THESIS. Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University

Transcription

1 The Effects of Word Box Instruction on Word Identification and Spelling Performance of Consonant-Vowel-Consonant Words of First Grade Students who are at Risk Learners THESIS Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University By Brittany Kanotz Graduate Program in Education The Ohio State University 2014 Master s Examination Committee: Sheila Morgan, Advisor Laurice Joseph

2 Copyrighted by Brittany Kanotz

3 Abstract This study examined the effects of word box instruction on word identification and spelling performance of CVC (consonant-vowel-consonant) words of first grade students who are at risk learners. Word identification was measured via oral responses and spelling performance was measured by correct letter sequence. Students were between the ages of five and six, and all three participants were identified as at risk learners in reading. A multiple-probe across participants design was used to evaluate intervention effectiveness. Finding indicated students reading and spelling performance of CVC words improved as a result of the intervention. ii

4 Acknowledgments I would like to thank my advisor, Dr. Sheila Alber Morgan, for her guidance, support, and encouragement, which made this thesis possible. She has been a wonderful mentor helping me create a study that I am very proud of. I wish to thank Dr. Laurice Joseph, who is a leading researcher in word box instruction. I was honored and humbled to work with her and appreciative of her advice and time. I am grateful to Christina Rouse and Mary Sawyer for their dedication and commitment in the planning of my study, editing my writing, and being a wonderful support system. Acknowledgements would not be complete without a special thank you to my family and friends. They have helped encourage me on this journey and have pushed me to reach my educational goals. iii

5 Vita B.S. Early Childhood Education Kent State University Kent, Ohio present Teacher Millennium Community School Columbus, Ohio Major Field: Education FIELDS FOR STUDY Area of Emphasis: Special Education, Mild to Moderate Needs, Early Childhood Education iv

6 Table of Contents Abstract.....ii Acknowledgements iii Vita iv Table of Contents... v List of Tables..... vi List of Figures......vii Chapter 1: Introduction Chapter 2: Methods Chapter 3: Results Chapter 4: Discussion References Appendix A: Word Box Appendix B: CVC Words. 60 Appendix C: Procedural Fidelity Check List Appendix D: Social Validity Questionnaires v

7 List of Tables Table 1. Participant Demographics.26 Table 2. IOA Table 3. Procedural Fidelity...38 Table 4. Maintenance.41 Table 5. Summary of Participants Reading Results Table 6. Summary of Participants Spelling Results...44 Table 7. Social Validity Student Results Table 8. Social Validity Teacher Results...46 vi

8 List of Figures Figure 1. Number of Words Read Correctly Figure 2. Number of Words Spelled Correctly.40 vii

9 CHAPTER 1 LITERATURE REVIEW Reading: A Necessary Life Skill Teaching a child to read is one of the most important life skills an educator can pass on to a child. However, many students within our society are failing to learn to read. Described as the gateway to all other achievements by the American Federation of Teachers (2007), reading is an essential component to success. Leading literacy researchers have estimated tens of millions of adults lack the essential literacy skills required for normal daily activities (Bursuck and Damer, 2011). One major piece of these basic literary skills is phonemic awareness. Phonemic awareness is one of the five components of reading in addition to vocabulary, comprehension, phonological awareness, and fluency (National Reading Panel, 2000). All of these factors play an essential role in a child s reading development, but phonemic awareness needs to be the focus of literary development from the start. Phonemic awareness is when a person is able to hear and manipulate individual letter sounds in spoken words (Bursuck & Damer, 2011). Students are taught this skill in preschool and kindergarten as an emergent literacy skill to allow a smooth transition into reading. Students who do not develop phonemic awareness in their primary years are at 1

10 risk of performing below grade level in other reading skills including phonics, fluency, and further literacy components (Wagner et al., 1997). Phonemic Awareness Instructional Practices There are several ways to incorporate phonemic awareness activities into the classroom in order to help students become successful with hearing and manipulating individual phonemes. One simple way teachers have taught phonemic awareness within the classroom is through rhyming activities. Teachers incorporate rhyming activities in their classrooms through read alouds, sorting rhymes, explicit instruction on rhymes, and matching and producing rhymes. The ability to hear the similarities and difference between the words strengthens students phonemic awareness abilities and helps them become familiar with many common word patterns. Another phonemic awareness strategy that has been common in the primary grades are blending and segmenting activities. Blending a word is when a child is given individual phonemes and is able to say the entire word. Segmenting is when a child is given the whole word and is able to say each individual phoneme within the word. Teachers have used activities such as clapping syllables in a word, blending syllables or onsets and rimes into words, or segmenting words into onsets and rimes. Blending and segmenting activities have enabled students to develop early literacy and reading skills. Segmenting is the primary component of word box instruction. During word box instruction, students are segmenting each individual phoneme in the word, which helps them blend the word after hearing it segmented over multiple phases. In word sort instruction students are categorizing words based upon certain criteria, which is similar to 2

