Read Naturally
Study: Heistad (2005)

Summary

The Read Naturally strategy develops fluency, supports vocabulary, and promotes comprehension by combining the research-based strategies of teacher modeling, repeated reading, and progress monitoring. A student works on fluency at his or her own pace in an appropriate level of material. The student masters a story by reading along with audio and then practicing the story until he or she can read it accurately and with expression at a goal rate. The student tracks progress on a graph.ck here to enter text.

Target Grades:
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12
Target Populations:
  • Students with learning disabilities
  • English language learners
  • Any student at risk for academic failure
Area(s) of Focus:
  • Phonics/word study
  • Comprehension
  • Fluency
  • Vocabulary
Where to Obtain:
Candyce Ihnot/ Read Naturally
2945 Lone Oak Dr, Suite 190, St. Paul, MN 55121
(651) 452-4085
www.readnaturally.com
Initial Cost:
$129.00 per level
Replacement Cost:
Contact vendor for pricing details.

Encore $129 per level; 30 seats of Read Live $599; Network Plus Software levels $399 each Read Live is a yearly subscription; Encore and Network Plus software one time purchase.

Staff Qualified to Administer Include:
  • Special Education Teacher
  • General Education Teacher
  • Reading Specialist
  • Math Specialist
  • EL Specialist
  • Interventionist
  • Student Support Services Personnel (e.g., counselor, social worker, school psychologist, etc.)
Training Requirements:
1 day of training

Read Naturally provides live full day seminars, video workshops and self study training books.


Over the past 21 years, the manuals have been updated and revised numerous times based on teacher input.

Access to Technical Support:
Professional educators and technical support staff are available five days a week to support teachers and technical staff.
Recommended Administration Formats Include:
  • Individual students
  • Small group of students
Minimum Number of Minutes Per Session:
30
Minimum Number of Sessions Per Week:
3
Minimum Number of Weeks:
Detailed Implementation Manual or Instructions Available:
Yes
Is Technology Required?

Program Information

Descriptive Information

Please provide a description of program, including intended use:

The Read Naturally strategy develops fluency, supports vocabulary, and promotes comprehension by combining the research-based strategies of teacher modeling, repeated reading, and progress monitoring. A student works on fluency at his or her own pace in an appropriate level of material. The student masters a story by reading along with audio and then practicing the story until he or she can read it accurately and with expression at a goal rate. The student tracks progress on a graph.ck here to enter text.

The program is intended for use in the following age(s) and/or grade(s).

not selected Age 0-3
not selected Age 3-5
not selected Kindergarten
selected First grade
selected Second grade
selected Third grade
selected Fourth grade
selected Fifth grade
selected Sixth grade
selected Seventh grade
selected Eighth grade
selected Ninth grade
selected Tenth grade
selected Eleventh grade
selected Twelth grade


The program is intended for use with the following groups.

not selected Students with disabilities only
selected Students with learning disabilities
not selected Students with intellectual disabilities
not selected Students with emotional or behavioral disabilities
selected English language learners
selected Any student at risk for academic failure
not selected Any student at risk for emotional and/or behavioral difficulties
not selected Other
If other, please describe:

ACADEMIC INTERVENTION: Please indicate the academic area of focus.

Early Literacy

not selected Print knowledge/awareness
not selected Alphabet knowledge
not selected Phonological awareness
not selected Phonological awarenessEarly writing
not selected Early decoding abilities
not selected Other

If other, please describe:

Language

not selected Expressive and receptive vocabulary
not selected Grammar
not selected Syntax
not selected Listening comprehension
not selected Other
If other, please describe:

Reading

not selected Phonological awareness
selected Phonics/word study
selected Comprehension
selected Fluency
selected Vocabulary
not selected Spelling
not selected Other
If other, please describe:

Mathematics

not selected Computation
not selected Concepts and/or word problems
not selected Whole number arithmetic
not selected Comprehensive: Includes computation/procedures, problem solving, and mathematical concepts
not selected Algebra
not selected Fractions, decimals (rational number)
not selected Geometry and measurement
not selected Other
If other, please describe:

Writing

not selected Handwriting
not selected Spelling
not selected Sentence construction
not selected Planning and revising
not selected Other
If other, please describe:

BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTION: Please indicate the behavior area of focus.

