How Effective Are One-to-One Tutoring Programs in Reading for Elementary Students at Risk for Reading Failure? A Meta-Analysis of the Intervention Research
Title
How Effective Are One-to-One Tutoring Programs in Reading for Elementary Students at Risk for Reading Failure? A Meta-Analysis of the Intervention Research
Author
Elbaum, B., Vaughn, S., Hughes, M.T., & Moody, S.W.
Source
Journal of Educational Psychology, 92(4), 605-619.
Year Published
2000
Background
Adult-delivered, one-to-one instruction is considered by many to be an ideal teaching practice, especially when used with students who are considered at risk for school failure or who have been identified as having reading or learning disabilities. Unfortunately, due to logistical and time constraints that are common across general and special education classrooms, teachers rarely are able to provide this type of individualized instruction. In response, many schools and parents have employed tutors (e.g., certified teachers, paraprofessionals, or volunteers) to provide additional instruction for their students.
In addition, research evaluating Reading Recovery, the most widely used, one-to-one instructional program, suggests that, indeed, the program works. However, many have suggested that flawed research methods have tended to overestimate the program’s impact. They recommend more cost-efficient strategies, such as a broader use of trained paraprofessional and volunteer tutors as well as small-group instruction.
Research Questions
- How effective are adult-delivered, one-to-one, instructional interventions in reading for children at risk for reading failure—that is, what gains, if any, can we reasonably expect for students taught using this approach?
- How do the outcomes of Reading Recovery compare with outcomes produced by other interventions?
- How do the outcomes of one-to-one reading interventions compare with those of small-group interventions?
Findings
- Well-designed and carefully administered one-to-one reading instruction contributed to improved performance for many students who were struggling to read.
- Students taught in small groups of 2-6 students were able to make the same gains in reading performance as students taught in one-on-one sessions, including Reading Recovery.
- Certified teachers and reliably trained adult volunteers were equally able to help struggling readers in both one-on-one and small group settings.
Conclusion/Recommendations
- Students at risk for reading failure can clearly benefit from quality one-on-one instruction. As a result of this strategy, below-average readers may eventually be able to perform at grade level. However, such intervention is probably not enough by itself to help students with more severe reading problems; these students would likely need ongoing support to keep up with regular classroom instruction.
- Well-trained paraprofessionals and adult volunteers in small-group settings can serve an important function in helping struggling learners to read, and can do so in a way that is more cost effective than expensive one-on-one reading programs that require the instruction to be led by a certified teacher or specialist.
- One-on-one and small-group instruction are both effective strategies for helping students to read but should be thought of as one part of a larger instructional program coordinated by certified classroom teachers who closely monitor the teaching and learning process.