Reading Recovery and a developmental approach to phonological processing.
Material type:
TextDescription: 191 pISBN: 0599237120Subject(s): Education, Special | Education, Reading | 0529 | 0535Dissertation note: Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of Washington, 1999. Summary: A substantial amount of research has been done on early literacy acquisition that has helped to identify and underscore the critical need to support developing readers and writers. Two areas of early literacy research are of particular importance to this study including the role of: (1) early intervention in reducing the risk of failure in reading and (2) phonological skill development in the facilitation of reading.Summary: The purpose of this research was to investigate whether the instructional approaches used in Reading Recovery, an early intervention program, could be improved to increase the program's effectiveness. The study introduced a phoneme identity approach to the letter identification section and a more systematic approach to the word work section of the Reading Recovery lesson. A comparison was then done on the experimental group and control group's outcomes.Summary: Teachers were randomly assigned to the control or experimental Reading Recovery intervention. Following standard Reading Recovery procedures, the teachers identified the four lowest achieving first grade children in their school using the Observation Survey (Clay, 1979). For the purposes of this study additional reading and phonological assessments were included as both pre test and post test measures.Summary: The children assigned to the control group (n = 12) were instructed in the standard Reading Recovery format which includes reading, letter and word work, and writing. The subjects in the experimental group (n = 16) followed the same lesson format but with enhanced letter and word work. The intervention was taught for 20 weeks.Summary: A significant difference was detected for the Dolch and pseudoword tests favoring the control group. There were no significant differences on any other measures. Potential reasons for these results are discussed including the possibility of a neutralizing interactive effect between the two treatments (i.e., phoneme identity training and word work). There is also the possibility that the differential effects in this study favoring the control group is an indicator that the existing Reading Recovery model is sufficient and does not need embellishment.
Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 60-04, Section: A, page: 1084.
Chair: Richard S. Neel.
Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of Washington, 1999.
A substantial amount of research has been done on early literacy acquisition that has helped to identify and underscore the critical need to support developing readers and writers. Two areas of early literacy research are of particular importance to this study including the role of: (1) early intervention in reducing the risk of failure in reading and (2) phonological skill development in the facilitation of reading.
The purpose of this research was to investigate whether the instructional approaches used in Reading Recovery, an early intervention program, could be improved to increase the program's effectiveness. The study introduced a phoneme identity approach to the letter identification section and a more systematic approach to the word work section of the Reading Recovery lesson. A comparison was then done on the experimental group and control group's outcomes.
Teachers were randomly assigned to the control or experimental Reading Recovery intervention. Following standard Reading Recovery procedures, the teachers identified the four lowest achieving first grade children in their school using the Observation Survey (Clay, 1979). For the purposes of this study additional reading and phonological assessments were included as both pre test and post test measures.
The children assigned to the control group (n = 12) were instructed in the standard Reading Recovery format which includes reading, letter and word work, and writing. The subjects in the experimental group (n = 16) followed the same lesson format but with enhanced letter and word work. The intervention was taught for 20 weeks.
A significant difference was detected for the Dolch and pseudoword tests favoring the control group. There were no significant differences on any other measures. Potential reasons for these results are discussed including the possibility of a neutralizing interactive effect between the two treatments (i.e., phoneme identity training and word work). There is also the possibility that the differential effects in this study favoring the control group is an indicator that the existing Reading Recovery model is sufficient and does not need embellishment.
School code: 0250.
There are no comments on this title.