Externalizing Behavior

not selected Physical Aggression
not selected Verbal Threats
not selected Property Destruction
not selected Noncompliance
not selected High Levels of Disengagement
not selected Disruptive Behavior
not selected Social Behavior (e.g., Peer interactions, Adult interactions)
not selected Other
If other, please describe:

Internalizing Behavior

not selected Depression
not selected Anxiety
not selected Social Difficulties (e.g., withdrawal)
not selected School Phobia
not selected Other
If other, please describe:

Acquisition and cost information

Where to obtain:

Address
2945 Lone Oak Dr, Suite 190, St. Paul, MN 55121
Phone Number
(651) 452-4085
Website
www.readnaturally.com

Initial cost for implementing program:

Cost
$129.00
Unit of cost
level

Replacement cost per unit for subsequent use:

Cost
Unit of cost
Duration of license

Additional cost information:

Describe basic pricing plan and structure of the program. Also, provide information on what is included in the published program, as well as what is not included but required for implementation (e.g., computer and/or internet access)

Encore $129 per level; 30 seats of Read Live $599; Network Plus Software levels $399 each Read Live is a yearly subscription; Encore and Network Plus software one time purchase.

Program Specifications

Setting for which the program is designed.

selected Individual students
selected Small group of students
not selected BI ONLY: A classroom of students

If group-delivered, how many students compose a small group?

  

Program administration time

Minimum number of minutes per session
30
Minimum number of sessions per week
3
Minimum number of weeks
not selected N/A (implemented until effective)

If intervention program is intended to occur over less frequently than 60 minutes a week for approximately 8 weeks, justify the level of intensity:

Does the program include highly specified teacher manuals or step by step instructions for implementation?
Yes

BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTION: Is the program affiliated with a broad school- or class-wide management program?

If yes, please identify and describe the broader school- or class-wide management program:

Does the program require technology?
Yes

If yes, what technology is required to implement your program?
not selected Computer or tablet
not selected Internet connection
not selected Other technology (please specify)

If your program requires additional technology not listed above, please describe the required technology and the extent to which it is combined with teacher small-group instruction/intervention:
The Encore version requires a CD player. The software version is standalone software CD or a school network version. Read Live is an online web based version.

Training

How many people are needed to implement the program ?

Is training for the instructor or interventionist required?
Yes
If yes, is the necessary training free or at-cost?

Describe the time required for instructor or interventionist training:
1 day of training

Describe the format and content of the instructor or interventionist training:
Read Naturally provides live full day seminars, video workshops and self study training books.

What types or professionals are qualified to administer your program?

selected Special Education Teacher
selected General Education Teacher
selected Reading Specialist
selected Math Specialist
selected EL Specialist
selected Interventionist
selected Student Support Services Personnel (e.g., counselor, social worker, school psychologist, etc.)
not selected Applied Behavior Analysis (ABA) Therapist or Board Certified Behavior Analyst (BCBA)
not selected Paraprofessional
not selected Other

If other, please describe:

Does the program assume that the instructor or interventionist has expertise in a given area?
Yes   

If yes, please describe: 

Reading

Are training manuals and materials available?
Yes

Describe how the training manuals or materials were field-tested with the target population of instructors or interventionist and students:
Over the past 21 years, the manuals have been updated and revised numerous times based on teacher input.

Do you provide fidelity of implementation guidance such as a checklist for implementation in your manual?

Can practitioners obtain ongoing professional and technical support?
Yes

If yes, please specify where/how practitioners can obtain support:

Professional educators and technical support staff are available five days a week to support teachers and technical staff.

