Background Research Project Results Readable English Results Standard English Results References...

Similar documents
Stages of Literacy Ros Lugg

Running head: DELAY AND PROSPECTIVE MEMORY 1

Understanding and Supporting Dyslexia Godstone Village School. January 2017

Organizing Comprehensive Literacy Assessment: How to Get Started

Assessment Strategies Sight Word Assessments Running Records Daily Work Anecdotal Notes

Test Blueprint. Grade 3 Reading English Standards of Learning

Linking the Common European Framework of Reference and the Michigan English Language Assessment Battery Technical Report

Dyslexia/dyslexic, 3, 9, 24, 97, 187, 189, 206, 217, , , 367, , , 397,

Program Matrix - Reading English 6-12 (DOE Code 398) University of Florida. Reading

Loughton School s curriculum evening. 28 th February 2017

Mandarin Lexical Tone Recognition: The Gating Paradigm

9.85 Cognition in Infancy and Early Childhood. Lecture 7: Number

Dyslexia and Dyscalculia Screeners Digital. Guidance and Information for Teachers

SLINGERLAND: A Multisensory Structured Language Instructional Approach

What the National Curriculum requires in reading at Y5 and Y6

The Effect of Extensive Reading on Developing the Grammatical. Accuracy of the EFL Freshmen at Al Al-Bayt University

Florida Reading Endorsement Alignment Matrix Competency 1

Interpreting ACER Test Results

Table of Contents. Introduction Choral Reading How to Use This Book...5. Cloze Activities Correlation to TESOL Standards...

Phonemic Awareness. Jennifer Gondek Instructional Specialist for Inclusive Education TST BOCES

The Effects of Super Speed 100 on Reading Fluency. Jennifer Thorne. University of New England

Application of Multimedia Technology in Vocabulary Learning for Engineering Students

Richardson, J., The Next Step in Guided Writing, Ohio Literacy Conference, 2010

NEALE ANALYSIS OF READING ABILITY FOR READERS WITH LOW VISION

Developing a College-level Speed and Accuracy Test

The Role of Test Expectancy in the Build-Up of Proactive Interference in Long-Term Memory

FractionWorks Correlation to Georgia Performance Standards

Computerized training of the correspondences between phonological and orthographic units

MARK 12 Reading II (Adaptive Remediation)

Running head: DEVELOPING MULTIPLICATION AUTOMATICTY 1. Examining the Impact of Frustration Levels on Multiplication Automaticity.

MARK¹² Reading II (Adaptive Remediation)

+32 (0)

Multisensory Teaching Approach for Reading, Spelling, and Handwriting, Orton-Gillingham Based Curriculum, in a Public School Setting

1 st Quarter (September, October, November) August/September Strand Topic Standard Notes Reading for Literature

Enhancing Van Hiele s level of geometric understanding using Geometer s Sketchpad Introduction Research purpose Significance of study

Improved Effects of Word-Retrieval Treatments Subsequent to Addition of the Orthographic Form

Reading Comprehension Tests Vary in the Skills They Assess: Differential Dependence on Decoding and Oral Comprehension

Jack Jilly can play. 1. Can Jack play? 2. Can Jilly play? 3. Jack can play. 4. Jilly can play. 5. Play, Jack, play! 6. Play, Jilly, play!

CLASSIFICATION OF PROGRAM Critical Elements Analysis 1. High Priority Items Phonemic Awareness Instruction

YMCA SCHOOL AGE CHILD CARE PROGRAM PLAN

Centre for Evaluation & Monitoring SOSCA. Feedback Information

OPTIMIZATINON OF TRAINING SETS FOR HEBBIAN-LEARNING- BASED CLASSIFIERS

Are You Ready? Simplify Fractions

READ 180 Next Generation Software Manual

Study Board Guidelines Western Kentucky University Department of Psychological Sciences and Department of Psychology

Running head: METACOGNITIVE STRATEGIES FOR ACADEMIC LISTENING 1. The Relationship between Metacognitive Strategies Awareness

Cued Recall From Image and Sentence Memory: A Shift From Episodic to Identical Elements Representation

Piano Safari Sight Reading & Rhythm Cards for Book 1

Student Morningness-Eveningness Type and Performance: Does Class Timing Matter?

TRAITS OF GOOD WRITING

Introduction to Ensemble Learning Featuring Successes in the Netflix Prize Competition

A Critique of Running Records

Limitations to Teaching Children = 4: Typical Arithmetic Problems Can Hinder Learning of Mathematical Equivalence. Nicole M.

Exams: Accommodations Guidelines. English Language Learners

Algebra 1, Quarter 3, Unit 3.1. Line of Best Fit. Overview

DIBELS Next BENCHMARK ASSESSMENTS

School Size and the Quality of Teaching and Learning

Literature and the Language Arts Experiencing Literature

Automatization and orthographic development in second language visual word recognition

Cognitive bases of reading and writing in a second/foreign language. DIALUKI (

ELA/ELD Standards Correlation Matrix for ELD Materials Grade 1 Reading

Psychometric Research Brief Office of Shared Accountability

THE UNITED REPUBLIC OF TANZANIA MINISTRY OF EDUCATION, SCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY AND VOCATIONAL TRAINING CURRICULUM FOR BASIC EDUCATION STANDARD I AND II

First Grade Curriculum Highlights: In alignment with the Common Core Standards

Wonderworks Tier 2 Resources Third Grade 12/03/13

Fluency YES. an important idea! F.009 Phrases. Objective The student will gain speed and accuracy in reading phrases.

