Reading difficulties have a relatively high prevalence among children (e.g., 6.49%, Moll et al., 2014). Due to their persistence, the difficulties are likely to remain throughout life, although in a milder form (Astrom et al., 2007; Psyridou et al., 2020). Given that reading ability is built upon different sub-skills, differentiated diagnostics (Ferrer et al., 2016) and adequate and evidence-based interventions (through long-term, individualized symptom-related training conducted over a more extended period; Ise et al., 2012) are required as early as possible. However, in addition to reading difficulties, comorbid social-emotional difficulties often occur (Hendren et al., 2018). It is for this reason of utmost importance to intervene early in life with a twofold intervention, addressing both reading and social-emotional difficulties (Boyes et al., 2020). In the intervention study within the Lubo-LRS project (University of Cologne, 2022), we aim to strengthen students with reading difficulties in this regard by addressing social-emotional challenges that may accompany their difficulties. Thus, reading training, provided to small groups of students with reading difficulties by project members, is combined with training in social-emotional skills provided to the whole class by the teachers.

As an extension of the intervention study, this poster presents a multiple baseline design of six second graders with reading difficulties. Thus, in addition to the pre-, post- and follow-up assessments, reading skills were measured twice a week using a curriculum-based measurement (CBM). The focus on these six children is particularly valuable because they face various individual circumstances (especially low reading skills, German as a second language, hearing impairment, social-emotional problems). Participants received a small-group reading intervention for seven months. In total, participants received 32 training sessions of respectively 50 minutes. The training was conducted twice a week during the first three months (10/2022 to 01/2023) and once per week in the following months (01/2023 to 05/2023).

The reading training was based on the evidence-based concept “Kieler Leseaufbau” (KLA; Dummer-Smoch & Hackethal, 2021) and associated materials. Since the children usually acquire letter knowledge during their first school year, our intervention focused on repeated reading of syllables, words, sentences, and brief texts. Various games and attractively designed materials were used. Each session was structured similarly: In the beginning, the content of the previous session and homework were repeated. Afterwards, new letters were introduced, writing exercises and reading games based on syllables or words were performed, and after ten sessions, short stories were read. Additionally, parents were encouraged to foster their children’s reading skills at home for five to ten minutes per day using the reading materials associated with the current session.

Both groups of three students received reading training from the same project member and social-emotional skills training with the whole class from their teacher (“Lubo aus dem All”; Hillenbrand et al., 2022). In addition, one of the two groups received a once-per-week small group training regarding social-emotional skills related to particular difficulties in reading (e.g., strengthening self-esteem and emotion regulation strategies).

The single case study illustrates the individual improvements in the students’ reading skills and enables more profound insights into promoting basic reading skills in children with reading difficulties. The following research question is addressed by exploratory analyses:

To what extent can improvement in reading skills be seen among individual students?

In addition, the following sub-questions will be answered:

-) How does reading development proceed individually during reading training?

-) What individual learning progresses in reading skills are evident, and how can differences be explained?

-) To what extent do differential effects of basic reading skills emerge in students who receive additional social-emotional training?

Two established German reading tests were used to assess reading skills. Six students were identified in the summer of 2022 as having reading difficulties (≤16th percentile; WLLP; Schneider et al. 2011). Baseline measurements (Phase A: 5-7 measurements) took place between September and October 2022, and the intervention was implemented between October 2022 and April 2023 (Phase B: 32 measurements). For this purpose, a German CBM instrument (LDL, Walter, 2010), was used. This instrument covers basic decoding skills and reading fluency. In addition, reading skills were assessed via SLRT II (Moll & Landerl, 2017) before and after the entire intervention period as part of a pre- and post-test (10/2022 & 05/2023). The SLRT II (Moll & Landerl, 2017) consists of two basic reading subtests: word (lexical decoding) and pseudoword (non-lexical decoding) reading. The students achieved the following pretest results (percentiles for lexical decoding & non-lexical decoding): Felix (4-5/ 8), Johannes (10/13-18), Clara (10/27-30), Leon (11-13/ 19-23), Karl (8-9/ 4) and Samuel (6-7/8). Within the pretest, instruments were used to survey the vocabulary of the children (GraWo, Seifert et al., 2017), to measure the cognitive abilities (CFT 1-R, Weiß & Osterland, 2013) and to determine languages spoken within the family, details of further reading training and demographic data (parents survey). Within both the pretest and post-test, a teachers’ social-emotional questionnaire (adapted and revised from Gasteiger-Klicpera et al., 2006) determined demographic data, information regarding reading skills, and five subscales regarding social-emotional skills from the teachers’ view. Further, a training protocol recorded all important information (e.g., attending children, disruptive factors, practice at home). In order to answer the research questions, we visually analyze data to determine trend, level, and variability in baseline and intervention phases. Further, we report common effect size measurements such as PND (percentage of non-overlapping data), NAP (non-overlap of all pairs; Parker & Vannest, 2009), and Tau-U (Parker et al., 2011). We mainly interpret the effects by piecewise linear models (PLM), Hedge’s g, and log-response ratio (LRR). To determine the individual differences in reading skills and the differential effects of basic reading skills, we use all the instruments from pre- and post-test.

