Effective Classroom Instruction: Implications of Child Characteristics by Reading Instruction Interactions on First Graders' Word Reading Achievement
Connor, Carol McDonald; Morrison, Frederick J.; Schatschneider, Christopher; Toste, Jessica R.; Lundblom, Erin; Crowe, Elizabeth C.; Fishman, Barry (2011). Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, v4 n3 p173-207. Retrieved from: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ932552
-
examining396Students, grade1
Grant Competition
Review Details
Reviewed: October 2017
- Grant Competition (findings for Individualized Student Instruction (ISI))
- 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Letter and word reading skills (WJ-III Letter-Word Identification subtest, W score) |
Individualized Student Instruction (ISI) vs. Business as usual |
1 Semester |
Full sample;
|
N/A |
N/A |
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.
-
- 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
Florida
Study Details
Setting
This study took place in seven schools in an ethnically and economically diverse north Florida school district among first-grade classrooms.
Study sample
The seven schools participating in the study ranged in percentage of children qualifying for free- or reduced-price lunch from 4 to 87%. Of the students in the sample, almost half qualified for free- or reduced-price lunch (44% in the intervention group, 49% in the comparison group). The majority of the students were girls (51% in the intervention group, 54% in the comparison group). Race/ethnicity percentages were as follows: 32% of the intervention and 26% of the control group were African American, 45% of both groups were white, and the remaining children across both study groups identified as other ethnic groups (e.g., Hispanic, multiracial). In terms of eligibility for special or exceptional student education (e.g., speech impairment, language impairment, developmental disability), 14% of children in the intervention and 15% of children in the comparison group were identified as eligible.
Intervention Group
The ISI intervention takes into account the interaction between child characteristics (e.g., language and literacy skills) and balanced instruction (e.g., basic skill vs. meaningful reading experiences) to determine the optimal reading instruction for each child. The ISI intervention has five components: (1) conceptualizing reading instruction across multiple dimensions; (2) student assessment and progress monitoring; (3) Assessment-to-instruction (A2i) web-based software, a teacher instruction planning tool that computes recommended amounts and types of reading instruction for each student using computer algorithms; (4) teacher training including online professional development resources, workshop, school, and classroom-based support; and (5) implementation in the classroom. The intervention is designed to be implemented daily during a 90-minute dedicated block of time devoted to literacy instruction throughout the school year. Student assessment data from the fall and then winter were entered into A2i which resulted in relevant instruction recommendations based on the most up-to-date student assessments of word reading and vocabulary.
Comparison Group
The comparison group received literacy instruction as usual during the 90-minute block of time devoted to literacy instruction. Teachers in this group were provided written reports of the assessment results for their students in the fall, winter, and spring, and received the intervention the following school year when the study was completed.
Support for implementation
Teachers received intensive professional development, including the use of online resources, videos of master teachers, and biweekly classroom-based support during literacy instruction and monthly school-level meetings provided by highly trained research assistants. Professional development focused on how to use the A2i software for progress monitoring and planning instruction; using assessment to guide instruction; classroom management, using stations or centers effectively; differentiating instructional content according to students’ reading and language skill levels; and using research to inform practices, among other topics. All schools used Open Court as their core literacy curriculum and were mandated to dedicate a 90-minute block of time devoted to literacy instruction and use of small group instruction each day.
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).