high and low content overlap (i.e., In the six reading fluency studies (Fig- to the instructed phonics skill). The student ure 2), three (Daly et al., 1996; Dawson et al., demonstrated the highest degree of fluency 2000; Rose, 1984) appear prior to 2000 (30% during matched passages with high content of the total) and three appear after (27% of the overlap and maintained those scores in 1- total; Daly et al., 2006; Lingo et al., 2006; month follow-up assessments (Daly et al., Scott & Shearer-Lingo, 2002). Settings includ- 1996). Using similar phonics instruction com- ed a self-contained classroom (Daly et al., ponents (i.e., modeling, practice, error correc- tion, and performance feedback), Daly et al. 1996; Scott & Shearer-Lingo, 2002), resource (2006) examined the effects of instructional room (Lingo et al., 2006; Rose, 1984), general and reward choice (i.e., token economy) on education classroom (Dawson et al., 2000), reading fluency. Students had a maximum of and a pullout setting (Daly et al., 2006). There 10 min available for instructional choice on number of students ranged from one to five, four separate passage sessions. Following and they were aged 7 to 13 years. instructional and reward choice phases, both Two studies (Dawson et al., 2000; Rose, students increased reading fluency and pre- 1984) addressed the effects of different pre- served gains during maintenance (Daly et al., viewing options on reading fluency. Rose 2006). compared no previewing, silent previewing, and teacher previewing 2 to 6 min each day for 33 consecutive school days on 1-min Comprehension timings. Dawson et al. balanced seven oppor- Vocabulary instruction tunities of no previewing, computer-read models, and teacher-read models with each Figure 2 shows vocabulary instruction session lasting from 3 to 6 min. Rose found occurring in one study (Schuster et al., 1990), that students demonstrated fewer errors and representing 10% of the articles published more correct words per minute after listening before 2000. Working individually in a re- to a teacher-previewed passage. Similarly, source room, Schuster et al. taught unknown Dawson et al. noted quicker and more vocabulary words and definitions on flash accurate student responding following the cards to one 10-year-old student. Each probe teacher-previewed model. and instructional session consisted of 30 trials Two of the post-NRP (2000) studies, Lingo (i.e., each word presented six times) and lasted et al. (2006) and Scott and Shearer-Lingo 10 min. The 5-s time delay procedure resulted (2002), reported the effects of commercially in the student’s completing both five-word lists available programs on oral reading fluency. at 100% accuracy within four instructional Lingo et al. used Corrective Reading with two sessions and 100% during the maintenance students across an average of eight 45-min checks at 6, 10, and 14 weeks following the intervention sessions. For three students, Scott study. Schuster et al. also reported that the and Shearer-Lingo implemented Teach Your student demonstrated generalization at the

Behavioral Disorders, 33 (2), 62–74 February 2008 / 67 conclusion of the study by naming the word Wehby et al., 2005) combined phonemic when presented with the definition. awareness and phonics, three studies (Pols- grove et al., 1980; Staubitz et al., 2005; Strong Text comprehension instruction et al., 2004) combined comprehension and fluency, one study combined alphabetics and As shown in Figure 2, the three text fluency (Barton-Arwood et al., 2005), and one comprehension studies (Babyak et al., 2000; study combined alphabetics and comprehen- Blankenship et al., 2005; Hale et al., 2005) sion (Reith et al., 1977). incorporated 10% of those published before 2000 and 18% of those published since. Each Phonemic awareness and phonics of these studies included between one and three students in either a general education Falk and Wehby (2001), Wehby et al. setting (Blankenship et al., 2005) or students (2003), and Wehby et al. (2005) examined the pulled out for individualized instruction (Ba- effects of commercially available curricula and byak et al., 2000; Hale et al., 2005). Students instructional programs on one or two students ranged in age from 11 to 15 years. in a self-contained classroom. Total time spent Two of the studies (Babyak et al., 2000; instructing each student ranged from approx- Blankenship et al., 2005) used similar inter- imately 11 hr to 60 hr. In each