Participation in Intervention Programmes of Children with Poor Reading Skills in Hungary
Abstract
In this century, the value of information has become more significant; reflecting this change, focus has shifted to preparing pupils for the functional use of reading. Therefore, the latest international assessments of reading literacy are set up to address this kind of knowledge. Significant numbers of individuals are performing below the minimum level in these assessments in Hungary, signalling lower capacity for participation in the community. When attempting to eliminate functional illiteracy, it is crucial to analyse the present support system, and the efficiency of recognising reading problems in the early stages, in order to improve the provision of education systematically. When examining the probable causes of the struggle to comprehend texts, one of the prerequisites of understanding written language is appropriate decoding. This research focuses on investigating the access to intervention programmes of 5th-grade children with poor reading skills. The speed and accuracy of the aloud reading of 957 pupils attending mainstream classrooms were measured and compared to the data regarding the participation in rehabilitation programmes. The most relevant finding of the research was that only less than half of the children with poor reading skills receive help to improve their performance; 55% of slow readers and 60% of non-accurate readers were left without support, even though their performance is significantly worse than that of their peers. This finding indicates the need to revise the screening system and necessitates more extensive and less diagnosis-based access to intervention programmes.
Downloads
References
Babić, D., & Baucal, A. (2011). The big improvement in PISA 2009 reading achievements in Serbia: Improvement of the quality of education or something else? Center for Education Policy Journal, 1(3), 53–74. https://www.cepsj.si/index.php/cepsj/article/view/414/238
Cromley, J. G., & Azevedo, R. (2007). Testing and refining the direct and inferential mediation model of reading comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99(2), 311–325. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.99.2.311
Csapó, B. (2015). A magyar közoktatás problémái az adatok tükrében: Értékek és viszonyÃtási keretek [Problems of Hungarian public education in the light of the data: Values and reference frameworks]. Iskolakultúra, 25(7–8), 4–17. https://doi.org/10.17543/ISKKULT.2015.7-8.4
Csapó, B., Fejes, J. B., Kinyó, L., & Tóth, E. (2014). Az iskolai teljesÃtmények alakulása Magyarországon nemzetközi összehasonlÃtásban [Development of school performance in Hungary in international comparison]. In T. Kolosi & I. G. Tóth (Eds.), Társadalmi Riport 2014 (pp. 110–136). TÃRKI.
da Costa, A. F., Pegado, E., Ãvila, P., & Coelho, A. R. (2013). Mixed-methods evaluation in complex programmes: The national reading plan in Portugal. Evaluation and Program Planning, 39, 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2013.02.001
Dékány, J., & Mohai, K. (2012). Egyéb pszichés fejlÅ‘dési zavarral küzdÅ‘ gyermekek, tanulók komplex vizsgálatának diagnosztikus protokollja – Specifikus tanulási zavarok (Ãrott nyelvhasználat zavarai, diszkalkulia) [Diagnostic protocol for complex examination of children and students with other developmental disorders - Specific learning disorders (written language disorders, dyscalculia]. In A. Torda (Ed.), Diagnosztikai kézikönyv. Educatio Nonprofit Kft.
Forzani, E., & Leu, D. J. (2012). New literacies for new learners. The Educational Forum, 76(4), 421–424. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-287-532-7_111-1
Fox, E., & Alexander, P. A. (2011). Learning to read. In R. E. Mayer & P. A. Alexander (Eds.), Handbook of research on learning and instruction (pp. 7–31). Routledge.
Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., Hosp, M. K., & Jenkins, J. R. (2001). Oral reading fluency as an indicator of reading competence: A theoretical, empirical, and historical analysis. Scientific Studies of Reading, 5(3), 239–256. https://doi.org/10.1207/S1532799XSSR0503_3
Gray, W. S. (1956). The teaching of reading and writing. UNESCO.
Harsányi, G., Koltói, L., Kovacs, D., Kövesdi, A, Nagybányai-Nagy, O., Nyitrai, E., Simon, G., Smohai, M., Takács, N., & Takács, Sz. (2020). Az iskolai teljesÃtménykülönbség és a szocioökonómiai státusz összefüggései - az országos kompetenciamérés eredményei- nek vizsgálata a szülÅ‘k munkájának rendszeressége, az észlelt társadalmi helyzet és a lakókörnyezet vonatkozásában [Relationships between the school performance differences and socio-economic status - an examination of the results of the national competence survey in relation to the regularity of the work of the parents, the perceived social situation and the living environment]. Psychologia Hungarica 7(4), 148–221. https://doi.org/10.12663/PSYHUNG.7.2019.4.5
Hudson, R., Lane, H., & Pullen, P. (2005). Reading fluency assessment and instruction: What, why, and how? Reading Teacher, 58(8), 702–714. https://doi.org/10.1598/RT.58.8.1
Jahnukainen, M., & Itkonen, T. (2016). Tiered intervention: History and trends in Finland and the United States. European Journal of Special Needs Education, 31(1) 140–150. https://doi.org/10.1080/08856257.2015.1108042
Johnson, E. S., Pool, J., & Carter, D. R. (n.d.). Screening for reading problems in grade 4–12. RTI Action Network, National Center for Learning Disabilities. http://www.rtinetwork.org/essential/assessment/screening/screening-for-reading-problems-in-grades-4-through-12
Kim, Y.-S., Petscher, Y., Schatschneider, C., & Foorman, B. (2010). Does growth rate in oral reading fluency matter in predicting reading comprehension achievement? Journal of Educational Psychology, 102(3), 652–667. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0019643
LaBerge, D., & Samuels, S. J. (1974). Toward a theory of automatic information processing in reading. Cognitive Psychology, 6(2), 293–323. https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0285(74)90015-2
Leu, D. J., Forzani, E., Burlingame, C., Kulikowich, J. Sedransk, N., Coiro, J., & Kennedy, C. (2013). The new literacies of online research and comprehension: Assessing and preparing students for the 21st century with common core state standards. In S. B. Neuman, L. B.Gambrell, & C. Massey (Eds.), Reading instruction in the age of common core standards (pp. 219–236). International Reading Association.
