Efficacy of a Cognitive Reading Remediation Program For At-Risk Children in Grade 1

Fifty-eight Grade 1 children experiencing reading difficulties were divided into two matched remediation groups: PREP (PASS Reading Enhancement Program) (see Das & Kendrick, 1997) and Meaning-Based Reading intervention. Both groups received remediation twice a week for 20 min over a 9-week period. Participants’ reading level was assessed pre- and post-intervention using Word Identification (WI) and Word Attack (WA) tests. Repeated measures ANOVAs showed a significant main effect of Testing Time for both WI and WA. For WA, the Testing Time by Remediation Group interaction was also significant; the PREP group gained more than the meaning-based group in terms of decoding skills. Next, the performance of High-Gainers and No-Gainers in both groups was compared on several cognitive processing tasks. Results indicated that High-Gainers in the PREP group were characterized by a somewhat higher level of successive processing, phonological processing, and word recognition skills at the beginning of the program. In contrast, High-Gainers in the meaning-based program were characterized by a higher level of planning, phonological processing, and visual memory. Implications for education and future directions for research on remediation are also presented.

[1]  Joseph K. Torgesen,et al.  An Evaluation of Computer-Assisted Instruction in Phonological Awareness with below Average Readers , 1995 .

[2]  D. Share.  Phonological recoding and self-teaching: sine qua non of reading acquisition , 1995, Cognition.

[3]  Benita A. Blachman,et al.  Kindergarten teachers develop phoneme awareness in low-income, inner-city classrooms , 1994 .

[4]  J. P. Das,et al.  Cognitive Strategies in Native Children: Analysis and Intervention. , 1976 .

[5]  D. Perkins,et al.  Rocky Roads to Transfer: Rethinking Mechanism of a Neglected Phenomenon , 1989 .

[6]  R. Woodcock.  Woodcock Reading Mastery Tests-Revised , 1987 .

[7]  J. P. Das,et al.  Strategy Training and Reading Comprehension , 1984, Journal of learning disabilities.

[8]  J. P. Das,et al.  A Process Approach to Remediating Word-Decoding Deficiencies in Chapter 1 Children , 1997 .

[9]  Ruth Fielding-Barnsley,et al.  Evaluation of a Program to Teach Phonemic Awareness to Young Children. , 1991 .

[10]  青山 真二,et al.  アメリカ合衆国におけるKaufman Assessment Battery for Childrenに関する研究動向 , 1995 .

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

[12]  Dixie Lee Spiegel.  Blending Whole Language and Systematic Direct Instruction. , 1992 .

[13]  R. Snow.  Aptitude-treatment interaction as a framework for research on individual differences in learning. , 1989 .

[14]  P. Mantzicopoulos,et al.  Use of the SEARCH/TEACH Tutoring Approach with Middle-Class Students at Risk for Reading Failure , 1992, The Elementary school journal.

[15]  E. W. Ball,et al.  Does Phoneme Awareness Training in Kindergarten Make a Difference in Early Word Recognition and Developmental Spelling , 1991 .

[16]  Lynette Bradley,et al.  Rhyme and reason in reading and spelling , 1985 .

[17]  D. P. Hurford,et al.  Early Identification and Remediation of Phonological-Processing Deficits in First-Grade Children at Risk for Reading Disabilities , 1994, Journal of learning disabilities.

[18]  J. Das,et al.  An Experiment on Cognitive Remediation of Word-Reading Difficulty , 1995, Journal of learning disabilities.

[19]  Joseph K. Torgesen,et al.  Development of young readers' phonological processing abilities , 1993 .

[20]  Z. Segal.  Assessment of Cognitive Processes , 1986 .