X hits on this document

PDF document

Reading Recovery: A Scientifically Based Analysis - page 18 / 21





18 / 21


Reading Recovery has not changed as a result of new research on reading. There

has been resistance to integrating the findings of independent, scientifically based reading

research into their program and making it more cost effective. A common finding in

research on Reading Recovery is that those students who do not respond are weak in

phonological awareness (Snow et al., 1998). Research by New Zealand researchers

Iverson and Tunmer (1993), in which explicit phonics component was added to a

standard Reading Recovery intervention, reduced the time required to complete the

program by about 30%. Morris, Tyner, and Perney (2000) found that a reading program

constructed like Reading Recovery with the addition of an explicit component addressing

spelling-to-sound patterns was highly effective, even with those students most at risk.

Over time, however, as students proceeded through grades there was a wash out effect

that occurred. Continued support that deals with more complex English orthography (i.e.

the Romance [Latin, French] and Greek layers) and comprehension strategies (e.g.

inference, questioning, monitoring and comprehension) is required.

Multiple methods used together tend to strengthen the inferences or the

conclusions that one can draw when studying things scientifically. Literacy intervention

must be considered in terms of available resources, including financial, instructional,

cultural, timing and time required. It is imperative to assess the existing external factors

or characteristics before simply adding an intervention. Characteristics of students who

are at risk must be taken into consideration.


Homan, P. (2002) An 8 year Longitudinal Analysis of Reading Recovery (1993-2000): Assessment, Technology, and Information Services. The Sioux Falls School District. Sioux Falls, SD.

Document info
Document views82
Page views82
Page last viewedSun Jan 22 08:12:46 UTC 2017