study, the ventions. After reading material in both stud- researchers combined different commercially ies, students used graphical organizers to available interventions. These combinations arrange and pull out main ideas. Babyak et included Kindergarten Peer Assisted Learning al. used the Cooperative Story Mapping Strategies (K-PALS) and teacher-directed pho- component from the Peer-Assisted Learning nics activities (Falk & Wehby, 2001), Open Strategies (PALS) program across six 30-min Court Reading and PALS (Wehby et al., 2003), sessions, and Blankenship et al. instructed and Scott Forseman Reading and Phonological students to use the Inspiration software map- Awareness Training for Reading (Wehby et al., ping aid across eleven 20-min sessions. With 2005). these interventions, students stated more cor- These studies (Falk & Wehby, 2001; rect story retells and grammar elements and Wehby et al., 2003; Wehby et al., 2005) scored higher on comprehension questions, measured either phonemic awareness (i.e., chapter quizzes, and chapter tests. segmentation, blending, letter naming, initial As an alternative to providing instruction, sound fluency) or phonics (i.e., letter sounds, Hale et al. (2005) measured student text nonsense-word fluency, sight words). The comprehension following different types of researchers measured each dependent variable reading models across nine sessions, each of as correct responses per minute and found which lasted an average of 16 min. Students either moderate (Wehby et al., 2003) or little to silently read passages, listened to the teacher no gains (Falk & Wehby, 2001; Wehby et al., read the passage, or listened to the teacher 2005). Wehby et al. (2005) found that letter while they read the passage. Students an- naming, nonsense word, and onset fluency swered more correct comprehension questions gains were not maintained during follow-up. following sessions in which they read with the teacher compared with listening or silently Comprehension and fluency reading the passages. Researchers (Polsgrove et al., 1980; Stau- Multiple Outcomes bitz et al., 2005; Strong et al., 2004) addressing reading comprehension and fluency estab- Multiple-outcome research (Barton-Ar- lished moderate to strong student reading wood et al., 2005; Falk & Wehby, 2001; gains. Articles reported testing an average of Polsgrove et al., 1980; Reith et al., 1977; four students aged 10 to 18 years from Staubitz et al., 2005; Strong et al., 2004; approximately 7 hr in a pullout setting Wehby et al., 2003; Wehby et al., 2005) (Polsgrove et al., 1980; Staubitz et al., 2005) encompassed 20% of the studies published to 63 hr of intervention in a self-contained before 2000 and 55% of the reading studies classroom (Strong et al., 2004). Staubitz et al. after (Figure 2). Within these eight studies, four and Strong et al. had students practice fluency distinct subgroups emerged. Three studies and comprehension following peer-mediated (Falk & Wehby, 2001; Wehby et al., 2003; repeated readings. In addition, Strong et al.

68 / February 2008 Behavioral Disorders, 33 (2), 62–74 compared performance during Corrective the NRP’s report (2000) and reading research Reading lessons with and without repeated for students with E/BD. Reading studies dou- readings. Polsgrove et al. compared different bled in number since 2000 and measured a instructional strategies (i.e., listening to the five-fold increase in publication rate for passage, corrective feedback, and silent re- articles that met inclusion criteria. Although hearsal) alone and in combination with per- other systematic variables may have contrib- formance feedback/reward contingency. uted to the publication increase, several All three studies reported moderate to factors suggest a link with the NRP report. strong outcome gains. Reading fluency and Namely, 3 of the 11 studies (Staubitz et al., comprehension increased with Corrective 2005; Strong et al., 2004; Wehby et al., 2005) Reading instruction, Corrective Reading in published since 2000 cite the NRP as guiding combination with repeated readings, and aspects of their research. repeated readings alone (Staubitz et al., The combination of the NRP’s report in 2005; Strong et al., 2004) as compared with conjunction with other factors may help baseline conditions. Polsgrove et al. (1980) interpret this rapid change. For instance, found the greatest fluency and comprehension researchers may have started to respond to gains during