Summarize this in 2 paragraphs no more than 3
Improving Reading Achievement Through Response to Intervention: Analyzing NAEP Data for Socioeconomically Disadvantaged Students
Introduction
Reading comprehension plays an essential role in determining a student’s overall academic success, particularly for those from socioeconomically disadvantaged backgrounds. For many students living in low-income households, the challenges associated with mastering literacy skills are compounded by factors beyond the classroom, such as limited access to books, fewer educational resources at home, and less exposure to enriching experiences that foster language development (Cutuli et al., 2013). These obstacles contribute to ongoing disparities in reading achievement, often placing lower-income students at greater risk of underperforming compared to their peers.
This issue is further exacerbated by the fact that students from underprivileged backgrounds frequently attend schools that are underfunded and understaffed, leaving educators with fewer resources to address the specific needs of struggling readers. Research has consistently shown that interventions tailored to develop core literacy skills — particularly in reading comprehension, fluency, and vocabulary — are essential in helping these students succeed (Dietrichson et al., 2021). Without these targeted supports, many disadvantaged students continue to lag behind, widening the achievement gap that persists throughout their academic careers.
The National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) provides critical data for understanding the extent of these challenges. Specifically, the Grade 4 reading scores for students eligible for the National School Lunch Program (NSLP) offer a revealing look into how socioeconomic status impacts literacy development. Students who qualify for NSLP, often from lower-income families, tend to score significantly lower in reading achievement than their peers. This paper will delve into NAEP data to examine the achievement gaps that exist and explore the potential for improving reading outcomes through targeted, multi-tiered interventions based on the Response to Intervention (RTI) framework. By focusing on students’ specific needs through Tier 2 and Tier 3 interventions, the goal is to enhance their reading proficiency and address broader inequities in educational outcomes.
Problem Statement
This project focuses on the reading achievement of Grade 4 students as reported in the 2022 NAEP assessment. The dataset highlights the performance of students who are socioeconomically disadvantaged, as indicated by their eligibility for the NSLP. Specifically, 52% of students eligible for NSLP scored below the “Basic” reading proficiency level, whereas only 3% scored at the “Advanced” level (see Table 1). These results are particularly alarming when compared to their peers who are not eligible for the NSLP, who performed significantly better.
The purpose of this analysis is to identify patterns in reading achievement gaps and propose Tier 2 and Tier 3 interventions based on the RTI framework. The goal is to address the specific needs of these low-performing students and improve their reading comprehension, thereby helping them close the achievement gap with their higher-income peers.To better understand the relationship between socio-economic status and reading achievement, a regression analysis was conducted using NSLP eligibility as the independent variable (see Appendix A for full results). The model shows a significant relationship between NSLP eligibility and reading scores, with students not eligible for NSLP scoring higher than their low-income peers. The model’s R-squared value indicates that 13% of the variance in reading scores can be explained by NSLP eligibility
Table 1: NAEP Reading Scores (2022) for NSLP-Eligible and Non-Eligible Students
|
Year |
Jurisdiction |
National School Lunch Program eligibility, 3 categories |
below Basic |
at or above Basic |
at or above Proficient |
at Advanced |
10th percentile |
25th percentile |
50th percentile |
75th percentile |
90th percentile |
|
|
2022 |
National |
Eligible |
52 |
48 |
19 |
3 |
149 |
177 |
206 |
231 |
251 |
|
|
2022 |
National |
Not eligible |
24 |
76 |
46 |
14 |
182 |
210 |
235 |
256 |
274 |
|
|
2022 |
National |
Information not available |
22 |
78 |
46 |
14 |
188 |
211 |
235 |
256 |
274 |
U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics. (2022).
National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2022 reading assessment.
Rationale for Selection
The selection of this dataset and research problem stems from the significant achievement gaps between low-income and higher-income students in reading proficiency. According to the data, over half of the students eligible for the NSLP fall below basic reading standards. These students struggle with fundamental reading skills, and the gap between their performance and that of their higher-income peers only widens as they progress through school.
