Return to Index Page
Return to Chapter One

Chapter 10: Conclusion: Summary of Results and A Research Agenda
Topics Selected
Initial Findings: The Number and Distribution of Studies Across Topic Areas
Additional Findings and Recommendations for Research
Summary
Background references
Study References
Appendix
Overview of the Reading Excellence Act
REA Definitions of Reading and Scientifically Based Research
Partnership for Reading

Chapter 10

Conclusion: Summary of Results and A Research Agenda

The work of the Reading Research Working Group (RRWG) provides a framework for beginning to address three critical questions:

  • What does the research say about ABE reading instruction?
  • What are the strengths and weaknesses in the ABE reading instruction research base?
  • What research is needed in order to provide the best possible tools for teaching reading to adults in ABE settings, including adults in ASE (adult secondary education) and ESOL programs?

The RRWG identified topic areas that are most important for adult reading instruction. Research is needed in each of these areas before a complete set of evidence-based practices can be recommended to those responsible for teaching reading to adults. In what follows, the distribution of research studies across the topic areas will be presented. This is a simple, straightforward way to see which topics have been the focus of research and which have not. In addition, significant results from the summary of research studies presented in previous sections of this report will be reviewed. These results should also be useful in providing direction for future research. Finally, research results from studies of reading instruction at the K-12 level that can provide suggestions for research in ABE will be presented.



Topics Selected


The main topic areas identified by the RRWG represent the major aspects of reading instruction: assessment of reading ability, alphabetics instruction (phonemic awareness and word analysis), fluency instruction, and vocabulary and comprehension instruction. Assessment is one of the first tasks completed by reading teachers. Those involved in ABE reading instruction, whether they are teaching, creating models for instruction, or publishing materials that are used for instruction, need to have knowledge of ABE students' strengths and needs in reading in order to ensure the most effective instruction possible. We can use reading assessment tools to help to identify strengths and needs in each individual aspect of the reading process (alphabetics, fluency, vocabulary, and comprehension). An assessment instrument may also measure more than one aspect of reading at a time, such as a test that includes both vocabulary and comprehension questions. Because instruction should involve all aspects of the reading process, some assessment techniques, such as assessment profiles, provide information about students' relative strengths and needs in several facets of reading.

Most assessment research is used to describe ABE learners' reading abilities and the specific abilities of subgroups in the ABE population including students with learning disabilities (LD) and students in ESOL programs (English for speakers of other languages). However, some assessment research is also concerned with the nature or quality of the assessment procedures or tests themselves, answering questions such as, "How effective or how valid are common ABE assessment instruments?"

Within each of the main topic areas, the RRWG identified several subtopics common to most: subtopics related to the goals or settings associated with reading instruction, those related to instructional methods and material, and those related to learner characteristics. The following table lists these subtopics and shows how they are related to the major components. Although additional categories or topics that are important to ABE reading instruction may be identified in the future, research is definitely needed in each of the subtopics identified so far by the RRWG (those areas shown in the shaded parts of the table).

Subtopics with Research-Based Principles (P) or Trends (T)

Major Components of Instruction (Chart)

Initial Findings: The Number and Distribution of Studies Across Topic Areas


For this review, research studies were located through a literature search and evaluated using criteria derived and modified somewhat from the "evidence-based methodological standards" developed by the NRP in its review of K-12 reading research (NRP, 2000b). The RRWG made several modifications to the approach used by the NRP. Important modifications included the addition of topics especially important to adult reading professionals, the inclusion of studies related to the assessment of reading ability, and the inclusion of non-experimental studies as well as those involving the use of control groups. Qualifying studies were placed into one or more of the topics areas described above and summarized as principles or trends. Because of the relatively small size of the research base and the small number of studies associated with most topic areas, the principles and trends were labeled "emerging principles and trends." With some exceptions, emerging principles are based on at least two experimental studies and any number of non-experimental studies while trends are based on at least one experimental study and any number of non-experimental studies.

One way to look at the distribution of research studies across topic areas is to note which topics are associated with emerging principles and trends derived from the research. Overall, there are eighteen assessment subtopics. In the table, these are represented by the cells in the first three shaded rows. The remaining 69 subtopics are associated with instruction. Cells in the table containing the letter P indicate subtopics that have enough qualifying research to have generated at least one emerging principle and perhaps some trends. Subtopics with the letter T have only enough research to have generated one or more trends.

Assessment Studies


There are enough research studies in over one-half of the assessment subtopics to have generated at least one emerging principle or trend per subtopic. Nine assessment subtopics have at least one emerging principle and two have at least one trend. The same principle covers all three subtopics under assessment profiles, or assessments that measure ABE students' reading ability in several or all of the major components (phonemic awareness, word analysis, fluency, vocabulary, and comprehension). The principles related to the assessment of ABE students' phonemic awareness are very strong. There are also principles related to the assessment of word analysis, fluency, and comprehension. The fluency and comprehension assessment principles are also fairly strong, based on results from studies with large, representative samples of adult learners, the NAEP fluency surveys and the NALS comprehension surveys. Results from the NALS also provide the only principles associated with the assessment of LD and ESOL adults' reading comprehension abilities, identifying the approximate proportions of adults in these categories with comprehension difficulties.

Assessment subtopics for which there are only trends include the assessment of LD students' phonemic awareness and the vocabulary ability of ABE adults generally. There were no studies, and therefore no principles or trends, that fit into the ESOL PA (phonemic awareness) assessment category. Nor were there studies in the ESOL and LD (learning disability) categories for word analysis, fluency, and vocabulary assessment. ESOL and LD students form a large proportion of the ABE population. Our lack of knowledge about their basic reading abilities, outside of the PA and assessment profiles subtopics, is surprising.