11 matching and sorting rhyming words. Word sort and word box instruction both incorporate other phonemic awareness strategies into the process. Previous research has examined the use of word sort and word box instructional strategies and their corresponding effects on phonemic awareness. Word box and word sort instruction are two phonics-based methods that help children make the connection between the written letter and spoken sound (Joseph, 2002b). Word boxes. Word boxes, also known as sound boxes or Elkonin boxes, consist of a rectangle that is divided into sections, depending on the number of phonemes in the word. For example, the word cat would be represented by a rectangle divided into three sections. Once the box is created, students are then guided through a three-step process. Using the word, students segment sounds, match letters to sounds, and then write letters. Sound boxes not only require students to use auditory skills, but the sound boxes incorporate a kinesthetic component that allows students to become more proficient with manipulating individual phonemes (McCarthy, 2008). Word sorts. Word sorts are similar to word boxes, but word sorts focus on categorizing common phonological and orthographic components. Joseph (2002b) shared that words sorts consist of a set of words that share a common spelling or sound pattern. Students are then guided through three steps: 1) placing chips below category words according to similar sound patterns; 2) sorting words printed on note cards below category words according to similar spelling patterns; 3) spelling words below category words according to similar spelling and sound patterns (p ). Word sorts, like word boxes, are an instructional strategy used by educators to help children develop 3

12 phonemic awareness. Word sorts enable students to explore words and observe their individual phonemes while distinguishing sound and letter patterns (Joseph, 2008). Previous Research Overall, studies evaluating word sort and word box instructional practices have found them to be effective in improving students reading and spelling performance. In the studies below, researches examine the effects of these phonemic awareness techniques using different variables, measures, and students ranging from preschool to high school with diverse learning abilities. Ball and Blachman (1991) studied the effects of phonemic awareness instruction on early word recognition and developmental spelling with 30 kindergarten students. The students were pre-assessed with the Peabody Picture and Vocabulary Test-Revised and the Word Identification Subtest of the Woodcock Reading Mastery Test as pre-tests. Students were then randomly placed into three groups: phoneme awareness training group, language activities group, and a control group. Students placed in the phoneme awareness group and language group met four times a week for 20-minute lessons in small groups of five over a seven-week period. The lesson for the phoneme awareness group consisted of three activities including: (1) a say it-and-move-it activity, which is very similar to word box instruction, (2) a segmentation-related activity, and (3) letter-naming and letter-sound instruction. Students who were placed in the language group participated in lessons including: (1) vocabulary building activities, (2) listening to stories, (3) categorizing skills, and (4) letter-sound and letter-naming activities. The control group received no intervention and instead 4

13 participated in traditional classroom instruction. At the end of the intervention students took the same tests prior to the study, and were also asked to read 20 and spell five CVC patterned words. Results showed that students who received specific segmentation training performed better on phoneme segmentation posttests than the students placed in the language activities group and the control group. The study concluded that children can be taught to segment words into phonemes, and when this skill is coupled with letter-naming and letter-sound instruction, students display early reading and writing skills Similarly, Joseph (1999) used the same phonemic awareness strategy, word box instruction, and extended the research by implementing the strategy with elementary students identified with learning disabilities. In this study the author examines whether word box instruction would be effective for improving word identification and spelling performance of children with learning disabilities. The word box instructional method was implemented with six urban elementary students, ranging from second to fourth grade, who were identified as having a specific learning disability in basic reading skills. Students were receiving services in a resource room for part of the day, as well as active members in the general education classes for specific subjects. Throughout the study, word box sessions lasted 20 minutes over 21 daily sessions. The author met with each student one-on-one and provided guidance and feedback as necessary. The instructor went through each phase of the word box instruction, beginning with chips, moving to magnetic letters, and then ending with writing the letters. Once word box instruction was completed, the instructor administered 10-item word 5

14 identification and spelling probes Finding from this study reported word box instruction was effective in improving and maintaining all students word identification and spelling performance. After several word box instruction sessions, students began to say each phoneme in the correct order prior to saying the word as a whole. Maintenance and generalization measures demonstrated all students could successfully identify and spelled words in another context one month after instruction and intervention was terminated. Another study conducted by Joseph (2000a) also examined word box instruction, and in addition compared this strategy to word sort instruction. Specifically, the author compared word box instruction, word sort instruction, and traditional classroom instruction to compare student s phonemic awareness, spelling, and word identification. The participants included in this study were forty-two first grade students from two classrooms. The participants were placed in one of the three experimental conditions totaling 14 students per group. Words chosen for the study were CVC patterned words because students had not met mastery with reading or spelling. Children who participated in the word box and word sort instruction received 50 lessons total, which consisted of 20-minute daily lessons. The general education teacher taught the students in the control group with traditional lessons focusing on phonograms. These lessons included choral reading and workbook activities that related to the phonograms being taught. Findings from the Joseph (2000a) study were measured in a separate classroom where students were able to work in an environment that was free of distractions. The 6

