ABSTRACT

This exploratory study examined the nature of instruction provided in two reading intervention programs designed for elementary-grade students with dyslexia (The Multisensory Teaching Approach and Reading RULES!). In addition to documenting the proportion of time dedicated to particular content components (i.e., letter-name knowledge, phonological awareness, phonics/decoding, encoding, sight word recognition, passage reading/fluency, comprehension, vocabulary), the research team also documented the degree to which instruction (a) included teacher explanation/modeling, guided practice, group practice, and individual practice, (b) addressed particular types of decoding/encoding procedures, including multi-sensory (defined as tactile/kinesthetic) procedures and use of orthographic rules, and (c) made use of given instructional materials. The team conducted 12, ~45-minute observations. There were many similarities between the two programs (e.g., both were explicit, systematic, and sequential; both included curriculum-based measures of student learning that informed instruction; both dedicated approximately equal amounts of time to decoding and encoding instruction). However, our observations indicated a statistically significant difference between the programs (p < .002) in proportion of time dedicated to letter-name knowledge, text reading, and comprehension instruction. The programs also differed in their emphasis on articulating/applying orthographic rules and on particular procedures for decoding and encoding words.

摘要

这项探索性研究检查了两个阅读干预计划中提供的教学性质，这些计划是为患有阅读障碍的小学生设计的（多感官教学方法和阅读规则！）。除了记录用于特定内容组件（即字母名称知识、语音意识、语音/解码、编码、视觉单词识别、段落阅读/流利度、理解力、词汇）的时间比例外，研究团队还记录了教学 (a) 包括教师解释/建模、指导练习、小组练习和个人练习的程度，(b) 涉及特定类型的解码/编码程序，包括多感官（定义为触觉/动觉）程序和使用拼写规则，以及 (c) 使用给定的教学材料。该团队进行了 12 次，约 45 分钟的观察。这两个程序之间有许多相似之处（例如，两者都是明确的、系统的和顺序的；都包括基于课程的学生学习措施，以指导教学；两者都将大致相等的时间用于解码和编码教学）。然而，我们的观察表明这些程序之间存在统计学上的显着差异（p < .002) 与用于字母名称知识、文本阅读和理解指导的时间成比例。这些程序在强调表达/应用正字法规则以及解码和编码单词的特定程序方面也有所不同。