Population / 55 first grade students (The 32 in the experimental group were identified by their teachers and principals. Criterion was either being eligible for special education services, scoring below 80% on the pretest, repeating first grade, or being nominated as having potential for reading failure. The 23 students in the criterion group were students in two of the participating classrooms that did not qualify for the experimental group.
setting / Inclusive first grade classrooms in six states
Method / The study investigated the effects of the computer based IntelliTools Reading program on: (a) onset-rime word decoding skills, (b) phonemic awareness skills, (c) sight words recognition skills, and (d) developmental writing and spelling skills. Scores on pre- and post- tests in six areas were obtained and compared: Onset, Rime, Phonemic Awareness Total, Write Total, Write Weighted Developmental Spelling, and Weighted Total Word identification.
There was an experimental group, but no true control group. Rather all eligible students were in the experimental group. Their performance was compared to peers who were called a “criterion” group. All students in both groups received their regular reading instruction with their class. There was no control of what was taught or how it was taught. None of the sites had a specific literacy program, but each included some mix of phonics, reading of children’s literature, and writing. The typical instruction varied from 60 to 120 minutes per day with fluctuation within and across sites. In addition to the regular reading instruction, the experimental groups received 16 weeks of instruction using the IntelliTools Reading program for 30 minutes per day, four days a week. 15 of the 30 minutes were supported by the teacher and 15 minutes were extended independent practice. All of the students in the experimental group worked in small groups with 2 or 3 students per computer.
Students in the experimental group received a consistent set of balanced-reading instructional activities that were repeated several times during the four-week intervention. Balanced reading instruction was defined in this study as a combination of: (a) instruction in phonics, (b) instruction in automatic word identification, (c) instruction in reading connected text, and (d) opportunities to independently read self-selected texts with approximately equal time spent on each.
From the beginning, the criterion group performed consistently higher and with less variation that the experimental group. However, by the end of the study the experimental group was performing at or above the criterion group’s pretest scores.
Experimental subjects made significant progress in all six areas. When the results were analyzed to determine the effects of the specific interventions (i.e. group interactions) four were found to be significant and two were not. The effect of Write Total and Write Weighted Developmental Spelling were not significant. These two scores had no maximum and when the scores on them were graphed it showed that scores for these two tests rose at a similar rate for both experimental and criterion groups, thus no interaction was evidenced.
However, the progress made by the experimental group was substantial and significant. It is made even more so by the fact that many of the students had previously received intensive interventions to improve their reading and writing skills with little success and several were repeating what had been an unsuccessful first grade year. Their greatest gains were in the use of onsets and in word identification. The gains in word identification were achieved with repeated exposure to words in isolation or any rote drill and practice. The authors also cited the significant gains in the subtests of phonemic awareness, writing, and developmental spelling. There was no formal instruction on phonemic awareness or opportunity to use a complete alphabetic keyboard, however, the results suggested that participants developed these skills a by-product of the IntelliTools Reading program.
Summary / This was a preliminary study. It had some significant problems in that students were not randomly assigned to groups, there was no true control group, there was a possible ceiling effect, and there was no comprehension measure. In spite of this, the magnitude of the progress that was made is encouraging and warrants further research.
Additional Resources / The full text of this research is available from:
Implications for the Classroom / Use of a reading software program such as the IntelliTools Reading program may be beneficial for struggling readers who need to work on phonemic awareness, use of onsets and rimes, word identification, writing, and developmental spelling.
JHCTE- Research A 3.3