This experimental study was conducted to examine the relative effectiveness of a Repeated Reading (RR) and Wide Reading (WR) intervention when compared to typical instruction on secondary struggling readers' comprehension, fluency, and word reading. The sample consisted of a total of 96 students (9th through 12th grade) ranging in age from 13-17 in special education reading and English classrooms. Participants included students with learning disabilities (LD), dyslexia, or students selected as students with significant reading difficulties. The investigator paired students on variables of interest (i.e., reading level) within classes and then randomly assigned pairs to one of three groups: repeated reading (N=33), wide reading (N=34), or typical instruction (N=29). Tutors, trained by the investigator, monitored students as they worked in pairs in each treatment condition. Intervention was provided daily for approximately 15-20 minutes for 10 weeks. Treatment effects for each outcome measure were estimated using analysis of covariance (ANCOVA). Results indicate no overall statistically significant differences for any condition. Effects ranged from -.81 to .28 usually hovering around no effect or favoring the C condition over the treatment conditions or favoring the RR condition over the WR condition. Five separate ANCOVAs were conducted using the following dependent variables with each pretest score used as a covariate: (1) Woodcock Johnson Tests of Achievement III (WJIII) Passage Comprehension subtest (RR vs. C = -.10; WR vs. C = -.20; RR vs. WR= .10); (2) Test of Silent Reading Fluency (TOSRE) (RR vs. C =.-31; WR vs. C = -.81; RR vs. WR= .10); (3) Woodcock Johnson Tests of Achievement III (WJIII) Letter-Word Identification subtest (RR vs. C = -.05; WR vs. C = -.11; RR vs. WR = .06); (4) AIMSWeb Oral Reading Fluency System (RR vs. C = -.08; WR vs. C = -.26; RR vs. WR= .18); and (5) Test of Silent Contextual Reading Fluency (RR vs. C =.28; WR vs. C = -.01; RR vs. WR= .28). Results indicate that neither RR nor WR should be implemented for secondary readers with significant reading difficulties and more research into ways to make fluency instruction more explicit and instructional for these students is warranted.

As response to intervention (RTI) is adopted by increasing numbers of schools and districts, knowledge about "what works" continues to grow. This much-needed book analyzes the key components of RTI service delivery and identifies the characteristics of successful implementation. Critically reviewing the available research, leading authorities describe best practices in multi-tier intervention, assessment, and data-based decision making. Clear-cut recommendations are provided for implementing evidence-based interventions to support students' needs in reading, writing, math, and behavior. A state-of-the-art resource for K–12 practitioners and administrators, the book also will fill a unique niche in graduate-level courses.

Presenting major advances in understanding learning disabilities (LDs) and describing effective educational practices, this authoritative volume has been significantly revised and expanded with more than 70% new material. Foremost LD experts identify effective principles of assessment and instruction within the framework of multi-tiered systems of support (MTSS). With a focus on what works in the classroom, the book explores the full range of reading, mathematics, and writing disabilities. It synthesizes knowledge from neuropsychology, cognitive neuroscience, and special and general education. Illustrations include eight color plates. As a special supplement, a chapter on the history of the LD field from the first edition is provided at the companion website. New to This Edition *Heightened emphasis on intervention, including significant new developments in reading comprehension and math. *Chapter on principles of effective instruction and MTSS. *Chapter on automaticity in reading, math, and writing. *Chapter on challenges in real-world implementation of evidence-based practices. *Chapter on the validity of the LD construct.

Reading fluency has been identified as a key component of proficient reading. Research has consistently demonstrated significant and substantial correlations between reading fluency and overall reading achievement. Despite the great potential for fluency to have a significant outcome on students’ reading achievement, it continues to be not well understood by teachers, school administrators and policy makers. The chapters in this volume examine reading fluency from a variety of perspectives. The initial chapter sketches the history of fluency as a literacy instruction component. Following chapters examine recent studies and approaches to reading fluency, followed by chapters that explore actual fluency instruction models and the impact of fluency instruction. Assessment of reading fluency is critical for monitoring progress and identifying students in need of intervention. Two articles on assessment, one focused on word recognition and the other on prosody, expand our understanding of fluency measurement. Finally, a study from Turkey explores the relationship of various reading competencies, including fluency, in an integrated model of reading. Our hope for this volume is that it may spark a renewed interest in research into reading fluency and fluency instruction and move toward making fluency instruction an even more integral part of all literacy instruction.

ABSTRACT This study investigated the effect of repeated reading on the reading achievement of middleschool students with visual impairments. Using a matched subject research design, two pairs of students were matched on the following variables: reading level, reading medium and the presence or absence of additional disabilities. One student from each matched pair was randomly selected for the repeated reading intervention. The corresponding student in the pair was assigned to the control group. The repeated reading method used in this study required the student to reread a passage three times. The nonrepetitive method required the student to read a wide variety of young adult literature without any rereading of the text. The amount of time engaged in reading remained equivalent for the students in the matched pairs. The students were administered a preand posttest and the repeated reading intervention was conducted over a five week period. The mean differences in reading rate, correctly read words and comprehension were compared to determine if repeated reading was more effective than wide reading in improving reading fluency and comprehension. In addition, the study investigated if the gains in fluency using repeated reading generalized to new text. The results of the study indicated that there was not a significant difference between repeated reading and wide reading on reading rate, correctly read words or comprehension. In addition, the students who participated in the repeated reading showed a gain in fluency when rereading the same passage; however the gains in fluency were not transferred to new text. Repeated reading was not more effective than an equivalent amount of wide reading for improving fluency.