15 author assessed the student s final performance using four posttest measures: (1) phonemic awareness, (2) word identification, (3) pseudo word naming, and (4) spelling measures. Results indicated word box instruction and word sort instruction were successful strategies for improving skills in phonemic awareness, spelling, and word identification compared to the control group. In addition, when word sort instruction was compared to word box instruction, there were very little differences in the students performance. The study suggested that future research should compare phonics approaches using a larger sample size of participants with high frequency words rather than CVC words so generalization can be concluded Joseph (2000b) continued the word box instruction research when this second study incorporated the phonemic awareness method using a larger sample size of students, an entire class of first graders. This particular study explored the effectiveness of word box instruction on the word identification and spelling performance of fortyeight first grade students. Students were given a spelling and word identification pre-test consisting of 30 CVC patterned words that were selected from a list of 200 words. During the intervention students were either placed in the word box instruction group or the traditional phonics instruction group. Both groups of 24 children used the same 30 words from the pretests during their instruction. Groups met daily in separate classrooms for 20 minutes over a four-week period. In both conditions, CVC words were taught in order of introducing the middle /a/ vowel sound first, then /e/, /i/, /o/ and /u/. The word box instruction consisted of three phases: (1) phonemic awareness, (2) letter to sound matching, and (3) a spelling phase. The traditional phonics instruction group used 7

16 methods such as choral reading, choral responding, and completing worksheets that contained the CVC words presented in the activities. Findings from Joseph (2000b) demonstrated students in the word box instruction group outperformed students in the traditional phonics approach for both spelling and word identification. This study also provided evidence that word box instruction can be effective while using a large group of students, as oppose to the one-on-one approach. The study suggests that future research should examine words outside of the CVC word pattern and investigate the effects of word box instruction on reading and writing words in connected text form. Joseph and Maslanka (2002) continued to research the effects of sound box instruction, this time comparing it to another phonemic awareness approach, sound sort instruction on the phonological awareness of preschool children. All pretest and posttests measures consisted of the same five components: rhyme, segmentation, isolation, blending, and detecting similar and different beginning and ending sounds. The twenty preschool students, ranging from ages 3-4 years old, were split into two groups, one group received sound sort instruction and the others received sound box instruction. Both groups met for 15 minutes per day, over a 26 consecutive days. The study was conducted in the student s classroom, but the students worked with the interventionist in groups of 5 at a small table in the back of the room. Pictures used for both activities were taken from Words their Way, Word Study for Phonics, Vocabulary, and Spelling (Joseph & Maslanka, 2002, p. 279). Findings from this study concluded that sound box instruction was more 8

17 successful than the sound sort instruction with improving the skills of segmenting and isolating medial sounds. In all other areas (i.e., rhyme, blending, detecting similar and different beginning and ending sounds) there was no significant different between the two types of instruction. The study suggests that future research should include children from lower socioeconomic levels and diverse cultures since the students in this current study were from parents of middle to high socioeconomic levels and Caucasian. Another future topic of study recommended by Joseph and Maslanka (2002) was to implement the same techniques, but to add a control group who would not receive any specialized phonological awareness techniques or instruction. Joseph continued to extend the research on the word box instruction by implementing the method with a different population of students, primary aged students with mild intellectual disabilities. The purpose of this was to investigate the combination of word box and word sort instruction on spelling and word identification performance for children ages nine and ten with intellectual disabilities in an urban school setting. The author chose the participants after observing students difficulty in reading and spelling CVC words, work samples, and the results of screening for reading proficiency with CVC words. Prior to the intervention, the author composed a screening process which consisted of students reading 100 CVC words over a five day period, 20 words per day, one-on-one with the author, followed by a whole group evaluation on spelling of the same 100 words. Words spelled or read correctly were eliminated from the study. After the screenings were administered, the author held the interventions in the classroom at a 9