phases with corrective feedback, reading and academic intervention reviews for an instructional method, and a performance students with E/BD. Ruhl and Berlinghoff feedback/reward contingency. (1992) initially called for increased attention to this issue. An update by Lane (2004) and a Alphabetics and fluency series of other reviews (Coleman & Vaughn, 2000; Levy & Chard, 2001; Pierce et al., 2004; Barton-Arwood et al. (2005) examined the Rivera et al., 2006; Ryan et al., 2004; Vaughn effect of combined interventions on alpha- et al., 2002) echoed previous recommenda- betics and fluency. They spent approximately tions. However, the increase may still have 49 hr intervening with two self-contained limited links to the NRP, as three of the students with E/BD using a combination of reviews (Levy & Chard, 2001; Rivera et al., Horizons Fast Track AB and PALS over a 14- 2006; Vaughn et al., 2002) explicitly cite the week period. They measured effectiveness of NRP report and findings. instruction on phonemic awareness (i.e., seg- A renewed nationwide awareness in read- mentation), phonics (i.e., nonsense-word flu- ing may also have accounted for the increased ency, sight words), and oral reading fluency attention since 2000. As part of the No Child once per week. The combination of Horizons Left Behind Act of 2001, Reading First, based Fast Track AB and PALS showed increasing on the findings of the NRP (2000), has trends from baseline to treatment for segmen- promoted via federal funding evidence-based tation, nonsense-word fluency, and sight-word reading methods for states and schools (Antu- reading with moderate increases for reading nez, 2002). Also at a researcher level, external fluency. funding sources may have contributed to the increase. For example, the Institute of Educa- Alphabetics and comprehension tional Sciences, started in 2002, has continued to award funding for research targeting aca- The last multiple-measures study (Reith et demic and social outcomes for students with al., 1977) compared reading workbook page serious emotional disturbance. completion with and without a reward contingency. Workbook tasks consisted of both comprehension and decoding exercises. The Overall Study Focus student completed more workbook assign- Aside from the limited connections linking ments and with increased accuracy when able E/BD reading research and the NRP (2000) to earn additional free time. Students contin- report, a closer examination of study break- ued accurate completion for 2, 7, and 12 downs may provide more insightful compari- weeks following the completion of the study. sons. Many of the more recent studies do not explicitly connect with the NRP but report Discussion using effective reading methods. For example, direct instruction, a suggested method for The number of published pre- and post- students with E/BD (Landrum et al., 2003), 2000 studies suggests a possible link between appears in multiple studies focusing on pho-

Behavioral Disorders, 33 (2), 62–74 February 2008 / 69 nemic awareness and phonics (Barton-Arwood Almost 50% of the studies have oral reading et al., 2005; Strong et al., 2004; Wehby et al., fluency measures either in isolation or mixed 2003) and fluency (Lingo et al., 2006; Scott & with other measures (Barton-Arwood et al., Shearer-Lingo, 2002). In addition, researchers 2005; Daly et al., 1996; Daly et al., 2006; (Barton-Arwood et al., 2005; Falk & Wehby, Dawson et al., 2000; Lingo et al., 2006; 2001; Wehby et al., 2003) also used peer- Polsgrove et al., 1980; Rose, 1984; Scott & tutoring methods, another suggested method, Shearer-Lingo, 2002; Staubitz et al., 2005; to instruct reading. As E/BD reading research Strong et al., 2004). Researchers found that evolves, researchers examine and report read- students read more fluently following guided ing methods and outcomes that mirror many of repeated reading sessions rather than sustained the NRP’s findings. silent reading sessions (Staubitz et al., 2005). In addition, students read less fluently follow- Multiple outcomes ing silently previewed passages than teacher- or computer-previewed models (Dawson et Since 2000, students with E/BD have al., 2000; Rose, 1984). These strong findings participated in more studies containing multi- not only reflect the findings of the NRP but also ple reading outcomes (e.g., phonemic aware- help establish guided repeated reading meth- ness, phonics, fluency, and comprehension) ods as effective for students