Docstoc

The Effects of Intensive Phonemic Awareness Intervention on Struggling Readers

Document Sample
The Effects of Intensive Phonemic Awareness Intervention on Struggling Readers Powered By Docstoc
					The Effects of Intensive Phonemic Awareness Intervention on Struggling Readers
Ellsworth, C; Fiorella, M; Hoover, J; Valeriani, J; Green, R; King, J; Lindstedt, E
Department of Communication Sciences & Disorders, Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff, AZ 86011
Abstract
Given the relationship between phonological processing skills and literacy achievements, assessment of reading and phonological measures are useful in identifying children whose reading problems are due to phonological processing deficits. These children have the most to gain from interventions with a strong phonological emphasis. Seven children who failed previous reading interventions were evaluated using language, literacy and cognitive assessments. They presented with below average scores on the language and literacy tests. Three children were selected to receive the Lindamood Phoneme Sequencing Program (LiPS) on an intensive schedule. Overall, scores on the language and literacy tests for the LiPS group improved 50% more than the Success For All (SFA) control group. Data indicates that intensive LiPS intervention built a solid foundation for good reading development in this group of students who were initially identified as at-risk for reading failure. for two hours each day, five days per week. The students who did not receive LiPS did participate in the SFA general education reading program for one and one-half hours per day, five days per week. The SFA students served as a control group for the LiPS students. One of the initial seven students was dropped from the study due to inconsistencies in his data.

USDOE Personnel Preparation Grant 84.325 H

FIGURES: All standard deviations are rounded to three decimal places.
LiPS Intervention
2.000 1.500 1.000 0.500 0.000 -0.500 -1.000 -1.500 -2.000

Method
In order to assess the effects of intensive phonemic awareness intervention (specifically the LiPS) on struggling readers, the following tests were administered both prior to and following the students’ participation in LiPS, the same tests were also administered to the control group prior to and following their participation in the SFA program.
Cognitive: Clinical Evaluation of Language Fundamentals – 4th edition (CELF-4) Semantic and Letter-Naming Verbal Fluency/Word Retrieval (FAS) Test of Nonverbal Intelligence (TONI)

PRE POST

CELF-4 (Expressive Vocab)

CTOPP (Phonological Memory)

TONI (Total)

CELF-4 (Expressive)

CTOPP (Alter. Phonolgical Awareness)

CTOPP (Alter. Rapid Naming)

FAS (Rapid Naming Categories - animals)

Introduction
Research indicates that reading comprehension, phonemic awareness, and reading fluency are the essential skills for proficient reading. "One of the most compelling and well-established findings in the research on beginning reading is the important relationship between phonemic awareness and reading acquisition." (Kame'enui, et. al., 1997) According to the definitions of the “essential components of reading instruction” and “reading” in section 1208 of the Reading First subpart of NCLB law, phonemic awareness is defined as the skills and knowledge needed to understand how phonemes (sounds) are connected to print. Reading fluency is the ability to read fluently. Lastly, reading comprehension strategies are defined as “the development of appropriate active strategies to construct meaning from print.”
Acquisition of reading comprehension, phonemic awareness, and reading fluency are essential in the development of reading skills. Children who have deficits in one or more of these skills may present with poor reading skills.

Language:
Clinical Evaluation of Language Fundamentals – 4th edition (CELF-4) Phonological: Comprehensive Test of Phonological Processing (CTOPP)
2.000 1.500 1.000 0.500 0.000 -0.500 -1.000 -1.500 -2.000

Success For All Intervention

Results
The average pre-test standard deviation for the SFA students was 0.937 and the average post-test standard deviation was -0.478. The difference was 0.459. The average pre-test standard deviation for the LiPS students was -0.504. Their average post-test standard deviation was 0.087. The difference was 0.591. On the CTOPP, the average standard deviation of the pre-tests of the SFA students was -0.533. The average standard deviation of the posttests was -0.121. The difference was 0.412. The average standard deviation of the pre-tests of the LiPS students was -0.2. The average standard deviation of the post-tests was 0.44. The difference was 0.64. Results from the batteries of tests that were administered indicated that the average scores of the three students who participated in the LiPS program improved 50% more than the students who participated in the SFA program.

FAS (Rapid Naming Categories - foods)

CELF-4 (Receptive)

CTOPP (Rapid Naming)

CELF-4 (Spoken Paragraph)

CELF-4 (Formulation of Sentences)

CTOPP (Phonological Awareness)

CELF-4 (Concepts & Directions)

CELF-4 (Sentence Structure)

FAS (Rapid Naming Words)

CELF-4 (Recall Sentences)

CELF-4 (WC Expressive)

CELF-4 (Total)

CELF-4 (Lang. Content)

CELF-4 (Lang. Structure)

CELF-4 (WC Receptive)

CELF-4 (Word Structure)

CELF-4 (WC Total)