Summary of Evidence Base

Please identify, to the best of your knowledge, all the research studies that have been conducted to date supporting the efficacy of your program, including studies currently or previously submitted to NCII for review. Please provide citations only (in APA format); do not include any descriptive information on these studies. NCII staff will also conduct a search to confirm that the list you provide is accurate.

Christ, T. J. & Davie, J. (2009). Empirical evaluation of Read Naturally effects: A randomized control trial (RCT). (unpublished manuscript). University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN.

Hasbrouk, J. E., Ihnot, C., & Rogers, G. H. (1999). Read Naturally: A strategy to increase oral reading fluency. Reading Research and Instruction (39), 1, 27-38.        

Heistad, D. (2004). The effects of Read Naturally on fluency and reading comprehension: A supplemental service study (four-school study). (unpublished manuscript). Minneapolis, MN.     

Heistad, D. (2004). The effects of Read Naturally on fluency and reading comprehension: A supplemental service study (two-school study). (unpublished manuscript). Minneapolis, MN.                   

Heistad, D. (2004). The effects of Read Naturally on grade 3 reading: A study in the Minneapolis public schools. (unpublished manuscript). Minneapolis, MN.                                                                                                                                                      

Study Information

Study Citations

Heistad, D. The Effects of READ NATURALLY on Fluency and Reading Comprehension: A Supplemental Service Intervention. To obtain: David Heistad, Ph.D., Executive Director, Research, Evaluation and Assessment, Minneapolis Public Schools, 807 NE Broadway, Mpls. MN 55413, Ph: 612-668-0570 Or Read Naturally, Inc., 2945 Lone Oak Drive, Suite 190, St. Paul, MN 55121, www.readnaturally.com www.oneminutereader.com, 651-452-4085, 800-788-4085

Participants Empty Bobble

Describe how students were selected to participate in the study:
Schools were recruited from among Minneapolis Public Schools to volunteer for the study. Four schools agreed to participate. Students were selected for participation based on the recommendations of school-based teams and/or parent requests/nominations. The students who were selected were considered to be “not on course” in reading achievement and were identified because the teams believed that they would not achievement proficiency as measured by the MN Comprehensive Assessment, which was administered in the spring of Grade 3 and Grade 5. Ninety-six students across grades were nominated to participate in the program condition (Read Naturally) and 78 of those students were included all analysis. The 18 students excluded for analysis were missing either pre-test or post-test data. An additional 78 students were identified from other Minneapolis Schools with the same AYP status. A match procedure was used to identify and select students based on pre-test and demographic variables. Students were matched first on NALT pretest score from spring of 2003 (i.e. matches needed to be within 3 scale score points of the target student) and then by the following demographic factors: 1) Grade 2) English Language Learner status 3) Special Education status 4) Free or reduced price lunch 5) Racial/Ethnic category 6) Home Language 7) Sex Perfect matches of RN and control students were accomplished for 73 (93%) of the pairs, 3 (4%) pairs were matched on 7 of 8 variables, and 2 pairs (3%) were matched on 6 of 8 variables.

Describe how students were identified as being at risk for academic failure (AI) or as having emotional or behavioral difficulties (BI):
Students in the program conditions were selected for participation based on the recommendations of school-based teams and/or parent requests/nominations. The students who were selected were considered to be “not on course” in reading achievement and were identified because the teams believed that they would not achieve proficiency as measured by the MN Comprehensive Assessment, which was administered in the spring of Grade 3 and Grade 5. Students in the control (business as usual) condition were selected as a matched sample from the available population in Minneapolis Public Schools.