with E/BD (Al than single reading outcomes. In other words, Otaiba & Rivera, 2006). researchers have broadened the focal point from examining singular aspects of reading to Phonemic awareness multiple features within the hierarchy of reading behaviors. Reading has many compo- Evidence not only suggests that phonemic nent skills, which ultimately combine to form a awareness plays an important role in the well-balanced composite behavior essential reading process but also demonstrates that for remedial, developmental, and advanced deficits in phonemic awareness often predict readers (Gough & Tunmer, 1986). Research future reading problems (Bos & Vaughn, 2006; suggests that effective instruction not only NRP, 2000). Although phonemic awareness breaks down skills into teachable parts but outcomes were not examined in isolation, four also integrates skills as a unit (NRP, 2000; studies did contain phonemic awareness out- Swanson, 1999). Therefore, as interventions comes (Barton-Arwood et al., 2005; Falk & allow, measuring multiple outcomes across the Wehby, 2001; Wehby et al., 2003; Wehby et reading behavior spectrum increases conclu- al., 2005), and students demonstrated some sions regarding instructional effectiveness. improvement. Three of the studies reported Some multiple-outcome studies provide assessing students’ ability to segment and/or further insight into the relationships of reading blend phonemes (Barton-Arwood et al., 2005; behaviors. Reith et al. (1977) reported increas- Falk & Wehby, 2001; Wehby et al., 2003). The es to both phonics and comprehension by National Institute for Literacy (2006) named showing student increases on workbook exer- both measures (i.e., segmenting and blending) cises. Staubitz et al. (2005) provided clear as central for laying the foundation for future examples of fluency gains affecting compre- reading skills. Following phonemic awareness hension, with other researchers providing gains, Wehby et al. (2003) found that students limited evidence of this relationship (Polsgrove did not elevate general reading behaviors and et al., 1980; Strong et al., 2004). These findings points to the brevity of the intervention as an support conclusions drawn by the NRP (2000) attempt to explain this lack of generalization. regarding phonics, fluency, and comprehen- These findings support the NRP’s (2000) sion relationships, suggesting that students assertion that although it is necessary for with E/BD respond similarly to students with- reading, phonemic awareness development out disabilities. alone does not guarantee reading gains.

Fluency Phonics

Although the NRP (2000) suggests that As another foundational reading skill, the teachers often neglect fluency instruction, NRP (2000) discussed the importance of researchers in E/BD have devoted considerable phonics. Phonics outcomes appeared in eight attention to studying oral reading fluency. studies, four before 2000 (Cochran et al.,

70 / February 2008 Behavioral Disorders, 33 (2), 62–74 1993; Reith et al., 1977; Reith et al., 1980) and ly, researchers can continue to examine four after 2000 (Barton-Arwood et al., 2004; reading using the methods and outcomes Falk & Wehby, 2001; Wehby et al., 2003; represented in the current body of literature, Wehby et al., 2005). Earlier studies presented especially since 2000. limited outcomes. Although noting improve- As a result of exposure to effective reading ment, Cochran et al. (1993) and Reith et al. programs, students with E/BD have demon- (1980) isolated phonic measures to sight-word strated rapid gains even after short amounts of learning. More recent research reported out- time (e.g., Wehby et al., 2003). Continuing to comes that included additional phonics such examine multiple reading outcomes through as letter-sound correspondence and nonsense- the use of these types of programs provides word fluency (Falk & Wehby, 2001; Wehby et students with much needed opportunities to al., 2005). These earlier phonic component increase their reading skills. measures partly result from younger student Another important reading skill, phonemic participants, but examining younger students awareness, did not receive much attention holds consistent with findings from the NRP, prior to 2000. Therefore, the recent and which found phonics introduced before first continued attention for phonemic awareness grade to be more effective than introducing will likely show positive benefits. Demonstrat- phonics