Instruction Studies


Of the 72 subtopics related to instruction, only nine are associated with emerging principles and 16 with trends. Of the nine principles, there are four in the broad "overall" category (for WA, comprehension, and computer technology), two in the broad "general literacy" category (for WA and fluency), and three in the teaching strategies category (for WA, fluency, and comprehension). Almost all of the subtopics associated with goals and setting and instructional methods and material in the comprehension component have either principles or trends. Fluency and WA subtopics have the greatest number of cells with principles from the instruction research (three each), while PA and vocabulary subtopics have only trends. There is very little qualifying research and consequently very few trends in the subtopics concern learner characteristics. Surprisingly, the effects on instructional outcomes of adults' reading level, language ability, and motivation, and whether or not they have a learning disability, are not addressed much by the research. With the exception of teaching strategies, the same is true for the instructional methods and material subtopics, other than those associated with reading comprehension.



Additional Findings and Recommendations for Research


The recommendations for ABE reading instruction research presented next are drawn from (a) the review of the distribution of studies across topics just presented, (b) a summary of findings from the ABE research presented in earlier sections of this report, and (c) a summary of results from the K-12 reading instruction research, also presented earlier. The distribution of studies shows which topics have been addressed by the research and which have not. Results from existing ABE reading instruction research show how well key questions and hypotheses important to ABE have been addressed and may also suggest new hypotheses to test. Strong results from the K-12 research show what is known about reading instruction for children and suggest approaches that might be tested with adults. All of this information can be used to provide direction for future ABE reading instruction research.

Directions Suggested by Gaps in the Research


Important topics and subtopics for ABE reading instruction were identified a priori by the Reading Research Working Group. As ABE reading instruction studies were identified, they were classified according to these categories. Because experts identified the topics before the studies were analyzed, the distribution of studies across the topic areas can help suggest where research is needed. All of the categories are important to ABE reading instruction and therefore any of these areas that have not been studied experimentally deserve attention.

Learner Characteristics


Many of the subtopic areas related to the characteristics of ABE learners have very little or no research. Certainly, from the above summary of the distribution of studies across topic areas, it is clear that research related to the assessment and instruction of adults with learning disabilities and of adults in ESOL programs is needed. Both of these groups are served in ABE programs and it is important to determine what their needs are and how these needs can be met through instruction. The same can be said of adults at different levels of reading ability. ABE instructors need research-based guidance on how ABE readers at different levels will react to various approaches to instruction.

Issues related to learner characteristics can be addressed in research considering larger questions related to instruction by assessing participating students in order to create appropriate subgroups of learners. For example, reading tests can be used to create or identify subgroups of learners at different reading levels or with different reading profiles. Although identifying students with learning disabilities can be complex and expensive, simple questions about past experiences in school, such as whether or not a learner was ever identified as having a reading disability or was ever in a special reading class, have been used effectively to identify those with a reading disability.

Answers to questions about whether a learner's first language is English, tests of English language ability, and tests of reading ability can be used to identify ESOL students at various reading levels. One problem with many existing ESOL reading studies is that the English reading ability of students is not identified with sufficient precision. This means that it is often impossible to determine whether those in a study actually qualify as ABE students. Many of these studies investigate reading comprehension instruction for college students in ESOL programs. To determine whether these results are applicable to ABE students in ESOL classes (probably those who are better ABE readers), it is important to know precise, initial reading levels as well as English language levels. To be precise for ABE purposes, reading levels will need to be referenced to common ABE standards such as grade equivalent scores, the NALS levels, or the National Reporting System (NRS) standards.

Many adult educators are convinced that motivation is an important factor in the progress adults are able to make, especially given the fact that ABE, unlike K-12 education, is not mandatory. Despite its importance among adult literacy educators, effects of motivation (whether they are positive, negative, or neutral) on reading achievement have received virtually no attention in the research examined for this review. Where it has been addressed, in the reading comprehension studies, results suggest that when issues related to motivation and feelings about one's reading ability are dealt with directly, reading achievement improves. Replication of this research and new research related to motivation are needed. Psychometric measures of motivation would also be useful if we want to know whether (or how) initial motivational levels increase in programs that address motivation in order to improve reading achievement.

Instructional Methods and Material


Most of the subtopics associated with instructional methods and material have not been studied. There is some research related to teaching strategies, but very little related to instructional materials, the intensity or duration of instruction, and teacher preparation. These are factors that, like motivation, help to make adult basic education unique, different from K-12 education. There is a greater degree of variation in materials that adults might use. In addition to traditional academic subject matter, they may also use material related to their jobs, families, and other special interests. Unlike children, adults are not required to participate in educational programs and, consequently, programs offer a wide variety of options that lead to greater variability in the amount of time spent in programs and the intensity of instruction provided. Children can spend hours on reading instruction each week while most adults cannot. Individual tutoring or small classes may not be feasible in ABE settings where funding is limited. The qualifications and training received by ABE reading teachers is also more variable. Certification requirements are not as well defined and relatively more volunteers and paraprofessionals are used in ABE classrooms.

Initial research that investigates the effects of instructional material, intensity and duration of instruction, and degree of teacher preparation on alphabetics, fluency, and vocabulary instruction is needed. Trends from the ABE vocabulary and reading comprehension research suggest that each is important. These trends, which should be replicated, also demonstrate the unique role that ABE reading instruction research may have in the investigation of instructional methods and materials. This will be discussed in more detail in the following section, along with other ABE research results.

Directions Suggested by Existing
ABE Reading Instruction Research


Although areas where research is missing provide some obvious suggestions for future research, existing research can also suggest promising directions. Emerging principles and trends need to be strengthened and refined by research that replicates existing research results. Existing research can also suggest promising new hypotheses to test.

Strong Research Strands

What are the strongest areas of ABE reading instruction research? Not surprisingly, the strongest emerging principles and trends were found within the few topic areas that have relatively well-developed research strands. Research strands develop when hypotheses related to reading assessment or instruction are formulated and then tested with well-designed studies. Next, the hypotheses are modified based on the results from these studies, and then tested again.