18 small table one-on-one with each student daily over a 40-minute period. The depended variable was the number of correctly read or spelled words. Reading responses were counted as correct if they were read accurately within 60 seconds, and writing responses were counted correct if the entire word was spelled accurately. The word box part of the study was broken into three sections: (1) Using counters to say each sound in the CVC word, (2) Counters were replaced with magnetic letters, following the same procedure as step one, and (3) Students wrote the correct letter in each box. The word sort activity followed the word box instruction, implementing the same words. Findings from this study indicated that all students demonstrated increased performance in reading and spelling CVC words with the combination of word box and word sort instruction. One participants performance was more immediate, in comparison to the other two participants, who had more of a gradual change in responding. Results from this study were consistent with other studies comparing the effects of word box instruction and word sort instruction on decoding and spelling performance CVC words. Joseph (2002a) suggested that future research should include setting mastery criteria to increase the number of words taught to students per session to further increase the amount of words taught by the end of the intervention. Similarly, Davualt and Joseph (2004) examined word box instruction, but adapted their research by coupling it with repeated readings. This study evaluated the effects of implementing two instructional techniques, word box instruction and repeated readings, to increase the reading fluency performance of high school students with intellectual disabilities. Students selected for the study were three high school students receiving 10

19 special education services for reading and language arts and were currently reading at the level of a first or second grade student. Prior to the intervention, students were given the DIBELS assessment to determine their independent reading levels. During the intervention students met one-onone with the author for minutes five days a week. The first part of each session students were to read reading passages one grade level above their independent reading levels within one minute. While reading, the instructor recorded all incorrect words, and then wrote those words on index cards to teach through word box instruction. At the end of the lesson, the students were instructed to reread the passage again within one minute. During each session, a new reading passage was presented to the student. Findings from Davault and Joseph (2004) indicated repeated readings paired with word box instruction increases reading fluency. By the end of the study, all three students were reading two grade levels above their independent reading level. Additionally, this study demonstrated that the two instructional techniques showed great significance in helping high school students with severe reading delays. The study suggests that future research should include adding a comprehension piece to the intervention and pairing repeated readings with other types of corrective feedback methods such as the I do, we do, you do method. During this strategy students are explicitly taught with instructor guidance, given guided practice, and then given an opportunity for independent practice. Another type of corrective feedback is direct or explicit feedback, which is when the teacher identifies the error and provides the correct response, as oppose to indirect feedback, in which the teacher identifies that an error has been made, but does not 11

20 identify the correct response. Conclusions After reviewing the positive results of previous research on the instructional practices of word box and word sort instruction, there are several strong conclusions. First, word box instruction is an effective approach to teaching students how to identify and spell words. Specifically, when Elkonin boxes are implemented students are able to hear the individual phonemes in words, segment words, and make the connection between the spoken phoneme and the corresponding grapheme (Clay, 1993). Students in each study showed a positive outcome after word box instruction was implemented. Another conclusion based upon the studies discussed was that word sorts have positive effects on the phonemic awareness of students of varying ages and a variety of ability levels. Furthermore, experts report that a child s phonemic awareness capabilities are a valid measure of how a child will succeed in reading (Conderman & Flett, 2002). Word sorts have helped students gain an understanding of phonemes, furthering students abilities to identify and spell words. A final conclusion that can be made based upon previous research is that using the phonemic awareness instructional strategies, word boxes and words sorts, increase students word recognition and writing skills. Despite the differences of each study (i.e., participant size, participants abilities, measures, variables), the phonemic awareness methods of word box and word sort instruction have shown to help students who are performing below grade level in reading by developing their phonemic awareness skills (Keesey, 2012). 12

21 Limitations and Implications for Future Research After examining previous research on word box and word sort instructional practices to increase phonemic awareness, there are several limitations. One for instance is the age level of students who were participants of the studies. More than half of the students who participated in the studies were in preschool through grade three, all primary grade levels. These two instructional strategies show a profound impact on phonemic awareness within the elementary grade levels, but there is not enough evidence to back up the support within middle and high school students. Another limitation was the population of students used within each study. The majority of the studies consisted of Caucasian students. It would be interesting to not only study the effects of these approaches with children from different cultural backgrounds, but also from various socioeconomic backgrounds as well. Finally, one last limitation of the studies was the words used within each of the interventions. A lot of the authors used CVC patterned words to carry out their interventions. Future research should incorporate other types of word patterns such as CCVC (flag, step, drop, stop), vowel teams (/ea/, /ie/, /oa/), and high frequency words, which are words that appear frequently in text (and, the, is). Addressing some of the limitations from this previous research should extend word sort and word box instruction on phonemic awareness to more diverse populations. For example, using word sort and word boxes to promote phonemic awareness with middle school or high schools students with mild/moderate disabilities would be a very beneficial to extend the research on these instructional practices. Researches can also use 13

