READING

COMPREHENSION
INTERVENTIONS
Running
Head:
READING COMPREHENSION
INTERVENTIONS

Best Practices in Reading Comprehension Interventions

Kelly DeCoste
University of Calgary

READING COMPREHENSION INTERVENTIONS

Best Practices in Reading Comprehension Interventions

The main goal of reading is to comprehend, or understand, written text (NRP, 2000;
Wendling & Mather, 2009), yet for the estimated 4% of school-age children who are affected by
a reading disorder, and for those who struggle but do not meet diagnostic criteria, reading
achievement is below expected levels (APA, 2000). Proficient reading requires the reader to
actively interact with the text, building relationships between the text and background knowledge
and among different parts of the text (Wendling & Mather, 2009). Many factors can influence
comprehension, including decoding (word reading) skills, fluency (speed), vocabulary and
knowledge of and ability to apply reading strategies (Antoniou & Souvignier, 2007; NRP, 2000;
Wendling & Mather, 2009). All potential factors must be considered in evaluating a readers
deficits in order to design effective interventions.
Miller (2007) summarizes several subtypes of reading disorders, each with a specific
combination of specific deficits in decoding (word reading), fluency (speed) and/or
comprehension (understanding). For students with deficits specific to reading comprehension,
difficulties associating the meaning of words, recognizing or recalling specific information,
making inferences, drawing conclusions, and predicting outcomes can be observed (Sencibaugh,
2007). As reading comprehension deficits are tied not only to achievement in language arts and
other curriculum areas, but also to success outside of the classroom (Antoniou & Souvignier,
2007; NRP, 2000), designing and implementing quality interventions has important long-term
consequences for struggling readers.
Theory and Research
Functional brain imaging techniques have identified three pathways involved in reading,
with two slower, inefficient pathways being activated in less skilled readers than the pathway

READING COMPREHENSION INTERVENTIONS

activated in proficient readers (Miller, 2007). Specifically, as word recognition becomes more
automatic, activation moves from being heavily reliant on the parieto-temporal region (e.g.,
angular gyrus, supramarginal gyrus) and a frontal reading pathway (which includes the
overactivation of Brocas area) to the occipito-temporal pathway (e.g., insular cortex).
Comprehension is facilitated in those whose reading relies on the more efficient pathway, as
word recognition (decoding) is automatic, permitting the allocation of more cognitive resources
to reading for meaning (Miller, 2007).
Extant research in reading comprehension has identified common characteristics of
proficient readers that include the ability to efficiently and flexibly apply a variety of reading
strategies (e.g., predicting, questioning, summarizing, and visualizing; Wendling & Mather,
2009). Similarly, shared difficulties have also been identified among struggling readers,
including limited vocabulary, knowledge gaps, and a lack of persistence and monitoring
(Wendling & Mather, 2009). It is a difficulty with monitoring that underlies the reading
comprehension difficulties of many struggling readers (Kolic-Vehovec & Bajsanki, 2007;
Sencibaugh, 2007; Wendling & Mather, 2009).
Existing research supports the efficacy of explicit strategy instruction in enhancing
reading comprehension for those readers who struggle with comprehension monitoring (an
awareness of their level of understanding of written text; NRP, 2000). In 2000, the National
Reading Panel (NRP) identified seven categories of empirically-based effective comprehension
strategies, including comprehension monitoring. Though direct, explicit instruction of
comprehension monitoring is effective for students with and without learning disabilities
(Antoniou & Souvignier, 2007; NRP, 2000), it is those students with learning disabilities who
really struggle with using strategies efficiently and flexibly, as their difficulties are often the

READING COMPREHENSION INTERVENTIONS

result of a lack of metacognitive skills (Sencibaugh, 2007). Metacognition involves an awareness