Phonemic Awareness. One such strand is the series of studies on ABE adults' phonemic awareness (PA) abilities. A relatively large number of assessment studies (ten experimental and two non-experimental) spanning a period of roughly 20 years demonstrate convincingly that adult non-readers have virtually no phonemic awareness ability, and adults who are just beginning to learn to read have very poor phonemic awareness ability. PA seems to develop in adult non-disabled readers at least until decoding or word analysis is firmly established.

Some of these phonemic awareness studies have found that the number and complexity of PA tasks that adult beginning readers can complete increases as their reading improves. Identifying the order in which PA tasks are learned would not only provide useful information for the development of additional tests of PA but might also provide information to teachers about the order in which these tasks can be taught. Similar research would be useful for WA (word analysis) instruction. In either case, close attention should be paid to learner characteristics, as noted above. A trend from the research that assesses PA ability in adults with a reading disability suggests that they may have more difficulty acquiring PA. This in turn suggests that studies with children demonstrating that those with a reading disability can be taught PA need to be replicated with adults.

Reading Comprehension. Another relatively large group of studies (seven experimental and 16 non-experimental) addresses one of the most important questions for ABE reading instruction: Does participation in adult basic education increase ABE students' reading comprehension achievement? This is an extremely important question because improved reading comprehension is the ultimate goal for reading instruction. Studies of the overall effects of ABE literacy programs on reading comprehension achievement suggest that, more often than not, participation leads to improved reading comprehension achievement. However, it is still the case that participation in some programs leads, on average, to increased achievement while participation in almost as many others does not. One question that certainly should be asked is: What is it that can make ABE reading comprehension instruction effective?

Unfortunately, most of the experimental research in this category has not focused on the causes of observed changes in reading comprehension, such as specific teaching techniques, or program and learner characteristics. Comparisons of different approaches and types of programs are needed. This will require careful descriptions of programs in order to isolate differences that may prove to be significant (and precise descriptions of learner characteristics, as discussed above). Research related to instructional methods and material offers several suggestions for the types of programs that might be investigated: two emerging principles support the use of explicit comprehension strategy instruction and multiple-components instruction while a trend points to less direct, enabling instruction. Simply comparing one city's ABE students' reading comprehension scores to another city's scores may provide a little information to policy makers but will not, at this point, advance reading instruction research much.

Assessment Profiles. In addition to the emerging principles derived from the NAEP and NALS studies related to fluency and comprehension assessment (the fluency and comprehension abilities of ABE learners), the assessment profiles research seems to demonstrate that the ABE population is fairly diverse and that measuring achievement in each of the major components of the reading process can identify instructionally relevant subgroups of ABE learners. This research should be replicated and extended. This might include additional studies of both ABE and K-12 learners to help understand the similarities and differences between these groups of learners and implications for differential instruction. Assuming that replication research confirms the existence of subgroups, studies of the use of profiles for instruction would be a natural extension of this research. This should include teacher-training studies, where ABE instructors learn to use profiles to help guide instruction.

Word Analysis. Several studies involving instruction in WA suggest that participation in ABE programs may lead to increases in WA achievement but, like those involving reading comprehension instruction, they do not identify specific approaches that are effective. When specific approaches are studied, most involve a mix of WA instruction and instruction in other aspects of reading in ways that make it impossible to isolate the effects of WA instruction. More studies that focus on WA instructional methods and material alone (e.g., Curtis & Chmelka, 1994) are needed.

Fluency. Several studies have also investigated the effects of fluency instruction. They suggest that fluency can be taught to ABE students and that fluency instruction leads to increases in reading achievement. Research has identified one specific strategy that appears to be effective: repeated readings, or reading a text multiple times until it can be read accurately at a normal rate. Fluency studies with ABE learners differ in the type of text they focus on during fluency instruction: whole passages of text, isolated words, or a mixture of text types. More research is needed to determine which of these may be more effective for a particular component.

Stronger Trends

Reading Comprehension. Several studies have found that it is possible to increase reading comprehension achievement within each of the major ABE settings or when focusing on important ABE goals, those related to the workplace, the family, or to general functional literacy. Although some comparative studies suggest that workplace or family literacy programs' goals and settings are more conducive to producing positive effects on reading comprehension achievement, learner characteristics are not controlled for in these studies. This trend should be tested in studies that do control for possible learner differences across major program types. Assessment profiles of learners in these studies might be the best way to provide the necessary data because they can provide information about learner differences in areas other than reading comprehension. It is possible, for example, that self-selection may make the profiles of learners across program types very different.

Some additional reading comprehension studies, such as those conducted by Mikulecky and his colleagues in workplace settings, suggest that issues that are especially important and perhaps unique to adult literacy merit additional study. These include the effects of reading self-efficacy and motivation, the use of contextually relevant adult-oriented instructional material, and the intensity and duration of instruction within ABE settings.

Computer Technology. One emerging principal and two trends in the ABE research, including trends derived from one meta-analysis, suggest that computer-assisted instruction is at least as effective as non-CAI instruction. Results are from studies undertaken in at least two settings important to ABE (general functional literacy and family literacy settings) and across two components of reading (word analysis and reading comprehension). Findings also suggest that CAI may be most effective for adults reading at the pre-secondary level (through GE 8). Replicating these findings and extending them to additional settings and components may be especially useful to ABE for several reasons. If, as has been found for CAI generally, it is more efficient than non-CAI in adult settings, the savings for ABE programs may be significant. Given the promise seen by some for CAI, as a motivational tool and in distance learning, for example (cf., U.S. Congress Office of Technology Assessment, 1993), conclusively demonstrating its effectiveness may help open the way for new, innovative approaches to ABE reading instruction.

Vocabulary. Finally, although there are seven studies having something to do with vocabulary achievement in ABE programs, the results from these studies are decidedly mixed. Vocabulary instruction is especially important for adults with low literacy levels because they are unable to rely as much on reading for exposure to new concepts. Although important, research describing effective approaches for vocabulary instruction is difficult to find, even within elementary and secondary education reading instruction research, which will be discussed next.