This poster presents the findings from a single case study regarding the effects of reading and social-emotional training to promote basic reading skills in six second graders with reading difficulties. We provide first insights into the extent to which students benefit from this reading training depending on several factors (e.g., attendance, practice at home, cooperation with parents, individual characteristics, and each child’s skills). Therefore, we conduct exploratory analysis and consider various individual factors (e.g., first language and German vocabulary, cognitive skills, further reading training, and social-emotional skills). The results will give some hints for dual interventions connecting reading skills and social-emotional issues in students with reading difficulties. This not only enables statements to be generated about the use of the specific reading training and the associated materials and to what extent these are suitable for supporting different students in their individual reading skills. It can also be used to derive general conditions for success in the use of small group reading support and to make initial assumptions about which individual student factors can influence the effectiveness of reading training internationally.

Astrom, R., Wadsworth, S., & DeFries, J. (2007). Etiology of the Stability of Reading Difficulties: The Longitudinal Twin Study of Reading Disabilities. Twin Research and Human Genetics, 10(3), 434-439. https://doi.org/10.1375/twin.10.3.434 Boyes, M. E., Leitão, S., Claessen, M., Badcock, N. A., & Nayton, M. (2019). Correlates of externalising and internalising problems in children with dyslexia: An analysis of data from clinical casefiles. Australian Psychologist, 55, 62-72. https://doi.org/10.1111/ap.12409 Dummer-Smoch, L., & Hackethal, R. (2021). Kieler Leseaufbau Handbuch [Kieler reading training manual] (10th edition). Veris. Ferrer, E., Shaywitz, B. A., Holahan, J. M., Marchione, K. E., Michaels, R., & Shaywitz, S. E. (2016). Achievement gap in reading is present as early as first grad and persists through adolescence. The Journal of Pediatrics, 167(5), 1121-1125. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpeds.2015.07.045 Hendren, R., Haft, S., Black, J., White, N., & Hoeft, F. (2018). Recognizing psychiatric comorbidity with reading disorders. Frontiers in Psychiatry, 9, 1-10. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2018.001017 Hillenbrand, C., Hennemann, T., Hens, S., & Hövel, D. (2022). „Lubo aus dem All“: Programm zur Förderung sozial-emotionaler Kompetenzen [„Lubo from space“] (5th edition). Ernst Reinhardt Verlag München. Ise, E., Engel, G., & Schulte-Körne, G. (2012). Was hilft bei der Lese-Rechtschreibstörung. Kindheit und Entwicklung, 21, 122-136. https://doi.org/10.1026/0942-5403/A000077 Moll, K., & Landerl, K. (2017). Salzburger Lese- und Rechtschreibtest [Salzburg reading and spelling test] (SLRT II; 2nd edition). Hogrefe. Parker, R. I., & Vannest, K. (2009). An improved effect size for single-case research: Non-overlap of all pairs. Behavior Therapy, 40(4), 357-367. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.beth.2008.10.006 Parker, R. I., Vannest, K. J., & Davis, J. L., (2011). Effect size in Single-Case Research: A Review of Nine Non-overlap Techniques. Behavior Modifications, 35(4), 302-322. https://doi.org/10.1177/0145445511399147 Psyridou, M., Tolvanen, A., Lerkkanen, M.-K., Poikkeus, A.-M., & Torppa M. (2020). Longitudinal Stability of Reading Difficulties: Examining the Effects of Measurement Error, Cut-Offs, and Buffer Zones in Identification. Front. Psychol.,10(2841), 1-14. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02841 Schneider, W., Blanke, I., Faust, V., & Küspert, P. (2011). Würzburger Leise Leseprobe – Revision [Würzburg silent reading sample] (WLLP-R): Ein Gruppentest für die Grundschule. Hogrefe. Schulte-Körne, G. (2010). The prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of dyslexia. Deutsches Ärzteblatt International, 107, 718-727. https://doi.org/10.3238/arztebl.2010.0718 Seifert, S., Paleczek, L., Schwab, S., & Gasteiger-Klicpera, B. (2017). Grazer Wortschatztest [Graz vocabulary test](GraWo). Hogrefe. Universität zu Köln (2022). Lubo-les: Sozial-emotionales Präventionsprogramm für Kinder mit Leseschwierigkeiten. https://lubo-les.uni-koeln.de/ Walter, J. (2010). Lernfortschrittsdiagnostik Lesen: Ein curriculumbasiertes Verfahren [learning progress diagnostics reading](LDL). Hogrefe. Weiß, R. H., & Osterland, J. (2013). Grundintelligenztest Skala 1 Revision [basic intelligence test scale 1 revision] (CFT 1-R). Hogrefe.