later. ing improvements to foundational reading skills such as phonemic awareness may affect Comprehension the lack of early reading gains for younger students with E/BD. However, effective in- Reading does not take place if a student struction of phonemic awareness must occur fails to understand the material (Gough & explicitly, and performance must be assessed Tunmer, 1986). Therefore, comprehension regularly (Barton-Arwood et al., 2005; Foor- plays a vital role in the reading process and man, Francis, Fletcher, Schatschneider, & the ability of students with E/BD to access the Mehta, 1998; NRP, 2000). general education curriculum (Blankenship et One outcome, oral reading fluency, has al., 2005). The research base shows the received continued attention with regard to significance of comprehension because these students with E/BD. As a quality measure of outcomes appear in 8 of the 21 studies overall reading ability (Fuchs, Fuchs, Hosp, & (Babyak et al., 2000; Blankenship et al., Jenkins, 2001), researchers should continue to 2005; Hale et al., 2005; Polsgrove et al., examine the effects of guided fluency practice 1980; Reith et al., 1977; Schuster et al., 1990; (e.g., repeated readings) on students with E/ Staubitz et al., 2005; Strong et al., 2004) with BD. As with other student populations (Chard, a variety of assessment methods. Reports Vaughn, Tyler, 2002; Therrien, 2004), using included varied questions and answers tar- guided repeated readings to improve oral geting different meanings of the passage reading fluency may hold both academic and (Babyak et al., 2000; Hale et al., 2005; behavioral benefits for students with E/BD. A Polsgrove et al., 1980; Strong et al., 2004), continued examination of effective fluency chapter test scores (Blankenship et al., 2005; practice procedures for other reading skills, Reith et al., 1977), cloze procedures (Staubitz such as letter sounds, segmenting, and blend- et al., 2005), story retells (Babyak et al., ing, may also assist students with E/BD as they 2000), and recalling word definitions (Shuster move along the reading behavior continuum. et al., 1990). The variance of outcomes Reading comprehension, the most critical blends with the evidence posed by the NRP reading skill, deserves additional focused (2000) as a combination of methods, and study. As supported by the NRP’s (2000) assessments demonstrate the most effective report, E/BD reading researchers presented gains in reading comprehension. various reading comprehension outcomes. However, the RAND research group asked Suggestions for Future Research questions regarding the sensitivity of various comprehension measures relating the reading Reading research for students with E/BD intervention used (Snow, 2002). Consider oral has increased since 2000. However, it remains reading fluency interventions: Do 1-min story unclear if 21 total studies meet the document- retells (Roberts, Good, & Corcoran, 2005) or ed reading needs of students with E/BD. Many cloze procedures (Staubitz et al., 2005) best avenues remain open for investigation. Initial- measure reading comprehension for students

Behavioral Disorders, 33 (2), 62–74 February 2008 / 71 with E/BD? Attending to this question, specif- Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, ically for oral reading fluency, partly addresses 9, 106–115. another question developed by RAND con- Antunez, B. (2002). A brief history of Reading First.Re- cerning the relation of reading fluency to trieved April 11, 2008, from www.readingrockets. reading comprehension and reading motiva- org/article/309 *Babyak, A. E., Koorland, M., & Mathes, P. G. tion (Snow, 2002). Generating answers to (2000). The effects of story mapping instruction these questions may suggest how E/BD reading on the reading comprehension of students with researchers intervene and improve reading behavioral disorders. Behavioral Disorders, 25, comprehension. 