Directions Suggested by K-12 Reading Instruction Research


As shown in the previous sections of this report, research summarized in the NRP review of K-12 research provides a wealth of evidence-based ideas for reading instruction. One strong recommendation from the RRWG is that results from K-12 research be used, when feasible, to at least temporarily fill in the gaps in research across the ABE topic areas. It can be convincingly argued that any instructional techniques borrowed from the K-12 research and recommended for use by adult educators be carefully researched with adult learners as soon as possible.

Overview: K-12 Reading Instruction Research is Complementary

What suggestions for ABE research can research from the K-12 level provide? In previous sections of this report, conclusions drawn from the NRP synthesis of K-12 reading instruction research were categorized according to the ABE topics identified by the RRWG. As the following table shows, K-12 research is strikingly complementary to ABE reading instruction research. In the table, the letter I in a cell is used to show which topics have one or more Ideas for reading instruction that have been derived from the NRP K-12 research summary. The letter C in a cell is used to show where K-12 research can offer one or more suggestions or Comments, which were defined as weaker suggestions than Ideas because they are based on fewer research studies.

Subtopics with research-based Principles (P), Trends (T), Ideas (I), or Comments (C)

Major Components of Instruction (Chart)

The NRP report did not look at assessment in K-12 reading instruction, so there are no ideas (and only one comment) within the reading assessment subtopics. The goals and settings subtopics also seem more important to ABE than to K-12 research. This is reflected in the greater number of these subtopics with principles and trends derived from the ABE research than subtopics with ideas or comments derived from the K-12 research. In contrast, there are somewhat more instructional methods and materials and learner characteristics subtopics with ideas and comments from the K-12 research base than trends from ABE research. This is especially true for the PA subtopics in these areas, which have no trends from ABE research but several ideas from K-12 reading research.

Direction Provided by Complementary K-12 Research Related to Alphabetics Instruction

K-12 research results support the major trends found in the ABE PA instruction research: It is possible to teach PA and PA instruction may lead to increased achievement in other aspects of reading. Research that replicates these findings with ABE learners is needed. This should be done with studies that are designed to identify specific aspects of PA instruction that are effective.

While the ABE research does not identify specific characteristics of effective PA instruction, K-12 research does. Effective K-12 approaches that might be tested with adults include explicit instruction in one or two PA skills, especially segmenting and blending, and using letters to teach PA rather than oral instruction alone. K-12 results related to the intensity and duration of instruction could be tested at the same time. Is, as is the case with children, too much as well as too little PA instruction ineffective, and is small group instruction more effective than individual tutoring and large group instruction?

K-12 PA research also suggests some interesting hypotheses related to learner characteristics. For children without a reading disability, earlier PA training is more effective than later training. Would this apply to one important group of presumably non-disabled ABE learners, those in ESOL classes who are beginning readers of English text only because they have not been exposed to English reading instruction?

Many non-ESOL ABE students are reading disabled. They have been through a K-12 educational system and have nevertheless failed to acquire adequate reading skills. One trend from the ABE research suggests that ABE beginning readers are more like children who are poor readers as opposed to those who are progressing normally. Another trend suggests that adults with a learning disability in reading, such as dyslexia, simply may not develop PA. K-12 research suggests that poor or disabled readers do not benefit as much from PA instruction. All of these findings suggest that disabled adult readers may not benefit sufficiently from PA instruction and that some alternative may needed. Could systematic phonics instruction, which teaches beginning WA skills, be this alternative? K-12 research finds that systematic phonics is equally effective with both disabled and non-disabled readers. And, as mentioned, the most effective form of instruction for teaching children PA is to use letters rather than teaching PA orally. Technically, this is phonics instruction, which teaches letter-sound correspondences. In short, the hypothesis that should be tested with adult disabled readers is whether systematic phonics instruction leads to gains in PA ability and whether direct, oral PA instruction may be, to some degree at least, bypassed.

Direction Provided by K-12 Research Related to Fluency, Vocabulary, and Comprehension Instruction

Unlike the alphabetics subtopics, topic areas related to fluency, vocabulary, and comprehension contain principals and trends derived from ABE research as well as ideas derived from K-12 research.

Directions for fluency research. K-12 research suggests that several repeated guided oral reading procedures may be effective in improving readers' fluency (repeated reading, paired reading, shared reading, and collaborative or assisted oral reading), although there was not enough research to determine which of these approaches may be most effective. ABE research suggests another approach that, along with these, should be tested for its effectiveness. In this approach, fluency in all aspects of reading is practiced, including automaticity practice with letters, syllables, words, phrases, sentences and paragraphs.

Directions for vocabulary research. ABE vocabulary research has not isolated specific approaches to teaching vocabulary that are effective with adults, although there is some emerging evidence that teaching vocabulary in contextually relevant situations or using contextually relevant material may be effective. Although the vocabulary research reviewed by the NRP was also weak, at least relative to the other K-12 areas investigated, it did support this trend from the ABE research. Because of the importance of context in ABE, this trend should be investigated in future studies. Other approaches suggested by the K-12 review include preteaching vocabulary words and restructuring instruction so that students understand what they need to do when reading and learning new words.

Directions for comprehension research. Comprehension research results from the NRP review of K-12 research are very strong and are concentrated in topic areas related to instructional methods and material and learner characteristics, including teaching strategies, teacher preparation, and reading level.

There is some evidence from ABE research that multiple-components instruction (reading instruction that includes all aspects or components of the reading process) leads to increased reading comprehension achievement. This is supported by strong evidence from K-12 research, where effective instruction in other components (alphabetics and fluency) consistently led to increases in reading comprehension achievement. Assuming that there are ABE programs that do not use a multiple-components approach, this method could be tested by exposing groups of students in these programs to such an approach. It may make sense to combine this type of intervention with teacher training studies in which teachers in these programs learn how to implement multiple-components instruction.

