Assel, Michael Andrew; Landry, Susan H.; Swank, Paul R.; Gunnewig, Susan (2007). Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, v20 n5 p463-494. Retrieved from: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ774756
Reviewed: May 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-Johnson test of academic achievement (WJ-3) Sound Awareness/Rhyming subtest |
Doors to Discovery vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
DDN vs. Control;
|
3.58 |
3.20 |
No |
-- | |
|
Pre-school language scale-IV edition—auditory comprehension subscale (PLS) |
Doors to Discovery vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
DDN vs. Control;
|
46.20 |
47.54 |
No |
-- | |
|
Expressive Vocabulary Test |
Doors to Discovery vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
DDN vs. Control;
|
40.55 |
43.04 |
No |
-- | |
|
Developing Skills Checklist (DSC) |
Doors to Discovery vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
DDN vs. Control;
|
7.90 |
9.07 |
No |
-- |
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Woodcock-Johnson III Tests of Achievement (WJ-III) Letter-Word Identification Subtest |
Doors to Discovery vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
DDN vs. Control;
|
9.50 |
9.99 |
No |
-- |
Characteristics of study sample as reported by study author.
The study took place in Head Start, Title I, and Universal Pre-K centers from a single large district in the Houston, Texas area.
Sample characteristics were shared at the overall study level. The study was performed with children ranging in age from 3 to 5 years (average 4.6 years); 54% of the sample were male and 46% were female.
The Doors to Discovery (The Wright Group, McGraw Hill, 2001) curriculum is designed to improve the development of children's literacy by using oral language, phonological awareness, concepts of print, alphabet knowledge, writing and comprehension. The curriculum focuses on vocabulary and receptive and expressive language development. Teachers are encouraged to use cloze techniques, student retelling, think alouds, and scaffolding to help children development their language skills. Themes such as Built it Big, Discovery Street, or Our Water Wonderland are used across multiple weeks across the school year.
Comparison classrooms lacked a specific curriculum, used different materials in the classrooms, or did not follow a curriculum systematically. Some material was developed in the school while some curriculum that was used was outdated.
Teachers received 4 days of teacher training specific to the Doors to Discovery and were provided a complete set of materials for Doors to Discovery. Some conditions of the study had curriculum mentors who supported the teachers. Conditions that combined curriculum with mentoring support were not of interest to this review.
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