Nonresponsiveness to kindergarten intervention is persistent and predicts school-identified reading problems through third grade¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · causal r2 · q3
Currency · newest study 2006 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i? Virtually all children nonresponsive to kindergarten intervention remained nonresponsive in first grade, and responsiveness status differed significantly on school-identified reading problems two years later. → Al Otaiba 2006 q3 i? At third grade, four of five nonresponsive-to-kindergarten children had IEP goals in reading. → Al Otaiba 2006

Evidence¶

Al Otaiba 2006¶

Al Otaiba, S., & Fuchs, D. (2006). Who Are the Young Children for Whom Best Practices in Reading Are Ineffective? An Experimental and Longitudinal Study. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 39(5), 414-431. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/00222194060390050401

q3 · i? · causal · r2

Longitudinal follow-up of 50 of the original 104 children tested at the end of third grade. The authors report persistence of nonresponsiveness from kindergarten to first grade and reading-related IEP goals by third grade for most nonresponders.

"Virtually our entire sample (91.89%)—and literally all children with IEPs—who were nonresponsive to kindergarten intervention remained nonresponsive in first grade. At third grade, four out of five children who had been nonresponsive to kindergarten intervention had IEP goals in reading."

Al Otaiba 2006 (2)¶

Al Otaiba, S., & Fuchs, D. (2006). Who Are the Young Children for Whom Best Practices in Reading Are Ineffective? An Experimental and Longitudinal Study. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 39(5), 414-431. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/00222194060390050401

q3 · i? · causal · r2

Chi-square analysis of third-grade educational placement (Table 10) for the 50 located children, comparing intervention and control students across responsiveness groups on reading difficulties, tutoring, retention, and IEP reading goals.

"There was a statistically significant difference among nonresponsive, sometimes responsive, and always responsive students in terms of school-identified reading problems 2 years beyond first grade, χ2(6, n = 50) = 40.60, p < .001."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Naming speed, vocabulary, sentence imitation, problem behavior, and amount of intervention correctly classify most nonresponsive and always responsive students
• Early literacy intervention reduced the proportion of nonresponders to 7.05% versus 25.35% among controls
• Nonresponsive students were in classrooms with lower-quality Ladders implementation and lower fall first-grade PALS fidelity
• Always responsive students showed large effect-size advantages over nonresponsive students, with the largest effect sizes ranging from 0.58 to 1.72
• Nonresponsive students scored significantly lower than always responsive students on seven measures and higher on problem behavior
• Nonresponsive, sometimes responsive, and always responsive students differ reliably on problem behavior, vocabulary, naming speed, sentence imitation, syntactic awareness, and segmentation — related
• A meta-analysis attributes the strongest predictors of nonresponsiveness to rapid naming and problem behavior — related
• Most students identified as significantly below benchmark on early literacy screeners remain significantly below benchmark 1 and 2 years later — related