McKenna, M. C., & Dougherty K. A. (2015). Assessment for reading instruction. The Guilford Press.
Meixner, I. (2000). A dyslexia prevenció és reedukáció módszere [The method for the prevention and for the re-education of dyslexia]. Bárczi Gusztáv Gyógypedagógiai Tanárképző Főiskola.
Mullis, I. V. S., & Martin, M. O. (2015). PIRLS 2016 assessment framework (2nd ed.). Boston College, TIMSS & PIRLS International Study.
Nagy, J. (2004). OlvasástanÃtás: a megoldás stratégiai kérdései [Teaching to read: Strategic issues of the solution]. Iskolakultúra, 14(3), 3–26.
O’Connor, R. E., Bocian, K. M., Beach, K. D., Sanchez, V., & Flynn, L. J. (2013). Special education in a 4-year response to intervention (RtI) environment: Characteristics of students with learning disability and grade of identification. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 28(3), 98–112. https://doi.org/10.1111/ldrp.12013
OECD. (2016). PISA 2015 Results. Vol. I: Excellence and equity in education. OECD Publishing.
OECD. (2019). PISA 2018 Results (Volume I): What students know and can do. OECD Publishing.
Ostorics, L., Szalay, B., Szepesi, I., & Vadász, Cs. (2016). PISA 2015 Összefoglaló jelentés [PISA 2015: A summary report]. Oktatási Hivatal.
Perfetti, C., & Hogaboam, T. (1975). The relationship between single-word decoding and reading comprehension skill. Journal of Educational Psychology, 67(4),461–469. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0077013
Price, K. W., Meisinger, E. B., Louwerse, M. M., & D’Mello, S. (2016). The contributions of oral and silent reading fluency to reading comprehension. Reading Psychology, 37(2), 167–201. https://doi.org/10.1080/02702711.2015.1025118
Sahlberg, P. (2011). PISA in Finland: An education miracle or an obstacle to change? Center for Education Policy Journal, 1(3), 119–140.
Shepard, L. A., Penuel, W. R., & Davidson, K. L. (2017). Design principles for new systems of assessment. Phi Delta Kappan, 98(6), 47–52.
Sipos, Zs. (2017). The characteristics of 3rd and 5th grade children’s reading skills. In 11th International Scientific Conference, 6th International Methodological Conference, 4th ICT in Education Conference - Book of selected papers (pp. 700–712). University of Novi Sad Hungarian Language Teacher Training Faculty.
Snowling, M. J., Duff, F., Petrou, A., & Schiffeldrin, J. (2011). Identification of children at risk of dyslexia: The validity of teacher judgments using ‘Phonic Phases’. Journal of Research in Reading, 34(2), 157–170. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9817.2011.01492.x.
Südkamp, A., Kaiser, J., & Möller, J. (2012). Accuracy of teachers’ judgments of students’ academic achievement: A meta-analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 104(3), 743–762. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0027627.
Torda, Ã. (2015). A logopédia ellátás szakszolgálati protokollja [The protocol for speech language therapy provision at pedagogical services]. Educatio Társadalmi Szolgáltató Nonprofit Kft.
Török, T., & Hódi, Ã. (2015). A morfológiai tudatosság fejlÅ‘dése, mérési lehetÅ‘ségei és az olvasás-szövegértéssel való kapcsolata [Development of morphological awareness, possibilities for the assessment and its relation to reading comprehension]. Anyanyelv-pedagógia, 8(1). https://anyanyelv-pedagogia.hu/cikkek.php?id=551
UNESCO. (1978). Records of the general conference. 20th session. Vol. 1. UNESCO.
UNESCO. (2015). Education 2030: Incheon declaration and framework for action for the implementation of sustainable development goal 4. http://uis.unesco.org/sites/default/files/documents/education-2030-incheon-framework-for-action-implementation-of-sdg4-2016-en_2.pdf
Vágvölgyi R., Coldea A., Dresler T., Schrader, J., & Nuerk H. -C. (2016). A review about functional illiteracy: definition, cognitive, linguistic, and numerical aspects. Frontiers in Psychology, 7, 1617. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01617
Vaughn, S., Fletcher, J. M., Francis, D. J., Denton, C. A., Wanzek, J., Wexler, J., Cirino, P. T., Barth, A. E., & Romain, M. A. (2008). Response to intervention with older students with reading difficulties. Learning and Individual Differences, 18(3), 338–345. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2008.05.0011
Virinkoski, R., Lerkkanen, M. K., Holopainen, L., Eklund, K., & Aro, M. (2018). Teachers’ ability to identify children at early risk for reading difficulties in grade 1. Early Childhood Education Journal, 46(5), 497–509. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10643-017-0883-5
Wagner, D. A. (1990). Literacy and research: Past, present and future. Literacy lessons. UNESCO.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors are confirming that they are the authors of the submitted article, which will be published online in the Center for Educational Policy Studies Journal (for short: CEPS Journal) by University of Ljubljana Press (University of Ljubljana, Faculty of Education, Kardeljeva ploščad 16, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia). The Author’s/Authors’ name(s) will be evident in the article in the journal. All decisions regarding layout and distribution of the work are in the hands of the publisher.
- The Authors guarantee that the work is their own original creation and does not infringe any statutory or common-law copyright or any proprietary right of any third party. In case of claims by third parties, authors commit themselves to defend the interests of the publisher, and shall cover any potential costs.
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/deed.en that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.
