Owens

Dr. Deb Owens

Ryan and Caroline's baby girl, Amelia, arrived Friday afternoon! She weighed in at 4 lbs. and is doing well. Our contiued thoughts and prayers go out to their lovely family!

Check out Sondra's PDF research profile on her page -- it's really great! Also, check out Straley's pie chart! And -- I love Margie's cartoon. Good stuff!

Deb

As we begin our exploration of research design paradigms, please read the following article:

Al Otaiba, S.; Folsom, J. S.; Schatscheider, C.; Wanzek, J.; Greulich, L.; Meadows, J.; et al.(2011). Predicting first grade reading performance from kindergarten response to tier I instruction. Exceptional Children, 77(4), 453-470.

As discussed in class, this article is a clearly quantitative in nature. I would like for you to think about this study and suggest ways in which you, as a researcher, might approach this topic from a qualitative perspective. While this study leads to interesting conclusions, does it leave some questions unanswered? If so, what types of data might strengthen the research and make it even more meaningful for educators?


 * My first reaction to this text is panic because after the first few paragraphs, I was lost. As far as questions that I have, I wanted to know what interventions were used. I know that the teachers used Tier 1 interventions, but which ones? How did they choose those interventions? Why did they choose those particular interventions? I would also like to investigate what differences occurred in the first grade classrooms that might have contributed to the lower than expected outcomes. Were there potential affective or relational issues that could have caused the lower scores? In my opinion, the fact that there was no study of the instructional practices at the first grade level decreases the validity of the researchers' findings because I feel that they have jumped to a conclusion based on numbers without a complete picture. I see room for teacher interviews and case studies. Show me through a case study how one of these children is making this rapid progress in kindergarten (detail his social interactions, relationships, and behaviors as well as his numerical test data) and then follow that same child through first grade to continue building the case study. I feel that this would give a more complete picture of what is happening and definitely make it more understandable and therefore more meaningful to the average teacher. And that is the purpose of research, yes? d2hk **

The question I have is, If Tier II and Tier III RTI was implemented in first and second grades, would the students continue to show growth? Even if a student reaches the goal at the end of kindergarten, doesn't mean they will continue growth in first or second grade. I think that continued Tier II and Tier III RTI could only stand to benefit the students. Also, what about regression during the summer? Were there any summer programs initiated to continue the growth made in kindergarten? The students that were targeted, what was the follow up? ~Denise

The research makes common sense and points to some interesting occurrences that call for additional research. It was not at all surprising to me that in the research vocabulary growth yielded less significant increases than did letter naming and other code based skills. As we all know, our children living in low socioeconomic settings are deprived enriched vocabulary exposures and experiences upon which to expand their schema. While it is understandable that the teachers focused on ‘kindergarten’ skills, I was disappointed that the shortage of comprehension and vocabulary instruction were not addressed and rather, the instruction the children received was deemed to be consistent with ‘evidence-based’ recommendations of the NRP and ‘high quality’ defined by the Institute of Education Sciences RTI Practice Guide and Tier one instructional observations were rated as ‘effective.’ Clearly, the children that have to make the most growth are the ones with the potential to show the most growth in any given study, but just what exactly do the growths show? The students were able to catch up to their peers that presented with greater knowledge bases at the beginning of kindergarten; however, the children that came with stranger knowledge bases are continuing to expand their knowledge as well which would mean students entering with a disadvantage will need more than one year to “catch-up” After all, most of them have had 5-6 years of insufficient exposure, guidance, and learning before they reach the doors of a kindergarten classroom. Yes, these children NEED ONGOING VOCABULARY instruction and COMPREHENSION assistance throughout the critical literacy acquisition phase!! How can the intervention be effective, as the research claims, when the study itself reveals that the teachers spent a larger portion of time on decoding skills AND that their skills as instructors were more greatly developed in these areas as compared to comprehension. Secondly, what were the interventions used and how did the teachers decide which interventions were best for individual students? We know that they were Tier 1 interventions, but that gives little in the way of assessing (for ourselves) the quality and usefulness of the interventions. While I appreciate the information about the growth of the kindergarten students, there are way too many factors that can/would skew the relational studies that they tried to portray in this research…. What instructional strategies were used in first grade? Were the class sizes increased and less time available to spend with each child? Were the teachers as effective as the kindergarten teachers? Were the classes kept intact, or were students shuffled into different classrooms with different peer groups? Did the ethnicity of the teacher play a role in the growth? …. Clearly, this research needs to be longitudinal with greater parameters and controls to give us a clear understanding of the effectiveness of RTI and imply ways to tweak the system to help our students.. - [|MelodyMooney] just now Me


 * I THOUGHT YOU MIGHT BE INTERESTED IN "WHAT'S HOT AND WHAT'S NOT?" ACCORDING TO THE INTERNATIONAL READING ASSOCIATION. THIS MIGHT "TICKLE YOUR BRAIN" AS YOU CONTEMPLATE YOUR THESIS RESEARCH. THIS IS AN ANNUAL SURVEY CONDUCTED BY THE IRA (AHA! QUANTITATIVE DATA!) THAT IS VERY INFORMATIVE ABOUT WHAT KINDS OF RESEARCH READING PROFESSIONALS - AT ALL LEVELS - ARE LOOKING FOR. [|IRA SURVEY]**


 * I think it is interesting that the Common Core is "hot" and yet writing is "not hot". Would like to know why participants thought that way. d2hk **


 * What I want to know is what is phonemic awareness and phonics on the "should not be hot" side. Did I read that correctly? Research tells us that children must have a strong understanding in both of those areas to be successful readers. In my classroom, I can tell which children do not, and they are the ones that I go back and teach those type of activities to in order to help increase their reading skills. ~MM **

Article #1

At first glance the article seemed quantitative but as Deb pointed out in class is a mixture of the two.

Upon reading this article, I realized that some very valid points were made when it comes to RTI interventions for kindergarten students but one problem is that there are some unclear points. Some of the questions I have about the article is that why weren't the first grade monitored more closely to make sure that the study was more valid? I would also like to know how can the data from the first grade really indicate how successful first graders can be if they didn't put in the same amount of time with them as they did for kindergartners? Even with those questions, I enjoyed reading the article because it gave me some things to look for and use when providing interventions for my students. ~ Diane Woods