This mixed method study examined the use of repeated reading with eighteen, eighth grade special education and regular education students. The purpose was to study use of repeated reading's structured, systematic, oral reading intervention while also seeking to further analyze LaBerge and Samuels' "Theory of Automaticity" (1974). Using repeated reading within the daily parameters of reading instruction, this intervention analyzed potential differences in reading fluency skills between special education and regular education students. This study also examined a hypothesized connection between improved oral reading fluency and reading comprehension skills. Independent sample and paired sample t-tests analyzing oral reading fluency scores (WCPM) and word recognition in context (WR) indicated no significant differences between special education and regular education students' pre- and post-intervention scores; nor within groups when comparing pre- and post- intervention scores. Comparison of prosody scores showed each group demonstrated significant increases on post- intervention scores over pre- intervention. In addition, regular education students exhibited significantly higher prosody scores over special education students on both pre- and post- intervention scores. Evaluation of comprehension scores within and between groups indicated significant differences or increases. Paired sample t-tests comparing pre- to post-intervention scores indicated each group significantly improved their post- intervention Maze comprehension scores over pre- intervention. Comparison between groups showed regular education students scored significantly higher than special education students on post- intervention Maze assessment. Each group demonstrated significant improvements between pre- and post- intervention silent reading comprehension assessments. Regular education students scored significantly higher than special education students on pre- and post-intervention assessments. Independent sample t-test comparison of instructional oral reading comprehension assessment scores signified regular education students scored significantly higher than special education students on pre- and post- intervention tests. Analysis of pre- versus post- intervention instructional oral reading comprehension scores revealed regular education students showed a borderline difference between their pre-and post- intervention scores. No significant differences existed for special education students between their pre- and post- intervention scores. This study provided valuable information to be used when developing, implementing, and evaluating instructional reading/ language arts practices in both regular and special education classrooms. [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://www.proquest.com/en-US/products/dissertations/individuals.shtml.]