The DOI matches its Crossref record; the references it cites are not checked yet.
Why intensive interventions are necessary for students with severe reading difficulties
Open accessAbstract
This article reviews research related to intensive interventions within a Response to Intervention framework. We review the research from studies that provided different levels of intensity of intervention with the goal of establishing a case that movement through less intensive tiers of intervention may not be an effective and responsible approach to addressing the reading difficulties of some students, particularly those with significant reading difficulties or disabilities.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Effective reading intervention requires intensive interventions that are delivered frequently, in small groups, over several months using explicit direct instruction with high levels of student engagement and practice.
“This research has demonstrated that an effective reading intervention requires intensive interventions that are delivered frequently, in small groups, over several months using explicit direct instruction with high levels of student engagement and practice [52].”
From Using Evidence-Based Practice and Data-Based Decision Making in Inclusive Education (2021) · cites this paper as [52]
The “Providing Intensive Interventions for Students with Reading Difficulties” section lists small groups, extended daily sessions, at least 20–30 weeks, explicit systematic instruction, active engagement, and practice as characteristics that appear related to effective interventions. The claim overstates this as a requirement for effective reading intervention generally; the paper qualifies the guidance as applying particularly to younger students at greatest risk and says the evidence is not definitive in some areas. No page number was supplied for the passage. (LLM, conf=0.88)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 27 · Cited by 163
Research works printed but not linked: 31
- 10.1177/07419325020230050501 · DOI
- 10.1177/0022219408326214 · DOI
- 10.1207/S1532799Xssr0502_2 · DOI
- Clay M. M., 2005, Literacy lessons: Designed for individuals, part two: Teaching procedures
- 10.1177/00224669030370031001 · DOI
- Denton C. A.(2009 February).Project 2: Prevention of reading difficulties. In S. Vaughn (Chair) Research of the Texas center for learning disabilities. Symposium conducted at the annual Pacific Coast Research Conference Coronado CA.
- 10.1177/00222194060390050601 · DOI
- Denton C. A. Nimon K. Mathes P. G. Swanson E. A. Kethley C. Kurz T. B. et al.(in review).The effectiveness of a supplemental early reading intervention scaled up in multiple schools.
- 10.1037/0022-0663.92.4.605 · DOI · Paper page
- Gersten R., 2009, Assisting students struggling with mathematics: Response to intervention (RtI) for elementary and middle schools (NCEE 2009‐4060)
- 10.1177/00222194050380050801 · DOI
- 10.1207/s1532799xssr0801_4 · DOI
- 10.1598/RRQ.40.2.2 · DOI
- National Association of State Directors of Special Education, Inc, 2008, Response to intervention: Blueprints for implementation
- Scammacca N., 2007, Extensive reading interventions in grades k‐3: From research to practice
- 10.1037/0022-0663.96.2.265 · DOI
- 10.1093/cercor/12.3.297 · DOI
- Swanson H. L., 1999, Interventions for students with learning disabilities: A meta‐analysis of treatment outcomes
- 10.1177/002221940103400104 · DOI
- Vaughn S., 2008, Response to intervention: A framework for reading educators
- 10.1016/j.lindif.2008.05.001 · DOI
- Vaughn S., 2003, Preventing and remediating reading difficulties: Bringing science to scale, 299
- 10.1177/001440290306900401 · DOI
- 10.1177/07419325030240050501 · DOI
- Vaughn S., The relative effects of group size on reading progress of older students with reading difficulties, Reading and Writing
- Vaughn S. &Wexler J.(2009 February).Teaching older student with reading difficulties and disabilities: How do we do RTI? Paper presented at the annual Pacific Coast Research Conference Coronado CA.
- 10.1177/002221940003300302 · DOI
- 10.1037/0022-0663.88.4.601 · DOI
- 10.1080/02796015.2007.12087917 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1177/0022219407313426 · DOI
- Woodcock R. W., 2001, Woodcock‐Johnson III tests of achievement
Metadata
- Authors
- Vaughn, S., Denton, C. A., & Fletcher, J. M.
- Affiliations
- The University of Texas at Austin (US)
- The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston (US)
- University of Houston (US)
- Corresponding author
- Vaughn, Sharon
- Venue
- Psychology in the Schools
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2010-03-10
- Volume
- 47
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 432-444
- ISSN
- 0033-3085 (ISSN-L)
- 1520-6807
- PMC
- PMC2975106
- OpenAlex
- W2138389016
- Cited by
- 163
- References
- 27
- Citations by year
- 2026: 7 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 15 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 15 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 15 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 10 · 2015: 14 · 2014: 15 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 14
- FWCI
- 14.73
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
- Locations
- Psychology in the Schools (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
- Funders
- Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (P50HD052117)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Reading and Literacy Development
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Behavioral and Psychological Studies
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Cognitive and developmental aspects of mathematical skills
- Keywords
- intensive intervention, Response to Intervention, reading disorders, intervention intensity, tiered intervention, struggling readers
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
