A Multi-State Study Examining the Impact of Explicit Reading Instruction with Incarcerated Students

Abstract

This randomized pretest/posttest group study examined the impact of explicit instruction in decoding, comprehension, and fluency on the reading achievement of incarcerated students from facilities in a southwestern (SW) state, a southeastern (SE) state, and a mid-Atlantic (MA) state. Comparisons were made between instruction comprised of higher and lower teacher-student ratio groups (1:12 v. 1:4) for the MA site and overall student reading growth rates for the SW and SE site. A total of 49 students were involved (SW=13, SE=16, MA=20). MANCOVA results for the MA site found significant differences for group size on the Letter-Word Identification subtest of the Woodcock Reading Mastery test. Pretest and posttest difference scores are reported for the SW and SE sites. Results are discussed in relationship to the implication of providing explicit reading instruction with lower teacher-student ratios and the overall difficulty of conducting juvenile justice research.

Incarcerated students have acute academic skill deficits that put them at significant risk for failing in school and functioning well in a society that emphasizes educational achievement (Foley, 2001). These skill deficits are particularly pronounced in the area of reading. When compared to nondelinquent peers, incarcerated students on average are two years behind in reading (Foley, 2001). Project READ (as cited in Brunner, 1993), one of the first studies to examine reading performance of incarcerated youth with a nationally representative sample indicated that the average reading level of incarcerated students in ninth grade was fourth grade reading level. This study also found that more than one third of these students were illiterate. Others (Humphrey & Mersky, 1979; Meltzer, Roditi, & Fenton, 1986) suggest that the average reading level of incarcerated youth is between the fifth and seventh grade. Specifically, Meltzer, Roditi, and Fenton (1986) indicated that incarcerated students had problems with word recognition, oral reading, and reading comprehension. Drakeford and Krezmien (2004) found lower scores when they assessed the reading comprehension of 71 detained and committed students 13 to 18 years of age in four states. Using the Grays Silent Reading Test, they found that the mean quotient reading comprehension score was 66.8, the mean reading grade level was 3.47, and the median grade level was 2.2. Of their population, 34% did not achieve scores above the first grade reading level. Finally, in a more recent study, Harris and her colleagues (2007) conducted an assessment of 398 juveniles ages 14 to 17 years incarcerated in three states. They report that, overall, the student group mean standard scores were approximately one standard deviation below the mean on Woodcock-Johnson III letter word identification, word attack, and passage comprehension subtests. In addition, those students receiving special education services had lower reading achievement than students not identified with disabilities.

Although there are differences in the findings across the studies, all of the authors found significant deficits in the reading skills of delinquent students. These reading skill deficits have been associated with negative outcomes for the individual and society. Illiteracy has been associated with increase school suspension, overall academic failure, and reduced employment opportunities (Brunner, 1993; Katsiyannis & Archwamety, 1999). It is estimated that reading failure is annually associated with $224 billion in welfare payments, crime enforcement, employment ineptitude, and lost tax revenues (NICHHD; National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, 2000). Additionally, American companies annually lose over 40 billion dollars in revenues due to illiteracy. These findings make it an imperative for researchers to investigate the effects of empirically validated reading interventions on the reading outcomes of incarcerated students. Investigations should consider the essential reading components for adolescents (NICHHD) including word study (phonics/decoding), fluency, vocabulary, and comprehension. In order to incorporate these critical elements of reading into our instruction, it is essential that a common ground and understanding of these principles is established.

Word study or decoding is the "ability to convert letters into sounds and blend them to form recognizable words" (NICHHD, 2000, p. 2-107). Students who experience difficulties decoding exert most of their efforts on trying to identify the symbols and words on the page, and demonstrate limited cognitive capacity to process meaning from the text. Although one's inability or inefficiency in decoding text is not the sole reason for poor comprehension, studies have found that decoding is an essential skill for comprehension and that improving the speed and accuracy of one's decoding is correlated with increases in comprehension (Torgesen, et al. 2001; NICHHD).

Fluency is defined as the ability "to read a text quickly, accurately, and with proper expression' (NICHHD, 2000, p. 3-5) and has been identified as a critical component in the transition from 'learning to read" to 'reading to learn.' A nonfluent reader has difficulty with word recognition, thereby contributing to the slow, laborious reading resulting in minimal comprehension.