The NRP review of K-12 reading comprehension research found a large number of approaches to teaching reading comprehension, eight altogether, that appear to be effective. Seven of these are effective when used by themselves: comprehension monitoring, cooperative learning, graphic organizers, story structure, question answering, question asking, and summarization. The eighth, multiple strategy instruction, is the most effective and involves the conscious and flexible use of a combination of the other seven. An emerging principle in the ABE reading comprehension instruction research suggests that explicit strategy instruction can be effective with adults as well. More research is needed, however, in order to isolate the specific strategies or combinations of strategies that work best with adults.

Weaker but nevertheless important findings from the K-12 research base suggest that training instructors to teach the use of multiple strategies is effective in improving their students' reading comprehension. This finding is especially important for ABE, where teacher training should be a priority because of the relatively low level of training and experience, on average, among ABE staff. A trend from the ABE research suggests that staff with more experience or training have a better chance at improving their students' reading comprehension achievement.

Taken together, these trends and ideas from the ABE and K-12 research suggest that studies of multiple strategy training, in which both ABE students and teachers receive training, would be very useful. K-12 research also suggests that multiple strategy use is most effective with good readers and those in the 7th grade and higher. Studies of ABE students should investigate whether particular combinations of strategies may be more effective for ABE students with specific assessment profiles. A trend from the ABE reading comprehension research also suggests that directly addressing adults' motivational issues may affect comprehension instruction outcomes and that motivation is another variable that should be controlled or manipulated in studies of comprehension instruction.

Direction Provided by K-12 Research Related to Computer Technology and Reading Instruction

Although weaker than other areas of K-12 reading instruction research, research related to computer technology at the K-12 level supports emerging principles and trends from the ABE research: It is possible to use computer technology effectively for reading instruction. Future ABE CAI research needs to identify specific approaches and computer applications that are effective in ABE settings with specific subgroups of ABE learners. One especially promising area for ABE CAI reading instruction research identified from K-12 research is the use of speech synthesis (text-to-speech applications).



Summary

Emerging principles and trends in ABE reading instruction research and ideas from a large body of synthesized research at the K-12 level provide direction for future ABE reading instruction research. ABE reading instruction research is needed in each of the topic areas identified by the RRWG as important. Assessment research that describes ABE learners' reading ability is important for instruction. Research that examines the quality and effectiveness of assessment instruments is also needed (e.g., Carver, 1998; Strucker, 1997; and Venezky et al., 1994). Reading instruction research should evaluate specific programs of instruction that are designed to increase achievement in specific components of the reading process.

Research should address issues that are especially important for ABE. At a minimum, it should carefully describe the learners' reading levels or abilities and, when possible, their motivational levels. Whenever possible, learner characteristics should be used as an independent variable. The effectiveness of the specific instructional interventions for groups at different reading levels, for groups of ESOL and non-ESOL learners, and for groups of adults with and without a reading disability, should be investigated. Goals and settings important to ABE should also be investigated to determine if specific programs of instruction are more effective in specific settings, such as general functional, family, and workplace literacy programs. Similarly, the use of adult-oriented instructional material should be investigated. Finally, whenever it is possible and makes sense, intervention studies should include groups of children and adults. The effectiveness of interventions for both groups of learners can be determined and comparisons between groups may help guide the application of findings from reading instruction research from one group to another.



Background references

Askov, E., Van Horn, B. V., & Carman, P. (1997). Assessment in adult basic education programs. In A. Rose & M. Leahy (Eds.), Assessing adult learning in diverse settings: Current issues and approaches (Fall ed., pp. 65-74). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.

Chall, J. S. (1994). Patterns of adult reading. Learning Disabilities, 5(1), 29-33.

Chall, J. S., & Curtis, M. E. (1990). Diagnostic achievement testing in reading. In C. Reynolds & R. Kamphaus (Eds.), Handbook of Psychological and Educational Assessment of Children (pp. 349-355). New York: Giulford.

CTB/McGraw-Hill. (1987, 1994). TABE: Tests of Adult Basic Education. Monterey, CA: CTB/McGraw-Hill.

Denzin, N.K. & Lincoln, Y.S. (Eds.). (2000). Handbook of qualitative research (Second ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.

Dochy, F., Segers, M., & Buehl, M. M. (1999). The relation between assessment practices and outcomes of studies: The case of research on prior knowledge. Review of Educational Research, 69(2), 145-186.

Harris, T., & Hodges, R. (1995). The Literacy Dictionary. Newark, Delaware: International Reading Association.

Joint Committee on Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing of the American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, and National Council on Measurement in Education (1999). Standards for educational and psychological testing. Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.

Karlsen, B., & Gardner, E. (1986). ABLE: Adult Basic Learning Examination. The Psychological Corporation, Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.

Kirsch, I. S., Jungeblut, A., Jenkins, L., & Kolstad, A. (1993). Adult literacy in America: A first look at the results of the National Adult Literacy Survey. Washington: U.S. Government Printing Office.

Koda, K. (1999). Development of L2 intraword orthographic sensitivity and decoding skills. Modern Language Journal, 83(1), 51-64.

Kulik, C.C., Kulik, J.A., & Shwalb, B. (1986). The effectiveness of computer-based adult education: A meta-analysis. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 2(2), 235-252.

Kulik, C.C., & Kulik, J. A. (1991). Effectiveness of computer-based instruction: An updated analysis. Computers in Human Behavior, 7(1), 75-94.

Kulik, J. (1994). Meta-analytic studies of findings on computer-based instruction. In E. Baker & H. O'Neil (Eds.), Technology assessment in education and training (pp. 9-33). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

McKeown, M. G., & Curtis, M. E. (1987). The Nature of Vocabulary Acquisition. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

McLeod, B., & McLaughlin, B. (1986). Restructuring or automaticity? Reading in a Second Language. Language Learning, 36(2), 109-123.

National Reading Panel. (2000a). Report of the national reading panel: Teaching Children to Read. Washington, DC: National Institute of Child Health and Human Development.

National Reading Panel. (2000b). Report of the national reading panel: Teaching Children to Read -- Reports of the Subgroups. Washington, DC: National Institute of Child Health and Human Development.

