2013
DOI: 10.1080/10888438.2012.689791
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A Meta-Analysis of Morphological Interventions in English: Effects on Literacy Outcomes for School-Age Children

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

17
271
3
11

Year Published

2014
2014
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
6
3

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 291 publications
(302 citation statements)
references
References 56 publications
17
271
3
11
Order By: Relevance
“…In addition, students who began the study with low morphological awareness skills demonstrated similar gains from the intervention as their peers with typical morphological awareness skills, suggesting that the intervention was equally beneficial for students with varying linguistic awareness skills. Overall, the results of the two studies were similar to those reported for older students in the two synthesis articles (Bowers et al, 2010;Goodwin & Ahn, 2013).…”
Section: How Does Morphological Awareness Affect Written Language Skisupporting
confidence: 86%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…In addition, students who began the study with low morphological awareness skills demonstrated similar gains from the intervention as their peers with typical morphological awareness skills, suggesting that the intervention was equally beneficial for students with varying linguistic awareness skills. Overall, the results of the two studies were similar to those reported for older students in the two synthesis articles (Bowers et al, 2010;Goodwin & Ahn, 2013).…”
Section: How Does Morphological Awareness Affect Written Language Skisupporting
confidence: 86%
“…Given the role of morphological awareness in written language skills, several researchers have evaluated whether morphological awareness interventions improve the morphological awareness and written language skills of school-age children. In 2010, Bowers, Kirby, and Deacon conducted a systematic review of 22 morphological awareness interventions; three years later, Goodwin and Ahn (2013) reported on the outcomes of a meta-analysis of 30 morphological awareness interventions. Across these two articles, the individual studies included in the reviews varied considerably in whether morphological awareness was the sole focus of the intervention, what outcome measures were used (e.g., judgment task, production task), what the length was of the interventions (i.e., seven sessions over 7 weeks vs. 140 lessons over an entire school year), what the participants' ages and ability levels were (most often third through sixth grade; typically developing or "less able"), and whether control groups were used.…”
Section: How Does Morphological Awareness Affect Written Language Skimentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Instruction is significantly effective when it is tailored in accordance with the needs of students who receive the instruction; however, there is no single strategy to ensure success for children of the same school-age. Some research provided insignificant differences indicating that there has been a focus on providing more individualized instruction than group interventions; in disagreement with general education learners who often receive instruction in big classroom-sized groups, interventions with learners with reading difficulties often take place in individualized environments (Goodwin & Ahn, 2013).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This view gained support from many studies showing a positive correlation between morphological awareness and reading development [47, 48] as well as reading disabilities [49]. Further support for using morphological knowledge in reading is emerging from studies demonstrating the contribution of morphological intervention to improved reading skills [50]. …”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 90%