Your search found 160206 results.

Descriptors:
Computer Assisted Instruction; Immigrants; Intervention; Feedback (Response); Control Groups; Instructional Effectiveness; Cooperative Learning; Educational Technology; Computer Mediated Communication; Foreign Countries; Comparative Analysis; Outcomes of Education; Quasiexperimental Design; Pretests Posttests; Multiple Regression Analysis; Elementary School Students; Predictor Variables; Measures (Individuals)

Abstract:
This study examined the effects of guided elaboration on students' learning outcomes in a computer-supported collaborative learning (CSCL) environment. The programme provided students with feedback on their elaborations, and students reflected on this feedback. It was expected that students in the experimental (elaboration) programme would show better learning gains and that students from immigrant families would especially benefit. Two hundred primary school students of 9 different schools participated. The research can be characterized as a quasi-experimental study with a pre-test, post-test, control group design. In a multilevel regression analysis, no main effect of the intervention was found. However, there was a significant differential effect of the intervention; students from immigrant families in the experimental programme outperformed their counterparts in the control group. It can be concluded that guided elaboration in a CSCL programme through feedback and reflection is a promising approach. (Contains 5 tables, 1 figure, and 1 note.) Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library |  Publisher's website

Descriptors:
Direct Instruction; Reading Comprehension; Intervention; Federal Legislation; Maps; Social Change; Grade 4; Metacognition; Constructivism (Learning); Instructional Effectiveness; Comparative Analysis; Reading Achievement; At Risk Students; Control Groups; Gender Differences; Race; Pretests Posttests; Elementary School Students; Statistical Analysis; Scores; Reading Tests

Abstract:
In spite of efforts to achieve the reading proficiency requirements mandated by the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, students' inability to comprehend text and meet grade level standards on state and national assessments continues to be problematic. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of explicit direct instruction of metacognitive strategies using thinking maps. Research questions compared the comprehension achievement of at-risk 4th grade students who received the metacognitive strategy instruction coupled with traditional READ 180 instruction with those who solely received traditional READ 180 instruction. Control and intervention groups were also compared by gender and race. The foundation of the study was based on the constructivist learning theory proposed by Vygotsky. A quasi-experimental, pretest/posttest control group design was used to compare the achievement of 58 students organized into 4 READ 180 program classes from 3 elementary schools in the study district. Data were collected and analyzed using ANOVAs, with intervention/control group, race, and gender as independent variables to compare students' reading comprehension scores on the Scholastic Reading Inventory. The findings revealed no significant differences between the control and intervention groups. The findings did indicate that male students tended to have greater improvements in SRI scores than females. Although the findings did not support the implementation of Thinking Maps to improve comprehension for at-risk 4th grade students, they supported recommendations for further research and professional development. Implications for social change include improved reading proficiency for all students. [The dissertation citations contained here are published with the permission of ProQuest LLC. Further reproduction is prohibited without permission. Copies of dissertations may be obtained by Telephone (800) 1-800-521-0600. Web page: http://www.proquest.com/en-US/products/dissertations/individuals.shtml.] Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library |  Publisher's website

Descriptors:
Writing Instruction; Reading Instruction; Reading Comprehension; Direct Instruction; Integrated Activities; Cooperative Learning; Literacy; Reading Achievement; Group Activities; Story Reading; Educational Research; Instructional Effectiveness; Elementary School Students

