Demonstrating the differential effectiveness of instructional approaches for learners is difficult because learners differ on multiple dimensions. The present study tests a person-centered approach to investigating differential effectiveness, in this case of reading instruction. In N = 517 German third-grade students, latent profile analysis identified four subgroups that differed across multiple characteristics consistent with the simple view of reading: poor decoders, poor comprehenders, poor readers, and good readers. Over a school year, different instructional foci showed differential effectiveness for students in these different profiles. An instructional focus on vocabulary primarily benefited good readers at the expense of poor decoders and poor comprehenders, while a focus on advanced reading abilities benefitted poor comprehenders at the expense of poor decoders and good readers. These findings are in contrast to those obtained by multiple regression, which, focusing on only one learner characteristic at a time, would have suggested different and potentially misleading implications for instruction. This study provides initial evidence for the advantages of a person-centered approach to examining differential effectiveness.

向学习者展示教学方法的不同有效性很困难，因为学习者在多个方面存在差异。本研究测试了以人为本的方法来调查差异有效性，在阅读教学的情况下。在N = 517 名德国三年级学生中，潜在概况分析确定了四个亚组，这些亚组在多个特征上存在差异，这与简单的阅读观点一致：解码能力差、理解能力差、阅读能力差和阅读能力好。在一个学年中，不同的教学重点对不同背景的学生表现出不同的效果。对词汇的教学重点主要有利于良好的阅读者，但会损害较差的解码器和较差的理解者，而对高级阅读能力的关注则有利于较差的理解者，但会损害较差的解码器和良好的阅读器。这些发现与通过多元回归获得的结果形成鲜明对比，多元回归一次只关注一个学习者特征，会对教学产生不同的、潜在误导性的影响。这项研究为以人为本的方法检查差异有效性的优势提供了初步证据。