What Research Reveals About Reading and Comprehension for Fluent and Disfluent Students

• The Nations Report Card (2019) reported that 35% of fourth-grade students are proficient readers (National Assessment of Educational Progress, 2022).

• The National Panel’s (2000) framework has been prevalent in student textbooks for reading teaching techniques for the past 20 years. Literacy instruction for reading comprehension instructional strategy trends has remained consistent over the past 20 years.

• Barron et al. (2018) maintained that the No Child Left Behind Act (2001) and Common Core Standards (2010) initiative had limited impact as numerous learners continue to fall behind in all aspects of reading, specifically comprehension.

• According to Duke et al. (2021), students with low reading comprehension and high decoding abilities are significant evidence that fundamental word reading is insufficient for reading to understand.

• Many unresolved questions about comprehension development were left unresolved by the National Reading Panel, yet the National Panel’s framework remains widely used across the United States ( Konza, 2014; Shanahan, 2005).

• The educational discipline must assess how educators instruct reading and potential changes in comprehension instruction across grade levels and content areas (Camilli et al., 2008).

• Ceylan and Baydik's (2018) findings supported comprehension challenges for fluent and disfluent readers.

• Various literacy instruction narratives exist, and a lack of literacy instruction has convoluted the teacher’s understanding of reading instruction. As a result, educators are underprepared and self-diagnosed (Ergen & Cevat, 2018).

References

Barron, E. R., Rupley, W. H., Paige, D. D., Nichols, W. D., Nichols, J., & Lumbreras, R. (2018). Middle school teachers’ knowledge and use of comprehension strategies in discipline instruction. International Journal of Literacy, Teaching, and Educational Research. https://doi.org/10.26803/ijlter.17.10.1

Camilli, G., Kim, S. H., & Vargas, S. (2008). A response to Steubing et al., “Effects of systematic phonics instruction is practically significant”: The origins of the national reading panel. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 16(15). https://doi.org/10.14507/epaa.v16n16.2008

Ceylan, M., & Baydik, B. (2018). Reading skills of students who are poor readers in different text genres. Cypriot Journal of Educational Science. 13(2), 422–435. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1183246.pdf

Duke, N. K., Ward, A. E., & Pearson, D. P. (2021). The science of reading comprehension instruction. The Reading Teacher, 74(6), 663–672. https://doi.org/10.1002/trtr.1993

Konza, D. (2014). Teaching reading: Why the “Fab Five” should be the “Big Six.” Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 39(12). https://doi.org/10.14221/ajte.2014v39n12.10

Shanahan, T. (2005). The national reading panel report: Practical advice for teachers. Learning Point Associates. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED489535.pdf