Abstract:
"Cooperative Integrated Reading and Composition"[R] is a reading and writing program for students in grades 2 through 6. It has three principal elements: story-related activities, direct instruction in reading comprehension, and integrated language arts/writing. Daily lessons provide students with an opportunity to practice comprehension and reading skills in pairs and small groups. Pairs of students read to each other; predict how stories will end; summarize stories; write responses to questions posed by the teacher; and practice spelling, decoding, and vocabulary. Within cooperative teams of four, students work to understand the main idea of a story and work through the writing activities linked to the story. A Spanish version of the program is available for grades 2 through 5. The What Works Clearinghouse (WWC) reviewed 52 studies of "Cooperative Integrated Reading and Composition"[R] for adolescent learners. Two studies meet WWC evidence standards with reservations; the remaining 50 studies do not meet either WWC evidence standards or eligibility screens. Based on these studies, the WWC found potentially positive effects on comprehension and general literacy achievement for adolescent learners. The conclusions presented in this report may change as new research emerges. Appendices include: (1) Study characteristics; (2) Outcome measures; (3) Summary of study findings included in the ratings; (4) Summary of one-year implementation findings; (5) "Cooperative Integrated Reading and Composition"[R] ratings; and (6) Extent of evidence by domain. (Contains 10 footnotes.) Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

 ERIC Full Text (276K)

Descriptors:
Learning Disabilities; Reading Fluency; Direct Instruction; Vocabulary Development; Reading Improvement; Secondary School Students; Reading; Vocabulary; Intervention; Grade 10; Reading Comprehension; Adolescents; Literacy; Federal Legislation; Content Area Reading; Science Education; Science Instruction; Comparative Analysis; Word Recognition; Reader Text Relationship

Abstract:
This study examined the effects of three types of reading interventions on the science text reading of secondary students with learning disabilities (LD). Twenty 10th-grade students with LD participated in the study. Using a within-subjects design, the relative effects of three different instructional approaches--text reading, vocabulary learning, and text reading plus vocabulary learning--were examined and compared with a control condition in which participants received no instruction. The effects of the interventions on reading fluency, vocabulary knowledge, and comprehension were examined. Results revealed that the text-reading and combined interventions had a positive effect on reading fluency and vocabulary knowledge, and that the vocabulary intervention had a positive effect on vocabulary knowledge. Potential effects were found for the comprehension measures. Results imply that students' reading of science text, and knowledge of the vocabulary used in that text, can be improved with direct instruction. (Contains 5 tables and 2 figures.) Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library |  Publisher's website

Descriptors:
Reading Programs; Computer Assisted Instruction; Beginning Reading; Alphabets; Reading Fluency; Reading Comprehension; Elementary School Students; Kindergarten; Grade 1; Grade 2; Grade 3; Intervention; Educational Research; Foreign Countries

Abstract:
"Fast ForWord"[R] is a computer-based reading program intended to help students develop and strengthen the cognitive skills necessary for successful reading and learning. The program, which is designed to be used 30-100 minutes a day, 5 days a week, for 4-16 weeks, includes three series. The "Fast ForWord[R] Language" series and the "Fast ForWord[R] Literacy" series aim to build cognitive skills such as memory, attention, processing, and sequencing. They also strive to build language and reading skills, including listening accuracy, phonological awareness, and knowledge of language structures. The "Fast ForWord[R] to Reading" series (also known as the "Fast ForWord[R] Reading" series) aims to increase processing efficiency and further improve reading skills such as sound-letter associations, phonological awareness, word recognition, knowledge of English language conventions, vocabulary, and comprehension. The program is designed to adapt the nature and difficulty of the content based on individual student's responses. The What Works Clearinghouse (WWC) identified 342 studies that investigated the effects of "Fast ForWord"[R] on the reading skills of beginning readers. The WWC reviewed 25 of those studies against group design evidence standards. Seven studies (Borman, Benson, & Overman, 2009; Scientific Learning Corporation, 2004, 2005a, 2005b, 2005c, 2006, 2007) are randomized controlled trials that meet WWC evidence standards without reservations, and two studies (Overbay & Baenen, 2003; Scientific Learning Corporation, 2008) are quasi-experimental designs that meet WWC evidence standards with reservations. Those nine studies are summarized in this report. Sixteen studies do not meet WWC evidence standards. The remaining 317 studies do not meet WWC eligibility screens for review in this topic area. Appended are: (1) Research details for Borman, Benson, & Overman, 2009; (2) Research details for Scientific Learning Corporation, 2004; (3) Research details for Scientific Learning Corporation, 2005a; (4) Research details for Scientific Learning Corporation, 2005b; (5) Research details for Scientific Learning Corporation, 2005c; (6) Research details for Scientific Learning Corporation, 2006; (7) Research details for Scientific Learning Corporation, 2007; (8) Research details for Overbay and Baenen, 2003; (9) Research details for Scientific Learning Corporation, 2008; (10) Outcome measures for each domain; (11) Findings included in the rating for the alphabetics domain; (12) Findings included in the rating for the reading fluency domain; (13) Findings included in the rating for the comprehension domain; (14) Description of subgroup findings for the alphabetics domain; and (15) Description of subgroup findings for the reading fluency domain. A glossary of terms is included. (Contains 14 tables and 23 endnotes.) Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

