Scholarship in school psychology has continued to document the need and importance of contextually relevant intervention and prevention research, but this type of research remains relatively scarce. Also problematic, this type of research is even more limited in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC) compared to high-income countries. This situation within school psychology scholarship not only has negative implications for research and practice, it also limits internationalization within the discipline. The geographical context for the present study was in Costa Rica, currently a Latin American LMIC. Given the global importance of literacy, this article describes an experimental evaluation comparing two time- and resource-efficient reading interventions that differed only by instructional grouping: A one-on-one intervention, and an even more resource-efficient small-group intervention. Participants included third-graders experiencing significant reading difficulties. Analyses showed that all students benefitted from intervention, but some students responded somewhat more favorably to one intervention versus the other. Limitations, implications, and future research directions are discussed, particularly within the context of international school psychology and how professionals in the discipline can benefit from more intervention research in otherwise underrepresented global regions.