Higher-Level Language Strategy-Based Intervention for Poor Comprehenders: A pilot single case experimental design

Kelso, K., Whitworth, A., & Leitão, S. (2022). Higher-Level Language Strategy-Based Intervention for Poor Comprehenders: A pilot single case experimental design. Child Language Teaching and Therapy, 38(2), 151-165. https://doi.org/10.1177/02656590211071003

Poor comprehenders are a subgroup of poor readers who can read accurately and fluently at a level appropriate for their age but struggle to comprehend what they read. The current consensus is that 7-8% of children in middle primary can be classified as poor comprehenders, with this number increasing across school grades. While there is far less research on children with specific comprehension difficulties, compared with word reading accuracy difficulties, there is now a sizeable body of research on the language and cognitive profiles of poor comprehenders, with intact phonological processing skills being a key feature. There is also limited research into reading comprehension instruction more broadly, and even less on effective instruction for poor comprehenders, although there is some evidence to suggest that strategy-based instruction to improve inference making can be effective.

This pilot study used a single case series design to explore whether an intervention designed to target higher-level language skills was effective in improving the oral inference making and comprehension monitoring skills of poor comprehenders and, in turn, their reading comprehension. Participants were 11 children in grades 3 – 6 (aged 7;8 −12;1 years) who presented with a profile of adequate vocabulary and grammar skills but higher-level language difficulties. The intervention consisted of 10, 45 minute weekly sessions, presented in two blocks of five weeks. Testing was completed at four time points: two prior to intervention, one immediately following intervention, and a fourth 4-5 months post-intervention. In the first block of sessions, five strategies were introduced for use across the reading cycle (before, during , after). The second five sessions focused on applying the strategies taught and making inferences during reading of longer fiction and non-fiction texts.

The results of the study showed that oral inference making improved post-intervention for most participants, as did the ability to identify inconsistencies in texts (comprehension monitoring) for eight of the 11 participants. Transfer to improvement on standardised reading comprehension measures was more limited, consistent with previous research findings, particularly for nonfiction texts. However, the majority of participants had improved in the number of literal and inference questions answered correctly at the 4-5 month follow-up. The authors concluded by suggesting that the preliminary findings indicated that the 10-session intervention has the potential to improve children's comprehension during reading, and that examining responses to different types of questions may be beneficial to identify poor comprehenders, rather than just looking at overall reading comprehension test scores.

Blogger: Katrina Kelso is a Postdoctoral Associate working with Dr. Lisa Archibald.