239–258. Finally, researchers noted that students *Barton-Arwood, S. M., Wehby, J. H., & Falk, K. B. with E/BD demonstrate high degrees of vari- (2005). Reading instruction for elementary-age ability with reading behaviors (Barton-Arwood students with emotional and behavioral disor- et al., 2005; Falk & Wehby, 2001; Wehby et ders: Academic and behavioral outcomes. Ex- al., 2003). Future studies can examine other ceptional Children, 72, 7–27. factors that may play a role in the acquisition *Blankenship, T. L., Ayres, K. M., & Langone, J. of reading behaviors. Such factors include (2005). Effects of computer-based cognitive mapping on reading comprehension for students competing motivating variables, socioeco- with emotional behavior disorders. Journal of nomic differences, and individual behavioral Special Education Technology, 20, 15–23. repertoires. Bos, C. S., Coleman, M., & Vaughn, S. (2002). Reading and students with E/BD. What do we know and recommend? In K. L. Lane, F. M. Conclusions Gresham, & T. E. O’Shaughnessy (Eds.), Inter- ventions for children with or at risk for Congress asked the National Institute of emotional and behavioral disorders (pp. 87– Child Health and Human Development to 103). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon. convene a national panel of reading experts Bos, C. S., & Vaughn, S. (2006). Strategies for who would provide a definitive report of teaching students with learning and behavior effective methods for instructing reading. Since problems. Boston, MA: Pearson, Allyn, & Bacon. the release of the National Reading Panel’s Chard, D. J., Vaughn, S., & Tyler, B. (2002). A report in 2000, reading research for students synthesis of research on effective interventions with E/BD has changed. Although the avail- for building reading fluency with elementary able evidence does not establish a direct link, students with learning disabilities. Journal of the large jump in publication rate suggests a Learning Disabilities, 35, 386–406. *Cochran, L., Feng, H., Cartledge, G., & Hamilton, possible relationship. The increase in E/BD S. (1993). The effects of cross-age tutoring on the reading research has also shifted from exam- academic achievement, social behaviors, and ining only isolated reading behaviors to self-perceptions of low-achieving African Amer- multiple reading behaviors. Studies and liter- ican males with behavioral disorders. Behavior- ature reviews have cited findings from the NRP al Disorders, 18, 292–302. with greater frequency as the reading research Coleman, M., & Vaughn, S. (2000). Reading base has grown. Therefore, the National interventions for students with emotional/behav- Reading Panel may serve as one guidepost ioral disorders. Behavioral Disorders, 25, for helping researchers evaluate effective 93–104. outcomes for students with E/BD. *Daly, E. J., III, Garbacz, S. A., Olson, S. C., Persampieri, M., & Ni, H. (2006). Improving oral reading fluency by influencing students’ choice of instructional procedures: An experi- REFERENCES mental analysis with two students with behav- Allyon, T., Kuhlman, C., & Warzak, W. J. (1982). ioral disorders. Behavioral Interventions, 21, Programming resource room generalization us- 13–30. ing lucky charms. Child & Family Behavior *Daly, E. J., III, Martens, B. K., Kilmer, A., & Massie, Therapy, 4(2-3), 61–67. D. R. (1996). The effects of instructional match Al Otaiba, S., & Rivera, M. O. (2006). Individualiz- and content overlap on generalized reading ing guided oral reading fluency instruction for performance. Journal of Applied Behavior Anal- students with emotional and behavioral disor- ysis, 29, 507–518. ders. Intervention in School & Clinic, 41, *Dawson, L., Venn, M. L., & Gunter, P. L. (2000). 144–149. The effects of teacher versus computer reading Anderson, J. A., Kutash, K., & Duchnowski, A. J. models. Behavioral Disorders, 25, 105–113. (2001). A comparison of the academic progress *Falk, K. B., & Wehby, J. H. (2001). The effects of of students with EBD and students with LD. peer-assisted learning strategies on the begin-

72 / February 2008 Behavioral Disorders, 33 (2), 62–74 ning reading skills of young children with Mooney, P., Epstein, M. H., Reid, R., & Nelson, J. R. emotional or behavioral disorders. Behavioral (2003). Status of and trends in academic Disorders, 26, 344–359. intervention research for students with emotion- Foorman, B. R., Francis, D. J., Fletcher, J. M., al disturbance. Remedial and Special Education, Schatschneider, C., & Mehta, P. (1998). The 24, 273–287. role of instruction in learning to read: Preventing Mooney, P., Ryan, J. B., Uhing, B. M., Reid, R., & reading failure in at-risk children. Journal of Epstein, M. H. (2005). A review of self-manage- Educational Psychology, 90, 37–55. ment interventions targeting academic out- Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., Hosp, M. K., & Jenkins, J. R. comes for students with emotional and behav- (2001). Oral reading fluency as an indicator of ioral disorders. Journal of Behavioral