22 the same techniques of word box and word sorts by using high frequency words instead of CVC patterned words. It is clear that phonemic awareness instructional strategies and techniques would benefit from addressing the limitations of previous research to support future research. Successful phonemic awareness instruction helps children to effectively and proficiently detect and manipulate sounds in spoken and written language (Beller, 2006). Some questions that are still unanswered by the research are: (1) What are the effects of word box and sound sort instruction with students in middle and high school with sever reading disabilities? (2) How can these instructional strategies benefit students from various socioeconomic levels? (3) Are these phonological awareness strategies effective when incorporating words that do not follow the CVC pattern? By focusing on these questions, it is hoped the research will aid authors, researchers, and educators in choosing the best techniques to promote phonemic awareness. The purpose of the current study was to examine the effects of word box instruction on word identification and spelling performance of CVC words of first grade students who are at risk learners. Research suggest that the use of word box instruction can improve the reading and spelling performance of CVC words for students with disabilities; therefore, word box instruction was selected for this intervention. Word box instruction can help students, who are at risk learners struggle with phonemic awareness, learn and segment phonemes into words to become better readers and spellers. The goal of this study was to extend previous research on word box instruction by examining the effects of word box instruction with at risk learners. 14

23 The following research questions were posed: 1. What are the effects of word box instruction on word identification of CVC words of first grade students who are at risk learners? 2. What are the effects of word box instruction on spelling performance of CVC words of first grade students who are at risk learners? 3. What are the teacher and student opinions of word box instruction? 15

24 CHAPTER 2 METHODS This chapter presents the methods that were used in this study. The participants and setting are explained as well as identifying the observer and experimenter. In addition, this chapter presents the materials used, definition and measurement of dependent variables, IOA, procedural reliability, experimental design, and procedures. Participants and Setting Three first-grade students participated in the study. Students ranged from ages six to seven years old, including two males and one female. All students were African American and attended a charter school in Columbus, Ohio, where 100% of the school population received free and reduced breakfast and lunch. The experimenter obtained permission consent from all parents prior to the start of the study. All students were performing below grade level in reading and were considered at risk. According to the Diagnostic Reading Assessment, given during the beginning of the school year, all students were reading at a level one, which correlated to a beginning kindergarten reading level. Students were administered the Stanford Achievement test in November and all students scored a grade equivalence of K.1-K.3 in reading (see Table 1 for student demographics and scores). All baseline, intervention, and post-intervention sessions were conducted in the 16

25 title room, which was located in the second/third grade wing of the school building. The room was divided in half with a wall partition, one half used for math instruction, and the other half used for reading instruction. The reading half of the room contained a kidney shaped table used for small group instruction, bookshelves, a computer center, and a teacher s desk. The classroom provided an environment that was mostly free from noise and distractions. Students attended school from 9:00 AM to 3:00 PM and received instruction in a first grade classroom throughout the day. The researcher served as the interventionist, and the intervention was implemented at a kidney shaped table in the corner of the room. During individual intervention sessions, the participant sat next to the interventionist. Materials were positioned in front of them so the participant could see the teacher modeling taught skills. All sessions during baseline, intervention, and post-intervention conditions took place between 8:45 AM and 1:00 PM. Experimenter The experimenter was a second year master s student in the Mild/Moderate Intervention Specialist program at The Ohio State University. She held a bachelor s degree in Early Childhood Education from Kent State University and was a classroom teacher of four years working with kindergarten students. She was the Title One Reading teacher at the school where the research was conducted. Observers The primary data collectors were two doctoral students in the Special Education Program at The Ohio State University. They both collected interobserver agreement data 17

26 and procedural fidelity data for all sessions required across all phases of the study for each participant. Materials A researcher-created word box was utilized throughout the intervention (see Appendix A). The word boxes created for all students were on 3x5 index cards. The cards had a rectangle divided into three sections, separated by two vertical lines. Other materials included yellow and red 1 diameter circular chips, plastic lowercase letters, pre-written word lists, lined and numbered paper for spelling probes, pencils, dry erase markers, erasers, and flashcards containing consonant-vowel-consonant words (CVC words) (see Appendix B). Assessment Screening in baseline. All students were screened prior to the administration of the intervention of each CVC phase (i.e., vowel /a/, vowel /e/, vowel /i/, vowel /o/, vowel /u/) to eliminate CVC words students have already mastered. Students met with the researcher individually and were asked to read aloud and spell words that contained the same vowel in the CVC patterned word prior to that specific phase. For example, during phase one, students were only assessed on words containing the middle vowel /a/. Words were counted as mastered if students were able to read the word. If students were able to read the word, this word was not included in the intervention phase. Definition and Measurement of Dependent Variables Data was collected on two dependent variables for each student. The dependent variables were the number of correctly spelled CVC words (i.e., vowel /a/, vowel /e/, 18