Fountas-Pinnell Level M Realistic Fiction

The New Theory of Disuse Predicts Retrieval Enhanced Suggestibility (RES)

Evidence-based Practice: A Workshop for Training Adult Basic Education, TANF and One Stop Practitioners and Program Administrators

Fountas-Pinnell Level P Informational Text

Learning By Asking: How Children Ask Questions To Achieve Efficient Search

100 Tier 2 Words For High School

The Effect of Written Corrective Feedback on the Accuracy of English Article Usage in L2 Writing

5. UPPER INTERMEDIATE

1. READING ENGAGEMENT 2. ORAL READING FLUENCY

Prentice Hall Literature: Timeless Voices, Timeless Themes Gold 2000 Correlated to Nebraska Reading/Writing Standards, (Grade 9)

Listening and Speaking Skills of English Language of Adolescents of Government and Private Schools

Evidence for Reliability, Validity and Learning Effectiveness

CEFR Overall Illustrative English Proficiency Scales

Rendezvous with Comet Halley Next Generation of Science Standards

Regions Of Georgia For 2nd Grade

Missouri Mathematics Grade-Level Expectations

The influence of orthographic transparency on word recognition. by dyslexic and normal readers

PROGRESS MONITORING FOR STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES Participant Materials

Journal of Phonetics

Course Law Enforcement II. Unit I Careers in Law Enforcement

Accountability in the Netherlands

Welcome to ACT Brain Boot Camp

Characteristics of the Text Genre Realistic fi ction Text Structure

Prentice Hall Literature: Timeless Voices, Timeless Themes, Platinum 2000 Correlated to Nebraska Reading/Writing Standards (Grade 10)

Age Effects on Syntactic Control in. Second Language Learning

The Efficacy of PCI s Reading Program - Level One: A Report of a Randomized Experiment in Brevard Public Schools and Miami-Dade County Public Schools

Multi-sensory Language Teaching. Seamless Intervention with Quality First Teaching for Phonics, Reading and Spelling

How to Judge the Quality of an Objective Classroom Test

Lower and Upper Secondary

Characteristics of the Text Genre Informational Text Text Structure

UDL AND LANGUAGE ARTS LESSON OVERVIEW

Fluency Without Fear: Research Evidence on the Best Ways to Learn Math Facts

Greek Teachers Attitudes toward the Inclusion of Students with Special Educational Needs

Transcription:

Table of Contents Background... 3 Research Project... 4 Results... 5 Readable English Results... 5 Standard English Results... 7 References... 8 2014 Readable English. All rights reserved. The New, Easier Way to Learn to Read English readablenglish.com 2.

Background English is a difficult language to learn to read because it is not phonetic. The English spelling system is erratic, and there are many complex rules and exceptions. Most letters make more than one sound, some characters are silent, and it is often hard to know where syllable breaks occur. It takes native English speaking children significantly longer to learn to read than children in at least 14 other countries [1]. As a result, in many English-speaking countries, literacy rates are alarmingly low. In 2006, the Australian Bureau of Statistics [2] estimated that 46% of Australians are functionally illiterate and lack the literacy skills needed to work in the emerging knowledge based economy. Contrast this to countries with phonetic languages, such as Italy. In Italian, each character has only one sound so words are easy to sound out, and there are no additional rules to learn. Italian children can learn to read Italian in only 3-6 months [3], and learning to read poses many fewer difficulties, even for dyslexics. Readable English is a new approach to learning and teaching people to read in English. Without changing the spelling of words, the simple system makes English fully phonetic by greying out silent characters, adding syllable breaks to words, and adding intuitive visual cues, called glyphs, that indicate exactly what sound each letter makes. Like Italian, in Readable English there is only one sound per character with no additional complicated rules or exceptions to memorise. Students can easily sound out any word, enabling them to focus on improving comprehension and vocabulary. The New, Easier Way to Learn to Read English readablenglish.com 3.

