Structure Altering Effects of a Multicomponent Reading Intervention: An Application of the Direct and Inferential Mediation (DIME) Model of Reading Comprehension in Upper Elementary Grades

Reading-to-Writing Mediation model of higher-order literacy

Introduction

Writing difficulties frequently manifest comorbidly with reading challenges, and reading is implicated in particular acts of writing, such as reviewing and editing. Despite what is known, however, there remain significant barriers to understanding the nature of reading-writing relations, as few studies are comprehensive in the number and types of literacy skills evaluated. This study consists of a secondary data analysis of two studies employing structural equation modeling (SEM) to evaluate relations among reading and writing components skills independently, using the Direct and Inferential Mediation Model (DIME) of reading comprehension and Not-so-Simple View of Writing (NSVW) as theoretical frameworks.

Methods

We examine relations between reading and writing components from these models with a sample of upper elementary students with/at-risk for learning disabilities (n = 405). Lower-order components included word reading, vocabulary, handwriting and spelling. Higher-order components included background knowledge, reading strategies, inferencing, planning, editing, and revision. The literacy outcomes were oral and silent reading fluency, reading comprehension, and writing quality and productivity. We systematically build a Reading-to-Writing Mediation (RWM) model by first merging the DIME and NSVW components in a direct effects model (Aim 1), expanding the joint model to include reading and writing fluency (Aim 2), evaluating indirect effects between DIME and NSVW component skills (Aim 3), and finally, evaluating indirect effects with reading and writing fluency (Aim 4).

Results

The findings suggest that higher order fluency and comprehension skills are differentially related to writing activities and products.

Discussion

The pattern of results helps elucidate the mechanisms of how various reading and writing skills transfer and relate. The results have implications for targeted and implicit instruction in multicomponent interventions and the use of screeners to identify areas of risk.

PROPERTIES OF A COMBINED MEASURE OF READING AND WRITING: THE ASSESSMENT OF WRITING, SELF-MONITORING, AND READING (AWSM READER)

There is significant overlap between reading and writing, but no known standardized measure assesses these jointly. The goal of the present study is to evaluate the properties of a novel measure, the Assessment of Writing, Self-Monitoring, and Reading (AWSM Reader), that simultaneously evaluates both reading comprehension and writing. In doing so, we evaluate reliability (Cronbach's alpha) and various aspects of construct-related validity, including separate criterion measures of reading and writing, and the AWSM Reader's relations with other variables, including language and executive function (EF), both of which are implicated for both reading and writing. Participants were 377 3rd, 4th, and 5th graders with or at-risk for reading and writing difficulties. Reliability was low for the AWSM Reader reading comprehension (α = .58), but good for writing (α = .75-.80). Criterion-related validity indices revealed moderate correlations with other standardized and commonly used reading and writing measures, r = .47 to .50 (all ps < .001). Additionally, validity data supported the relations of both language and EF to AWSM Reader reading and writing, with EF showing unique prediction in both reading and writing domains. Results provide initial support for the measure per se but stress the difficulty in constructing combined reading and writing measures; directions are given for future work. Results also add to data on the contributions of language and EF to both reading and writing.

Quantität und Qualität des Strategieeinsatzes von Grundschülerinnen und Grundschülern in reziproken Lesegruppen

Zur Förderung der Leseleistungen von Schülerinnen und Schülern werden von nationalen und internationalen Experten Programme empfohlen, in denen Kinder gemeinsam an Leseaufgaben arbeiten und verschiedene Lesestrategien erlernen. Die Ergebnisse von Evaluationsstudien belegen die Wirksamkeit solcher Programme für die Entwicklung individueller Leseleistungen von Schülerinnen und Schülern, enthalten jedoch keine Informationen dazu, wie die gemeinsame Strategieanwendung in den Kleingruppen abläuft. Der vorliegende Beitrag betrachtet anhand von Videomaterial zu drei Messzeitpunkten, ob und wie Schülerinnen und Schüler der 3. Klasse gemeinsam die Lesestrategien Klären, Fragen und Vorhersagen auf Sachtexte anwenden und ob ein Trainingseffekt für Kinder in Kleingruppen festzustellen ist, die an einer peer-gestützten strategiebasierten Leseförderung teilgenommen haben. Dazu wird eine Interventionsgruppe mit einer Unterrichtskontrollgruppe verglichen, die regulären Deutschunterricht ohne explizite Strategieförderung erhielt. Sowohl die Quantität als auch die Qualität der Strategieanwendung in den Lesegruppen wurde anhand eines deduktiv entwickelten Schemas kodiert. Die Ergebnisse zeigen, dass zu allen drei Messzeitpunkten (Prä‑, Post- und Follow-up-Test) weniger als 50 % der Schülerinnen und Schüler Lesestrategien anwendeten. Am häufigsten wurde insgesamt die Strategie Fragen genutzt. Ein moderat positiver Trainingseffekt zeigte sich insbesondere für die Strategie Vorhersagen. Zu diskutieren ist, warum die Schülerinnen und Schüler nicht mehr Strategien auf einem höheren Elaborationsniveau anwendeten und ob weitere Kompetenzen für die wirkungsvolle Strategieanwendung in Kleingruppen benötigt werden. Die Untersuchung unterstreicht die Bedeutung prozessnaher Datenerhebung für die Weiterentwicklung von Fördermaßnahmen in Forschung und Praxis.

The Not-So-Simple View of Writing in Struggling Readers/Writers

Research suggests that executive function, motivation, transcription, and composition processes are implicated in the writing quality and productivity of children with and without learning difficulties. However, numerous components embedded within these constructs create both conceptual and empirical challenges to the study of written expression. These challenges are reflected in the writing research by way of poor delineation of constructs and insufficient distinction among domain general resources (e.g. working memory) versus processes related to the academic domain of writing (e.g. pre-planning), as well as among lower- (e.g. handwriting) and higher-order (e.g. editing) writing-specific processes. The current study utilizes the Not-so-Simple View of Writing (NSVW) as an organizing framework for examining the relations among multiple components, correlates, and attributes of writing in a sample of struggling readers/writers (n = 402) in grades 3-5. Data were collected on measures of (a) handwriting, spelling, planning, revision, and editing, derived from the Test of Oral Written Language (TOWL-4), (b) executive function derived from the NIH Examiner, and (c) motivation/self-efficacy derived from the Student Contextual Learning Scale. Structural equation modeling was utilized to test direct and indirect relations in the NSVW model. Results showed generally moderate correlations among observed/latent variables and found support for relations among writing-specific processes. Domain-general resources (executive function and motivation/self-efficacy) were related to spelling directly and indirectly to writing. Domain-specific processes (handwriting, spelling, planning, editing, and revision) were related to writing. The results have implications for explicit instruction of writing processes and for future research on empirical models.