Segmentation/Spelling Instruction as Part of a First-Grade Reading Program: Effects on Several Measures of Reading

1993 ◽  
Vol 28 (3) ◽  
pp. 218 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joanna K. Uhry ◽  
Margaret Jo Shepherd
1996 ◽  
Vol 28 (1) ◽  
pp. 9-34 ◽  
Author(s):  
Riitta-Liisa Korkeamäki ◽  
Mariam Jean Dreher

This study investigated children's reading strategies and progress when a meaning-based approach to reading instruction was implemented in a Finnish 1st-grade classroom. A reading program was designed in which the teacher introduced predictable books, literacy-related centers, and minilessons in context on selected letter-sound correspondences. Field notes and videotapes of individual reading sessions were analyzed to describe the strategies the students used while reading both familiar and unfamiliar books. In the fall, in a familiar context, the students read mostly based on their memory. In an unfamiliar context, the students used graphemic information and sounded out and elongated the words and named some letters. Later, they used their phonological recoding skills in both familiar and unfamiliar contexts. All the students progressed toward conventional reading, demonstrating that they had reached at least the alphabetic phase of reading development.


2020 ◽  
Vol 53 (6) ◽  
pp. 454-468 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peng Peng ◽  
Douglas Fuchs ◽  
Lynn S. Fuchs ◽  
Eunsoo Cho ◽  
Amy M. Elleman ◽  
...  

We conducted a secondary analysis of data from a randomized control trial to explore this question: Does “response/no response” best characterize students’ reactions to a generally efficacious first-grade reading program, or is a more nuanced characterization necessary? Data were collected on 265 at-risk readers’ word reading prior to and immediately following program implementation in first grade and in spring of second grade. Pretreatment data were also obtained on domain-specific skills (letter knowledge, decoding, passage comprehension, language) and domain-general skills (working memory, non-verbal reasoning). Latent profile analysis of word reading across the three time points with controls as a local norm revealed a strongly responsive group ( n = 45) with mean word-reading z scores of 0.25, 1.64, and 1.26 at the three time points, respectively; a mildly responsive group ( n = 109), z scores = 0.30, 0.47, and 0.55; a mildly non-responsive group ( n = 90), z scores = −0.11, −0.15, and −0.55; and a strongly non-responsive group ( n = 21), z scores = −1.24, −1.26, and −1.57. The two responsive groups had stronger pretreatment letter knowledge and passage comprehension than the two non-responsive groups. The mildly non-responsive group demonstrated better pretreatment passage comprehension than the strongly non-responsive group. No domain-general skill distinguished the four groups. Findings suggest response to early reading intervention was more complicated than response/no response, and pretreatment reading comprehension was an important predictor of response even with pretreatment word reading controlled.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Braze ◽  
Florencia Salvarezza ◽  
Kenneth R. Pugh

A multi-sensory structured language reading program was deployed in six first grade public school classrooms (n=150 students) in Buenos Aires, Argentina. Six control rooms usedbusiness-as-usual, whole language, instruction (n=178 students). Control and treatment roomswere well-matched in initial status. Students’ abilities and progress were recorded 3 times over27 weeks using a test battery covering basic pre-reading and reading skills: phonological awareness, decoding, vocabulary, rapid automatized naming, and executive function. At the startof 1st grade, most students have no measurable capacity for decoding. Many struggle withphonological awareness and letter naming. Very high rates of absenteeism and school closures(similar in both groups) meant that planned treatment dosage was not achieved. However, atthe endpoint of the study, students in MSL classrooms show an advantage over those in control classrooms in sentence reading comprehension, but the groups remain at parity in othermeasured skills.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jill Fitzgerald ◽  
Jackie Eunjung Relyea ◽  
Jeff Elmore ◽  
Elfrieda H. Hiebert

2004 ◽  
Vol 26 (1) ◽  
pp. 23-28 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jerome V. D’Agostino ◽  
Judith A. Murphy

We conducted a meta-analysis of 36 studies of Reading Recovery (RR), an intensive tutorial intervention designed to develop the literacy skills of low-performing first-grade students. Few individual studies of the program have yielded conclusive evidence regarding the program’s effectiveness due to various methodological limitations. We relied on specific meta-analytic strategies to combine as much available evidence as possible to study overall program effects. We also analyzed the results from the few more rigorously designed studies separately. In general, we found positive program effects for both discontinued and not discontinued students on outcomes tailored to the program and standardized achievement measures. RR effects were most pronounced, however, for discontinued students on measures designed for the program. Contrary to conventional belief, we found no evidence suggesting that prior observed effects could be explained completely by factors resulting from methodological flaws (e.g., regression artifacts).


1972 ◽  
Vol 38 (8) ◽  
pp. 613-621 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joseph W. Halliwell ◽  
Harold A. Solan

At the beginning of the first grade, 105 students designated as potential reading problems were divided into three groups of 35 children each: experimental I, which received supplementary perceptual training in addition to the regular reading program; experimental II, which received traditional supplementary reading instruction in addition to the regular reading program; and the control group, which received no supplementary instruction. The Metropolitan Achievement Test (MAT) was administered at the end of May. The statistical analysis of the data indicated that, of all the groups, only the experimental I total group and the experimental I boys read significantly better than the respective control groups on the reading subtest of the MAT.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document