Failure Free Reading
Study: Torgesen et al. (2006)

Failure Free Reading (FFR) is a research based, scientifically validated diagnostic/prescriptive reading intervention documented in numerous quality design research studies to improve reading outcomes for students who have not responded to regular and/or remedial reading instruction. The program’s unique combination of scaffolds enable the lowest level readers to immediately experience success with age- and grade level- appropriate passages regardless of current reading ability. FFR’s approach has consistently been shown to rapidly build comprehension, vocabulary and fluency, along with efficacy, confidence and esteem. Multi-sensory, and based on intensive language development, the print-based FFR methodology was developed in the late 1980’s by program author Dr. Joseph Lockavitch for special education and at-risk students, along with other “treatment resisters” (including those with language and/or audio phonological deficits). The software component was added in the 1990s. Over the years, numerous studies involving FFR as treatment (including 8 published studies) reported rapid and significant gains in comprehension and other measures. For example, two of the published studies reported a more than 40% reduction in the numbers of students who, post treatment, would have no longer qualified for special education services based on IQ-Achievement discrepancies. Unfortunately, neither of those studies incorporated control groups so they are not being submitted as part of this response. However, in part because of FFR’s documented evidence in reducing the number of students unnecessarily placed in special education, the publisher believes FFR is an appropriate Response to Intervention (RtI) program for Tier ll and Tier lll level students performing in the bottom 15 percent (below Basic) on standardized reading tests. FFR can rapidly move Level 1 English Language Learners (ELLs), learning disabled, cognitively challenged, at-risk, and treatment resisters up the proficiency scale, to levels 2 & 3, so that they can participate in and benefit from core and remedial instruction. In support, the What Works the National Reading Research Clearing House (WWC) reported an improvement index average of 10 percentile points (Power4Kids, 2006 – one of the studies submitted as part of this response) for comprehension measures and concludes that the average effect size across the two comprehension outcomes was “large enough to be considered substantively important,” though it was not statistically significant (note: Power4Kids focused on striving readers and not the typical group of bottom 15% performing students that FFR targets). In the interest of “collecting more evidence on the program’s effects” (see attached Narrative document in PDF format), MDRC of NYC applied for an Institute of Education Sciences (IES) grant in June 2009 to fund a two year national validation randomized trial study (goal 3 reading topic) to involve a total sample of approximately 1,200 grades 3,4, & 5 students in 25 schools. The authors of Power4Kids (Torgesen et al., 2007) later reported the following outcomes in their one year follow up evaluation (note: Note: for students in the third-grade cohort, FFR (the only word level plus comprehension program) had an impact on one measure of phonemic decoding, two of the three measures of word reading accuracy and fluency, and one measure of comprehension: • Alphabetics: FFR had a statistically significant effect on one measure of phonemic decoding and one measure of word reading accuracy. The average effect size across the Word Attack was statistically significant and large enough one year later to be considered substantively important according to the WWC criteria (that is, an effect size of .33). In addition, the authors found statistically significant and large effect sizes to occur with a significant number of their 3rd grade subgroups: Students with High Baseline Word Attack Scores, Students with Low Vocabulary, and Students Eligible for Free and Reduced Lunch (effect sizes of : .62, .46 and.45 respectively). The average effect size for the Test of Word Reading Efficiency (TOWRE) for Students Eligible for Free and Reduced Lunch was statistically significant and/or large enough one year later to be considered substantively important according to the WWC criteria (that is, an effect size of .24). • Fluency. One outcome in this domain (the Oral Reading Fluency test) was reported and the authors reported a statistically significant effect for FFR. While the overall average effect size of .20 was not large enough to be considered substantively important according to WCC criteria, the authors reported that FFR did have a statistically significant effect and/or large enough effective size to be considered substantively important for two 3rd grade cohorts: those with High Baseline Word Attack Scores, and those with Low Vocabulary (effect size of .25 and .27 respectively). • Comprehension. Two outcomes were reported for this domain (WRMT–R: Passage Comprehension subtest and Group Reading Assessment and Diagnostic Evaluation (GRADE): Passage Comprehension subtest) and again reported statistically significant effects similar to those found in the first year of the initial year report (Torgesen et al., 2006). FFR did have a statistically significant effect and/or large enough effective size in the Passage Comprehension subtest to be statistically significant and/or considered substantively important for five 3rd grade cohorts: High Baseline Word Attack, High Vocabulary, Low Baseline Word Attack with High