NIFL/NCSALL Reading Research Working Group (2002). Research-Based Practices for Adult Basic Education Reading Instruction: A Guide to the Research for Reading Professionals. Washington, DC: National Institute for Literacy.

Piper, T., & Cansin, D. (1988). Factors influencing the foreign accent. Canadian Modern Language review, 44(2), 334-342.

Roswell, F. G., & Chall, J. S. (1994). Creating successful readers: A practical guide to testing and teaching at all age levels. Chicago: Riverside.

Snow, C. E., Burns, S. M., & Griffin, P. (Eds.). (1998). Preventing Reading Difficulties in Young Children. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

Snow, C. E., & Strucker, J. (2000). Lessons from preventing reading difficulties in young children for adult learning and literacy. In J. Comings & B. Garner (Eds.), Annual review of adult learning and literacy: A project of the National Center for the Study of Adult Learning and Literacy (Vol. 1, pp. 25-73). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

U.S. Congress Office of Technology Assessment (1993). Adult Literacy and New Technologies: Tools for a Lifetime (OTA-SET No. 550). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.

Weiderholt, J.L., & Bryant, B.R. (1992). Gray Oral Reading Test: Third Edition. Austin: Pro-Ed.



Study references

Aderman, B., Nitzke, S., Pingree, S., & Voichick, J. (1987). Readers' responses to language experience approach materials. Adult Literacy and Basic Education, 11(1), 13-22.

Adrian, J. A., Alegrai, J., & Morais, J. (1995). Metaphonological abilities of Spanish illiterate adults. International Journal of Psychology, 30, 329-353.

Alessi, S. M., Siegel, M., Silver, D., & Barnes, H. (1982-83). Effectivenss of a computer based reading comprehension program for adults. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 11(1), 43-57.

Bertelson, P., Gelder, B.D., Tfouni, L.V., & Morais, J. (1989). Metaphonological abilities of adult illiterates: New evidence of heterogeneity. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 1(3) 239-250.

Boudett, K. P., & Friedlander, D. (1997). Does Mandatory Basic Education Improve Achievement Test Scores of AFDC Recipients? Evaluation Review, 21(5), 568-88.

Brock, M. (1998). The enhancement of literacy development in an adult beginning reader through creating texts to accompany wordless books. In B. Sturtevant & J. Dugan & P. Linder & W.M. Linek (Eds.), Literacy and Community: The twentieth yearbook, A peer reviewed publication of the College Reading Association. Commerce, Texas: College Reading Association.

Brooks, G., Davies, R., Ducke, L., Hutchinson, D., Kendall, S., & Wilkin, A. (2001). Progress in adult literacy: Do Learners learn? London: The Basic Skills Agency.

Bruck, M. (1992). Persistence of dyslexics' phonological deficits. Developmental Psychology, 28(5), 874-886.

Byrne, B., & Ledez, J. (1983). Phonological awareness in reading-disabled adults. Australian Journal of Psychology, 35(2), 185-187.

Byrne, M. E., Crowe, T. A., & Hale, S. T. (1996). Metalinguistic and pragmatic abilities of participants in adult literacy programs. Journal of Communication Disorders, 29(1), 37-49.

Carver, R. P., & Clark, S. W. (1998). Investigating reading disabilities using the rauding diagnostic system. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 31(5), 453-471, 481.

Chall, J. (1994). Patterns of adult reading. Learning Disabilities, 5(1), 29-33.

Cheek, E. H., & Lindsey, J. D. (1994). The effects of two methods of reading instruction on urban adults' word identification and comprehension abilities. Journal of Vocational and Technical Education, 11(1), 14-19.

Conti, G. J. (1985). The Relationship between Teaching Style and Adult Student Learning. Adult Education Quarterly, 35(4), 220-28.

Curtis, M. E., & Chmelka, M. B. (1994). Modifying the "Laubach Way to Reading" program for use with adolescents with Learning Disabilities. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 9(1), 38-43.

Curtis, M. E., & Longo, A. M. (1997). Reversing Reading Failure in Young Adults. Focus On Basics, 1(B), 18-22.

Darkenwald, G. G., & Valentine, T. (1985). Outcomes of participation in adult basic skills education. Lifelong Learning, 8(5), 17-22.

Diem, R. A., & Fairweather, P. G. (1980). An evaluation of a computer-assisted education system in an untraditional academic setting - A county jail. AEDS Journal, 13, 204-213.

Fitzgerald, N. B., & Young, M. B. (1997). The Influence of Persistence on Literacy Learning in Adult Education. Adult Education Quarterly, 47(2), 78-91.

Friedlander, D., & Martinson, K. (1996). Effects of mandatory basic education for adult AFDC recipients. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 18, 327-337.

Gallo, D. R. (1972). Reading Rate and Comprehension: 1970-71 Assessment ( NAEP 02-R-09). Denver, CO: Education Commission of the States, Denver, Colorado, National Assessment of Educational Progress.

Gambrel, L. B., & Heathington, B. S. (1981). Adult disabled readers' metacognitive awareness about reading tasks and strategies. Journal of Reading Behavior, 13(3), 215-221.

Gerber, S., & Finn, J. D. (1998). Learning Document Skills at School and at Work. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 42(1), 32-44.

Gold, P. C., & Horn, P. L. (1982). Achievement in Reading, Verbal Language, Listening Comprehension and Locus of Control of Adult Illiterates in a Volunteer Tutorial Project. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 54(3), 1243-1250.

Gold, P. C., & Johnson, J. A. (1982). Prediction of achievement in reading, self-esteem, auding, and verbal language by adult illiterates in a psychoeducational tutorial program. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 38(3), 513-522.

Gold, R. (1983). Recall of story schema categories by reading disabled adults: Effect of mode of presentation. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 56(2), 387-396.

Gombert, J. E. (1994). How Do Illiterate Adults React to Metalinguistic Training? Annals of Dyslexia, 44, 250-269.

