1 / 15

Article Evaluation

Article Evaluation. Presented by Chinnie 黃秀琴 2008.11.26. Effect of Targeted Intervention on Early Literacy Skills of At-Risk Students. The Journal Article. Article title : Effect of Targeted Intervention on Early Literacy Skills of At-Risk Students Article source :

honora
Download Presentation

Article Evaluation

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Article Evaluation Presented by Chinnie 黃秀琴 2008.11.26 Effect of Targeted Intervention on Early Literacy Skills of At-Risk Students

  2. The Journal Article • Article title : Effect of Targeted Intervention on Early Literacy Skills of At-Risk Students • Article source : Journal of Research in Childhood Education • Authors : Chuang Wang, Bob Alogozzine • APA reference : Wang, C. & Alogozzine, B.(2008). Effect of Targeted Intervention on Early Literacy Skills of At-Risk Students. Journal of Research in Childhood Education,22(4) • APA citaion : Wang & Alogizzine (2008)

  3. Abstract • Reading problems are among the most prevalent concerns in schools. • In a large-scale project, children with serious reading problems received targeted intervention to address critical early literacy skills. • Participating students achieved significant gains in reading performance compared to a control group not receiving intervention.

  4. Introduction • The latest emphasis on the importance of literacy success is clearly established in No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB), which requires schools to take steps to ensure that all students are reading at grade level by the end of 4th grade. • Poor readers who do not receive special assistance are particularly at risk for academic performance. • The purpose of this study was to provide intensive interventions for at-risk students and compared their progress to other peers who received only district guided reading.

  5. Research Questions • What’ s the effect targeted intervention on early literacy skills of at-risk students • What’s the interaction between treatment groups and control groups in terms of different literacy skills?

  6. Literature Review • Intervention • O’Connor(2000) and Coyne , Kame’euni, and Simmons (2001) definded the context and shared “big ideas” for prevention and intervention in beginning reading. • Vaughn and her colleagues have documented and discussed the value of effective interventions for students at risk for reading difficulties. • Kamps and Greenwood (2005) reported first-year 1st-grade finding for students participating in secondary-level interventions (i.e., small-group reading instruction)

  7. Literature Review • DIBELS • DIBELS (Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills; Good &Kaminski, 2002, 2003) assessments are widely used for identifying students likely to experience reading failure and are sensitive, time-efficient measures with multiple forms that allow for repeated assessments of value in evaluating intervention efforts with those children (Elliott, Huai, & Roach, 2007). • DIBELS has become a test to inform instruction, to identify children at risk of failure in reading, and to hold schools accountable for students achievement (Manzo,2005, p.1).

  8. Methodology • Participants and setting • The Behavior and Reading Improvement Center (BRIC) provided services in six public elementary schools. • 2 of the 6 BRIC schools are randomly selected to be the control group; the other 4 BRIC schools received the intervention. • 101 first-grade students were included in treatment, 59 were males and 42 were females. • 38 first-grade students were in control schools, 26 were males and 12 were females.

  9. Methodology • Procedure • Open court is the core reading program in all elementary schools. • All students participated in a 120-minute literacy block of instruction that focused on scripted lessons for all students and independent word time (IWT) for practicing skills. • Supplemental, Targeted Intervention Program. A project-developed treatment to increase phonemic awareness, alphabetic understanding, decoding skills, and fluency. • Student participating in the targeted intervention received from 10 to 15 minutes a day of instruction.

  10. Methodology • Instruments • Woodcock Reading Mastery Test-Revises (WRMT_R; Woodcock, 1978). • WI, WA and PC (literacy skills) • Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills (DIBELS). • PSF and NWF (literacy skills) • Treatment Fidelity • In order to ensure that assistant implemented the intervention as intended, a rating scale was used to evaluate the fidelity of implementation of each activity or section of a lesson.

  11. Methodology • Data Analysis • Double Multivariate Analysis of Variance (MANOVA) was employed when non-commensurate dependent variables, WI, WA….were repeatedly measured across the treatment and control groups. Wilks’ Lambda was used as the test statistic for MANOVA.

  12. Results • From the Descriptive analysis, the treatment group gained more than the control group in reading skills. • For PSF, both treatment and control groups made statistically significant gains: t(83)=-11.68, p<.001, d=1.28, for the treatment group and t(34)=-5.78, p<.001, d=.98, for the control group. • Even when both the treatment and control groups made statistically significant gains, the treatment group gained more than the control group.

  13. Discussion and Conclusions • Low reading performance in early grades and academic failure signal the continuing need for immediate, explicit, and effective reading interventions for at-risk students. • Struggling readers benefit from an intensive, explicit approach to reading instruction. • The model instruction in the research provided a basic understanding of reading , promoting independence in reading, and using a direct instructional approach with repetition and immediate performance feedback.

  14. Limitations and Suggestions for Future Studies • Independent measures MANOVA failed to detect any statistically significant differences between the treatment and control groups on literacy measures. This indicated that longitudinal work appears warranted so that the gap between the treatment and control groups might be large enough to be detected by MANOVA. • A longitudinal study, hierarchical linear modeling (HLM) could be used to examine the trajectory of the students’ growth in literacy through growth-curve analysis.

  15. My Comments on the research • If the authors could identify and explain more clearly regard to the purpose of this study, it will be more concrete. • If the authors could provide more tables or figures regard to the statistical analysis of results, the readers will get more understanding about difference between treatment groups and control groups. • If the authors could provide some appendixes related to instruction and measure instruments, the readers as a research will have more interests for application or researches or teaching.

More Related