Vadasy, Patricia F.; Sanders, Elizabeth A.; Nelson, J. Ron (2015). Retrieved from: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED557796
Reviewed: August 2022
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.
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Woodcock Reading Mastery Test-Revised/Norm Referenced (WRMT-R/NU) Word Attack Subtest |
Early Vocabulary Connections vs. Interactive Shared Book Reading |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
105.93 |
103.07 |
No |
-- | ||
|
Wide Range Achievement Test-4 (WRAT-4) Spelling Subtest |
Early Vocabulary Connections vs. Interactive Shared Book Reading |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
96.69 |
95.45 |
No |
-- | ||
| Show Supplemental Findings | |||||||||
|
Woodcock Reading Mastery Test-Revised/Norm Referenced (WRMT-R/NU) Word Attack Subtest |
Early Vocabulary Connections vs. Interactive Shared Book Reading |
7 Months |
Full sample;
|
109.35 |
105.22 |
Yes |
|
||
|
Wide Range Achievement Test-4 (WRAT-4) Spelling Subtest |
Early Vocabulary Connections vs. Interactive Shared Book Reading |
7 Months |
Full sample;
|
102.05 |
97.66 |
Yes |
|
||
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Researcher-developed curriculum-based measure of target word reading vocabulary |
Early Vocabulary Connections vs. Interactive Shared Book Reading |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
0.64 |
0.49 |
Yes |
|
|
|
|
Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test-IIIA |
Early Vocabulary Connections vs. Interactive Shared Book Reading |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
80.54 |
80.32 |
No |
-- | ||
| Show Supplemental Findings | |||||||||
|
Researcher-developed curriculum-based measure of target word reading vocabulary |
Early Vocabulary Connections vs. Interactive Shared Book Reading |
7 Months |
Full sample;
|
0.63 |
0.58 |
Yes |
|
||
Characteristics of study sample as reported by study author.
| Other or unknown | 100% |
| Other or unknown | 100% |
| Other or unknown | 100% |
The study took place in 13 public elementary schools located in an urban area in the Pacific Northwest of the United States. All schools had a large population of English Learners.
A total of 324 students were included in the study. The study included 163 students in 40 kindergarten classes within 13 schools in the intervention group and 161 students in 39 kindergarten classes within 13 schools in the comparison group. Students were 44 percent female and 94 percent received English language learner services. Four percent of students received special education services. Home languages included Spanish (33%), African languages (34%), and Asian languages (29%). 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.
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 students in the intervention group received small-group Connections instruction for 30 minutes a day, for 4 days per week, outside of their classroom. These sessions lasted for an average of 20 weeks. During the sessions, students received lessons in which they were introduced to a new target word each day, spelled the newly taught word aloud once, and decoded or pronounced the word eight times. Students were also taught 2 to 4 related words during sessions and reviewed previously taught words. Lessons used six instructional activities to teach new words: tutors modeling word decoding or spelling, tutors reading a definition of the word, students reading a passage featuring the word, students completing a "fill-in-the-blank" sentence, students identifying the picture for the target word, and students using the word in a sentence.
The students in the comparison group received small-group instruction using interactive book reading. Instruction occurred for 30 minutes a day, 4 days per week, outside of their classroom. These sessions lasted for an average of 20 weeks. During sessions, students were read aloud a storybook that featured target words at least twice. Tutors had scripted prompts to ensure students interacted with the target word at least three times during a lesson.
Tutors providing both Connections (intervention) and interactive book reading (comparison) instruction received training and feedback during both years of the study on their respective instructional program. The training was a full day and included an overview of the program, a model on how to implement the program, guided practice on the materials and review of procedures. Tutors received on-site follow-up training and coaching from researchers during the first three weeks, and as needed. Researchers observed tutors at least six times to assess implementation fidelity and provided feedback linked to the fidelity criteria for each program. Researchers also emailed the tutors with suggestions weekly, and provided corrective feedback. Tutors had access to videotapes of exemplar tutors as models for effective instruction.
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).
Resources
Newsflash
Contact Us
Facebook
Twitter
YouTube