Journal of Behavioral Education

, Volume 19, Issue 1, pp 30–46 | Cite as

Programming for the Generalization of Oral Reading Fluency: Repeated Readings of Entire Text versus Multiple Exemplars

  • Jennifer M. Silber
  • Brian K. Martens
Original Paper


This study compared a multiple exemplar approach involving the training of key words and sentence structures to a typical repeated readings procedure for their effects on students’ generalized oral reading fluency. The two training approaches were also compared in terms of their relative learning rates (i.e., fluency gain per minute of instruction time). Participants were 111 first- and second-grade students from three public schools in a large urban school district. This study utilized an across students pre-test/post-test experimental design and one-way analyses of variance on the gain scores from pre-test to post-test to assess the effectiveness of multiple exemplar instruction, listening passage preview/repeated readings, and a time and attention control condition. Results showed significantly higher gain scores for students in both the multiple exemplar and listening passage preview/repeated readings groups versus controls on the trained and generalization passages. Multiple exemplar instruction also resulted in significantly larger learning rates than listening passage preview/repeated readings. Implications, limitations, and directions for future research are discussed.


Oral reading fluency Generalization Multiple exemplar instruction Repeated readings Learning rate 


  1. Ardoin, S. P., Eckert, T. L., & Cole, C. A. A. (2008). Promoting generalization of reading: A comparison of two fluency-based interventions for improving general education student’s oral reading rate. Journal of Behavioral Education, 17, 237–252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ardoin, S. P., McCall, M., & Klubnik, C. (2007). Promoting generalization of oral reading fluency: Providing drill versus practice opportunities. Journal of Behavioral Education, 16, 54–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Becker, W. C., Engelmann, S., & Thomas, D. R. (1975). Teaching 2: Cognitive learning and instruction. Chicago: Science Research Associates.Google Scholar
  4. Begeny, J. C., Krouse, H. E., Ross, S. G., & Mitchell, R. C. (2009). Increasing elementary-aged students’ reading fluency with small-group interventions: A comparison of repeated reading, listening passage preview, and listening only strategies. Journal of Behavioral Education, 18, 211–228.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Carlisle, J. F., & Stone, C. A. (2005). Exploring the role of morphemes in word reading. Reading Research Quarterly, 40, 428–449.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cates, G. L., Skinner, C. H., Watson, T. S., Meadows, T. J., Weaver, A., & Jackson, B. (2003). Instructional effectiveness and instructional efficiency as considerations for data-based decision making: An evaluation of interspersing procedures. School Psychology Review, 32, 601–616.Google Scholar
  7. Chafouleas, S. M., Martens, B. K., Dobson, R. L., Weinstein, K. S., & Gardner, K. B. (2004). Fluent reading as the improvement of stimulus control: Additive effects of performance-based interventions to repeated readings on students’ reading and error rates. Journal of Behavioral Education, 13, 67–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Chard, D. J., Vaughn, S., & Tyler, B. J. (2002). A synthesis of research on effective interventions for building reading fluency with elementary students with learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 35, 386–406.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Christ, T. J., & Silberglitt, B. (2007). Estimates of the standard error of measurement for curriculum-based measures of oral reading fluency. School Psychology Review, 36, 130–146.Google Scholar
  10. Daly, E. J., Bonfiglio, C. M., Mattson, T., Persampieri, M., & Foreman-Yates, K. (2005). Refining the experimental analysis of academic skills deficits: Part I. An investigation of variables that affect generalized oral reading performance. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 38, 485–497.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Daly, E. J., Chafouleas, S. M., Persampierei, M., Bonfiglio, C. M., & LaFleur, K. (2004). Teaching phoneme segmenting and blending as critical early literacy skills: An experimental analysis of minimal textual repertoires. Journal of Behavioral Education, 13, 165–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Daly, E. J., Martens, B. K., Barnett, D., Witt, J. C., & Olson, S. C. (2007). Varying intervention delivery in response to intervention: Confronting and resolving challenges with measurement, instruction, and intensity. School Psychology Review, 36, 562–581.Google Scholar
  13. Daly, E. J., Martens, B. K., Kilmer, A., & Massie, D. R. (1996). The effects of instructional match and content overlap on generalized reading performance. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 29, 507–518.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Dowhower, S. L. (1987). Effects of repeated reading on second-grade transitional readers’ fluency and comprehension. Reading Research Quarterly, 22, 389–406.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Eckert, T. L., Ardoin, S. P., Daly, E. J., & Martens, B. K. (2002). Improving oral reading fluency: A brief experimental analysis of combining an antecedent intervention with consequences. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 35, 271–281.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., & Maxwell, L. (1988). The validity of informal measures of reading comprehension. Remedial and Special Education, 9, 20–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Kuhn, M. R. (2005). A comparative study of small group fluency instruction. Reading Psychology, 26, 127–146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. LaBerge, D., & Samuels, S. J. (1974). Toward a theory of automatic information processing in reading. Cognitive Psychology, 6, 293–323.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Lee, J., Grigg, W. S., & Donahue, P. L. (2007). The nation’s report card: Reading 2007. Washington, D.C.: National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, Department of Education.Google Scholar
  20. National Institute of Child Health, 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. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.Google Scholar
  21. Nist, L., & Joseph, L. M. (2008). Effectiveness and efficiency of flashcard drill instructional methods on urban first-graders’ word recognition, acquisition, maintenance, and generalization. School Psychology Review, 37, 294–308.Google Scholar
  22. Pallant, J. P. (2007). SPSS survival manual (3rd ed.). Berkshire, England: Open University Press.Google Scholar
  23. Rashotte, C. A., & Torgesen, J. K. (1985). Repeated reading and reading fluency in learning disabled children. Reading Research Quarterly, 20, 180–188.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Rose, T. L. (1984). The effects of two prepractice procedures on oral reading. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 17, 544–548.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Samuels, S. J. (1979). The method of repeated readings. The Reading Teacher, 32, 403–408.Google Scholar
  26. Shapiro, E. S. (2004). Academic skills problems: Direct assessment and intervention (3rd ed.). New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  27. Skinner, C. H. (2008). Theoretical and applied implications of precisely measuring learning rates. School Psychology Review, 37, 309–314.Google Scholar
  28. Skinner, C. H., Belfiore, P. J., & Watson, T. S. (2002). Assessing the relative effects of interventions in students with mild disabilities: Assessing instructional time. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 20, 346–357.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Spache, G. (1953). A new readability formula for primary-grade reading materials. The Elementary School Journal, 53, 410–413.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Stokes, T. F., & Baer, D. M. (1977). An implicit technology of generalization. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 10, 349–367.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Szadokierski, I., & Burns, M. K. (2008). Analogue evaluation of the effects of opportunities to respond and ratios of known items within drill rehearsal of Esperanto words. Journal of School Psychology, 46, 593–609.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Therrien, W. J. (2004). Fluency and comprehension gains as a result of repeated reading: A meta-analysis. Remedial and Special Education, 25, 252–261.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Evergreen CenterMilfordUSA
  2. 2.Syracuse UniversitySyracuseUSA

Personalised recommendations