Improving teacher candidates’ knowledge of phonological awareness: A multimedia approach.
Kennedy M. J., Driver M. K., Pullen P. C., Ely E., & Cole M. T. (2013). Computers & Education, 64, 42–51.
-
examining142Students, gradePS
Practice Guide
Review Details
Reviewed: April 2019
- Practice Guide (findings for Content Acquisition Podcasts (CAPs))
- 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 |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
researcher-designed test of phonemic and phonological awareness |
Content Acquisition Podcasts (CAPs) vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
26.27 |
22.65 |
Yes |
|
|
|
| Show Supplemental Findings | |||||||||
|
researcher-designed test of phonemic and phonological awareness |
Content Acquisition Podcasts (CAPs) vs. Business as usual |
21 Days |
Full sample;
|
25.94 |
21.56 |
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
Study sample characteristics were not reported.Study Details
Setting
This study took place in one introductory course in special education at the school of education in a single university.
Study sample
Sample characteristics are as follows: Seventy percent of the sample are education majors; 62.4 percent had taken no reading courses, 27.5 percent had taken 1 course and 9.4 percent had taken either 2 or 3 reading courses. The authors do not present any demographic characteristics.
Intervention Group
[Content Acquisition Podcasts (CAPs)] Students in intervention group watched a 12-minute CAP on phonological awareness. The CAP contained three pause points that corresponded to three major sections of the video. These three sections included the following topics: (1) What is phonological awareness? (2) Why is phonological awareness necessary? (3) What are effective ways of teaching phonological awareness to students? When all students completed their work in the treatment and comparison conditions, students received the regularly scheduled lecture for approximately 90 minutes.
Comparison Group
[Text Only] Students in the comparison group read "a practitioner-oriented article (Pullen, 2004) on the same topic." This article's content aligned to the content of the CAP, and students were instructed to take notes at their own discretion.
Support for implementation
The intervention group students watched a podcast; students in the treatment group were instructed to bring laptops and headphones for the CAP, and were provided to students who did not bring them.
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).