Reading disorders are a growing concern facing schools. Observational studies have shown that without intervention, the reading issues will be maintained over time. More specifically, phonological processing deficits, the most basic of reading skills, will remain without mediation. Early intervention in the form of individual and group tutoring has been studied with interest over the past two decades. A number of researchers have found that various intervention techniques effectively mediate reading difficulties. The goal of the present study was to compare individual and group tutoring methods to determine their relative effectiveness. A comparison group was also created, to which each of the intervention methods were evaluated. One-hundred and one children were initially tested on measures of phonological processing and reading achievement at the beginning of the academic year. Forty-eight of the subjects fell below a determined cut-off of 1.5 standard deviations from the norm on one or more measures. Each of these children was then randomized into either individual or group tutoring intervention methods. Eleven subjects elected not to participate in the tutoring, making up a comparison group. Nineteen subjects completed one academic year of individual tutoring while twelve completed group tutoring. Each of the 42 subjects was re-tested at the end of the academic year on phonological processing, reading achievement, and overall intellect. Change scores were computed for each subject and one-way ANOVA was used to determine differences between the groups. No significant differences were found between the individual intervention and the comparison group or between the group intervention and the comparison subjects. Further, there were no overall significant differences noted between the groups. When directly comparing the individual and group techniques, no significant differences were seen. However, when comparing pre- to post-intervention scores within the individual tutoring group significant changes were seen on all measures, except for the spelling achievement subtest. Overall, there was no significant difference noted between the different intervention types when evaluating against either each other or a comparison group. There were significant gains in phonological processing and reading achievement for subjects in the individual tutoring intervention, but not the group tutoring intervention. Future studies should utilize larger sample sizes, as power was a limitation of the present study. Additionally, it would be interesting to extrapolate the individual tutoring method to a group format to compare the effectiveness of the technique at different sizes since the subjects who participated in the individual tutoring made significant gains over the school year. [The dissertation citations contained here are published with the permission of ProQuest LLC. Further reproduction is prohibited without permission. Copies of dissertations may be obtained by Telephone (800) 1-800-521-0600. Web page: http://bibliotheek.ehb.be:2222/en-US/products/dissertations/individuals.shtml.]