27 vowel /i/, vowel /o/, vowel /u/) and the number of correctly read CVC words (i.e., vowel /a/, vowel /e/, vowel /i/, vowel /o/, vowel /u/). Criteria levels for success were set for 9 out of 9 words read correctly in two consecutive sessions. Correctly spelled CVC words. The number of correctly spelled CVC words was defined as the number of words the student wrote with correct spelling during the spelling probe. Spelling probes consisted of the same CVC patterned words used in the preassessment and intervention instruction. The instructor said the word in isolation, in a sentence, and then in isolation again. The instructor repeated the word only once after the initial time upon student request. Responses were counted as correct if the entire word was spelled in correct letter sequence. Responses were counted as incorrect if only part of the word was spelled correctly, a different word was spelled, or if the student made no response. Correctly read CVC words. The number of correctly read CVC words was defined as the number of words with CVC patterns that the student correctly read. Reading probes consisted of the same CVC patterned words used in the baseline screening and intervention instruction. The CVC words were written in black marker on index cards. Responses were counted as correct if the CVC word was read aloud correctly within three seconds of seeing the card. Responses were counted as incorrect if the student pronounced only part of the word or substituted a word for the target word. Definition and Measurement of Independent Variable The independent variable used for the intervention was word box instruction. Word box instruction is an instructional method that is used to help build phonemic 19

28 awareness skills in beginning readers. Word box instruction includes three phases, in which each phase is taught using a model (I do), teacher guided with corrective feedback (we do), and independent practice (you do). During each phase, the student was presented with a card that had a rectangle divided into three sections. In the first stage, students moved a chip into each box segmenting each sound in the CVC word. In the second stage the chips were replaced with magnetic letters to say each phoneme. In the final stage, students wrote each phoneme in each section of the box. Inter-observer agreement (IOA). Two trained observers independently collected data for 33% of baseline and intervention sessions. IOA was calculated for all dependent variables (reading and spelling) during baseline and intervention conditions. Permanent products (i.e., spelling probes and video recordings) were used to collect data on CVC words written correctly for spelling and CVC words read out loud correctly for reading. The experimenter made copies of one-third of both baseline and intervention spelling probes before scoring them for the independent observer s use. The trained observers were also provided with video recordings. An agreement on spelling probes was defined as both observers independently recording a word spelled correctly or incorrectly. A disagreement was defined as one observer scoring a word correct and the other observer scoring the word incorrect. An agreement on CVC words read aloud was defined as both observers independently recording a CVC word read correctly or incorrectly aloud. A disagreement was defined as one observer scoring a CVC word read correctly and the other observer scoring the CVC word read as incorrect. Agreements per dependent variable were then 20

29 divided by the total number of agreements plus disagreements and multiplied by 100. Procedural Fidelity Baseline, intervention, and post-intervention sessions with all participants were video recorded in order to assess the integrity with which the interventionist implemented the intervention. The experimenter created a procedural integrity checklist (Appendix C), which was used throughout every session to ensure the fidelity of intervention procedures. The checklist consisted of 21 steps, which guided each session. In steps one and two the experimenter passed out the materials to the students and explained clear directions and expectations. Steps three through fourteen were used to make sure the correct phase of the intervention was being implemented and corrective feedback was given throughout. The last six steps ensured the reading and writing probes were administered with fidelity. In addition to the experimenter utilized the checklist to selfmonitor implementation of procedures. The two trained observers independently scored at least 33% of intervention sessions using the procedural fidelity checklist and video recordings of sessions. Social Validity Social validity was measured through questionnaires administered to both the students who participated in the intervention (see Appendix D) and the students primary classroom teachers (see Appendix D). The questionnaire administered to the student participants was read to each child independently by the students classroom teacher when the study was complete. Each question was read aloud, and the student responded by filling in either a smiley face or a sad face, depending on whether or not they agreed 21

30 with the statement. The questions on the questionnaire addressed whether the students liked the intervention, whether they felt it helped them become better readers, whether they felt it helped them become better at spelling, and whether they felt it would be good for other students. The students primary classroom teachers were given a questionnaire with statements referring to the procedures and outcomes of the intervention. Teachers responded to questions about whether they noticed an increase in their students spelling and reading performance, and whether they felt a change in their students attitudes about reading and writing. Experimental Design To evaluate intervention effects experimentally, a multiple probe design across students was employed. The design allowed the instructor to examine changes across baseline, instruction, and maintenance conditions on spelling and reading probes. Procedures Baseline screening. During baseline conditions spelling and reading probes (screening) were administered to students to assess current levels of spelling and reading of CVC words. Each probe consisted of nine CVC patterned words (i.e., vowel /a/, vowel /e/, vowel /i/, vowel /o/, vowel /u/) containing the same vowel. The probes were administered in the same format as the ones created and implemented during the intervention. All probes were given to students using the same language and wording as the ones used during the intervention. If a student read one word correctly during the screening in baseline, the word was removed from the list, replaced with a new word, and another probe was administered the following session. This process was used to ensure 22