ACADEMIC INTERVENTION: What percentage of participants were at risk, as measured by one or more of the following criteria:
  • below the 30th percentile on local or national norm, or
  • identified disability related to the focus of the intervention?
%

BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTION: What percentage of participants were at risk, as measured by one or more of the following criteria:
  • emotional disability label,
  • placed in an alternative school/classroom,
  • non-responsive to Tiers 1 and 2, or
  • designation of severe problem behaviors on a validated scale or through observation?
%

Specify which condition is the submitted intervention:
Read Naturally fluency intervention The first section of READ NATURALLY instruction involves a student choosing a story from his/her individual instructional level and making a prediction. The student then writes what s/he already knows about the subject of the story. Next, the student takes a “cold timing” on the passage where s/he reads for one minute and records difficult words. The student then graphs the number of words read correctly per minute. During the next component of instruction the student reads along with prerecorded audio of a fluent reader on the same passage three consecutive times, with each reading slightly faster than the previous reading. The student then reads the story independently without audio support. The student sets the timer for one minute for each reading and practices the passage several times until the predetermined rate (i.e. words read correctly) is reached. The final part of the process occurs once the target fluency is reached. The student then answers multiple choice and constructed response questions that pertain to the story. Passages at each grade level include non-fiction themes. The questions tap inferential and literal passage comprehension. After answering the questions, the student retells the story in writing. The entire process is monitored by the instructor with corrective feedback and guided practice provided as needed.

Specify which condition is the control condition:
No treatment, business as usual.

If you have a third, competing condition, in addition to your control and intervention condition, identify what the competing condition is (data from this competing condition will not be used):

Using the tables that follow, provide data demonstrating comparability of the program group and control group in terms of demographics.

Grade Level

Demographic Program
Number
Control
Number
Effect Size: Cox Index
for Binary Differences
Age less than 1
Age 1
Age 2
Age 3
Age 4
Age 5
Kindergarten
Grade 1
Grade 2
Grade 3 23 23 0.00
Grade 4 33 33 0.00
Grade 5 22 22 0.00
Grade 6
Grade 7
Grade 8
Grade 9
Grade 10
Grade 11
Grade 12

Race–Ethnicity

Demographic Program
Number
Control
Number
Effect Size: Cox Index
for Binary Differences
African American 28 30 0.05
American Indian 4 4 0.00
Asian/Pacific Islander
Hispanic 20 20 0.00
White 13 13 0.00
Other

Socioeconomic Status

Demographic Program
Number
Control
Number
Effect Size: Cox Index
for Binary Differences
Subsidized Lunch 50 50 0.00
No Subsidized Lunch 28 28 0.00

Disability Status

Demographic Program
Number
Control
Number
Effect Size: Cox Index
for Binary Differences
Speech-Language Impairments
Learning Disabilities 9 9 0.00
Behavior Disorders
Emotional Disturbance
Intellectual Disabilities
Other
Not Identified With a Disability

ELL Status

Demographic Program
Number
Control
Number
Effect Size: Cox Index
for Binary Differences
English Language Learner 28 28 0.00
Not English Language Learner 50 50 0.00

Gender

Demographic Program
Number
Control
Number
Effect Size: Cox Index
for Binary Differences
Female 34 37 0.07
Male 44 41 0.07

Mean Effect Size

0.01

For any substantively (e.g., effect size ≥ 0.25 for pretest or demographic differences) or statistically significant (e.g., p < 0.05) pretest differences between groups in the descriptions below, please describe the extent to which these differences are related to the impact of the treatment. For example, if analyses were conducted to determine that outcomes from this study are due to the intervention and not demographic characteristics, please describe the results of those analyses here.