Vocabulary, High Baseline Word Attack with High Vocabulary and Students Not Eligible for Free and Reduced Lunch (effect sizes of: .40, .36, .26, .50,and .51 respectively). The authors also reported that Failure Free Reading did have a statistically significant effect and/or large enough effective size in the Group Reading Assessment and Diagnostic Evaluation (GRADE) subtest to be statistically significant and/or considered substantively important for four 3rd grade cohorts: High Baseline Word Attack, Low Baseline Word Attack with High Vocabulary, Low Baseline Word Attack with High Vocabulary and Students Eligible for Free and Reduced Lunch (effect sizes of: .35, .42, .53, and .37 respectively). Unlike most other commercial reading interventions, FFR combines word level instruction with reading comprehension/vocabulary instruction. The program does not incorporate phonics or phonemic decoding instruction, attempt to remediate deficits, or “teach skills to mastery”. Instead, FFR’s unique non-phonic methodology compensates for the environmental, language and audio-phonological deficits that prevent so many students from reading age-level texts with fluency and comprehension success, and developing grade level vocabularies. FFR is less concerned with etiology (why a student is a “non-reader”) and more what the utilization of effective instructional strategies found to impact non-readers, such as the use of multiple exposures within multiple contexts (McCormick,1994). Students who are engaged in highly sequenced cumulative learning opportunities presented to them in a consistent multi-contextual format show significant growth. The program employs multiple exposures within multiple contexts through the use of teacher-guided language/literacy lessons, talking software and pencil & paper reinforcement activities. Included in the program are thematic Lexile-based reading Illustrated Booklets, Instructional Readers, flashcards and take home parent communication reports. The lessons in the FFR Elementary, Secondary and Life Skills Solutions – and Rapid Response to Reading Intervention offerings – are all based on the same highly structured pedagogy. Each lesson takes 45-60 minutes to deliver, and is taught in a one-to-one or small group format. Each day, the instruction begins with scripted direct teacher-led lesson that involves five steps: previewing material, listening to the instructor read, answering factual, inferential, and leading questions, reading the material, and reviewing the material. Following the teacher-led lesson, students complete a talking software session, and then pencil & paper activities, both of which are designed to extend and reinforce the teacher lesson. FFR materials are highly controlled semantically and syntactically, and provide students with sufficient repetition regardless of individual need. All content is age and developmentally appropriate content. Students rapidly acquire Dolch words and EDL Core Vocabulary in the context of simple stories they can access and relate to. The methodology is designed to immediately enable students to experience success, maximal time on task, and a sense of challenge. As a result, even secondary age “non-readers” become capable of rapidly building self-efficacy and esteem, and experiencing success and independent engagement. FFR presents these age appropriate materials within a multi-sensory format using practices based on direct instruction, scaffolding, repeated readings and meta-cognitive strategies. More importantly, Failure Free Reading has created instructional materials which incorporate the principles of cumulative learning (McCormick, 1994), and stress the therapeutic necessity of (1.) repetition within multiple instructional contexts (Gates, 1930, Hargis et. al., 1992, McCormick, 1994), (2.) control for syntax and semantics (Harper, 1979, Wigg and Semel,1980), and (3.) providing immediate performance feedback. Key to the efficacy of FFR is its instructional integration, cognitive chunking and multiple exposures within multiple contexts. Assessment is on-going and utilizes Lexile-based diagnostic prescriptive software, paper and pencil criterion referenced CBM tests measuring discrete growth in: word recognition, comprehension, fluency and changes in attitude and behavior as seen by the student, parent and teacher. Lessons and tasks within each unit frequently involve concepts from more than one strand and actively explore their interconnections and relationships. For example, each lesson presented within aThematic Series is a logical extension of the lessons that preceded it. Students are taught one paragraph at a time. Students learn the first unit on the first day, review the first unit on the second day before being introduced to the new unit for that day. On the third day, the instructor reviews days one and two before introducing the new material for day three. This process repeats until the students have mastered the entire theme. This abundant repetition in a logical and meaning based environment is what sets FFR material apart. Every single task includes teacher guided questions designed to produce deductive and inductive thinking strategies . Students are also actively engage in higher-order thinking activities to promote knowledge and growth in areas such as vocabulary and syntax. Finally, FFR is taught by certified and non-certified instructors in regular classrooms, extended day programs, pull-out situations, and lab settings. For additional information, visit www.failurefreeonline.com, or contact the program author Dr. Joseph Lockavitch at Failure Free Reading. 1-800-542-2170.