Readable English is unique as it is the only system that makes written English phonetic without changing the spelling of words. Keeping the spelling intact is important for developing sight-word recognition (the ability to recognise words by sight). Because Readable English maintains the standard spelling of words, users are able to start developing sight-word recognition right away which is fundamental for achieving reading fluency. See www.readablenglish.com/videos for more information. Research Project We recently completed a research project investigating the effectiveness of Readable English for teaching reading and improving reading skills. The project involved 60 participants from three Year 2 classes, and was conducted with the approval of the NSW Department of Education. One class of 23 students was randomly selected to act as a control group and the other two classes consisting of 37 students made up the Readable English test group. As a part of the research project, students in the test group participated in two half-hour classes per week for twelve weeks (a total of twelve hours class time), and could access Readable English online at home. Students in the control group participated in their regular reading classes while the Readable English classes were being taught. Students were pre- and post-tested before and after the program using a standardised reading assessment, the Neale Analysis of Reading Ability (Neale). The Neale assesses students reading ability in three aspects of reading; accuracy, comprehension and rate. Raw scores from the assessment are converted into a reading age for each aspect for each participant. Additional passages from a standardised reading fluency test, the Gray Oral Reading Test (GORT), were also used as reading stimuli. Scores from the GORT passages were converted into an error rate, as well as an accuracy reading rate (a measure of reading fluency that takes into account both speed and accuracy) measuring the number of words read correctly per minute. Students from the control group who did not learn Readable English read both their pre- and post-tests in Standard English text. Participants from the Readable English test group were assessed in the pre-test reading Standard English text, and read stimuli in both Standard and Readable English text in the post-test. This was done so that improvements reading both Standard English and Readable English text could be examined. In the post-test, passages from the Neale were read in The New, Easier Way to Learn to Read English readablenglish.com 4.

Readable English text, and the additional GORT passages were read in Standard English text. Results Seven participants were excluded from the analysis due to incomplete data (these participants had left the school or were absent from school during the post-tesing). Independent sample t-tests were conducted to determine if there were any significant differences between the control group and the test group before the program began. There were no significant differences in reading ages between the two groups in accuracy reading age (t(51) = -.996, p >.05), comprehension reading age (t(51) = -.737, p >.05) or rate reading age (t(51) = -.003, p >.05). Readable English Results (Test conducted using the Neale) An improvement in reading age for each factor of reading (accuracy, comprehension and rate) was calculated for each participant by subtracting the pretest reading age from the post-test reading age. A one-way Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) was then conducted for each of the factors to determine any differences between the test group and the control group. 1. Accuracy. There was an average improvement in reading age for accuracy in the control group of 5.3 months (M =.44, SD =.45)*. This was significantly less than the improvement in reading age for the Readable English group where the average improvement was 10.7 months (M =.89, SD =.77) for accuracy (F(1,51) = 5.59, p =.02). (*Means and Standard Deviations are shown in years. An improvement of 0.44 years is equal to 5.3 months.) The New, Easier Way to Learn to Read English readablenglish.com 5.

Reading Age Improvement (in months) Reading Age Improvement (in months) Accuracy 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Readable English group Control group 2. Comprehension. For the control group, there was an average improvement in reading age for comprehension of 4.5 months (M =.38, SD =.60). This was significantly less than the improvement in reading age for the test group where the average improvement in reading age was 9.8 months (M =.81, SD =.72) for comprehension (F(1,51) = 5.26, p =.03). 12 Comprehension 10 8 6 4 2 0 Readable English group Control group 3. Rate. There was no significant difference between the test group and the control group in improvement in reading age for rate (F(1,51) = 3.07, p =.086). This suggests that the time taken to sound out words did not significantly slow down the reading rates of students. The New, Easier Way to Learn to Read English readablenglish.com 6.

Number of words read correctly (per minute) Standard English Results (Test conducted using passages from the GORT) Independent sample t-tests were conducted on the GORT pre-test reading scores to determine if there were any significant differences between the control group and the test group before the program began. There were no significant differences between the two groups in neither error rate (total number of errors made) (t(50) = -.363. p >.05) nor accuracy reading rate (number of words read correctly per minute) (t(50) = 0.276, p >.05). Differences in error rate and accuracy reading rate from before the program compared to after the program were calculated for each participant by subtracting the pre-test scores from the post-test scores. A one-way ANOVA was conducted on the error rate and accuracy reading rate data to determine if there were any differences in improvement between the Readable English test group and the control group. 1. Students from the Readable English test group read on average 24.6 more words correctly per minute in the post-test than the pre-test (M = 24.64, SD = 16.69). This was significantly more than students from the control group who read on average 10.9 more words correctly per minute in the post-test than the pre-test (M = 10.88, SD = 20.46) (F(1,51) = 7.022, p =.01). Accuracy Reading Rate (in Standard English) 105 100 95 90 85 80 75 70 65 60 Readable English group Control group Pre-test Post-test 2. There was no significant difference in error rates between the two groups. Error rates were low for participants in both groups, and this may account for the reason no difference was found. The New, Easier Way to Learn to Read English readablenglish.com 7.

3. No students performed significantly worse in the post-test, or were negatively impacted after participating in the Readable English program. References [1] Seymour, P. (2001). How do children learn to read? Is English more difficult than other languages? British Festival of Science. Retrieved 16 July 2014 from http://www.englishspellingsociety.org/news/media/seymour.php [2] Australian Bureau of Statistics. (2006). Adult literacy and life skills survey. Retrieved 24 July 2009 from ABS: http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/previousproducts/4228.0main%20feat ures22006%20(reissue)?opendocument&tabname=summary&prodno=4228.0&issu e=2006%20(reissue)&num=&view= [3] Dehaene, S. (2009). Reading in the brain: The new science of how we read. New York, NY: Penguin Books. The New, Easier Way to Learn to Read English readablenglish.com 8.