Design Half Bobble

What method was used to determine students' placement in treatment/control groups?
Systematic
Please describe the assignment method or the process for defining treatment/comparison groups.
Each student receiving READ NATURALLY services was matched with a student not receiving READ NATURALLY (RN) services. Students were matched first on NALT pretest score from spring of 2003 (i.e. matches needed to be within 3 scale score points of the target student) by the following demographic factors: Pretest Score, Grade, English Language Learner status, Special Education status, Free or reduced price lunch, Racial/Ethnic category, Home Language, Sex, Birth Date (to break ties). Matching was accomplished by sorting the merged file of RN students with the entire grade 3-5 population of students. The file was sorted hierarchically by the demographic factors above. The best match to the RN student was typically the student directly above or below in the record. The number of variables was computed and if the student directly above and directly below the RN student had the same number of matches, the student birth date closest to the RN student was used to break the tie. Perfect matches of RN and control students were accomplished for 73 (93%) of the pairs, 3 (4%) pairs were matched on 7 of 8 variables, and 2 pairs (3%) were matched on 6 of 8 variables.

What was the unit of assignment?
Students
If other, please specify:

Please describe the unit of assignment:
study used matched sample by student

What unit(s) were used for primary data analysis?
not selected Schools
not selected Teachers
selected Students
not selected Classes
not selected Other
If other, please specify:

Please describe the unit(s) used for primary data analysis:

Fidelity of Implementation Empty Bobble

How was the program delivered?
not selected Individually
selected Small Group
not selected Classroom

If small group, answer the following:

Average group size
5
Minimum group size
5
Maximum group size
10

What was the duration of the intervention (If duration differed across participants, settings, or behaviors, describe for each.)?

Weeks
30.00
Sessions per week
4.00
Duration of sessions in minutes
30.00
What were the background, experience, training, and ongoing support of the instructors or interventionists?
One lead teacher in each school site was provided training from the vendor, which was a standard 6-hour training.

Describe when and how fidelity of treatment information was obtained.
Three visits from a trained Reading Fluency Monitor (RFM) assessor were made during the year. While collecting the RFMs the assessor made informal observations of the degree of student engagement and use of RN materials.

What were the results on the fidelity-of-treatment implementation measure?
Feedback was provided to teachers to ensure fidelity, but data were not collected and analyzed.

Was the fidelity measure also used in control classrooms?

Measures and Results

Measures Targeted : Full Bobble
Measures Broader : Dash

Study measures are classified as targeted, broader, or administrative data according to the following definitions:

  • Targeted measures
    Assess outcomes, such as competencies or skills that the program was directly targeted to improve.
    • In the academic domain, targeted measures typically are not the very items taught but rather novel items structured similarly to the content addressed in the program. For example, if a program taught word-attack skills, a targeted measure would be decoding of pseudo words. If a program taught comprehension of cause-effect passages, a targeted measure would be answering questions about cause-effect passages structured similarly to those used during intervention, but not including the very passages used for intervention.
    • In the behavioral domain, targeted measures evaluate aspects of external or internal behavior the program was directly targeted to improve and are operationally defined.
  • Broader measures
    Assess outcomes that are related to the competencies or skills targeted by the program but not directly taught in the program.
    • In the academic domain, if a program taught word-level reading skill, a broader measure would be answering questions about passages the student reads. If a program taught calculation skill, a broader measure would be solving word problems that require the same kinds of calculation skill taught in the program.
    • In the behavioral domain, if a program taught a specific skill like on-task behavior in one classroom, a broader measure would be academic performance in that setting or on-task behavior in another setting.
  • Administrative data measures apply only to behavioral intervention tools and are measures such as office discipline referrals (ODRs) and graduation rates which do not have psychometric properties as do other, more traditional targeted or broader measures.

Click here for more information on effect size.


