Close
Reading Recovery has been widely researched nationally and internationally. This is crucial to understanding the wider impact of intervention: it enables us to learn lessons from the past and sharpens our awareness and monitoring of the present, in order to make cost effective decisions for the future.
Research also helps refine and improve literacy intervention generally, examining issues ranging from effectiveness and cost-effectiveness, to self-esteem and continued progress. In short, research enables policymakers to have a better understanding of Reading Recovery's multiple facets. Below, we have categorised research publications based on the questions which are most commonly asked when considering whether to implement Reading Recovery.
- Effectiveness
Research into effectiveness assesses whether an intervention works in the field and can be integrated into the existing education system. There is substantial evidence evaluating Reading Recovery’s effectiveness with the lowest-attaining pupils in a wide range of educational contexts. Here are the most recent.
Hurry, J., Fridkin, L. and Holliman, A. J. (2022). Reading intervention at age 6: Long-term effects of Reading Recovery in the UK on qualifications and support at age 16. British Educational Research Journal Vol 48, Issue 1.Gourlay, G., & Harmey, S. (2020). A Reading Recovery Comparison Study: Supporting a New Implementation in Scotland. Journal of Reading Recovery, 20 (1), 59 - 70
Hurry, J. and Fridkin, L. (2018), The impact of Reading Recovery ten years after intervention’, UCL Institute of Education.
D'Agostino, J.V., & Harmey, S.J. (2016), An International Meta- Analysis of Reading Recovery, Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk (JESPAR), Vol 21, NO.1, 29-46.
Raban, B., (2016), 'Reading Recovery or Not', Australian Literacy Educators' Association.
Consortium for Policy Research in Education (CPRE), (2013, 2014, 2016). Evaluation of the i3 Scale-up of Reading Recovery reports.
Burroughs-Lange, S. and Douetil, J. (2006) Evaluation of Reading Recovery in London Schools Every Child A Reader 2005-2006.pdf University of London: Institute of Education.
Burroughs-Lange, S. and Douetil, J (2007) Literacy progress of young children from poor urban settings: A Reading Recovery comparison study. Literacy Teaching and Learning, 12 (1), pp 19-46.
Burroughs-Lange, S. (2008) Comparison of Literacy Progress of Young Children in London Schools - a Reading Recovery Follow up Study. University of London: Institute of Education.
You can access more research papers from our archives.
- Continued progress
The goal of Reading Recovery is that children not only catch up with their peers but sustain those gains, remaining in the average band of literacy attainment. Many research and evaluation studies demonstrate that Reading Recovery students maintain and improve their gains in the years following Reading Recovery.
Hurry, J., Fridkin, L. and Holliman, A. J. (2022). Reading intervention at age 6: Long-term effects of Reading Recovery in the UK on qualifications and support at age 16. British Educational Research Journal Vol 48, Issue 1.Hurry, J. and Fridkin, L. (2018), The impact of Reading Recovery ten years after intervention’, UCL Institute of Education.
Hurry, J. (2012) 'The impact of Reading Recovery five years after intervention'. University of London: Institute of Education.
Hurry, J. and Holliman, A. (2009) 'The impact of Reading Recovery three years after intervention'. University of London: Institute of Education.
Burroughs-Lange, S. (2008) Comparison of Literacy Progress of Young Children in London Schools - a Reading Recovery Follow up Study. University of London: Institute of Education.Burroughs-Lange, S. and Douetil, J (2007) 'Literacy progress of young children from poor urban settings: A Reading Recovery comparison study'. Literacy Teaching and Learning, 12 (1), pp 19-46.
Burroughs-Lange, S. and Douetil, J. (2006) Evaluation of Reading Recovery in London Schools Every Child A Reader 2005-2006.pdf University of London: Institute of Education.
You can access more research papers from our archives.
- Cost-effectiveness
Given the competing demands on education budgets, literacy interventions need to be cost-effective. No analysis has compared the different types of implementation for interventions (for example, small-group instruction with one-to-one instruction).
In Reading Recovery, the long-term benefits of literacy achievement may significantly outweigh the short-term cost of instruction and teacher preparation. By intervening early, Reading Recovery reduces later costs in special education, later catch-up programmes, and has lasting effects. The local cost of providing Reading Recovery services for 12 to 20 weeks will be substantially less than the future costs of meeting the needs of large number of pupils who cannot access the curriculum.
Pro Bono Economics (2018), ‘Assessing the impact of the Reading Recovery programme. An economic evaluation’.
KPMG Foundation (2013), KPMG Foundation Impact Report.
Schwartz, R.M. Schmitt, M.C. and Lose, M.K. (2012), 'Effects of teacher-student ratio in response to intervention approaches' The Elementary School Journal, 112 (4), 547-567.
Department for Education (2011), 'Evaluation of Every Child a Reader (ECaR)', DFE-RR114.You can access more research papers from our archives.
- Reviews of research
With more than 30 years of data, Reading Recovery is the world’s most widely researched early literacy intervention. There are many summaries of research studies to date that enable us to identify trends and determine areas for further research.
Schwartz, R. M. (2015) Ideology and Early Literacy Evidence: A Response to Chapman & Tunmer (2015). Oakland University.
What Works Clearinghouse (2013) 'Updated intervention report: Reading Recovery'. U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences.
Promising Practices Network (2013) 'Programs that work: Reading Recovery' RAND Corporation.
You can access more research papers from our archives.- Self-esteem
Improving attainment can lead to improved self-esteem. Research suggests that this association is particularly strong for Reading Recovery.
Department for Education (2011), 'Evaluation of Every Child a Reader (ECaR)', DFE-RR114.
Burroughs-Lange, S. and Douetil, J (2007) 'Literacy progress of young children from poor urban settings: A Reading Recovery comparison study'. Literacy Teaching and Learning, 12 (1), pp 19-46.
Burroughs-Lange, S. and Douetil, J. (2006) Evaluation of Reading Recovery in London Schools Every Child A Reader 2005-2006.pdf University of London: Institute of Education.
You can access more research papers from our archives.