This gap calls for immediate and targeted intervention, specifically through the RTI framework. As a multi-tiered approach, RTI offers research-based interventions that can be tailored to meet the diverse needs of struggling students (Fuchs & Fuchs, 2017). This paper will focus on designing Tier 2 and Tier 3 interventions that can help these students achieve proficiency in reading.
Data Analysis
The NAEP dataset offers valuable insights into the performance of socioeconomically disadvantaged students in reading. The mean reading score for students eligible for the NSLP is 206, while their non-eligible peers score a mean of 235 at the 50th percentile. The wide performance gap between these two groups is consistent across all percentiles, particularly at the 90th percentile, where eligible students score 254 compared to 274 for non-eligible students.
Measures of Central Tendency
•
Mean: The average score for eligible students is significantly lower than that of non-eligible students, indicating a widespread issue among low-income students.
•
Median: The median reading score for eligible students shows a similar trend of underperformance, highlighting the need for targeted support.
•
Range: The score range between the 10th and 90th percentiles is broader for eligible students, reflecting both a large number of struggling readers and a small number of high achievers.
Patterns and Trends
The most apparent trend in this dataset is the persistent underachievement of low-income students compared to their higher-income peers. At the 10th percentile, the gap is relatively narrow (149 vs. 182), but by the 90th percentile, the gap widens significantly (254 vs. 274). This suggests that even high-performing low-income students are not reaching the same levels of achievement as their non-eligible peers.
Additionally, the high percentage of students scoring below basic reading proficiency is concerning. With over half of NSLP-eligible students in this category, the data suggests that many of these students lack foundational reading skills, making it difficult for them to catch up without targeted interventions.
Goals and Objectives
The goal of this project is to improve reading proficiency among NSLP-eligible students through the implementation of RTI-based interventions. The following objectives are designed to achieve this goal:
•
Objective 1: When presented with reading passages at their instructional level, students will use context clues to define unfamiliar words with 80% accuracy, as measured by reading comprehension assessments.
•
Objective 2: Students will improve their reading fluency by participating in small-group interventions, increasing their reading speed and accuracy by 20% over the course of a semester.
•
Objective 3: Through the use of questioning strategies, students will demonstrate an 80% improvement in comprehension of informational texts, as measured by oral and written assessments.
Interventions and Action Plan
Tier 2 Interventions: Small Group Instruction
Tier 2 interventions will focus on students scoring between the 25th and 50th percentiles, who demonstrate moderate difficulty in reading but have the potential to improve with targeted instruction. These students will be grouped into small cohorts and will receive additional reading instruction three times a week. Each session will last 30 minutes and will focus on comprehension strategies, vocabulary building, and reading fluency.
Tier 3 Interventions: Individualized Instruction
Tier 3 interventions are designed for students scoring below the 25th percentile, who exhibit significant difficulties in reading. These students will receive one-on-one instruction four times a week, focusing on foundational reading skills such as phonics, decoding, and vocabulary development. Instruction will be personalized to meet each student’s specific needs, and progress will be closely monitored through bi-weekly assessments.
Summary and Discussion
The analysis of the 2022 NAEP reading data allowed us to understand a disparity that persists in the educational attainment of students whose families are poor enough to qualify for the National School Lunch Program (NSLP) and for their wealthier counterparts as well. More than 50% of the students participating in NSLP were below basic reading proficiency that reflect the most foundational skills expected to be obtained by all learners. Our paper emphasizes the need of appropriate multi-level interventions through RTI with respect to the nature of these literacy deficits.
The result of the regression analysis and measures of central tendency further establishes the assumption about every student with NSLP eligibility seating in the lower reading composite score which led to the conclusion that indeed socioeconomic status still determines the level of academic achievement reached. By developing and monitoring the implementation of Tiers 2 and 3 interventions that incorporate small-group and one-on-one instruction as a means of embedding focused strategies to help students with reading difficulties address particular reading skills, teachers can help students with particular reading weaknesses. These interventions are in tune with research that supports the use of varied instruction in addressing the reading problems of children from poor families (Fuchs & Fuchs, 2017; Dietrichson et al., 2021).