and monitoring of ones own comprehension processes (Klingner, 2004), thus their deficit in
knowing about knowing includes difficulties with knowing how and when to use reading
comprehension strategies. It is for these students that explicit instruction of comprehension
monitoring (including how, when, where and why to this strategy) is particularly advantageous
(Sencibaugh, 2007).
A Problem Solving Approach to Interventions
A shift in the method of service delivery has occurred in the past few years, with school
psychologists taking a problem solving approach to intervention design, implementation and
evaluation (Upah & Tilly, 2002). An increased focus on monitoring at all stages of intervention
helps ensure positive outcomes for the struggling learner, as the process is continually evaluated
(Upah & Tilly, 2002) so that required changes can be made in a timely manner. Upah and Tilly
view interventions as a set of procedures and strategies designed to improve student
performance with the intent of reducing the students problem (2002, p. 483). They note the
importance of purposeful (planful) goal-directed actions aimed at modifying the individuals
environment, and which is achieved through a 12-component model: behavioral definition,
baseline data, problem validation, problem analysis steps, goal setting, intervention plan
development, measurement strategy, decision-making plan, progress monitoring, formative
evaluation, treatment integrity, and summative evaluation.
Upah and Tillys 12 steps for best practices fit within the four stages of a behavioral
consultation model (Bergan and Kratochwills, 1990, as cited in Upah & Tilly, 2002) and will
serve as a framework for the design, implementation and evaluation of a quality intervention for
reading comprehension. Though the focus of this paper will be on applying these components in

READING COMPREHENSION INTERVENTIONS

the context of the explicit instruction of comprehension monitoring, this process should be
similarly followed for other empirically supported strategies, as proficient readers are able to
efficiently and flexibly select among strategies to suit the specific reading situation (Yang, 2006).
Becoming a proficient reader requires proficiency in multiple reading strategies, which in turn
requires the explicit instruction of each (NRP, 2000; Yang, 2006).
Problem Identification
When taking a problem-solving approach to reading comprehension interventions, the
first task is to identify and define the problem. Utah and Tilly (2002) define a problem as the
difference between what is expected and the actual student behavior or performance (p. 484).
For students with a specific reading comprehension deficit (i.e. without accompanying decoding
and fluency difficulties), reading comprehension is lower than age or grade-level expectations.
However, as this may be the result of many factors (e.g., lack of knowledge or application of
reading strategies, decoding or fluency deficits), gaining an accurate and thorough picture of
contributing factors is vital at this stage in the intervention process.
For many students with deficits in reading comprehension, the underlying difficulty lies
in knowledge and application of comprehension strategies (Kolic-Vehovec & Bajsanki, 2007;
Sencibaugh, 2007; Wendling & Mather, 2009), and the explicit teaching of these strategies can
lead to improved reading comprehension for these students (Klingner, 2004; Wendling & Mather,
2009). In 2000, the National Reading Panel identified seven effective strategies for improving
reading comprehension: comprehension monitoring, cooperative learning, graphic and semantic
organizers, question answering, question generating, story structures and summarization.
Comprehension monitoring seeks to enhance the readers inner voice during reading tasks
(NRP, 2000). Through comprehension monitoring, the reader learns to become aware of when

READING COMPREHENSION INTERVENTIONS

their understanding has broken down (e.g., when encountering contradictory sentences in written
texts), and what steps can be taken to address this issue (e.g., rereading the passage). Explicit
instruction in how, when, where and why to use comprehension monitoring can lead to improved
reading comprehension (NRP, 2000).
Once the problem (lack of comprehension monitoring) has been identified and defined,
attention can be shifted to determining the students current level of performance. It is important
to measure reading comprehension performance in natural settings (e.g., the classroom) over
repeated sessions to gather an accurate estimate of the range of reading comprehension skills
(Upah & Tilly, 2002). Specific norm-referenced tests of reading comprehension (e.g., selected
subtests from the Wechsler Individual Achievement Test-2nd edition (WIAT-II) or WoodcockJohnson Tests of Achievement-3rd edition; WJ-III-ACH) can be used to gain an overall level of
reading comprehension and permit comparison of reading comprehension performance with a
normative sample. However, these tests are not sufficient to gain the specific information
required to design an intervention tailored to the students specific difficulties or to later evaluate
its effectiveness. Thus, a combination of norm-referenced tests, informal reading inventories
(with various levels of open-ended reading comprehension questions), interviews,
questionnaires, cloze activities and observations are needed to gain a thorough understanding of
the students knowledge and use of reading strategies, and to determine whether the strategies the
reader identifies as using are used correctly in practice (Klingner, 2004).
Information gathered on the readers current level of functioning serves as a baseline and
will be compared to data collected in the future to evaluate the interventions efficacy. It also
allows the practitioner to evaluate the magnitude of the deficit (the difference between the
students performance and grade level expectations) to confirm the existence of a problem that is

