ABSTRACT
The purpose of this study was to identify subgroups of adult basic education (ABE) learners with different profiles of skills in the core reading components of decoding, word recognition, spelling, fluency, and comprehension. The analysis uses factor scores of those 5 reading components from on a prior investigation of the reliability and construct validity of measures of reading component skills (MacArthur, Konold, Glutting, & Alamprese, 2010). In that investigation, confirmatory factor analysis found that a model with those 5 factors fit the data best and fit equally well for native and non-native English speakers. The study included 486 students, 334 born or educated in the United States (native) and 152 not born nor educated in the US (non-native) but who spoke English well enough to participate in English reading classes. The cluster analysis found an 8-cluster solution with good internal cohesion, external isolation, and replicability across subsamples. Of the 8 subgroups, 4 had relatively flat profiles (range of mean scores across factors < 0.5 SD), 2 had higher comprehension than decoding, and 2 had higher decoding than comprehension. Profiles were consistent with expectations regarding demographic factors. Non-native speakers were overrepresented in subgroups with relatively higher decoding and underrepresented in subgroups with relatively higher comprehension. Adults with self-reported learning disabilities were overrepresented in the lowest performing subgroup. Older adults and men were overrepresented in subgroups with lower performance. The study adds to the limited research on the reading skills of ABE learners and, from the perspective of practice, supports the importance of assessing component skills to plan instruction.
ABSTRACT
This article reports the results from a randomized control field trial that investigated the impact of an enhanced decoding and spelling curriculum on the development of adult basic education (ABE) learners' reading skills. Sixteen ABE programs that offered class-based instruction to Low-Intermediate level learners were randomly assigned to either the treatment group or the control group. Reading instructors in the 8 treatment programs taught decoding and spelling using the study-developed curriculum, Making Sense of Decoding and Spelling (MSDS), and instructors in the 8 control programs used their existing reading instruction. A comparison group of 7 ABE programs whose instructors used K-3 structured curricula adapted for use with ABE learners were included for supplemental analyses. Seventy-one reading classes, 34 instructors, and 349 adult learners with pre- and posttests participated in the study. The study found a small but significant effect on one measure of decoding skills, which was the proximal target of the curriculum. No overall significant effects were found for word recognition, spelling, fluency, or comprehension. Pretest to posttest gains for word recognition were small to moderate, but not significantly better than the control classes. Adult learners who were born and educated outside of the U.S. made larger gains on 7 of the 11 reading measures than learners who were born and educated within the U.S. However, participation in the treatment curriculum was more beneficial for learners who were born and educated in the U.S. in developing their word recognition skills.
ABSTRACT
The purposes of this study were to investigate the reliability and construct validity of measures of reading component skills with a sample of adult basic education (ABE) learners, including both native and nonnative English speakers, and to describe the performance of those learners on the measures. Investigation of measures of reading components is needed because available measures were neither developed for nor normed on ABE populations or with nonnative speakers of English. The study included 486 students, 334 born or educated in the United States (native) and 152 not born or educated in the United States (nonnative) but who spoke English well enough to participate in English reading classes. All students had scores on 11 measures covering five constructs: decoding, word recognition, spelling, fluency, and comprehension. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was used to test three models: a two-factor model with print and meaning factors; a three-factor model that separated out a fluency factor; and a five-factor model based on the hypothesized constructs. The five-factor model fit best. In addition, the CFA model fit both native and nonnative populations equally well without modification, showing that the tests measure the same constructs with the same accuracy for both groups. Group comparisons found no difference between the native and nonnative samples on word recognition, but the native sample scored higher on fluency and comprehension and lower on decoding than did the nonnative sample. Students with self-reported learning disabilities scored lower on all reading components. Differences by age and gender were also analyzed.
