Efficacy of a Tier 2 Supplemental Root Word Vocabulary and Decoding Intervention with Kindergarten Spanish-Speaking English Learners
Nelson, J. Ron; Vadasy, Patricia F.; Sanders, Elizabeth A. (2011). Journal of Literacy Research, v43 n2 p184-211. Retrieved from: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ950696
-
examining185Students, gradeK
Single Study Review
Review Details
Reviewed: May 2021
- Single Study Review (findings for Early Vocabulary Connections)
- Randomized Controlled Trial
- Meets WWC standards without reservations because it is a randomized controlled trial with low attrition.
This review may not reflect the full body of research evidence for this intervention.
Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.
Findings
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Woodcock Reading Mastery Test Revised Normative Update (WRMT-R/NU): Mean of Word Attack and Word Identification standard scores |
Early Vocabulary Connections vs. Interactive Shared Book Reading |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
106.65 |
104.54 |
Yes |
|
|
|
| Show Supplemental Findings | |||||||||
|
Woodcock Reading Mastery Test-Revised/Norm Referenced (WRMT-R/NU) Word Attack Subtest |
Early Vocabulary Connections vs. Interactive Shared Book Reading |
6 Months |
Full sample;
|
108.12 |
103.88 |
Yes |
|
||
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Root word vocabulary (Nelson et al. 2011) |
Early Vocabulary Connections vs. Interactive Shared Book Reading |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
20.30 |
15.48 |
Yes |
|
|
|
|
Woodcock Reading Mastery Test Revised Normative Update (WRMT-R/NU): Word Comprehension subtest |
Early Vocabulary Connections vs. Interactive Shared Book Reading |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
105.59 |
103.30 |
No |
-- | ||
| Show Supplemental Findings | |||||||||
|
Woodcock Reading Mastery Test Revised Normative Update (WRMT-R/NU): Word Comprehension subtest |
Early Vocabulary Connections vs. Interactive Shared Book Reading |
6 Months |
Full sample;
|
101.85 |
98.44 |
Yes |
|
||
|
Root word vocabulary (Nelson et al. 2011) |
Early Vocabulary Connections vs. Interactive Shared Book Reading |
6 Months |
Full sample;
|
23.58 |
21.65 |
Yes |
|
||
Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.
Sample Characteristics
Characteristics of study sample as reported by study author.
-
100% English language learners -
Female: 48%
Male: 52% -
- B
- A
- C
- D
- E
- F
- G
- I
- H
- J
- K
- L
- P
- M
- N
- O
- Q
- R
- S
- V
- U
- T
- W
- X
- Z
- Y
- a
- h
- i
- b
- d
- e
- f
- c
- g
- j
- k
- l
- m
- n
- o
- p
- q
- r
- s
- t
- u
- v
- x
- w
- y
Midwest
Study Details
Setting
The study took place in six public elementary schools in the U.S. Midwest.
Study sample
A total of 185 students (93 in the intervention group and 92 in the comparison group) were included in the study. The 185 students were in 26 kindergarten classrooms. The sample was 52% male and 48% female. All students in the sample were English Learners from Spanish-speaking households. The authors did not provide information on the race or ethnicity of the sample or the percentage of sample members eligible for free or reduced-price lunch.
Intervention Group
Early Vocabulary Connections is supplemental reading vocabulary program that focuses on reading, vocabulary and decoding skills of students learning the English language or who have literacy deficits. The intervention was administered to small groups for 20 minutes per day, 5 days per week from October to April and was designed to connect to the beginning core reading instruction provided to all children. The tutor used a 12x17 inch presentation manual to present lessons to small groups. Each page was one lesson divided into two parts with instructions on each side in large print. One target word was taught per session and lessons had a consistent format. The intervention had six components that included both word recognition and production tasks: (1) word blending and spelling to reinforce decoding skills, (2) word meaning to introduce the meaning of new target words in a scaffolded context, (3) fast read passage to reinforce students' understanding of target words and reinforce decoding skills, (4) sentence completion to reinforce understanding of target words and develop comprehension sequencing skills, (5) word meaning match to check student understanding of word meaning, and (6) say a sentence to reinforce students' understanding of the meaning of target words.