 ERIC Full Text (403K)

Descriptors:
Reading Achievement; Educational Technology; Cooperative Learning; Reading Instruction; Reading Programs; Beginning Reading; Phonological Awareness; Effect Size; Direct Instruction; Teaching Methods; Writing Instruction; Curriculum; Comparative Analysis; Program Effectiveness; Elementary School Students

Abstract:
What beginning reading programs have been proven to help students in grades K-1 to succeed? To find out, this review summarizes evidence on four types of programs designed to improve beginning reading achievement: (1) Reading Curricula (Curr), such as "Open Court Reading," "Reading Street," and other standard and alternative textbooks; (2) Instructional Technology (IT), such as "Waterford," "Lexia Learning Systems," and "Writing to Read"; (3) Instructional Process Programs (IP), such as cooperative learning and phonological awareness training; and (4) Combined Curriculum and Instructional Process Programs (Curr & IP), such as "Success for All" and "Direct Instruction." Overall, 63 experimental-control comparisons met the inclusion criteria, of which 19 used random assignment to treatments. Effect sizes (experimental-control differences as a proportion of a standard deviation) were averaged across studies, weighting by sample size. [For the full report, "Effective Beginning Reading Programs: A Best-Evidence Synthesis," see ED527638.] Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text |  Publisher's website

Descriptors:
Reading Achievement; Program Effectiveness; Intervention; Kindergarten; Experimental Groups; Beginning Reading; Reading Difficulties; Control Groups; Reading Instruction; At Risk Students; Hierarchical Linear Modeling; Young Children; Decoding (Reading); Effect Size; Reading Skills; Gender Differences; Comparative Analysis; Teaching Methods; Racial Differences

Abstract:
The purpose of this varied replication study was to evaluate the effects of a supplemental reading intervention on the beginning reading performance of kindergarten students in a different geographical location and in a different instructional context from the initial randomized trial. A second purpose was to investigate whether students who received the intervention across both the initial and replication studies demonstrated similar learning outcomes. Kindergarten students (n = 162) identified as at risk of reading difficulty from 48 classrooms were assigned randomly at the classroom level either to a commercial program (i.e., Early Reading Intervention; Pearson/Scott Foresman, 2004) that included explicit/systematic instruction (experimental group) or school-designed typical practice intervention (comparison group). Both interventions were taught by classroom teachers for 30 min per day in small groups for approximately 100 sessions. Multilevel hierarchical linear analyses revealed no statistically significant differences between conditions on any measure. Combined analyses that included students from both the initial and replication studies suggested that differences in the impact of the intervention across studies were largely explained by mean differences in the comparison group students' response to school-designed intervention. (Contains 10 tables, 1 figure, and 1 footnote.) Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library |  Publisher's website

Descriptors:
Intervention; Reading Programs; Kindergarten; Reading Fluency; Emergent Literacy; Curriculum Based Assessment; Direct Instruction; Suburban Schools; Summer Programs; Early Childhood Education; Reading Comprehension; Reading Tests; Longitudinal Studies; Reading Achievement