Education, reading competence: A theoretical, empirical, 14, 203–221. and historical analysis. Scientific Studies in National Institute for Literacy. (2006). Questions about Reading, 5, 239–256. reading instruction. Retrieved January 3, 2007, Gable, R. A., & Shores, R. E. (1980). Comparison of from http://www.nifl.gov/partnershipforreading/ procedures for promoting reading proficiency of questions/questions_about.html two children with behavioral and learning National Reading Panel. (2000). Teaching children disorders. Behavioral Disorders, 5, 102–107. to read: An evidence-based assessment of the Gough, P. B., & Tunmer, W. E. (1986). Decoding, scientific research literature on reading and its reading, and reading disability. Remedial and implications for reading instruction. Washing- Special Education, 7, 6–10. ton, DC: National Institute of Child Health and *Hale, A. D., Skinner, C. H., Winn, B. D., Oliver, R., Human Development. Allin, J. D., & Molloy, C. C. M. (2005). An Pierce, C. D., Reid, R., & Epstein, M. H. (2004). investigation of listening and listening-while- Teacher-mediated interventions for children reading accommodations on reading comprehen- with EBD and their academic outcomes: A sion levels and rates in students with emotional review. Remedial and Special Education, 25, disorders. Psychology in the Schools, 42, 39–51. 175–188. Landrum, T. J., Tankersley, M., & Kauffman, J. M. *Polsgrove, L., Reith, H., Friend, M., & Cohen, R. (2003). What is special about special education (1980). An analysis of the effects of various or students with emotional or behavioral disor- instructional procedures on the oral reading ders? Journal of Special Education, 37, 148–156. performance of high school special education Lane, K. L. (2004). Academic instruction and tutoring students. In R. B. Rutherford, Jr., A. Prieto, & J. interventions for students with emotional and McGlothin (Eds.), Severe behavior disorders of behavioral disorders: 1990 to the present. In R. children and youth. (Vol. 3, pp. 125–133). B. Rutherford, Jr., M. M. Quinn, & S. R. Mathur Reston, VA: Council for Children With Behav- (Eds.), Handbook of research in emotional and ioral Disorders. behavioral disorders (pp. 462–486). New York: *Reith, H., Polsgrove, L., Raia, S., Patterson, N., & Guilford Press. Buchman, K. (1977). The use of free time to Levy, S., & Chard, D. J. (2001). Research on reading increase the reading achievement of three instruction for students with emotional and students placed in programs for behavior disor- behavioural disorders. International Journal of dered children. Behavioral Disorders, 3, 45–54. Disability, Development, and Education, 48, *Reith, H. J., Polsgrove, L., Semmel, M., & Cohen, R. 429–444. (1980). An experimental analysis of the effects of *Lingo, A. S., Slaton, D. B., & Jolivette, K. (2006). increased instructional time on the academic Effects of corrective reading on the reading achievemnt of a behaviorally disordered high abilities and classroom behaviors of middle school pupil. In R. B. Rutherford, Jr., A. Prieto, & school students with reading deficits and chal- J. McGlothin (Eds.), Severe behavior disorders of lenging behavior. Behavioral Disorders, 31, children and youth. (Vol. 3, pp. 134–141). 265–283. Reston, VA: Council for Children With Behavioral Maher, C. A. (1984). Handicapped adolescents as Disorders. cross-age tutors: Program description and eval- Rivera, M. O., Al-Otaiba, S., & Koorland, M. A. uation. Exceptional Children, 51, 56–63. (2006). Reading instruction for students with McCormick, S. (1995). Instructing students who have emotional and behavioral disorders and at risk literacy problems. (2nd ed.). Merrill: Englewood of antisocial behaviors in primary grades: Cliffs, NJ, Review of literature. Behavioral Disorders, 31, McCurdy, B. L., Cundari, L., & Lentz, F. E. (1990). 323–337. Enhancing instructional efficiency: An examina- Roberts, G., Good, R., & Corcoran, S. (2005). Story tion of time delay and the opportunity to observe retell: A fluency-based indicator of reading instruction. Education and Treatment of Chil- comprehension. School Psychology Quarterly, dren, 13, 226–238. 20, 304–317. McLaughlin, T. F. (1992). Effects of written feedback *Rose, T. L. (1984). Effects of previewing on the oral in reading on behaviorally disordered students. reading of mainstreamed behaviorally disordered Journal of Educational Research, 85, 312–316. students. Behavioral Disorders, 10, 33–39.