Comparison Group
The comparison condition was based on interactive book reading to control for instructional time. Interactive book reading was administered to small groups for 20 minutes per day, 5 days per week from October to April. Vocabulary instruction was organized around a target word and 2 to 4 conceptually related words. Tutors used storybooks that contained target intervention curriculum words and 5x8 inch picture cards with child-friendly definitions to introduce target words, engage students, and support expanded explanations and student use of word meanings. There was a three-step instructional sequence for the comparison condition: (1) tutors used the picture cards to introduce and define the target and conceptually related words, (2) tutors asked open-ended questions connected to the target and related words during and after reading the storybook, (3) tutors provided opportunities for children to use target and associated words independently after reading the book.
Support for implementation
Tutors were trained during an initial 4-hour session to deliver Early Vocabulary Connections or the comparison interactive book reading intervention. Researchers used a five-step process to train the tutors: (1) trainers provided an overview of the theory and research base for the program, (2) trainers modeled the implementation activities with the tutors, (3) trainers created simulated practice conditions to ensure tutors obtained a high level of skill performance, (4) trainers provided structured feedback to tutors on their performance, (5) data collectors monitored treatment fidelity and trainers provided ongoing instruction and modeling when needed to ensure high quality implementation. After the intervention began, project staff observed the first three lessons for each tutor to provide corrective feedback. Project staff then observed tutors on six additional occasions to assess fidelity and provide feedback as needed.
Additional Sources
In the case of multiple manuscripts that report on one study, the WWC selects one manuscript as the primary citation and lists other manuscripts that describe the study as additional sources.
-
Vadasy, Patricia F.; Nelson, J. Ron; Sanders, Elizabeth A. (2013). Longer Term Effects of a Tier 2 Kindergarten Vocabulary Intervention for English Learners. Remedial and Special Education, v34 n2 p91-101.
Teaching Academic Content and Literacy to English Learners in Elementary and Middle School
Review Details
Reviewed: April 2014
Teaching Academic Content and Literacy to English Learners in Elementary and Middle School Practice Guide- Randomized Controlled Trial
- Meets WWC standards without reservations
This review may not reflect the full body of research evidence for this intervention.
Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.
Findings
Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.
Sample Characteristics
Characteristics of study sample as reported by study author.
-
100% English language learners -
Female: 48%
Male: 52%
An indicator of the effect of the intervention, the improvement index can be interpreted as the expected change in percentile rank for an average comparison group student if that student had received the intervention.
For more, please see the WWC Glossary entry for improvement index.
An outcome is the knowledge, skills, and attitudes that are attained as a result of an activity. An outcome measures is an instrument, device, or method that provides data on the outcome.
A finding that is included in the effectiveness rating. Excluded findings may include subgroups and subscales.
The sample on which the analysis was conducted.
The group to which the intervention group is compared, which may include a different intervention, business as usual, or no services.
The timing of the post-intervention outcome measure.
The number of students included in the analysis.
The mean score of students in the intervention group.
The mean score of students in the comparison group.
The WWC considers a finding to be statistically significant if the likelihood that the finding is due to chance alone, rather than a real difference, is less than five percent.
The WWC reviews studies for WWC products, Department of Education grant competitions, and IES performance measures.
The name and version of the document used to guide the review of the study.
The version of the WWC design standards used to guide the review of the study.
The result of the WWC assessment of the study. The rating is based on the strength of evidence of the effectiveness of the intervention. Studies are given a rating of Meets WWC Design Standards without Reservations, Meets WWC Design Standards with Reservations, or >Does Not Meet WWC Design Standards.
A related publication that was reviewed alongside the main study of interest.
Study findings for this report.
Based on the direction, magnitude, and statistical significance of the findings within a domain, the WWC characterizes the findings from a study as one of the following: statistically significant positive effects, substantively important positive effects, indeterminate effects, substantively important negative effects, and statistically significant negative effects. For more, please see the WWC Handbook.
The WWC may review studies for multiple purposes, including different reports and re-reviews using updated standards. Each WWC review of this study is listed in the dropdown. Details on any review may be accessed by making a selection from the drop down list.
Tier 1 Strong indicates strong evidence of effectiveness,
Tier 2 Moderate indicates moderate evidence of effectiveness, and
Tier 3 Promising indicates promising evidence of effectiveness,
as defined in the
non-regulatory guidance for ESSA
and the regulations for ED discretionary grants (EDGAR Part 77).