Explore the vast range of titles available.

Technology to support student learning has become increasingly prevalent in schools and homes during the last few decades. Several recent reviews have examined aspects of technology-based literacy instruction, but they have not focused on the full array of literacy skills that can be addressed during technology-delivered instruction for elementary students, nor have they utilized meta-analytic methods to rigorously examine effects of such instruction. Therefore, the purpose of this meta-analysis was to describe and evaluate recent research on technology-delivered literacy instruction for students in Grades K-5. A total of 53 experimental or quasi-experimental studies were analyzed. Results demonstrated a statistically significant main effect of instruction on norm- or criterion-referenced literacy outcomes (g = 0.24, p < .001), indicating that elementary students are likely to benefit from technology-delivered literacy instruction. Although the effects of several moderator variables representing study, participant, instruction, and outcome characteristics were explored, analyses revealed no statistically significant moderators of effects of instruction. Overall, findings indicate that further research on technology-based literacy instruction is needed to determine what works for whom and under what conditions.

This introduction to the special series summarizes evidence for the genetic and brain bases for dyslexia and cognitive– behavioral indicators (including ones that can be measured even before the onset of reading instruction) that attest to meaningful differences between children with dyslexia and their non-dyslexic peers. Authors review controversies that have surrounded approaches to dyslexia identification and treatment during the last few decades. Finally, they introduce the findings of the articles in the special series and discuss potential implications for dyslexia identification and treatment.

This meta-analysis synthesizes the last two decades of experimental and quasiexperimental research on reading instruction across academic contexts (e.g., social studies, science, mathematics, English language arts) for English learners (ELs) in grades 4 through 8, to determine (a) the overall effectiveness of reading instruction for upper elementary and middle school students who are ELs and (b) how the magnitude of the effect varies based on student, instructional, and study characteristics. The analysis included a total of 11 studies with 46 individual effect sizes and yielded a mean effect size of g=0.35 across all (i.e., standardized and unstandardized) reading measures, g=0.01 across standardized reading measures, and g=0.43 across unstandardized reading measures. For all reading, unstandardized reading, all vocabulary, and unstandardized vocabulary measures, results suggest that higher quality studies tended to have smaller effects, and these effects were even more evident for unstandardized measures (i.e., one unit increase in study quality was associated with decreased effects: g=0.21, g=0.30, g=0.24, g=0.30, respectively). For all comprehension measures, effects were larger for instruction that included both vocabulary and comprehension (g=0.39) than for instruction that focused on vocabulary alone (g=0.08). Results suggest the benefit of developing and refining high-impact approaches to reading instruction for ELs that can be delivered across content areas and grades.

This study examined the heterogeneity of early literacy profiles of English learners and non-English learners. Utilizing a latent profile analysis, the degree to which distinct learner profiles emerged was examined using code-based and language-based measures administered in the beginning of first grade. Participants included 11,803 English learners and 34,129 non-English learners. Three early literacy profiles emerged for English learners while four profiles emerged for non-English learners. Both sets of profiles can be identified based on the severity of students’ difficulties with component skills rather than the specificity of their difficulties. Resulting profiles in both samples were then utilized to predict performance on a measure of broad reading comprehension administered at the end of first and second grade. Results indicated that the profile that was associated with the greatest success on the later measures of reading comprehension for both samples included the strongest performance on measures of both code-related and language-related skills. Results highlight the heterogeneity of early literacy skills within the English learner and non-English learner populations and demonstrate the importance of designing instruction that addresses the severity of a student’s skill deficit.