31 that students did not have prior knowledge with the various CVC words during intervention. Word Box Instruction Intervention. During the intervention, the instructor met with each student individually for 10 to 15 minute sessions at different times throughout the day. The words used during the intervention were compiled from the same list used to create the baseline probes. The CVC words introduced to students started with the middle /a/ vowel sound and then /e/, /i/, /o/, and /u/. Words were not used during intervention if the students spelled or read these words correct during the baseline screening probes for each type of CVC word patterns. At the beginning of the lesson the student was presented with a word box card, three colored chips, plastic letters, a dry eraser marker, and an eraser. There were a total of three stages for each CVC word instructed within the intervention including: (1) working with chips, (2) working with plastic letters, and (3) writing the actual letters in the word box using a dry-erase marker. Once the student placed all materials in front of their working space, the instructor modeled (I do), guided instruction (we do), and then allowed independent practice (you do) during each stage of the instruction. Stage one of the intervention (use of chips) focused on phonemic awareness. Students placed their notecard and chips on the desk. First, students watched as the instructor modeled the strategy using the chips. One chip was placed under each rectangle, as the instructor stretched out each phoneme in the word, a chip was moved up into the rectangular box for the phoneme spoken. Next, the teacher and the student repeated the word slowly and together moved their own chips in their word box. Finally, 23

32 the student independently articulated the word slowly and moved the chips into the box as each phoneme was spoken. During stage two of the intervention (use of plastic letters), students replaced the chips with plastic letters. The letters given to the students corresponded with the phonemes in the word being instructed. The same direct instruction procedures (I do, we, do, you do) were utilized as in the first stage of the intervention. In the final stage of the instruction (written letters), the plastic letters were replaced with written letters. Again, the same direct instruction procedures (I do, we, do, you do) were utilized as in the first stage of the intervention. All students during the intervention were given positive feedback and corrective feedback when necessary. If a student made an error, the teacher implemented the, I dowe do-you do strategy again from the beginning of that stage (chips, plastic letters, or written letters). During the last five minutes of each session students were presented with the same type of reading and spelling probes, to measure the dependent variables, given during baseline. Generalization. To see if students were able to generalize their skills with CVC words and patterns, generalization data were taken during the intervention. Once the student met the reading criteria, nine words read correctly in two consecutive sessions, the instructor administered a generalization probe with nine untrained words, containing the same vowel sound. For example, when measuring generalization for the vowel /a/, the experimenter showed the student nine untrained /a/ CVC words for the reading probe, and then read aloud the same nine /a/ words for the spelling probe. The probe was 24

33 administered the same way as the ones used in baseline and intervention. Maintenance. To ensure students success with mastering the skills taught during the intervention, maintenance data were collected during and after the intervention. During the intervention the experimenter probed the student on the previously taught vowel words one week after instruction ended, and then once every other week. For example, when measuring maintenance for the vowel /a/, the experimenter referred back to the same nine taught words during intervention and used those words for both the reading and spelling probe. 25

34 Chapter 2 Table Table 1. Participant Demographics and Scores. Participant Age Grade Race DRA Level Stanford Achievement Score Matthew 7 1 African American 1 K.3 Lauren 6 1 African American 1 K.1 Liam 6 1 African American 1 K.1 26

35 CHAPTER 3 RESULTS IOA IOA was calculated for all dependent variables (reading and spelling) during baseline and intervention sessions by the two trained observers for 33% of all sessions. IOA was calculated using the total number of agreements per dependent variable divided by the total number of agreements plus disagreements multiplied by 100. See full results in Table 2. Matthew IOA (baseline, spelling intervention, and reading intervention) 97.5% Lauren IOA (baseline, spelling intervention, and reading intervention) 100% Liam IOA (baseline, spelling intervention, and reading intervention) 100% Procedural Fidelity Procedural fidelity was measured independently by the two trained observers using a checklist that task analyzed each step of the baseline and word box instruction procedures. Procedural integrity was calculated by dividing the number of steps completed accurately in the correct sequence by the total number of steps and then multiplied by 100. Procedural fidelity was taken on 33% of all sessions. See full results in Table 3. Matthew procedural fidelity (baseline, spelling intervention, and reading intervention) - 99% 27

