Search

Background: To date, little is known about factors that might contribute to positive literacy outcomes in children with (a risk of) reading difficulties (RD). Research into resilience in literacy is needed to understand why some children with (a risk of) RD can overcome their difficulties in the face of adversity given the right circumstances. Aim: This scoping review aims to systematically review empirical evidence for protective, skill-enhancing, and promotive factors involved in resilience in atypical literacy development of children with (a risk of) RD. Method: The systematic literature search focused on descriptive studies with a focus on compensation in literacy development, including samples of 6 to 16-year-old children with a detectable (risk of) RD. Outcome measures had to include at least one relevant literacy measure. Results: Analysis of the 22 included studies revealed two general findings: 1) most studies had (very) small sample sizes and thus low statistical power to find relevant effects, 2) study designs and/or statistical analyses used were often insufficient to distinguish between protective, skill-enhancing, and promotive factors. Furthermore, findings point towards underrecognition of evidence for promotive and skill-enhancing factors as well as overinterpretation of the same evidence towards protective effects. Conclusion: Overall, empirical evidence for protective factors is sparse and currently based on only a few studies. Recommendations for future studies include, among others, a need for replications as well as new studies applying appropriate study designs and statistical analyses to carefully test hypothesized relations between (potential) protective factors and literacy outcomes.

A comparison is performed between Bayesian penalized regression priors: the lasso and regularized horseshoe using the statistical programming language R. This study aims to provide researchers with insights into the use of these priors to deal with high-dimensional data. Therefore, the shrinkage behavior of the Bayesian lasso and regularized horseshoe models, using different hyperparameter settings, were compared. Furthermore, variable selection was executed for the models. Lastly, the predictive performances were evaluated based on their Root Mean Square Error (RMSE). Results showed that researchers have to take several factors into consideration. First consideration concerns which prior is best suited on their data. The Bayesian lasso showed more variation in shrinkage behavior and is easy to implement, while regularized horseshoe prior is more robust to their specific hyperparameter settings and is complex to implement. Second, researchers should consider a variable selection method. This paper shows that an RMSE plot is a suitable tool for variable selection. In conclusion, there were no significant differences in predictive performances found between the Bayesian lasso and regularized horseshoe.

Learning how to read fluently was a goal the researcher had which led to the research question; How does the intervention of repeated reading impact oral reading fluency rates in students who are reading below a 2nd grade level? The purpose of the action research was to implement the intervention of repeating reading to see if the oral reading fluency rates in struggling students increased. Struggling readers were identified through the Dynamic Indicators Of Basic Early Literacy Skills assessment (DIBELS). Struggling readers were considered to be reading below 52 words per minute, which was the 2nd grade benchmark for the fall. The study had five participants who were reading below 52 words per minute. The participants worked with the researcher during the guided reading part of their school day. The group met three or four times a week for at least 15 minutes. At the end of each week a running record was taken to monitor the participants’ progress in their fluency rates. All data was charted on a fluency graph and analyzed by the researcher. The data showed an increase in fluency rates in each participant over the five-week study. Students read anywhere from 38% to 225% more words per minute at the end of the study compared to the beginning. An in depth look at the study is given in this paper along with background research. Keywords used to accumulate research were fluency, reading rates, elementary reading fluency, oral reading rates, and fluency strategies.