Gorman, T.P., & Moss, N. (1981). A survey of attainment and progress of learners in adult literacy schemes. Educational Research, 23(3), 190-198.

Gottesman, R. L., Bennett, R. E., Nathan, R. G., & Kelly, M. S. (1996). Inner-city adults with severe reading difficulties: A closer look. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 29(6), 589-597.

Greenberg, D. (1998). Betsy: Lessons Learned from Working with an Adult Nonreader. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 41(4), 252-261.

Greenberg, D., Ehri, L. C., & Perin, D. (1997). Are Word-Reading Processes the Same or Different in Adult Literacy Students and Third--Fifth Graders Matched for Reading Level? Journal of Educational Psychology, 89(2), 262-75.

Gretes, J. A., & Green, M. (1994). The effect of interactive CD-ROM/digitized audio courseware on reading among low-literate adults. Computers in the Schools, 11(2), 27-42.

Hayes, A. E. (1989). William R. Kenan, Jr. Charitable Trust Family Literacy Project: Final Project Report.. Louisville, Kentucky: National Center for Family Literacy.

Kirsch, I. S., Jungeblut, A., Jenkins, L., & Kolstad, A. (1993). Adult literacy in America: A first look at the results of the National Adult Literacy Survey. Washington: U.S. Government Printing Office.

Lazar, M. K., Bean, R. M., & Van Horn, B. V. (1998). Linking the success of a basics skills program to workplace practices and productivity. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 41(5), 352-362.

Maclay, C. M., & Askov, E. N. (1988). Computers and adult beginning readers: An intergenerational approach. Lifelong Learning, 11(8), 23-28.

McDonald, B. A. (1997). The impact of content-based instruction: Three studies. Focus on Basics, 1(D).

McKane, P. F., & Greene, B. A. (1996). The Use of Theory-Based Computer-Assisted Instruction in Correctional Centers To Enhance the Reading Skills of Reading-Disadvantaged Adults. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 15(4), 331-344.

Meyer, V. (1982). Prime-O-Tec: A successful strategy for adult disabled readers. Journal of Reading, 25(6), 512-515.

Mikulecky, L., & Lloyd, P. (1997). Evaluation of workplace literacy programs: A profile of effective instructional practices. Journal of Literacy Research, 29, 555-585.

Morais, J., Bertelson, P., Cary, L., & Alegria, J. (1986). Literacy training and speech segmentation. Cognition, 24, 45-64.

Morais, J., Cary, L., Alegria, J., & Bertelson, P. (1979). Does awareness of speech as a sequence of phones arise spontaneously? Cognition, 7(4), 323-331.

Morais, J., Content, A., Bertelson, P., Cary, L., & Kolinsky, R. (1988). Is there a critical period for the acquisition of segmental analysis? Cognitive Neuropsychology, 5(3), 347-352.

Mudd, N. (1987). Strategies used in the early stages of learning to read: A comparison of children and adults. Educational Research, 29(2), 83-94.

Nickse, R. S. (1988). An intergenerational adult literacy project: A family intervention/prevention model. Journal of Reading, 31(7), 634-642.

Norman, C. A., & Malicky, G. (1987). Stages in the Reading Development of Adults. Journal of Reading, 30(4), 302-07.

Norman, C. A., Malicky, G., & Fagan, W. T. (1988). The reading processes of adults in literacy programs. Adult Literacy and Basic Education, 12(1), 14-26.

Pennington, B., Orden, G. C. V., Smith, S., Green, P. A., & Haith, M. M. (1990). Phonological processing skills and deficits in adult dyslexics. Child Development, 61(6), 1753-1778.

Perin, D., & Greenberg, D. (1993). Relationship between Literacy Gains and Length of Stay in a Basic Education Program for Health Care Workers. Adult Education Quarterly, 3(3), 171-86.

Philliber, W. W., Spillman, R. E., & King, R. E. (1996). Consequences of family literacy for adults and children: Some preliminary findings. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 39(7), 558-565.

Pratt, A., & Brady, S. (1988). Relation of phonological awareness to reading disability in children and adults. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80(3), 319-323.

Purcell-Gates, V. (1993). I Ain't Never Read My Own Words Before. Journal of Reading, 37(3), 210-19.

Rachal, J. (1984). The computer in the ABE and GED classroom: A review of the literature. Adult Education Quarterly, 35(2), 86-95.

Rachal, J. R. (1995). Adult Reading Achievement Comparing Computer-Assisted and Traditional Approaches: A Comprehensive Review of the Experimental Literature. Reading Research and Instruction, 34(3), 239-58.

Read, C., & Ruyter, L. (1985). Reading and Spelling Skills in Adults of Low Literacy. Remedial and Special Education (RASE), 6(6), 43-51.

Read, C., Zhang, Y.-f., Nie, H.-y., & Ding, B.-q. (1986). The ability to manipulate speech sounds depends on knowing alphabetic writing. Cognition, 24(1-2), 31-44.

Rich, R., & Shepherd, M. J. (1993). Teaching text comprehension strategies to adult poor readers. Reading & Writing, 5(4), 387-402.

Scarborough, H. S. (1984). Continuity between childhood dyslexia and adult reading. British Journal of Psychology, 75, 329-348.

Scliar-Cabral, L., Morais, J., Nepomuceno, L., & Kolinsky, R. (1997). The awareness of phonemes: So close - so far away. International Journal of Psycholinguistics, 13(38), 211-240.

Scully, M. J. (1991). The use of an educational therapy model with an illiterate adult. Journal of Reading, 35(2), 126-131.

Shaywitz, S., Shaywitz, B. A., Pugh, K. R., Fulbright, R. K., Constable, R. T., Mencl, W. E., Shankweiler, D. P., Liberman, A. M., Skudlarski, P., Fletcher, J. M., Katz, L., Marchione, K. E., Lacadie, C., Gatenby, C., & Gore, J. C. (1998). Functional disruption in the organization of the brain for reading in dyslexia. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA, 95, 2636-2641.