Behavioral Disorders, 33 (2), 62–74 February 2008 / 73 Ruhl, K. L., & Berlinghoff, D. H. (1992). Research on strategy and direct instruction model. Learning improving behaviorally disordered students’ Disabilities Research & Practice, 14, 129–140. academic performance: A review of the litera- Teaching, L. D. (2007). Current practice alerts. ture. Behavioral Disorders, 17, 178–190. Retrieved April, 14, 2008, from http://www. Ryan, J. B., Reid, R., & Epstein, M. H. (2004). Peer- teachingld.org/ld_resources/alerts/default.htm mediated intervention studies on academic Therrien, W. J. (2004). Fluency and comprehension achievement for students with EBD: A review. gains as a result of repeated reading: A meta- Remedial and Special Education, 25, 330–341. analysis. Remedial and Special Education, 25, *Schuster, J. W., Stevens, K. B., & Doak, P. K. (1990). 252–261. Using constant time delay to teach word defini- U.S. Department of Education. (2006). Twenty-sixth tions. Journal of Special Education, 24, 306–318. annual report to Congress on the implementa- *Scott, T. M., & Shearer-Lingo, A. (2002). The effects tion of the Individuals With Disabilities Educa- of reading fluency instruction on the academic tion Act. Washington, DC: Author. and behavioral success of middle school stu- Vaughn, S., Levy, S., Coleman, M., & Bos, C. S. dents in a self-contained EBD classroom. Pre- (2002). Reading instruction for students with LD venting School Failure, 46, 167–173. and EBD: A synthesis of observation studies. Scruggs, T. E., & Osguthorpe, R. T. (1986). Tutoring Journal of Special Education, 36, 2–13. interventions within special education settings: *Wehby, J. H., Falk, K. B., Barton-Arwood, S., Lane, A comparison of cross-age and peer tutoring. K. L., & Cooley, C. (2003). The impact of Psychology in the Schools, 23, 187–193. comprehensive reading instruction on the aca- Skinner, C. H., & Shapiro, E. S. (1989). A comparison demic and social behavior of students with of taped-words and drill interventions on read- emotional and behavioral disorders. Journal of ing fluency in adolescents with behavior disor- Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 11, ders. Education and Treatment of Children, 12, 225–238. 123–133. *Wehby, J. H., Lane, K. L., & Falk, K. B. (2005). An Snow, C. E. (2002). Reading for understanding: inclusive approach to improving early literacy Toward an R&D program in reading compre- skills of students with emotional and behavioral hension. Santa Monica, CA: RAND. disorders. Behavioral Disorders, 30, 155–169. *Staubitz, J. E., Cartledge, G., Yurick, A. L., & Lo, Y. (2005). Repeated reading for students with *References marked with an asterisk indicate studies emotional or behavioral disorders: Peer- and included in the literature review. trainer-mediated instruction. Behavioral Disor- ders, 31, 51–64. *Strong, A. C., Wehby, J. H., Falk, K. B., & Lane, K. AUTHORS’ NOTE L. (2004). The impact of a structured reading curriculum and repeated reading on the perfor- Address correspondence to Douglas Koste- mance of junior high students with emotional wicz, 5146 Wesley W. Posvar Hall, School and behavioral disorders. School Psychology of Education, University of Pittsburgh, Pitts- Review, 33, 561–581. Sutherland, K. S., & Singh, N. N. (2004). Learned burgh, PA 15260; E-mail: [email protected]. helplessness and students with emotional or behavioral disorders: Deprivation in the class- MANUSCRIPT room. Behavioral Disorders, 29, 169–181. Swanson, H. L. (1999). Instructional components that predict treatment outcomes for students with Initial Acceptance: 11/15/07 learning disabilities: Support for a combined Final Acceptance: 6/27/08

74 / February 2008 Behavioral Disorders, 33 (2), 62–74