PRE POST
CELF-4 (Expressive Vocab) CTOPP (Phonological Memory) TONI (Total) CELF-4 (Expressive) CTOPP (Alter. Phonolgical Awareness) CTOPP (Alter. Rapid Naming) FAS (Rapid Naming Categories - animals) FAS (Rapid Naming Categories - foods) CELF-4 (Receptive) CTOPP (Rapid Naming) CELF-4 (Spoken Paragraph) CELF-4 (Formulation of Sentences) CTOPP (Phonological Awareness) CELF-4 (Concepts & Directions) CELF-4 (Sentence Structure) FAS (Rapid Naming Words) CELF-4 (Recall Sentences) CELF-4 (WC Expressive) CELF-4 (Total) CELF-4 (Lang. Content) CELF-4 (Lang. Structure) CELF-4 (WC Receptive) CELF-4 (Word Structure) CELF-4 (WC Total)

The students selected in this study received intensive one-on-one therapy using the Lindamood Phoneme Sequencing Program (LiPS), which is part of a multi-sensory approach intended to develop strong pre-reading skills through listening, thinking, seeing and most importantly, feeling where and how each sound is formed in the mouth. The program is intended to develop the student’s ability to recognize, manipulate and hold on to individual sounds in words. This builds a strong foundation for good reading development.
The students in the control group remained in their classrooms where they received the Success for All (SFA) reading program. This comprehensive phonologically based literacy program provides strong foundational skills in the general education classroom to prevent reading failure.

LiPS - CTOPP Scores
2.000 1.500 1.000 0.500 0.000 -0.500 -1.000 -1.500 -2.000

References
PRE POST

Conclusions
This study demonstrates that phonological processing is a primary area of weakness for poor readers. This finding is consistent with a large body of literature in the area of language and reading disorders. Due to the strong correlation between phonological processing and reading skills, measures of phonological processing can be useful in determining eligibility for reading interventions that have a strong phonological emphasis. Specifically, those students who received LiPS intervention improved their language and literacy test scores by half of a standard deviation. Those students that receive SFA intervention improved their language and literacy test scores by slightly lower than half a standard deviation. Data indicates that intensive LiPS intervention builds a solid foundation for good reading development in this group of students who were initially identified as at-risk for reading failure. However, data also indicates that the SFA reading program provides an adequate beginning foundation for good reading development as well.

Sample
Three students from Kinsey Elementary School in the Flagstaff Unified School District were identified for this study. These students were identified following the results of the DIBELS (Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills) assessment as needing “intensive support” and had failed assessments of the SFA reading program.

Success For All - CTOPP Scores
2.000 1.500 1.000 0.500 0.000 -0.500 -1.000 -1.500 -2.000

Inclusion Criteria/Exclusion Criteria
Seven first and second grade children were identified using the DIBELS screening as being at-risk for reading deficiencies. These children were then categorized by their cognitive abilities, family support system, work ethic, and attendance. Three students were chosen from the above seven to participate in the LiPS program. Their selection was based on their better attendance, greater availability of family support, and superior motivation. LiPS intervention was provided

PRE POST

Fischer Family Trust: Success for All. Retrieved October 12, 2006 from www.fischertrust.org/success.htm. Haskell, D. W., Foorman, B. R., & Swank, P. R. (1992). Effects of three orthographic/phonological units on first-grade reading. Remedial and Special Education, 13, 40-49. Kame’enui, E. J., (2002). An Analysis of Reading Assessment Instruments for K-3 (Final Report). Institute for the Development of Educational Achievement, College of Education University of Oregon. Kame'enui, E. J., Simmons, D. C., Baker, S., Chard, D. J., Dickson, S. V., Gunn, B., Smith, S. B., Sprick, M., & Lin, S. J. (1997). Effective strategies for teaching beginning reading. In E. J. Kame'enui, & D. W. Carnine (Eds.), Effective Teaching Strategies That Accommodate Diverse Learners. Columbus, OH: Merrill. www.dibels.uoregon.edu Mid-Continent Research for Education and Learning: Delivering Research and Practical Guidance to Educators. Retrieved April 1, 2006, from http://www.mcrel.org. Reading rockets: Launching Young Readers. Retrieved April 1, 2006, from http://www.readingrockets.org. University of Oregon Center on Teaching and Learning: DIBELS. Retrieved April 1, 2006, from http://www.dibels.uoregon.edu.

CTOPP (Alter. Phonolgical Awareness)

CTOPP (Rapid Naming)

CTOPP (Alter. Rapid Naming)

CTOPP (Phonological Awareness)

CTOPP (Phonological Memory)

Acknowledgements
A special thanks to the faculty, staff, and students at Kinsey Elementary School in the Flagstaff Unified School District. Thank you, also, to Andrew Bowers, Erin Naumann, and Aisling Pomeroy for their preliminary work on this project and to Ellen Allen for her support of this project.

CTOPP (Alter. Phonolgical Awareness)

CTOPP (Rapid Naming)

CTOPP (Alter. Rapid Naming)

CTOPP (Phonological Awareness)

CTOPP (Phonological Memory)


				
DOCUMENT INFO
Shared By:
Categories:
Stats:
views:1276
posted:4/18/2008
language:English
pages:1