A short reading session helped children with reading difficulties
HelpedThe short version
Praise and goals to beat their last level and a peer helped students with reading difficulties understand more.

- 80
- children with reading problems, ADHD or neither
- Randomised
- groups picked at random
- Recorded
- behaviour was recorded
- 2 tools
- tested
The study
Who took part
80 children in grades 2 to 5 from three US public schools took part. 33 had reading difficulties, 17 had ADHD signs but no reading difficulties, and 30 were typical readers. Of the 33, 21 also had ADHD signs.
What they did
Everyone read stories and answered questions. One group first heard praise for past reading and a clever label for answering questions with few errors. They were also challenged to beat their last level and another child's score. The other group got the same stories with no such talk.
What happened
Students with reading difficulties read more fluently and understood more than the other group did. Typical readers also improved. Children with ADHD signs but no reading difficulties did not clearly improve. The session did not clearly help reading difficulties more than typical readers.
What the study found
- Helped
Praise and goals to beat their last level and a peer helped students with reading difficulties understand more.
Small randomised trial of 80 children with reading problems, ADHD or neither · vs students given plain instructions · behaviour was recorded · ⚠ summary claims more than the results show
- Helped
Students with reading difficulties read more fluently than the other group did.
Small randomised trial of 80 children with reading problems, ADHD or neither · vs students given plain instructions · behaviour was recorded · ⚠ summary claims more than the results show
How solid is this?
- Groups picked at random
- Behaviour was recorded
- Small group
- Summary claims more than the results show
Source
A reading motivation intervention with differential outcomes for students at risk for reading disabilities, ADHD, and typical comparisons: 'Clever is and clever does' (2012)
DOI: 10.1177/0731948712438556 (opens in a new tab)

