Does Supplemental Instruction Support the Transition from Spanish to English Reading Instruction for First-Grade English Learners at Risk of Reading Difficulties?
Baker, Doris Luft; Burns, Darci; Kame'enui, Edward J.; Smolkowski, Keith; Baker, Scott King (2015). Retrieved from: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED588218
-
examining78Students, grade1
Single Study Review
Review Details
Reviewed: April 2021
- Single Study Review (findings for Transition Lessons)
- 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills (DIBELS): Nonsense Words Fluency subtest |
Transition Lessons vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
70.85 |
68.26 |
No |
-- | |
|
Stanford Achievement Test (10th Edition), word reading subtest |
Transition Lessons vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
487.75 |
491.56 |
No |
-- |
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Group Reading Assessment and Diagnostic Evaluation (GRADE): Listening Comprehension subtest |
Transition Lessons vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
13.77 |
13.72 |
No |
-- | |
|
Group Reading Assessment and Diagnostic Evaluation (GRADE): Word meaning subtest |
Transition Lessons vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
21.69 |
22.31 |
No |
-- |
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Stanford Achievement Test (10th Edition), sentence reading subtest |
Transition Lessons vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
504.24 |
521.72 |
Yes |
|
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Dynamic Indicators for Basic Early Literacy Skills (DIBELS): Oral Reading Fluency (ORF) |
Transition Lessons vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
36.66 |
39.00 |
No |
-- |
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: 42%
Male: 58% -
- 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
West
-
Race Other or unknown 100% -
Ethnicity Hispanic 100%
Study Details
Setting
The study was conducted in seven schools in the Pacific Northwest. All schools received Title I services.
Study sample
The study sample consisted of 78 Spanish-speaking English learners in first grade who were identified as struggling readers, with 39 in the intervention group and 39 in the comparison group. All students were of Hispanic origin and were native Spanish speakers. Students' average age at the beginning of the study was 6.5 years and 42 percent were female. All students were eligible to receive Title I services. The study randomly assigned students to conditions.
Intervention Group
Students in the intervention condition received small group instruction aimed at supporting the transition of students from bilingual instruction in the first grade to English-only instruction in the second grade. The supplemental instruction focused on helping students understand which features of the Spanish language are transferable to English, decoding skills (including phonemic awareness, letter-sound knowledge, and word and sentence reading) and English language proficiency. The intervention was implemented after school in three schools and in small group sessions during the school day in the other four schools. All sessions were conducted in addition to students’ standard reading instruction. Each session was led by a bilingual teacher or an instructional assistant. The 30-minute sessions occurred 5 days a week for 12 weeks.
Comparison Group
The comparison condition received business-as-usual instruction, which varied across schools. Teachers at three schools used the Houghton Mifflin core reading curriculum along with supplemental materials for English language learners, such as leveled reading books to build vocabulary. Teachers at two schools used the Fast Track Phonics program (Wiley, 2001). At the remaining two schools, one teacher used the DISTAR program (Adams & Engelmann, 1996) and the other teacher used the Harcourt intervention program (Trophies, 2005). Students in the comparison condition received the same amount of reading instruction per day as students in the intervention condition.
Support for implementation
A member of the research team trained three teachers and 11 instructional assistants to implement the transition lessons prior to the beginning of the study. This training lasted for 7 hours during one day and focused on the intervention lesson plans, effective pacing, and explicit instruction. Teachers were first introduced to the lesson content and structure, then observed a model lesson and practiced each component of the lesson. The training highlighted the importance of teaching vocabulary and academic language for English learners.
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).