xi, 111 p. / Matching reading deficits to appropriate intervention programs is a challenge given the number of treatment options available to educators. The Fast ForWord (FFW) computerized intervention series has been marketed as a way to treat underlying causes of poor reading skill; i.e., substandard levels of basic language skill, phonemic awareness, and/or phonics application. If the programs work as claimed, then completion of Fast ForWord should improve the next reading subskill developed after phonics, oral reading fluency. Part 1 of this study involves a treatment ( n = 72) versus comparison ( n = 84) group two by two ANOVA to evaluate that hypothesis. No effect for FFW is found ( p = .84). Application of decision rules from Response to Intervention (RTI) models classifies positive changes in risk category at a greater rate for the comparison group ( n = 31) than for the FFW group ( n = 20) ( X 2 = 3.81, (1), p = .05). Pre-intervention language scores for the FFW group are compared to assist with intervention placement decisions. Differences in mean language scores are not significant ( p = .85) between the two groups [positive response ( n = 19) versus low response ( n = 57)]. In a binary logistic regression of quartile membership for language scores, no score ranges predict membership ( X 2 = 4.75, (8), p > .05). Measuring treatment effect with ORF is not recommended. The use of pre-intervention language and ORF scores below the 25th percentile as indicators of a positive change in oral reading fluency following FFW treatment also is not recommended. However, future research that considers language scores along with other curriculum-based measures of prereading skill either as pre-intervention indicators or outcome measures is recommended. / Committee in charge: Dr. Paul Yovanoff, Chair; Dr. Keith Hollenbeck, Member; Dr. Joseph Stevens, Member; Dr. Jeffery Sprague, Outside Member

No description available.

No description available.

The current study was completed through a retrospective analysis of school records of elementary school students in the Northeast Region of the Philadelphia School District (PSD) who have participated in the Fast ForWord (FFW) Language program. The data requested from student records included: demographic information (e.g., gender, grade,age, ethnicity, disability, and special education status), DIBELS scores, and FFW completion and participation variables. The current study set out to determine if DIBELS scores can predict student performance or mastery level on the FFW program. A total of seven individual FFW variables (percent of completion for each activity) and five overall FFW variables (percent complete, participation level, attendance level, total days to complete, and successful performance) served as the outcome variables. Frequency distributions, Pearson correlations, an ANOVA, and a standard multiple regression were used to determine the relationships of demographic variables among predictor and outcome variables as well as the predictive power of the DIBELS test scores. Results of the standard multiple regression analysis failed to yield significant results in the ability for either DIBELS raw or benchmark scores to predict performance on the FFW reading program. The current study highlighted that in the real-life conditions of a large, urban public school system, DIBELS seems to have very little, if any, predictive abilities specific to designating students appropriately to an intensive, costly, and time-consuming intervention program. It is hoped that the information presented in this study will stimulate some positive discussion and changes in the assessment and referral processes currently being widely employed across American schools in order to better serve and educate American children that demonstrate symptoms of early reading deficits. / School Psychology