program evaluation and research

Recent Research News on Reading Recovery

What Works Clearinghouse Report on Reading Recovery

Lesley University's Center for Reading Recovery and Literacy Collaborative, in conjunction with the Reading Recovery Council of Massachusetts (RRCMA), are proud to announce that after more than three years of study, the What Works Clearinghouse (WWC), a branch of the United States Department of Education, released its independent review of the experimental research on Reading Recovery (http://www.whatworks.ed.gov/InterventionReportLinks.asp?iid=209&tid=01&pg=IntRating.asp). This is extremely significant for Reading Recovery as the mission of the What Works Clearinghouse is to provide educators, policy makers, researchers and the public with a central and trusted source of scientific evidence of what works in education.

The WWC report clearly establishes that Reading Recovery is an effective intervention based on scientific research. The WWC report corrects misinformation that had ignored Reading Recovery's strong, positive research base.

The WWC determined that Reading Recovery, a one-to-one tutoring program for the lowest-achieving first graders, has positive effects on students' alphabetic skills (phonemic awareness, phonics and letter recognition) and general reading achievement. A finding of positive effects is the WWC's highest rating. The report also found potentially positive effects on fluency and comprehension outcomes, their next highest level of evidence. Both the positive and potentially positive ratings mean there is "no overriding contrary evidence."

"We are pleased that the What Works Clearinghouse has recognized Reading Recovery's strong scientific research base. The announcement confirms what teachers, parents, and administrators across the U.S. have learned – Reading Recovery works!" said Jady Johnson, Executive Director of the Reading Recovery Council of North America (RRCNA).

Since its introduction in the United States in 1984, Reading Recovery has served more than 1.6 million children, making it one of the nation's oldest scientifically-based literacy interventions. Professional development for teachers – an important element in Reading Recovery's success – occurs in more than 400 training sites across the U.S. Twenty-two universities provide oversight and support for teacher training. Unlike commercial programs, Reading Recovery is a non-profit partnership of schools and universities.

Reading Recovery in Massachusetts

• Since 1991, when Reading Recovery began in Massachusetts, 49,000 first graders have been served throughout the state. • During the 2005-06 school year, 428 Reading Recovery teachers worked with 3,220 children in 261 schools across 84 school districts. • In 2005-06, 78% of students in Reading Recovery who completed their lessons reached grade level proficiency in reading and writing. • Among 2,008 children who completed their lessons successfully, only 7 were referred and placed in special education for reading difficulties.

"The recognition as reported in the WWC's three year independent review and subsequent report reinforces that Reading Recovery as an early intervention has positive effects that can be proven scientifically," says Dr. Mario R. Borunda, Dean of Lesley University's School of Education and Dean's Representative on the executive board of the RRCNA.

• To find out what this report means to schools and teachers go to: http://www.readingrecovery.org/pdfs/WWCwhatitmeans07.pdf • To find out more about Reading Recovery, visit www.readingrecovery.org • To find out more about Reading Recovery in Massachusetts, visit www.lesley.edu/crr

Reading Today Article by Richard L. Allington

In the June 2005 issue of Reading Today, Richard L. Allington, professor of education at the University of Tennessee and president of the International Reading Association, suggests five additional pillars of effective reading instruction in addition to the five cited by the National Reading Panel. Among the additional five that he suggests (all of which are supported by a substantial body of research) is expert tutoring. He specifically refers to the meta-analysis of 36 studies of Reading Recovery recently published in Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis (2004) that showed "strikingly positive effects on reading achievement" as a result of Reading Recovery's expert tutoring intervention.

For Allington's Reading Today column, go to: http://www.reading.org/publications/reading_today/samples/RTY-0506-pillars.html

For a condensed version of the column that was distributed to newsrooms and Internet readers through Newswire services, go to: http://releases.usnewswire.com/GetRelease.asp?id=49940&

For the Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis article, Click Here.

A Research-Based Intervention

Reading Recovery has a strong scientific research base. Data collection and dissemination is carried out by the Reading Recovery National Data Evaluation Center (NDEC) at The Ohio State University. NDEC collects data from every Reading Recovery site in the United States each year. NDEC provides technical results annually for the United States and sends results packets to be used by each school-based teacher training site and university training center in evaluating the effectiveness of their implementation of Reading Recovery. The raw data collected and disseminated by NDEC also allows researchers at universities around the country to conduct additional program evaluation and research.

• The structure and design of Reading Recovery are consistent with a substantial body of research on reading and writing behaviors that originated in the 1960s and continues today.
• Reading Recovery research uses systematic and empirical methods to collect data annually on all children receiving the service. Data are collected systematically at three points throughout the school year (entry to program, exit from program, and end of school year). Additionally, data are collected for comparison purposes at the beginning and end of the school year on a random sample of children who did not receive the intervention.
• Reading Recovery uses systematic and simultaneous replication studies to document program outcomes for all children served, adhering to standardized methods, instruments, and time lines across all schools, school districts, training sites, and states. These studies show that the replication of Reading Recovery across time and location has been remarkably consistent.

Reading Recovery research is reported in numerous peer-reviewed research articles or research reviews that offer support for various aspects of Reading Recovery.

Adapted from "Reading Recovery and the Definition of Scientifically Based Research," RRCNA Fact Sheet; and Smith-Burke, M. et al. (2002). A Principal's Guide to Reading Recovery. Columbus, OH: Reading Recovery Council of North America.

