Outcomes and process in reading tutoring

Background: Large-scale randomised controlled trials are relatively rare in education. The present study approximates to, but is not exactly, a randomised controlled trial. It was an attempt to scale up previous small peer tutoring projects, while investing only modestly in continuing professional development for teachers.Purpose: A two-year study of peer tutoring in reading was undertaken in one local education authority in Scotland. The relative effectiveness of cross-age versus same-age tutoring, light versus intensive intervention, and reading versus reading and mathematics tutoring were investigated.Programme description (if relevant): The intervention was Paired Reading, a freely available cross-ability tutoring method applied to books of the pupils' choice but above the tutee's independent readability level. It involves Reading Together and Reading Alone, and switching from one to the other according to need.Sample: Eighty-seven primary schools of overall average socio-economic status, ability and gender in one council in Scotland. There were few ethnic minority students. Proportions of students with special needs were low. Children were eight and 10 years old as the intervention started. Macro-evaluation n = 3520. Micro-evaluation Year 1 15 schools n = 592, Year 2 a different 15 schools n = 591, compared with a comparison group of five schools n = 240.Design and methods: Almost all the primary schools in the local authority participated and were randomly allocated to condition. A macro-evaluation tested and retested over a two-year period using Performance Indicators in Primary Schools. A micro-evaluation tested and retested within each year using norm-referenced tests of reading comprehension. Macro-evaluation was with multi-level modelling, micro-evaluation with descriptive statistics and effect sizes, analysis of variance (ANOVA) and multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA).Results: Macro-evaluation yielded significant pre-post gains in reading attainment for cross-age tutoring over both years. No other differences were significant. Micro-evaluation yielded pre-post changes in Year 1 (selected) and Year 2 (random) greater than controls, with no difference between same-age and cross-age tutoring. Light and intensive tutoring were equally effective. Tutoring reading and mathematics together was more effective than only tutoring reading. Lower socio-economic and lower reading ability students did better. Girls did better than boys. Regarding observed implementation quality, some factors were high and others low. Few implementation variables correlated with attainment gain.Conclusions: Paired Reading tutoring does lead to better reading attainment compared with students not participating. This is true in the long term (macro-evaluation) for cross-age tutoring, and in the short term (micro-evaluation) for both cross-age and same-age tutoring. Tutors and tutees benefited. Intensity had no effect but dual tutoring did have an effect. Low-socio-economic status, low-ability and female students did better. The results of the different forms of evaluation were indeed different. There are implications for practice and for future research. © 2012 Copyright Taylor and Francis Group, LLC.

A randomized controlled trial of an early-intervention, computer-based literacy program to boost phonological skills in 4- to 6-year-old children

Background: Many school-based interventions are being delivered in the absence of evidence of effectiveness (Snowling & Hulme, 2011, Br. J. Educ. Psychol., 81, 1).Aim: This study sought to address this oversight by evaluating the effectiveness of the commonly used the Lexia Reading Core5 intervention, with 4- to 6-year-old pupils in Northern Ireland.Sample: A total of 126 primary school pupils in year 1 and year 2 were screened on the Phonological Assessment Battery 2nd Edition (PhAB-2). Children were recruited from the equivalent year groups to Reception and Year 1 in England and Wales, and Pre-kindergarten and Kindergarten in North America.
Methods: A total of 98 below-average pupils were randomized (T0) to either an 8-week block (inline image = 647.51 min, SD = 158.21) of daily access to Lexia Reading Core5 (n = 49) or a waiting-list control group (n = 49). Assessment of phonological skills was completed at post-intervention (T1) and at 2-month follow-up (T2) for the intervention group only.
Results: Analysis of covariance which controlled for baseline scores found that the Lexia Reading Core5 intervention group made significantly greater gains in blending, F(1, 95) = 6.50, p = .012, partial η2 = .064 (small effect size) and non-word reading, F(1, 95) = 7.20, p = .009, partial η2 = .070 (small effect size). Analysis of the 2-month follow-up of the intervention group found that all group treatment gains were maintained. However, improvements were not uniform among the intervention group with 35% failing to make progress despite access to support. Post-hoc analysis revealed that higher T0 phonological working memory scores predicted improvements made in phonological skills.
Conclusions: An early-intervention, computer-based literacy program can be effective in boosting the phonological skills of 4- to 6-year-olds, particularly if these literacy difficulties are not linked to phonological working memory deficits.

Parent education and home-based behaviour analytic intervention: an examination of parents' perceptions of outcome

There is convincing evidence that applied behaviour analysis (ABA) offers a highly effective form of intervention for children with autistic spectrum disorder (ASD). There is less evidence, however, about how parents perceive and evaluate ABA programmes. In this paper an examination of parents’ perceptions of outcome is reported. Twenty-two questionnaires were completed by two groups of parents. The first group had just completed an introductory course in ABA and were in the early stages of implementing ABA programmes with their children. The second group had been involved in ABA education for more than 2 years. Overall, both groups of parents reported a positive impact of ABA on the lives of their children, their family life, and themselves. The long- term group reported that they had achieved complex goals with their children, whilst the short-term group reported an immediate positive impact on child and family functioning and parental self-esteem. Conclusions are drawn in the context of evidence-based practice.