检视无声独立阅读对阅读结果的影响:2000 - 2020年的叙事综合回顾

IF 1.5 4区 教育学 Q2 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Reading & Writing Quarterly Pub Date : 2021-06-26 DOI:10.1080/10573569.2021.1944830
Florina Erbeli, Marianne Rice
{"title":"检视无声独立阅读对阅读结果的影响:2000 - 2020年的叙事综合回顾","authors":"Florina Erbeli, Marianne Rice","doi":"10.1080/10573569.2021.1944830","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Encouraging children to read extensively has been a widely recommended approach to developing reading. The National Reading Panel published a review study reporting inconclusive findings regarding the benefits of such an approach. In this systematic narrative synthesis review, we provided an update and an extension of the NRP’s review. We examined the effects of silent independent reading practices on reading outcomes for students in Grades K through 12, reviewing experimental and quasi-experimental studies between 2000 and 2020. We also incorporated a quality evaluation of primary studies. A systematic search of peer-reviewed articles was conducted, using identical procedures as in the National Reading Panel review. Our results from 14 primary studies comprising 5,522 participants in the treatment group and 4,966 in the control group alluded to no meaningful beneficial effects of independent reading on reading outcomes. However, due to a lack of primary studies adhering to the highest quality standards and implementation, it is impossible to determine whether such a result is universal or whether there might be conditions under which independent reading could be effective.","PeriodicalId":51619,"journal":{"name":"Reading & Writing Quarterly","volume":"38 1","pages":"253 - 271"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2021-06-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/10573569.2021.1944830","citationCount":"7","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Examining the Effects of Silent Independent Reading on Reading Outcomes: A Narrative Synthesis Review from 2000 to 2020\",\"authors\":\"Florina Erbeli, Marianne Rice\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/10573569.2021.1944830\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract Encouraging children to read extensively has been a widely recommended approach to developing reading. The National Reading Panel published a review study reporting inconclusive findings regarding the benefits of such an approach. In this systematic narrative synthesis review, we provided an update and an extension of the NRP’s review. We examined the effects of silent independent reading practices on reading outcomes for students in Grades K through 12, reviewing experimental and quasi-experimental studies between 2000 and 2020. We also incorporated a quality evaluation of primary studies. A systematic search of peer-reviewed articles was conducted, using identical procedures as in the National Reading Panel review. Our results from 14 primary studies comprising 5,522 participants in the treatment group and 4,966 in the control group alluded to no meaningful beneficial effects of independent reading on reading outcomes. However, due to a lack of primary studies adhering to the highest quality standards and implementation, it is impossible to determine whether such a result is universal or whether there might be conditions under which independent reading could be effective.\",\"PeriodicalId\":51619,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Reading & Writing Quarterly\",\"volume\":\"38 1\",\"pages\":\"253 - 271\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-06-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/10573569.2021.1944830\",\"citationCount\":\"7\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Reading & Writing Quarterly\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"95\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/10573569.2021.1944830\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"教育学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Reading & Writing Quarterly","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10573569.2021.1944830","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 7

摘要

鼓励孩子广泛阅读是一种被广泛推荐的培养阅读能力的方法。国家阅读小组发表了一项综述研究,报告了关于这种方法的益处的不确定发现。在这篇系统的叙述性综合综述中,我们对NRP的综述进行了更新和扩展。我们回顾了2000年至2020年间的实验和准实验研究,研究了默读独立练习对K至12年级学生阅读结果的影响。我们还纳入了初步研究的质量评估。采用与国家阅读小组审查相同的程序,对同行评议文章进行了系统搜索。我们的14项初步研究(包括治疗组5522名参与者和对照组4966名参与者)的结果表明,独立阅读对阅读结果没有显著的有益影响。然而,由于缺乏坚持最高质量标准和执行的初步研究,因此无法确定这样的结果是否具有普遍性,或者是否存在独立阅读有效的条件。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Examining the Effects of Silent Independent Reading on Reading Outcomes: A Narrative Synthesis Review from 2000 to 2020
Abstract Encouraging children to read extensively has been a widely recommended approach to developing reading. The National Reading Panel published a review study reporting inconclusive findings regarding the benefits of such an approach. In this systematic narrative synthesis review, we provided an update and an extension of the NRP’s review. We examined the effects of silent independent reading practices on reading outcomes for students in Grades K through 12, reviewing experimental and quasi-experimental studies between 2000 and 2020. We also incorporated a quality evaluation of primary studies. A systematic search of peer-reviewed articles was conducted, using identical procedures as in the National Reading Panel review. Our results from 14 primary studies comprising 5,522 participants in the treatment group and 4,966 in the control group alluded to no meaningful beneficial effects of independent reading on reading outcomes. However, due to a lack of primary studies adhering to the highest quality standards and implementation, it is impossible to determine whether such a result is universal or whether there might be conditions under which independent reading could be effective.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
5.30%
发文量
24
期刊最新文献
Argumentative Writing for Students With Disabilities in Inclusive Science Classes: A Pilot Study Online Intervention to Prevent Summer Learning Loss For Struggling First Grade Writers Can Artificial Intelligence Identify Reading Fluency and Level? Comparison of Human and Machine Performance Exploring Relations between Teachers’ Language- and Code-Based Writing Supports to Early Literacy and Vocabulary Learning in Children with Language Vulnerabilities The Technical Adequacy of Coding Procedures for Retell Measures in Elementary School Students with Dyslexia
×
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