WWC review of this study

Improving Reading Comprehension, Science Domain Knowledge, and Reading Engagement through a First-Grade Content Literacy Intervention

Kim, James S.; Burkhauser, Mary A.; Mesite, Laura M.; Asher, Catherine A.; Relyea, Jackie Eunjung; Fitzgerald, Jill; Elmore, Jeff (2021). Journal of Educational Psychology, v113 n1 p3-26. Retrieved from: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1281030

  • Randomized Controlled Trial
     examining 
    623
     Students
    , grade
    1

Reviewed: September 2022

No statistically significant positive
findings
Meets WWC standards without reservations
General Literacy Achievement outcomes—Indeterminate effect found for the domain
Outcome
measure
Comparison Period Sample Intervention
mean
Comparison
mean
Significant? Improvement
    index
Evidence
tier

Measure of Academic Progress (MAP) Primary Grade Reading

Model of Reading Engagement (MORE) vs. Business as usual

0 Days

Full sample;
478 students

N/A

N/A

No

--

mCLASS Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills (DIBELS) Composite Score

Model of Reading Engagement (MORE) vs. Business as usual

0 Days

Full sample;
623 students

N/A

N/A

No

--
Student Behavior outcomes—Indeterminate effect found for the domain
Outcome
measure
Comparison Period Sample Intervention
mean
Comparison
mean
Significant? Improvement
    index
Evidence
tier

Me and My Reading Profile

Model of Reading Engagement (MORE) vs. Business as usual

0 Days

Full sample;
465 students

N/A

N/A

No

--
Vocabulary outcomes—Indeterminate effect found for the domain
Outcome
measure
Comparison Period Sample Intervention
mean
Comparison
mean
Significant? Improvement
    index
Evidence
tier

Science Vocabulary Knowledge Depth (Kim et al 2021) Untaught words

Model of Reading Engagement (MORE) vs. Business as usual

0 Days

Full sample;
459 students

N/A

N/A

No

--
Writing Quality outcomes—Indeterminate effect found for the domain
Outcome
measure
Comparison Period Sample Intervention
mean
Comparison
mean
Significant? Improvement
    index
Evidence
tier

Science Argumentative Writing

Model of Reading Engagement (MORE) vs. Business as usual

0 Days

Full sample;
438 students

N/A

N/A

No

--


Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.

Characteristics of study sample as reported by study author.


  • 21% English language learners

  • Female: 51%
    Male: 49%
  • Race
    Asian
    9%
    Black
    33%
    Other or unknown
    37%
    White
    21%
  • Ethnicity
    Hispanic    
    33%
    Not Hispanic or Latino    
    67%
  • Eligible for Free and Reduced Price Lunch
    Other or unknown    
    100%

Setting

The study was set in first grade classrooms located in 10 public K-5 elementary schools. Each school was located in a different geographic region, or learning community, of the state.

Study sample

About one-third (33%) of students were African American, 21 percent were White, 9 percent were Asian, and the remaining 37 percent had an unknown race. Additionally, one-third of the students identified as Hispanic. There were slightly more females (51%) than males (49%). Twenty-one percent were English language learners, and seven percent were receiving special education services.

Intervention Group

The Model of Reading Engagement intervention (MORE) is a content literacy intervention, designed to increase first-grade students' science knowledge and reading engagement. MORE lessons focused on the life science topic of Arctic animal survival. The unit was 10 lessons long, conducted over a 3-week period, and each lesson was designed to take about 60 minutes. Teachers integrated five practices: conceptually related science texts, concept mapping, argumentative writing, read-alouds and discussion, and collaborative research. Students in the MS-H component chose three books to read and were assigned a homework activity.

Comparison Group

Teachers assigned to the comparison group taught their normal literacy program, which was based on a balanced literacy program including word study, guided reading, and writing activities in small group, teacher-directed instruction, and independent reading.

Support for implementation

Intervention teachers participated in a 2-hour professional development workshop where they learned about the theory of the program and reviewed the lesson materials. Teachers received ongoing support from their school literacy facilitators during the implementation period. Each school literacy facilitator was provided with two 30-minute planning calls to prepare them to support teachers as program implementation began and prior to the administration of student assessments. Research team members visited each school at least once during the 3-week implementation period to distribute instructional materials, support the data collection process, discuss teachers’ questions and concerns, and address challenges.

 

Your export should download shortly as a zip archive.

This download will include data files for study and findings review data and a data dictionary.

Connect With the WWC

loading
back to top