36 Lauren procedural fidelity (baseline, spelling intervention, and reading intervention) 100% Liam procedural fidelity (baseline, spelling intervention, and reading intervention) 100% Summary of Results Figure 1 shows the number of words read correctly (out of 9) and Figure 2 shows the number of words spelled correctly (out of 9) for all three participants for each session across all phases of the study. Figure 1 and 2 display generalization data and Table 4 displays maintenance data. Generalization and maintenance probes were conducted upon student s completion of each vowel phase (/a/, /e/, /i/, /o/, /u/) of word box instruction. See full results for a summary of scores in Table 5 and 6 for all participants. Reading. Matthew. Prior to implementing of each intervention phase, overall baseline data were generally stable. The number of words read correctly ranged between zero and five with a mean of 1.3 (14%) correct responses, displaying some variability. The amount of baseline sessions for Matthew ranged from two to five sessions before reaching intervention for each phase (/a/, /e/, /i/, /o/, /u/). During baseline screening for CVC words containing /a/, Matthew s scores ranged from two to five correctly read words with an average of 3.5 (38%) correct responses. As intervention for CVC words containing /a/ began, there was a significant change in level from baseline to intervention. Matthew displayed a consistent score of one word read correctly over four consecutive sessions, and then began to show a 28

37 continuous increasing trend. His responses ranged from zero words read correctly to nine over 18 sessions, with an average of 3.9 (43%) correct responses. During baseline screening for CVC words containing /e/, Matthew s scores ranged from zero to three correctly read words with an average of 1.5 (16%) correct responses. Once intervention began for CVC words containing /e/, there was an increasing trend that quickly reached nine out of nine words read correctly over seven sessions. Sessions ranged from two to nine words read correct with a mean of 6.2 (68%) correct responses. During baseline screening for CVC words containing /i/, Matthew s score was 0 correctly read words with an average of 0 (0%) correct responses. As intervention for CVC words containing /i/ was implemented, there was moderate variability over the 14 sessions. Reading responses ranged from one to nine words read correctly and the average number of words read for this phase was 5.5 (61%) correct responses. During baseline screening for CVC words containing /o/, Matthew s scores ranged from zero to five correctly read words with an average of 2 (22%) correct responses. Once intervention for CVC words containing /o/ began, Matthew displayed an increasing trend. From session three to session eight he maintained the same amount of words read for two consecutive sessions. Correct reading responses ranged from two to nine correct responses with a mean of 6 (66%) correct responses over 12 sessions. Intervention for CVC words containing /u/ only consisted of one intervention session due to the end of the school year. Matthew scored three words correct in the intervention session from one baseline score of zero. 29

38 Generalization data was collected during the last intervention session of each phase. Correct reading responses ranged from zero to four with a mean of 1.7 (18%) correct responses. Matthew displayed a consistent score of zero on his first two generalization reading probes, and then began to show an increasing trend from three to four. Maintenance data was collected the last day of the intervention for each phase and every other week after that. Mathew s reading maintenance data ranged from five out of nine (55%) words read correctly, to nine out of nine (100%) words read correctly over a seven week period, averaging 6.7 (74%) words read correctly every other week. Lauren. During all baseline sessions before the intervention phases of CVC words with /a/ and /e/, Lauren s reading responses remained stable and low. Overall, during baseline sessions, the number of words read correctly ranged between zero and two with a mean of one (11%) correct response. During baseline screening for CVC words containing /a/, Lauren read one, two, and then zero words correctly over three sessions. Therefore, Lauren s scores ranged from zero to one correctly read words with an average of.5 (5.5%) correct responses. As intervention for CVC words containing /a/ was implemented, Lauren maintained two words read correctly and then began to show an increasing trend. As the trend increased, during the fifth session it decreased, and then began to increase again during the eighth session. This pattern displayed moderate variability over 21 sessions. Correct reading responses ranged from three to nine words read correctly, with a mean of 6.4 (71%) correct responses. 30

39 During baseline screening for CVC words containing /e/, Lauren read zero, one, and then zero words correctly over three sessions. Therefore, Lauren s scores ranged from zero to one correctly read words with an average of.33 (3.6%) correct responses. During intervention for CVC words containing /e/, Lauren showed an increasing trend from baseline, but then decreased back to baseline with zero words read correctly. After the second session of the intervention phase, Lauren continued to show an increasing trend. Several times Lauren would maintain the same amount of words read correctly over two to three sessions. From sessions there was moderate variability moving between six to nine words read correctly, and then a quick decreasing trend in the final session. Overall, Lauren s reading responses ranged from zero to nine words read correctly with a mean of 5.9 (65%) correct responses. Lauren did not reach the rest of the intervention phases (i.e., /i/, /o/, /u/) due to the end of the school year. At the end of each intervention phase for CVC words containing /a/ and /e/, generalization was measured. Lauren was able to generalize six out of nine (66%) untaught words. Over a five-week period, maintenance data was collected on previously taught CVC words with the vowel /a/. Lauren was able to correctly read a range of seven to nine words correctly in the maintenance sessions, averaging 8 (88%) correct responses every other week. Liam. For Liam, the reading intervention of CVC words with /a/ using word boxes was adjusted to meet his specific learning needs. Liam received four varying types of instruction including: (1) teach three new words, (2) review two previously taught words and teach two new words, (3) Review two previously taught words with spelling 31