READING COMPREHENSION INTERVENTIONS

large enough to warrant intervention (Upah & Tilly, 2002). In cases where this has been
confirmed, the problem analysis stage of the intervention process can begin.
Problem Analysis
Upah and Tilly (2002) identified the problem analysis stage as critical to the intervention
process, as it is during this stage that the question of why the problem occurs is explored.
Relevant known and unknown information is gathered through interviews, record reviews and
observations. This information is used to formulate and validate a hypothesis (in the current
example, that the reading comprehension difficulties occur because comprehension strategies are
not known or cannot be applied), and lastly, a prediction can be formed based on the information
gathered thus far (i.e. if comprehension strategies are explicitly taught, problems applying them
during reading would decrease, resulting in improved comprehension). The hypothesis and
prediction generated informs intervention efforts, as the plan implementation stage of
intervention begins.
Plan Implementation
For students struggling with reading comprehension, the goal of the intervention is to
improve reading achievement, taking into consideration relevant characteristics of the individual
(e.g., current level of performance, growth rate suitable for the individual) to set the intervention
goal. For students with difficulties in self-monitoring, explicit instruction of comprehension
monitoring will be used to achieve the goal of improved reading comprehension through
improved comprehension monitoring skills. Comprehension monitoring encourages active
reading (readers must be aware of when there is a breakdown in comprehension and apply
learned strategies to address these issues), which is required for successful reading
comprehension. The explicit teaching of reading strategies including comprehension monitoring

READING COMPREHENSION INTERVENTIONS

is particularly important for students with learning disabilities, as they are less likely to learn
these strategies when they are presented in a more implicit manner (Antoniou & Souvignier,
2007). Strategies must be broken down into steps and taught sequentially, with plenty of teacher
modeling and demonstrations, frequent and sufficient opportunities for guided and independent
practice (with immediate corrective feedback and reinforcement) to have positive effects on
comprehension monitoring skills (Wendling & Mather, 2009). Students must be explicitly taught
when, why and how to apply reading strategies if they are expected to use them, and teacher-led
think alouds provide one such method to do so (Yang, 2006).
Think alouds are an example of an effective way to teach comprehension monitoring. The
teacher gives a clear description of the strategy (learning to be aware of their understanding of
the written text; NRP, 2000) as well as when and how to use it. She models the strategy,
interrupting her reading to describe places where her comprehension has been lost, and thinks
through how to address these breakdowns aloud (e.g., looking back at what was already read, or
looking forward to find a solution). Discussions around what makes the text difficult (e.g.,
unfamiliar words or concepts, confusing sentences) and how to address the problem (e.g.,
rereading, looking at pictures for clues), as well as asking what other strategies can be used, are
important components of think alouds (Klingner, 2004). Initially, this process is teacher-directed,
but support is gradually decreased as the readers understanding increases through explicit
instruction and guided practice, and eventually progresses to independent practice without
teacher support.
A measurement strategy must be developed to monitor the effectiveness of the
comprehension monitoring intervention. Decisions regarding how data will be collected and by
whom, the materials that will be used in this process, and when, where and how often data will

READING COMPREHENSION INTERVENTIONS

be collected need to be made. In the case of comprehension monitoring, informal measures that
permit the observation of the readers strategies (i.e. cloze activities requiring the reader to
provide appropriate missing words, passages that require the reader to detect and correct errors,
open-ended comprehension questions) and discussions about the readers perceived use of
strategies allow progress to be tracked to determine whether changes to the intervention are
needed and to determine when mastery of the strategy has been attained. Progress should be
monitored and documented multiple times per week (Upah & Tilly, 2002) to ensure timely
changes if required.
Problem Evaluation
Upah and Tillys (2002) program evaluation stage consists of progress monitoring,
treatment integrity, and formative and summative evaluation components. Ensuring that the
intervention is being implemented as intended is crucial when forming conclusions about the
efficacy of the intervention and making decisions about required changes (Upah & Tilly, 2002).
This requires the psychologist to train teachers and support staff in strategy instruction, conduct
periodic observations to ensure proper implementation of the strategy and address issues as they
arise, as well as facilitating instructor self-regulation through the provision of a written procedure
for proper strategy instruction that should be consulted regularly (Upah & Tilly, 2002).
Data must be collected frequently throughout the problem solving process to monitor
progress and guide necessary changes (using the same methods that were used to achieve
baseline levels of achievement). Creating visuals of this data not only serves to guide
conclusions of efficacy, but also serves as reinforcement for the student and others involved in
the intervention (Upah & Tilly, 2002). To determine whether the intervention was successful, the
final stage in this process, the summative evaluation, uses baseline and current (post-