Abstract:
The purpose of this study was to determine the effectiveness of a Direct Instruction summer reading intervention program designed to minimize summer reading regression. The summer intervention program targeted the lowest quartile of readers in grades kindergarten through third grade from a suburban school district over a three-week period before the first official day of school. This intervention included specific and explicit teaching of skills to support reading fluency and comprehension. Data were collected and analyzed over three years from the district's adopted curriculum-based measurement, AIMSweb Reading Curriculum-Based Measurement (R-CBM) and AIMSweb Test of Early Literacy (Phoneme Segmentation Fluency subtest). Data from the reading assessments were analyzed to determine if there was a significant difference in reading regression of students participating in this intervention compared to students who did not participate in the summer intervention over the three-year period. The cumulative data indicated less loss of learning for kindergarten through third grade students participating in the summer intervention. Thus, indicating that the intervention helped minimize the effects of the "summer slide." Overall, positive effects were found indicating that this type of intervention merits further investigation as an effective strategy to reduce summer reading regression. Limitations of the study, implications for practice, and future research directions were discussed. [The dissertation citations contained here are published with the permission of ProQuest LLC. Further reproduction is prohibited without permission. Copies of dissertations may be obtained by Telephone (800) 1-800-521-0600. Web page: http://www.proquest.com/en-US/products/dissertations/individuals.shtml.] Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library |  Publisher's website

Descriptors:
Reading Comprehension; General Education; Mental Retardation; Learning Disabilities; Metacognition; Multivariate Analysis; Comparative Analysis; Intervention; Instructional Effectiveness; Elementary School Students; Middle School Students; Rural Schools; Direct Instruction; Educational Strategies; Scoring Rubrics; Pretests Posttests; Special Education; Basal Reading; Reading Programs

Abstract:
Students with high-incidence disabilities struggle with reading comprehension due to difficulties in background knowledge and metacognitive skills, including use of self-monitoring and other strategies. In the United States, these students typically receive the majority of their instruction in general education settings. However, there is little research comparing reading comprehension interventions with the typical basal curricula used in these classrooms. We compared the effects of an explicit reading comprehension intervention to those of a typical language-arts curriculum on upper elementary and middle school students' (n = 38) retells of passages and understanding of main ideas. A 2 x 4 repeated measures multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) revealed significant differences between instructional groups. These results indicate systematic and explicit reading comprehension instruction can be delivered successfully to students with high-incidence disabilities in general education settings. (Contains 3 figures and 4 tables.) Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library |  Publisher's website

Descriptors:
Tutoring; Reading Programs; Minority Group Students; Bilingual Education; English (Second Language); Faculty Development; Second Language Learning; Bilingualism; Spanish; Language Dominance; Elementary School Students; English Language Learners; Language of Instruction; Intervention; Cooperative Learning; Direct Instruction; Program Descriptions; Educational Quality; Teaching Methods

Abstract:
This review synthesizes research on English reading outcomes of all types of programs for Spanish-dominant ELLs in elementary schools. It is divided into two major sections. One focuses on studies of language of instruction, and one on reading approaches for ELLs other than bilingual education. A total of 14 qualifying studies met the inclusion criteria for language of instruction. Though the overall findings indicate a positive but modest effect (ES=+0.19) in favor of bilingual education, the largest and longest-term evaluations, including the only multiyear randomized evaluation of transition bilingual education, did not find any differences in outcomes by the end of elementary school for children who were either taught in Spanish and transitioned to English or taught only in English. The review also identified some proven and promising whole-school and whole-class interventions, including Success for All, cooperative learning, Direct Instruction, and ELLA. In addition, programs that use phonetic small group or one-to-one tutoring have also shown positive effects for struggling readers. What is in common across the most promising interventions is their use of extensive professional development, coaching, and cooperative learning. The findings support a conclusion increasingly being made by researchers and policy makers concerned with optimal outcomes for ELLs and other language minority students: Quality of instruction is more important than language of instruction. (Contains 2 tables and 1 footnote.) [For the "Effective Reading Programs for Spanish Dominant English Language Learners (ELLs) in the Elementary Grades: A Synthesis of Research. Educator's Summary," see ED539713.] Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text |  Publisher's website