Educational Technology in Support of Elementary Students With Reading or Language-Based Disabilities: A Cluster Randomized Control Trial.

IF 2.4 2区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION, SPECIAL Journal of Learning Disabilities Pub Date : 2023-11-01 Epub Date: 2022-12-15 DOI:10.1177/00222194221141093
Lisa B Hurwitz, Kirk P Vanacore
{"title":"Educational Technology in Support of Elementary Students With Reading or Language-Based Disabilities: A Cluster Randomized Control Trial.","authors":"Lisa B Hurwitz, Kirk P Vanacore","doi":"10.1177/00222194221141093","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Experts laud the potential of educational technology (edtech) to promote reading among students with disabilities, but supporting evidence is lacking. This study evaluated the effectiveness of the Lexia<sup>®</sup> Core5<sup>®</sup> Reading edtech program (Core5) on the Measures of Academic Progress<sup>®</sup> (MAP) Growth Reading<sup>™</sup> and easyCBM oral reading fluency performance of students with reading or language-based disabilities in Grades K to 5. Core5 systematically addresses multiple reading domains and previously was effective in general education. We hypothesized treatment students using Core5 would outperform controls on the reading assessments. This was a cluster randomized effectiveness evaluation, with condition assignment by school (three treatment and two business-as-usual control schools). Participating students in Grades K to 5 (<i>N</i> = 115; <i>n<sub>Treatment</sub></i> = 65) were flagged by their Chicago-area district as needing reading intervention and had Individualized Education Program (IEP) designations of specific learning disability, speech or language impairment, or developmental delay. Treatment students used Core5 to supplement Tier 1 instruction for an average of 58.76 minutes weekly for 24.58 weeks. Regressions revealed treatment students outperformed controls on MAP (<i>B</i> = 3.85, CI = 0.57-7.13, <i>p</i> = .022, <i>d</i> = .24), but there were no differences for oral reading fluency. MAP findings confirm edtech can effectively supplement reading instruction for this population.</p>","PeriodicalId":48189,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Learning Disabilities","volume":" ","pages":"453-466"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10631285/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Learning Disabilities","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00222194221141093","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/12/15 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SPECIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Experts laud the potential of educational technology (edtech) to promote reading among students with disabilities, but supporting evidence is lacking. This study evaluated the effectiveness of the Lexia® Core5® Reading edtech program (Core5) on the Measures of Academic Progress® (MAP) Growth Reading and easyCBM oral reading fluency performance of students with reading or language-based disabilities in Grades K to 5. Core5 systematically addresses multiple reading domains and previously was effective in general education. We hypothesized treatment students using Core5 would outperform controls on the reading assessments. This was a cluster randomized effectiveness evaluation, with condition assignment by school (three treatment and two business-as-usual control schools). Participating students in Grades K to 5 (N = 115; nTreatment = 65) were flagged by their Chicago-area district as needing reading intervention and had Individualized Education Program (IEP) designations of specific learning disability, speech or language impairment, or developmental delay. Treatment students used Core5 to supplement Tier 1 instruction for an average of 58.76 minutes weekly for 24.58 weeks. Regressions revealed treatment students outperformed controls on MAP (B = 3.85, CI = 0.57-7.13, p = .022, d = .24), but there were no differences for oral reading fluency. MAP findings confirm edtech can effectively supplement reading instruction for this population.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
教育技术对有阅读或语言障碍的小学生的支持:一项聚类随机对照试验。
专家们称赞教育技术在促进残疾学生阅读方面的潜力,但缺乏支持性证据。本研究评估了Lexia®Core5®Reading edtech计划(Core5)对学业进步®(MAP)增长阅读的有效性™ 以及K至5年级阅读或语言残疾学生的easyCBM口语阅读流利性表现。核心5系统地涉及多个阅读领域,以前在普通教育中有效。我们假设使用Core5的治疗学生在阅读评估方面会优于对照组。这是一项集群随机有效性评估,按学校(三所治疗学校和两所照常营业的对照学校)分配条件。参与的K至5年级学生(N=115;治疗=65)被芝加哥地区标记为需要阅读干预,并被指定为特定学习障碍、言语或语言障碍或发育迟缓的个性化教育计划(IEP)。治疗学生使用Core5补充一级教学,平均每周58.76分钟,持续24.58周。回归分析显示,接受治疗的学生在MAP方面优于对照组(B=3.85,CI=0.57-7.13,p=.022,d=.24),但在口语阅读流利性方面没有差异。MAP的研究结果证实edtech可以有效地补充这一人群的阅读指导。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.60
自引率
3.30%
发文量
30
期刊介绍: The Journal of Learning Disabilities (JLD), a multidisciplinary, international publication, presents work and comments related to learning disabilities. Initial consideration of a manuscript depends upon (a) the relevance and usefulness of the content to the readership; (b) how the manuscript compares to other articles dealing with similar content on pertinent variables (e.g., sample size, research design, review of literature); (c) clarity of writing style; and (d) the author"s adherence to APA guidelines. Articles cover such fields as education, psychology, neurology, medicine, law, and counseling.
期刊最新文献
Mathematics Achievement in Women With and Without ADHD: Childhood Predictors and Developmental Trajectories Into Adulthood. Derivational Morphology Training in French-Speaking 9- to 14- Year-Old Children and Adolescents With Developmental Dyslexia: Does It Improve Morphological Awareness, Reading, and Spelling Outcome Measures? Graph Out Loud: Pre-Service Teachers' Data Decisions and Interpretations of CBM Progress Graphs. What Environments Support Reading Growth Among Current Compared With Former Reading Intervention Recipients? A Multilevel Analysis of Students and Their Schools. Ongoing Teacher Support for Data-Based Individualization: A Meta-Analysis and Synthesis.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1