The purpose of this study was two-fold. First the researcher set out to determine if phonemic awareness skills improved for first grade students of teachers who used the Lindamood Phoneme Sequencing Program (LiPS; Lindamood & Lindamood, 1998). Second, an attempt was made to determine if there was a relationship between reading improvement in decoding and teacher level variables (i.e., perception of their knowledge of the LiPS program (Lindamood & Lindamood, 1998), and relevant demographic variables).<p>Students scores based on the Learning Disabilities Working Committee Kindergarten screening tool (LDWC, 2005) were compared to their respective scores on the Learning Disabilities Working Committee Grade One screening tool (LDWC, 2002). Comparison of progress for all students were evaluated as well as assessment of progress for students deemed at risk (below the 25th percentile) of reading failure compared to those not at risk (above the 25th percentile). Teachers perceptions of the critical elements of the LiPS program (Lindamood & Lindamood, 1998) and demographic information were collected. The teacher level variables gathered from this survey (i.e., teaching experience, formal training, knowledge, or skill level in program delivery) were correlated to students scores on the screening tools.<p>Results revealed that teacher demographics, such as teaching experience, specialized training, and intensity of instructional approach are related to student reading achievement in decoding; however, no clearly defined relationship was found between teachers perceptions of the LiPS program (Lindamood & Lindamood, 1998) and student achievement. Paired-sample t-tests were also used to determine if statistically significant differences existed between the means of phonemic identity, phonemic blending, and letter/sound identification between Kindergarten and Grade One. Even though statistically significant results were noted, consideration of the actual change in mean scores and effect size suggested if a practical significance existed. Results indicated that gains were made by students in phonemic awareness and letter/sound correspondence; however, greater gains were noted for students deemed at-risk whose teachers used the LiPS program (Lindamood & Lindamood, 1998).

The purpose of this study was two-fold. First the researcher set out to determine if phonemic awareness skills improved for first grade students of teachers who used the Lindamood Phoneme Sequencing Program (LiPS; Lindamood & Lindamood, 1998). Second, an attempt was made to determine if there was a relationship between reading improvement in decoding and teacher level variables (i.e., perception of their knowledge of the LiPS program (Lindamood & Lindamood, 1998), and relevant demographic variables).<p>Students scores based on the Learning Disabilities Working Committee Kindergarten screening tool (LDWC, 2005) were compared to their respective scores on the Learning Disabilities Working Committee Grade One screening tool (LDWC, 2002). Comparison of progress for all students were evaluated as well as assessment of progress for students deemed at risk (below the 25th percentile) of reading failure compared to those not at risk (above the 25th percentile). Teachers perceptions of the critical elements of the LiPS program (Lindamood & Lindamood, 1998) and demographic information were collected. The teacher level variables gathered from this survey (i.e., teaching experience, formal training, knowledge, or skill level in program delivery) were correlated to students scores on the screening tools.<p>Results revealed that teacher demographics, such as teaching experience, specialized training, and intensity of instructional approach are related to student reading achievement in decoding; however, no clearly defined relationship was found between teachers perceptions of the LiPS program (Lindamood & Lindamood, 1998) and student achievement. Paired-sample t-tests were also used to determine if statistically significant differences existed between the means of phonemic identity, phonemic blending, and letter/sound identification between Kindergarten and Grade One. Even though statistically significant results were noted, consideration of the actual change in mean scores and effect size suggested if a practical significance existed. Results indicated that gains were made by students in phonemic awareness and letter/sound correspondence; however, greater gains were noted for students deemed at-risk whose teachers used the LiPS program (Lindamood & Lindamood, 1998).

The effects of coaching on teacher and student outcomes were compared to outcomes of classes randomized to professional development only and comparison conditions. Twenty-one teachers, trained to implement a Tier II reading intervention curriculum, were grouped by campus then randomized to one of three conditions: professional development plus coaching support (n=6), professional development only (n=7) and a comparison condition (n=8). Teachers in the coached and professional development only (un-coached) conditions were compared on measures of teacher knowledge and implementation fidelity as an indication of teacher practice. Student achievement scores on word attack, reading fluency and reading comprehension measures were compared for students in each of the three conditions. A multiple-gating procedure was used to help teachers identify the five lowest-performing readers in their first grade classrooms. Students completed a battery of seven reading ability assessments prior to and immediately following teacher-implementation of a seventeen-week reading intervention curriculum. Results of ANCOVA analyses indicated students in classes of teachers who received professional development and coaching support did not demonstrate significantly higher scores than teachers who only received professional development training on a battery of reading measures. Further analysis indicated students in the professional development plus coaching condition did have significantly higher scores than those in comparison conditions on five of the seven outcome measures. Teachers in coached and professional development only conditions completed a teacher knowledge survey to measure their knowledge of evidence-based reading practices. ANCOVA analysis revealed no significant differences between groups at posttest. Changes in teacher practice were measured as a function of intervention implementation fidelity. Intervention teachers were videotaped three times over the course of the intervention and taped classes were scored, rated and compared across conditions. Results of a Repeated Measures Analysis of Variance on fidelity scores revealed a statistically significant difference in favor of the teachers who received professional development plus coaching. / text

No description available.

Text in Afrikaans / Learners who struggle to read from the start, will stay behind. But the earlier intervention can start, the greater the chances of success. But what type of intervention is needed? Nowadays researchers overseas use phonemic awareness as a criteria to predict reading success. About 80% of pre-school children will have no trouble grasping the phonological structure of their home language, provided that they are thoroughly immersed in literacy. It is these same 80% who will not have any trouble learning to read. But literacy is a continuous process that starts at birth and there is no magical moment in a child's life that he will all of a sudden be ready to receive literacy instruction. Experience and practice will ensure that the hierarchy of phonemic awareness skills will develop. Those preschoolers who do not have that advantage, must develop phonemic awareness skills while learning to read or else face reading problems. / Educational Studies / M. Ed.(Special Needs Education)

Text in Afrikaans / Learners who struggle to read from the start, will stay behind. But the earlier intervention can start, the greater the chances of success. But what type of intervention is needed? Nowadays researchers overseas use phonemic awareness as a criteria to predict reading success. About 80% of pre-school children will have no trouble grasping the phonological structure of their home language, provided that they are thoroughly immersed in literacy. It is these same 80% who will not have any trouble learning to read. But literacy is a continuous process that starts at birth and there is no magical moment in a child's life that he will all of a sudden be ready to receive literacy instruction. Experience and practice will ensure that the hierarchy of phonemic awareness skills will develop. Those preschoolers who do not have that advantage, must develop phonemic awareness skills while learning to read or else face reading problems. / Educational Studies / M. Ed.(Special Needs Education)