PAGE 4

Literature Review: The Effects of a Fluency Intervention Program on the Fluency and Comprehension Outcomes of Middle-School Students with Severe Reading DeficitsDaniel CoffinConcordia University, Nebraska

Submitted in partial fulfillment ofthe requirements for EDUC 519July 17, 2015

The purpose of the study in this article, according to authors Spencer and Manis, was to investigate further the effects of fluency intervention on the decoding and reading comprehension skills of middle-school students with significant reading delays (2010, p. 77). The authors cite research by LaBerge and Samuels indicating a direct link between fluency and reading comprehension, and suggesting that student who have not developed decoding skills to the point of automaticity are overburdened cognitively by the work of decoding words and are unable to then process the content communicated by those words (Spencer & Manis, 2010, p. 76). It would follow, then, that an intervention designed to assist struggling readers with decoding would not only have the effect of improving students decoding skills, but should also better enable students to devote cognitive resources to comprehension of text. The authors indicate that research on the efficacy of fluency interventions for older readers, however, is lacking (Spencer & Manis, 2010, p. 77). The study included 60 urban middle-school students ranging in age from almost 11 years to 15 years of age, all of whom were placed in self-contained special education classes. Students were eligible for participation in the study if they scored below a fourth-grade equivalency on a standardized reading test, or if they scored between a fourth-grade and sixth-grade equivalency on a standardized reading test and then below a fifth-grade equivalency on a follow-up standardized test of reading fluency (Spencer & Manis, 2010, p. 77-78). The experimental group received fluency development instruction on individual words and sounds, phrases, and longer text passages for a period of 10 minutes each instructional day for a period of seven months. As students demonstrated mastery of a given page of exercises, they were provided with increasingly difficult passages. The control group received 10 minutes of individualized intervention per instructional day for an equivalent period of time using a study skills program as a basis (Spencer & Manis, 2010, p. 79-80). Upon completing the study, the data indicated that while the intervention was successful in improving the reading fluency of students as measured by standardized tests of phonemic decoding, oral reading rate, and oral reading accuracy, there was no measurable effect of the intervention on reading comprehension as measured by a standardized test of reading comprehension. The authors of the study suggested this might be due to the profound reading deficits exhibited by the study participants (Spencer & Manis, 2010, p. 82-83). I selected this article for review because I am currently working with other teachers in my school to start a fluency-based reading intervention program for struggling readers. I thought that it would be helpful to review studies of similar programs, consider these results, and hopefully replicate the successes and avoid the errors of others. Rather like the authors of the study, I was surprised to see in this study that there was no correlation between an increase in reading fluency and reading comprehension (Spencer & Manis, 2010, p. 83). My takeaway from this article is that while reading comprehension is dependent upon fluent and automatic decoding, it does not follow that training and practice in fluency development leads naturally and automatically to reading comprehension. To use a metaphor: a house requires a stable foundation. It does not follow, however, that once one had laid a foundation, a house automatically comes into being. The structure still has to be built. Similarly, the students in this study might not have demonstrated gains in comprehension as a result of the fluency intervention, but might be more ready now for meaningful training and practice in comprehension skills and strategies as a result of increased reading fluency. I would hope that other teachers reading this article would come to the same conclusion and not assume that fluency development is a magic bullet for reading intervention, but just one piece of a larger solution that should also include vocabulary development and direct instruction in comprehension skills and strategies. ReferencesSpencer, S.A., & Manis, F.R. (2010). The effects of a fluency intervention program on the flu ency and comprehension outcomes of middle-school students with severe reading deficits. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 25(2), 76-86.