READING COMPREHENSION INTERVENTIONS

10

intervention) levels of reading comprehension performance to determine the change in

achievement and form conclusions about the efficacy of the intervention. Specifically, looking at
performance on informal and formal, norm-referenced measures of comprehension (ensuring
alternate versions of these tests are selected to avoid practice effects) allows the efficacy of the
comprehension monitoring intervention to be measured. Additionally, these informal measures
should also be used by the teacher at regular intervals following the conclusion of the
intervention to ensure maintenance of effects, particularly as other reading comprehension
strategies are learned.
Conclusion
A problem-solving approach to intervention design, implementation and evaluation that
incorporates Upah and Tillys (2002) components of best practices for quality interventions helps
ensure positive outcomes for the struggling reader both in and outside of the classroom. For
many of these individuals, reading comprehension achievement is below expected levels as a
result of an underlying deficit in comprehension strategies such as comprehension monitoring.
Comprehension monitoring, or the readers awareness of their level of understanding of written
text, can be taught through direct and explicit interventions. Empirical support exists for the
efficacy of comprehension monitoring interventions in increasing comprehension monitoring
skills and producing improvements in reading comprehension achievement.

READING COMPREHENSION INTERVENTIONS

11

References
American Psychiatric Association. (2000). Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental
Disorders (4th ed., text rev.). Washington, DC: Author.
Antoniou, F., & Souvignier, E. (2007). Strategy instruction in reading comprehension: An
intervention study for students with learning disabilities. Learning Disabilities: A
Contemporary Journal, 5, 41-57. Retrieved from http://web.ebscohost.com.ezproxy
.lib.ucalgary.ca/ehost/detail?sid=f8aa1a9f-ec31-40e3-9145-24197109d6b2
%40sessionmgr15&vid=1&hid=9&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ%3d
%3d#db=ehh&AN=24314989
Klingner, J. K. (2004). Assessing reading comprehension. Assessment for Effective Intervention,
29, 59-70. doi: 10.1177/073724770402900408
Kolic-Vehovec, S., & Bajsanski, I. (2007). Comprehension monitoring and reading
comprehension in bilingual students. Journal of Research in Reading, 30, 198-211. doi:
10.1111/j.1467-9817.2006.00319.x
Miller, D. (2007). Essentials of School Neuropsychological Assessment. Hoboken, NJ: John
Wiley and Sons.
National Institute of Child Health and Human Development. (2000). Report of the National
Reading Panel. Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific
research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction (NIH
Pulication No. 00-4769). Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
Sencibaugh, J. (2007). Meta-Analysis of reading comprehension interventions for students with
learning disabilities: Strategies and implications. Reading Improvement, 44, 6-22.
Retrieved from http://web.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.lib .ucalgary.ca/ehost/detail?

READING COMPREHENSION INTERVENTIONS

12

sid=6d8a6d9b-7d74-4f13-b2d3-8d318f196ba3 %40
sessionmgr104&vid=1&hid=119&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ%3d
%3d#db=ehh&AN=24954482
Upah, K. & Tilly, D.W. (2002). Best practices in designing, implementing, and evaluating quality
interventions. In Thomas, A. & Grimes, J. (Eds.), Best practices in school psychology
(pp. 483-501). Bethesda, MD: NASP Publications.
Wendling, B., & Mather, N. (2009). Essentials of Evidence-Based Academic Interventions.
Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley and Sons.
Whitehurst, G. J., & Lonigan, C. J. (1998). Child development and emergent literacy. Child
Development, 69, 848872. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable /1132208
Yang, Y. (2006). Reading strategies or comprehension monitoring strategies? Reading
Psychology, 27, 313-343. doi: 10.1080/02702710600846852