This study focuses on adult learners whose word reading grade equivalency levels range from 3.0 to 5.9. There are three components to this study. The first component evaluates the degree of explicitness that is necessary in teaching reading to low reading adults. Specifically, adults will be administered one of the following instructional approaches: decoding and fluency; reading comprehension and fluency; decoding, reading comprehension and fluency; extensive reading; decoding, reading comprehension, extensive reading, and fluency. Outcomes on reading measures of individuals in each of these groups will be compared to each other and to a control group of adult literacy learners who do not receive any of these approaches. All reading instructional approaches will be of equal length (100 hours), similar format, and independently monitored for integrity. For each of the five instructional groups, and the control group, 60 students will be evaluated (total n=360). Each sample will be randomly recruited from adult literacy students who enroll in existing adult literacy programs. Both repeated measures designs and learning growth curve modeling techniques will be used to evaluate treatment outcomes in relation to individual ability characteristics. The second component of this project is designed to evaluate differential outcomes based on subtype classifications. Data will be analyzed to identify subtypes of adult literacy learners, and whether these subtypes respond differentially to different instructional approaches. In other words, which instructional approach, or combination of instructional approaches is effective for the different subtypes of adult poor readers? The third and final component of this study includes fMRI technology. There are two aspects to this component. The first aspect is to provide a systematic evaluation of the different components of the neural circuitry of adult poor readers compared to adult expert readers. The second aspect is to evaluate whether fMRI may provide a neurobiological index of the impact of instruction on adult learners. In years 3 and 4 of our study, 10 adult expert readers and 10 adult poor readers will undergo fMRI studies of basic reading processes. In addition, we will scan 5 participants from each of our 6 groups before they receive instruction and after the 100th hour is completed.

Agency
National Institute of Health (NIH)
Institute
Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health & Human Development (NICHD)
Type
Research Project (R01)
Project #
5R01HD043801-05
Application #
7123096
Study Section
Special Emphasis Panel (ZHD1-DSR-R (04))
Program Officer
Miller, Brett
Project Start
2002-09-25
Project End
2009-08-31
Budget Start
2006-09-01
Budget End
2009-08-31
Support Year
5
Fiscal Year
2006
Total Cost
$434,983
Indirect Cost
Name
Georgia State University
Department
Psychology
Type
Schools of Education
DUNS #
837322494
City
Atlanta
State
GA
Country
United States
Zip Code
30302
Hall, Ryan; Greenberg, Daphne; Gore, Jacqueline Laures et al. (2014) The Relationship Between Expressive Vocabulary Knowledge and Reading Skills for Adult Struggling Readers. J Res Read 37:87-100
Greenberg, Daphne; Wise, Justin C; Frijters, Jan C et al. (2013) Persisters and nonpersisters: Identifying the characteristics of who stays and who leaves from adult literacy interventions. Read Writ 26:495-514
Pae, Hye; Greenberg, Daphne; Morris, Robin D (2012) Construct Validity and Measurement Invariance of the Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test-III Form A in the Performance of Struggling Adult Readers: Rasch Modeling. Lang Assess Q 9:152-171
Greenberg, Daphne; Wise, Justin; Morris, Robin et al. (2011) A randomized control study of instructional approaches for struggling adult readers. J Res Educ Eff 4:
Nanda, Alice O; Greenberg, Daphne; Morris, Robin (2010) Modeling child-based theoretical reading constructs with struggling adult readers. J Learn Disabil 43:139-53
Greenberg, Daphne; Pae, Hye Kyeong; Morris, Robin D et al. (2009) Measuring adult literacy students' reading skills using the Gray Oral Reading Test. Ann Dyslexia 59:133-49