What populations are you submitting outcome data for?
not selected Full sample
not selected Students at or below the 20th percentile
not selected English language learners
not selected Racial/ethnic subgroups
not selected Economically disadvantaged students (low socioeconomic status)
Targeted Measure Reverse Coded? Reliability Relevance Exposure
Broader Measure Reverse Coded? Reliability Relevance Exposure
Administrative Data Measure Reverse Coded? Relevance

Posttest Data

Targeted Measures (Full Sample)

Measure Sample Type Effect Size P

Broader Measures (Full Sample)

Measure Sample Type Effect Size P

Administrative Measures (Full Sample)

Measure Sample Type Effect Size P

Targeted Measures (Subgroups)

Measure Sample Type Effect Size P

Broader Measures (Subgroups)

Measure Sample Type Effect Size P

Administrative Measures (Subgroups)

Measure Sample Type Effect Size P
For any substantively (e.g., effect size ≥ 0.25 for pretest or demographic differences) or statistically significant (e.g., p < 0.05) pretest differences, please describe the extent to which these differences are related to the impact of the treatment. For example, if analyses were conducted to determine that outcomes from this study are due to the intervention and not pretest characteristics, please describe the results of those analyses here.
Please explain any missing data or instances of measures with incomplete pre- or post-test data.
If you have excluded a variable or data that are reported in the study being submitted, explain the rationale for exclusion:
Describe the analyses used to determine whether the intervention produced changes in student outcomes:
Ran a series of paired sample t-tests and a chi-square analysis of Level III proficiency on the state test (MCA)

Additional Research

Is the program reviewed by WWC or E-ESSA?
WWC & E-ESSA
Summary of WWC / E-ESSA Findings :

What Works Clearinghouse Review

Adolescent Literacy Evidence Protocol

Effectiveness: Read Naturally® was found to have potentially positive effects on general literacy achievement for adolescent readers.

Studies Reviewed: 1 study meets standards out of 4 studies total

Full Report

Beginning Reading Protocol

Effectiveness: Read Naturally® was found to have no discernible effects on fluency and reading comprehension.

Studies Reviewed: 5 studies meet standards out of 11 studies total

Full Report

English Language Learners Protocol

Effectiveness: Read Naturally® was found to have no discernible effects on reading achievement and English language development of elementary school English language learners.

Studies Reviewed: 2 studies meet standards out of 3 studies total

Full Report

Students with Learning Disabilities Protocol

Effectiveness: Read Naturally® was found to have no discernible effects on reading fluency and potentially positive effects on writing for students with learning disabilities.

Studies Reviewed: 2 studies meet standards out of 3 studies total

Full Report

 

Evidence for ESSA

No studies met inclusion requirements.

How many additional research studies are potentially eligible for NCII review?
6
Citations for Additional Research Studies :

Arvans, R. (2010). Improving reading fluency and comprehension in elementary students using Read Naturally. Dissertation Abstracts International, 71(01B), 74-649.

Chenault, B., Thomson, J., Abbott, R. D., & Berninger, V. W. (2006). Effects of prior attention training on child dyslexics’ response to composition instruction. Developmental Neuropsychology, 29(1), 243–260.

Denton, C. A., Anthony, J. L., Parker, R., & Hasbrouck, J. E. (2004). Effects of two tutoring programs on the English reading development of Spanish-English bilingual students. The Elementary School Journal, 104(4), 289–305.

Hancock, C. M. (2002). Accelerating reading trajectories: The effects of dynamic research-based instruction. Dissertation Abstracts International, 63(6), 2139A. (UMI No. 3055690)

Kemp, S. C. (2006). Teaching to Read Naturally: Examination of a fluency training program for third grade students (Doctoral dissertation, University of California, Irvine and University of California, Los Angeles, 2006). Dissertation Abstracts International, 67(7A), 95-2447.

Mesa, C. L. (2004). Effect of Read Naturally software on reading fluency and comprehension. Unpublished master’s thesis, Piedmont College, Demorest, GA.

Disclaimer

Most tools and programs evaluated by the NCII are branded products which have been submitted by the companies, organizations, or individuals that disseminate these products. These entities supply the textual information shown above, but not the ratings accompanying the text. NCII administrators and members of our Technical Review Committees have reviewed the content on this page, but NCII cannot guarantee that this information is free from error or reflective of recent changes to the product. Tools and programs have the opportunity to be updated annually or upon request.