1 / 15

Early Steps Intervention in Schools with Explicit Code Instruction

This study examines the effectiveness of Early Steps intervention in at-risk G1 students with explicit code instruction. It also explores whether isolated phonological awareness instruction enhances the effectiveness of Early Steps.

jesusv
Download Presentation

Early Steps Intervention in Schools with Explicit Code Instruction

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. Early Steps Intervention in Schools with Explicit Code Instruction Is It Effective? Does Isolated Phonological Awareness Instruction Increase Effectiveness?

  2. University of Utah & Granite School District Salt Lake City, UT Kathleen J. Brown, Veronica Reynolds, Stacey Lowe, Debbie Skidmore, Debbie Van Gorder, Sue Patillo, Connie Weinstein, Julie World, Amy Morris

  3. Theoretical Framework • Early Steps: • repeated reading @ instructional level • systematic, isolated code instruction • writing-embedded PA instruction • Early Steps = effective for at-risk in G1 embedded or implicit code classrooms (Morris, 1999; Morris, Tyner, & Perney, in press; Santa & Hoien, 1999

  4. Theoretical Framework • Phonological Awareness (PA) is causally related to early reading success • PA instruction = important part of effective intervention (Bradley & Bryant, 1983; Perfetti, Beck, Bell, & Hughes, 1987; Tunmer, Nesdale, & Harriman,1988)

  5. Research Question Is Early Steps effective for at-risk G1 students whose classroom instruction provides: - sys. exp. decoding - sys. exp. PA - literature + decodable texts - spelling dictation, and - writing workshop?

  6. Research Question Once students are aware of initial phonemes, Does isolated PA instruction make Early Steps more effective? - Early Steps writing-embeddedPAI = listening for sounds in sentence writing - isolatedPAI (strictly oral activities, no text involved)

  7. Method • Students = 31% ethnic minority; 46% free lunch; 18% ESL • Tutors = G1 teachers, RS in training, grad students, Title I aides • Sept. 99-May 00

  8. Method: Intervention Study • At-risk G1 students identified by scores on: • alphabet knowledge • phonological awareness via spelling task • Control group identified by matching baseline scores with tx group Morris, 1992

  9. Method: Intervention Study • N=88 G1 students from 7 Title 1 schools • Early Steps Intervention • 30 min. daily, 1-on-1 • Title I Intervention • 30-45 min. daily, small group • reinforce Open Court

  10. Method: PAI study • Identified Early Steps students with “moderate alphabet knowledge” and “low PA” • matched on baseline scores • random assignment to conditions

  11. Method: PAI study • N=24 Early Steps students • Embedded + Isolated PA Instruction • writing-embedded PA • PA isolated in oral activities • PA Control • writing-embedded PA only

  12. Results: Intervention Study a = 73rd percentile b = 54th percentile c = 47th percentile d = 27th percentile

  13. Results: PAI Study

  14. Discussion • Early Steps benefits at-risk G1 students receiving explicit code instruction as measured by: • passage reading • word attack • comprehension • spelling

  15. Discussion • Once Early Steps students are aware of initial phonemes, adding isolated PAI does not improve effectiveness • “listening for sounds” during daily sentence writing may be sufficient

More Related