Sheehan-Holt, J. K., & Smith, M. C. (2000). Does basic skills education affect adults' literacy proficiencies and reading practices? Reading Research Quarterly, 35(2), 226-243.

Smith, M. C. (1996). Differences in Adults' Reading Practices and Literacy Proficiencies. Reading Research Quarterly, 31(2), 196-219.

Sticht, T. G. (1989). Adult literacy education. In E. Z. Rothkopf (Ed.), Review of research in education (Vol. 15, pp. 59-96). Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.

Sticht, T. G. (1997). The theory behind content-based instruction. Focus On Basics, 1(D).

Sticht, T. G., Armstrong, W. A., Hickey, D. T., & Caylor, J. S. (1987). Cast-off youth: Policy and training methods from the military experience. New York: Praeger.

Strucker, J. (1995). Patterns of reading in adult basic education. Unpublished Doctoral Thesis, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA.

Strucker, J. (1997). What silent reading tests alone can't tell you: Two case studies in adult reading differences. Focus on Basics, 1(B), 13-16.

Tan, A., Moore, D. W., Dixon, R. S., & Nicholson, T. (1994). Effects of training in rapid decoding on the reading comprehension of adult ESL learners. Journal of Behavioral Education, 4(2), 177-89.

Truch, S. (1994). Stimulating basic reading processes using auditory discrimination in depth. Annals of Dyslexia, 44, 60-80.

Venezky, R. L., Bristow, P. S., & Sabatini, J. P. (1994). Measuring change in adult literacy programs: Enduring issues and a few answers. Educational Assessment, 2, 101-131.

Appendix



Overview of the Reading Excellence Act

From the Reading Excellence Act homepage

(http://www.ed.gov/offices/OESE/REA/).

The Reading Excellence Program, a $280 million Federal grant program, competitively awards grants to States to improve reading. The program is designed to provide children with the readiness skills and support they need to learn to read once they enter school; teach every child to read by the end of the third grade; and use research-based methods to improve the instructional practices of teachers and other instructional staff.

The primary activities are:

  • Professional Development
  • Tutoring
  • Family Literacy
  • Transition programs for Kindergarten students

Grants are competitively awarded to states. The Department has awarded 27 states Reading Excellence funds. The state applications were reviewed by a non-federal expert panel. The expert review panel was selected by the U.S. Department of Education, National Institute for Child Health and Human Development, National Institute for Literacy, and National Academy of Sciences. The panel included experts in reading, family literacy, transforming research into practice, state and local education reform, and research/evaluation methodology.

From the REA Overview webpage

(http://www.ed.gov/offices/OESE/REA/overview.html):

The Reading Excellence Act was authorized to carry out the following purposes:

  • Teach every child to read by the end of third grade.
  • Provide children in early childhood with the readiness skills and support they need to learn to read once they enter school.
  • Expand the number of high quality family literacy programs.
  • Provide early intervention to children who are at risk of being identified for special education inappropriately.
  • Base instruction, including tutoring, on scientifically based reading research.

The National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) shows serious deficiencies in children's ability to read. Even in wealthier schools, almost a quarter of fourth-graders are unable to reach NAEP's basic level. More than two-thirds of fourth-graders in high poverty schools are unable to reach the basic level.

The law was passed for two major reasons. First, in recent years, findings from scientifically based reading research have provided compelling guidance for improved reading practice. Second, national assessments have continued to show great need for improving reading instruction in many schools, especially high poverty schools.



REA Definitions of Reading and Scientifically-Based Research

Title VIII, Section 2252, Definitions -- Reading Excellence Act

Reading

The term 'reading' means a complex system of deriving meaning from print that requires all of the following:

  1. The skills and knowledge to understand how phonemes, or speech sounds, are connected to print.
  2. The ability to decode unfamiliar words.
  3. The ability to read fluently.
  4. Sufficient background information and vocabulary to foster reading comprehension.
  5. The development of appropriate active strategies to construct meaning from print.
  6. The development and maintenance of a motivation to read.

Scientifically Based Reading Research

The term 'scientifically based reading research'

  1. means the application of rigorous, systematic, and objective procedures to obtain valid knowledge relevant to reading development, reading instruction, and reading difficulties; and
  2. shall include research that --
    • employs systematic, empirical methods that draw on observation or experiment
    • involves rigorous data analyses that are adequate to test the stated hypotheses and justify the general conclusions drawn;
    • relies on measurements or observational methods that provide valid data across evaluators and observers and across multiple measurements and observations; and has been accepted by a peer-reviewed journal or approved by a panel of independent experts through a comparably rigorous, objective, and scientific review.


The Partnership for Reading

The Partnership for Reading is a collaborative effort by three federal agencies--the National Institute for Literacy (NIFL), the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD), and the U.S. Department of Education--to bring the findings of evidence-based reading research to the educational community, families, and others with an interest in helping all people learn to read well. First established in 2000, The Partnership is now authorized by the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (P.L. 107-110).

The Partnership's mission is to disseminate evidence-based research, a focus that makes it substantively different from earlier information dissemination efforts and clearinghouses. This mandate to use evidence-based research as the basis for making decisions about reading instruction was advanced by the work of the National Reading Panel (NRP), assigned by Congress in 1997 to review the available research. Setting high standards for research quality, the NRP examined more than 460 studies to extract the essential findings about what has been scientifically proven to work in reading instruction.

The work of the NRP was just the beginning. Through ongoing, high quality research, our understanding of how to teach reading will continue to grow. The Partnership for Reading will stay at the forefront of that effort in several ways. First, The Partnership will bring the substantial body of evidence established by the NRP to the educational community through products and events that articulate the findings for a wide range of audiences. Second, it will continue to build the connection between scientific evidence and strategies used in classrooms and at home to make children better learners. And finally, The Partnership will add to the body of knowledge through continual review of new and existing research, using high standards of research quality. Visiit the web site @ http://www.nifl.gov/partnershipforreading.

Back to top
Back to Chapter One