The Reciprocal Relationship between Research and Development: An Example Involving a Decoding Strand for Poor Readers

The two major goals of this paper are to describe a 5-year research and development project that led to the creation of a decoding program for poor readers in Grades 1–8 and to report the results of our research along the way. Unlike most research and development projects, research did not simply follow program development and assess its effectiveness. Instead, action research was used as a means of developing the program and program development led to modifications in the research as well. Thus, research and development had a reciprocal relationship and evolved together. The word identification program that eventually took shape emphasized phonemic awareness and decoding by analogy. Our findings were consistent with the conclusion that the word identification program enabled students to become better decoders and allowed them to make small gains in spelling, vocabulary, and comprehension.

[1]  P. Groff.  Research versus the Psycholinguistic Approach to Beginning Reading , 1980, The Elementary School Journal.

[2]  Duane R. Tovey.  Children's Grasp of Phonics Terms vs. Sound-Symbol Relationships. , 1980 .

[3]  Linnea C. Ehri,et al.  Development of the ability to read words: Update. , 1994 .

[4]  M. T. Zivian,et al.  Performance on a word-likeness task by normal readers and reading-disabled children , 1986 .

[5]  Jana M. Mason,et al.  Reading Instruction for Today , 1990 .

[6]  K E Stanovich,et al.  Individual Differences in the Cognitive Processes of Reading: II. Text-Level Processes , 1982, Journal of learning disabilities.

[7]  S. Jay Samuels,et al.  Understanding reading: A psycholinguistic analysis of reading and learning to read . Third edition. Frank Smith. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston, 1982. Pp. xii + 263. , 1983, Applied Psycholinguistics.

[8]  I. Gaskins.  There's More to a Reading Problem than Poor Reading , 1984, Journal of learning disabilities.

[9]  Patricia M. Cunningham.  Applying a Compare/Contrast Process to Identifying Polysyllabic Words , 1980 .

[10]  R. Calfee,et al.  The Reading Diary: Acquisition of Decoding. , 1981 .

[11]  E. Pascarella,et al.  Interactive Effects of Prior Reading Achievement and Training in Context on the Reading of Learning-Disabled Children. , 1980 .

[12]  N. J. Frenzel.  Children Need a Multipronged Attack in Word Recognition. , 1978 .

[13]  J. P. Das,et al.  Intelligence and learning , 1981 .

[14]  G. Marsh,et al.  Comparison of Reading and Spelling Strategies in Normal and Reading Disabled Children , 1981 .

[15]  M. Wittrock.  Handbook of research on teaching , 1986 .

[16]  Betty Ann Levy,et al.  Reading and Its Development: Component Skills Approaches , 1990 .

[17]  U. Goswami,et al.  Rhyme, Analogy, and Children’s Reading , 1992 .

[18]  P. David Pearson.  Handbook of reading research. , 1990 .

[19]  M. Scriven,et al.  Perspectives of curriculum evaluation , 1968 .

[20]  Gail M. Huffman,et al.  Psycholinguistics: Teaching Strategies for Comprehension , 1979 .

[21]  P. Johnston.  Understanding Reading Disability: A Case Study Approach , 1985 .

[22]  Connie Juel,et al.  The development and use of mediated word identification , 1983 .

[23]  P. Groff.  Teaching Reading by Syllables. , 1981 .

[24]  Patricia M. Cunningham.  Investigating a synthesized theory of mediated word identification , 1975 .

[25]  G. Marsh,et al.  Developmental Changes in Reading Strategies , 1977 .

[26]  G. Marsh,et al.  Pattern‐component transfer in learning to read , 1978 .

[27]  F. Vellutino,et al.  Converging Perspectives in the Study of the Reading Process , 1984 .

[28]  D. Wolff.  Analogy Strategies for Improving Word Recognition in Competent and Learning Disabled Readers. , 1985 .

[29]  Robert W. Gaskins,et al.  A Decoding Program for Poor Readers--And the Rest of the Class, Too!. , 1991 .

[30]  K. Stanovich.  Speculations on the Causes and Consequences of Individual Differences in Early Reading Acquisition , 1992 .

[31]  John J. Pikulski,et al.  A Comparison of Various Approaches to Evaluating Phonics. , 1980 .

[32]  G. McCloskey.  Wide Range Achievement Test-Revised , 1987 .

[33]  Robert L. Emans,et al.  Children's Use of Phonic Generalizations. , 1981 .

[34]  I. Gaskins,et al.  Using What You Know to Figure Out What You Don't Know: An Analogy Approach to Decoding. , 1992 .

[35]  Marilyn Jager Adams,et al.  Beginning To Read: Thinking and Learning about Print. , 1991 .

[36]  Danielle R. Zinna,et al.  Children's Sensitivity to Factors Influencing Vowel Reading. , 1986 .

[37]  Patricia M. Cunningham.  A Compare/Contrast Theory of Mediated Word Identification. , 1979 .

[38]  M. Lovett.  Treating the Core Deficits of Developmental Dyslexia: Evidence of Transfer of Learning after Phonologically- and Strategy-Based Reading Training Programs. , 1994 .

[39]  Patricia A. Rubeck.  Decoding Procedures: Pupil Self-Analysis and Observed Behaviors. , 1977 .

[40]  Barbara L. Jenkins.  Children's Use of Hypothesis Testing when Decoding Words. , 1980 .

[41]  Harry Singer,et al.  Theoretical models and processes of reading , 1976 .

[42]  Linnea C. Ehri,et al.  Reconceptualizing the Development of Sight Word Reading and Its Relationship to Recoding , 1992 .

[43]  K. Stanovich.  Matthew effects in reading: Some consequences of individual differences in the acquisition of literacy. , 1986 .

[44]  M. Scriven.  The methodology of evaluation , 1966 .