Code-oriented instruction for kindergarten students at risk for reading difficulties: a replication and comparison of instructional groupings

Abstract

The purposes of this study were to replicate previous research on phonicsbased tutoring in kindergarten and to compare treatment effects for students who received individual instruction compared to instruction in dyads. Thirty classroom teachers from 13 urban elementary schools referred at-risk students for participation. Students who met screening criteria were quasi-randomly assigned, within classroom, to one of three conditions: individual tutoring (n = 22), tutoring in dyads (n = 32), or no tutoring (n = 22, classroom instruction only). Twenty-one paraeducators provided 18 weeks of explicit instruction in phonemic skills and the alphabetic code to students during the latter half of kindergarten. Multilevel model results showed that tutored students outperformed non-tutored controls on posttest measures of phonological awareness, word reading accuracy, oral reading fluency, spelling, and comprehension. However, no significant differences were found between the two tutored groups on any measure, suggesting that code-oriented tutoring for pairs of students is a viable alternative to the gold standard of individual instruction.

Efficacy of supplemental phonics-based instruction for low-skilled kindergarteners in the context of language minority status and classroom phonics instruction.

“…Results from our posttest models (see Table 5) show, first, that treatment effects largely replicate the results of previous kinder- garten studies (Vadasy & Sanders, 2008a, 2008bVadasy et al, 2006a). Holding all other variables constant, treatment students significantly outperformed controls on every posttest except phonological awareness: treatment students averaged 13.54 more letters correct per minute, 7.82 more standard score points on word reading, 24.50 more points on developmental spelling, 13.18 more words correct per minute on passage reading fluency, and 6.00 more standard score points on comprehension (recall that treatment status was effect coded).…”

“…Tutored students also maintained significantly higher levels of growth at follow-up at the end of first grade. The subsequent two studies (Vadasy & Sanders, 2008a, 2008b replicated these results.…”

Efficacy of Supplemental Phonics-Based Instruction for Low-Skilled First Graders: How Language Minority Status and Pretest Characteristics Moderate Treatment Response

“…Our finding of significant positive treatment effects on all but one of our outcome measures (across LM and non-LM students) replicates earlier results on the effectiveness of paraeducator-implemented, supplemental phonics-based instruction for at-risk kindergarteners (Vadasy & Sanders, 2008a;Vadasy, Sanders, & Peyton, 2006a), first graders (Jenkins et al, 2004;Vadasy et al, 1997aVadasy et al, , 1997b, and children in Grades 2 and 3 (Vadasy, Sanders, & Peyton, 2006b; …”

Examining How Treatment Fidelity Is Supported, Measured, and Reported in K–3 Reading Intervention Research

“…Although there may be a relation between treatment implementer and the frequency of fidelity reporting, there appears to be a threat to the validity of this finding. Patricia Vadasy was the first author on nine of the 22 studies conducted with paraprofessionals, and all of these studies reported treatment fidelity (Vadasy and Sanders 2008a; Vadasy and Sanders 2008b; Vadasy and Sanders 2010; Vadasy and Sanders 2011; Vadasy et al 2005; Vadasy et al 2006a; Vadasy et al 2006b; Vadasy et al 2007; Vadasy et al 2002, b). If these studies were removed, the percentage of studies with paraprofessional implementers reporting treatment fidelity (46%) would have approximated the level of treatment fidelity reporting across all studies (47%).…”