This best-evidence synthesis reviews the past 20 years of rigorous reading intervention research to identify effective programs of instruction for Grade K–3 English Learners (ELs), as well as to determine the average effect of reading instruction on reading outcomes for this population. We identified 10 studies, all of which only included students in Grades K, 1, and/or 2. These studies evaluated the effects of seven programs, reporting 76 effect sizes. We did not identify any studies that included Grade 3 ELs. To guide researchers and practitioners, we describe each program and discuss associated effect sizes in foundational skills, fluency, comprehension, and oral language. Proactive Reading, delivered in a small group setting, produced some of the largest effects on foundational skills, fluency, and reading comprehension outcomes. Sound Partners was also shown to be effective even when delivered for a shorter duration, in a one-to-one setting. Finally, for practitioners and researchers aiming to improve oral language outcomes, Early Vocabulary Connection, delivered to small groups of students for 20 weeks, had the largest effects on oral language outcome measures. The primary limitation of this review was the small number of studies meeting the best-evidence synthesis criteria. Future research is needed to better understand the impact of reading interventions on reading outcomes for ELs in Grades 2–3 and the impact of meaning-focused intervention on reading outcomes. In particular, additional research is needed to identify interventions that have the potential to meaningfully improve reading comprehension and oral language outcomes for K–3 ELs.

In theory, teacher knowledge predicts instructional practice, thus impacting student outcomes. When it comes to knowledge to teach elementary-grade reading, most previous surveys have focused on knowledge essential for word reading development; few surveys have provided a picture of educator knowledge to teach both word reading and language comprehension. This article describes the development and validation of the Teacher Understanding of Literacy Constructs and Evidence-Based Instructional Practices (TULIP) survey, which assesses teacher knowledge in the domains of (a) phonological awareness, (b) phonics, decoding, and encoding, (c) reading fluency, (d) oral language, and (e) reading comprehension. The TULIP survey was created using an iterative development process involving a systematic review of research, expert review of items, field testing, and a pilot study. A validation study of the resulting TULIP survey was conducted with a sample of 313 in-service elementary-grade teachers of reading. Confirmatory factor analyses revealed that both one-factor and five-factor models of the survey had acceptable fit. The overall TULIP scale had good reliability, and subscales representing knowledge within specific literacy domains had acceptable reliability (with the oral language subscale having lower reliability than the other four subscales). Knowledge overall and within each literacy domain was significantly related to education level, such that teachers with more education had higher scores.

Working in an inner-city school in San Antonio, Texas, with many students growing up in low-income homes, she quickly realized that several of her students experienced challenges acquiring reading proficiency, particularly with word reading and spelling. Because these students were also English learners (ELs), she was unclear as to whether their challenges learning to read were related to acquiring proficiency in English, to serious reading problems like dyslexia, or perhaps to both. [...]like native English speakers, ELs may demonstrate dyslexia as a result of complex interactions between neurobiological and environmental factors that impact neural systems related to learning and reading (Fletcher, Lyon, Fuchs, & Barnes, 2019). [...]intervention research shows treatments for ELs should not be delayed until students possess a certain degree of English proficiency (Richards-Tutor, Baker, Gersten, Baker, & Smith, 2016). [...]although ELs with reading difficulties present particular underperformance in vocabulary knowledge and linguistic processes relative to their native speaking peers due to their status as second language learners, many ELs with reading difficulties also demonstrate difficulties in word reading, which require targeted intervention (e.g., Cho, Capin, Roberts, Roberts, & Vaughn, 2019; Vaughn et al., 2019).

Early access to evidence-based reading intervention improves outcomes for students with or at risk for reading difficulties. Additionally, teacher implementation of reading interventions plays a key role in the efficacy of reading interventions. Previous research suggests the influence of intervention implementation fidelity on student language and literacy outcomes is more significant for lower-performing students and students with disabilities, such as dyslexia. However, recent syntheses have suggested that less than half of reading intervention studies report treatment fidelity data. This meta-analysis examined fidelity reporting within reading intervention studies for students with or at risk for dyslexia in Grades K–5. We aimed to record the frequency and extent of fidelity reporting, explore associations between study or intervention features and fidelity reporting, and compare mean intervention effect sizes for studies reporting fidelity and those that did not. A total of 51 studies were included. Results indicated that 75% of studies reported fidelity data. Studies reporting fidelity primarily focused on adherence and dosage data with little to no information reported for other dimensions of fidelity (i.e., quality, responsiveness, differentiation). Suggestions for improving reporting of treatment fidelity data are discussed.