Abstract: The purpose of this study was to compare the effect of two theoretically differ- ent reading programs on the reading out- comes of first-grade students (N = 107). Two elementary schools were chosen for partici- pation based on the first-grade reading pro- gram currently being implemented in the schools. One school used the Horizons Fast Track A-B reading program and the other used a Guided Reading approach. Students were assessed on Phoneme Segmentation Fluency, Nonsense Word Fluency, and Oral Reading Fluency using the AIMSweb (Edformation, 2006) progress monitoring system. Results showed differing responses to the interventions. Students in both condi- tions significantly increased across time on Phoneme Segmentation Fluency, Nonsense Word Fluency, and Oral Reading Fluency. However, the students in the Guided Reading condition significantly outperformed the stu- dents in the Horizons condition on Phoneme Segmentation Fluency, while the students in the Horizons condition made significantly greater gains than students in the Guided Reading condition on Oral Reading Fluency. Results are discussed in regards to the differ- ences between the two reading programs. One of the most pressing societal issues in our country is that of teaching our children to read. The first graders of today will be adults in a global world where the literacy demands placed on them will determine, even more than today, their access to knowledge and eco- nomic success (Adams, 1990; Snow, Burns, & Griffin, 1998). Because of this concern, over 20 years of research has been conducted by the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, the U.S. Office of Education, and many private foundations and institutes to examine how best to teach read- ing to ensure that all children acquire ade- quate progress in reading (Lyon, Alexander, & Yaffee, 1997; Torgesen et al., 2001). This goal is repeated in the No Child Left Behind Act (2001) requiring that all children should receive evidence-based reading instruction (Snow et al.). Even though research has shown the impor- tance of explicit and systematic teaching of phonological awareness and phonics (Adams, 1990; Cunningham, 1990; Iverson & Tunmer, 1993; National Reading Panel (NRP), 2000), many teachers and administrators take for granted that a published reading program has research evidence supporting efficacy and ben- efit. Unfortunately, this is not always the case. Many programs and educational methods are developed around a set of philosophical beliefs on student learning or an ideal that is identi- fied by a marketing survey; however, these programs rarely, if ever, have controlled evi- dence-based research evaluating their effec- tiveness (Brown-Chidsey & Steege, 2005). With research showing that waiting until mid- dle elementary school years to implement Journal of Direct Instruction 35 A Comparison of Two R eading Programs on the R eading Outcomes of First-grade S tudents Journal of Direct Instruction, Vol. 9, No. 1, pp. 35-46. Address correspondence to Kevin Tobin at kevintobin@verizon.net. KEVIN G . TO BIN , Pittsfie ld Pub lic Sc ho o ls, a nd MARY BETH C ALHO O N , G e o rg ia Sta te Unive rsity