Reading Recovery Student Outcomes: 2005-2006

During the 2005-2006 school year, Reading Recovery served more than 3,200 struggling first graders across Massachusetts. These children were taught by more than 300 highly trained Reading Recovery teachers, who were in turn supported by 19 Teacher Leaders across the state. The Center for Reading Recovery and Literacy Collaborative provides ongoing training, professional development and support to these Teacher Leaders.

The extensive training and professional development Reading Recovery teachers and Teacher Leaders receive translates into results for Reading Recovery children. Of the more than 3,200 children who participated in the intervention in Massachusetts in the 2005-2006 school year, 63% of them successfully completed the intervention, having reached average levels of literacy performance. Of the children who had the opportunity to receive a full program of instruction (up to 20 weeks), 78% completed the program successfully.

Children who completed the full series of Reading Recovery lessons- both those who reached grade level and those who were recommende for futher support- showed substantial first-grade gains in their ability to read continuous text and in their writing vocabulary.

In reading and in writing, Reading Recovery children began with average scores well below those of children in a random sample, but most (78%) made accelerated progress and their end-of-year averages were comparable to those of the random sample of children. In text reading, the Reading Recovery children began with an average level of 1.1 as compared with the random sample average of 4.6. By the end of the year, the average level for 78% of the Reading Recovery children was 19.6, almost as high as 20.3 for the random sample. In writing vocabulary, Reading Recovery children began with an average level of 9.6 as compared with an average level of 19.3 for the random sample of children. By the end of the year, the average writing level for 78% of the children was 61.2 as compared with 60.4 for the random sample.

Longer Term Effectiveness of Reading Recovery: Results on Standardized Tests

As a data driven education program, Reading Recovery research takes place on an ongoing basis at universities across the country. Recent studies have examined the longer-term effectiveness of Reading Recovery by tracking the performance of former Reading Recovery children on standardized tests. Researchers at Lesley University have looked at student results on the Massachusetts Comprehensive Assessment System (MCAS), finding that former Reading Recovery children pass the state-mandated standardized test at higher rates than the overall student population. To read the study, click here. A study of children in Holyoke, MA, conducted by Massachusetts Teacher Leader Laurel Dickey, finds similar results to the statewide MCAS research study. Reading Recovery children pass the third grade MCAS exam at higher rates than the district as a whole. To read the press release, click here /crr/content/rr/holyoke_mcas_news.doc.

Such longer-term findings have been duplicated across the country. In a study of Reading Recovery students in Upstate New York, for instance, former Reading Recovery children were found to perform similarly to 4th graders across the state of New York on the 4th grade test of English Language Arts. Download the complete article here /crr/content/rr/jrr_article_spring_04.pdf. Researchers at Emporia State University in Kansas have examined the performance of former Reading Recovery students on the Gates-MacGinitie Reading Test, a nationally recognized test of literacy skills. The study (http://www.rrcna.org/pdfs/Reading_Recovery_in_Kansas.pdf) concludes that the effect of Reading Recovery lasts at least through fourth grade.Scholars at the University of Iowa have also conducted research to examine the longer term effectiveness of the program and come to similarly positive conclusions. Using the Iowa Test of Basic Skills (ITBS), researchers found lasting effects among former Reading Recovery students. To read a summary of the Iowa study, click here. Reading Recovery has also been cited as the primary reason for such high rates of passing among fourth graders on Maine's state-mandated standardized test,as reported in an October 2003 article in the Bangor News.

Closing the Achievement Gap

Using statewide data from the 2002-2003 school year,we conducted research on the impact of Reading Recovery on first graders from various racial, ethnic, and gender groups. We found that Reading Recovery was highly successful across all groups, and by the end of first grade, successful Reading Recovery children looked no different than their average performing peers. Sadly by the spring, we began to see ethnic and gender achievement gaps developing among average performers, where they had not existed in the fall. To read the full study, click here /crr/content/rr/achievement_gap_complete_ms.doc. This research was presented at the 2004 Literacy For All Northeast K-6 Literacy Conference and Reading Recovery Institute, held in Providence, Rhode Island. To view the presentation, click here /crr/content/rr/narrowing_the_literacy_divide.ppt. It is currently under journal Review.

Reading Recovery and English Language Learners

Through a generous grant from the Reading Recovery Council of North America, we were able to study the effectiveness of Reading Recovery on English Language Learners versus native English speakers on both Reading Recovery and non-Reading Recovery measures. Examining the lingusitically diverse district of Fall River, Massachusetts, we found that the intervention tended to work as well for English Language Learners as for native speakers. To read the full study, click here /crr/content/rr/ell_journal_write_up.doc. This research was presented at the 2005 Massachusetts Reading Association's Annual Conference and is currently under journal review.

The Cost-Savings of Reading Recovery

Although the effectiveness of Reading Recovery is rarely disputed, the cost of the intervention has frequently arisen as a factor in a school district's decision on whether or not to use Reading Recovery, given the extensive teacher training, professional development, and one-to-one nature of the intervention. A study of the Boston school district finds that the special education costs avoided because of Reading Recovery more than justify the costs of the intervention. To read the study, click here /crr/content/rr/cost_savings_complete.doc. This research was presented at the 2005 Leadership Academy and Teacher Leader Institute in Washington, D.C. To view the presentation, click here /crr/content/rr/cost_savings.ppt.