Evaluating a Multidimensional Reading Comprehension Program and Reconsidering the Lowly Reputation of Tests of Near–Transfer

Evaluating a Multidimensional Reading Comprehension Program and Reconsidering the Lowly Reputation of Tests of Near–Transfer

We conducted a 14–week experimental study of 2 versions of a relatively comprehensive RC intervention that involved 50 classroom teachers, 15 tutors, and 116 children drawn in equal proportions from grades 3 and 5 in 13 schools in a large urban school district. Students were randomly assigned in equ...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Learning disabilities research and practice Vol. 33; no. 1; pp. 11 - 23
Main Authors: Fuchs, Douglas, Hendricks, Emma, Walsh, Meagan E., Fuchs, Lynn S., Gilbert, Jennifer K., Zhang Tracy, Wen, Patton, Samuel, Davis-Perkins, Nicole, Kim, Wooliya, Elleman, Amy M., Peng, Peng
Format: Journal Article
Language:English
Published: Los Angeles, CA SAGE Publications 01-02-2018
Wiley-Blackwell
Subjects:
Achievement Gains
Control Groups
Experimental Groups
Experimental Programs
Grade 3
Grade 5
Multidimensional Scaling
Outcome Measures
Program Effectiveness
Program Evaluation
Reading Achievement
Reading Comprehension
Reading Programs
Reading Tests
Reputation
Tutoring
Urban Schools
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:We conducted a 14–week experimental study of 2 versions of a relatively comprehensive RC intervention that involved 50 classroom teachers, 15 tutors, and 116 children drawn in equal proportions from grades 3 and 5 in 13 schools in a large urban school district. Students were randomly assigned in equal numbers to the two tutoring conditions and a control group. Results indicated that students in the two tutored groups tended to perform comparably on all tests and to outperform controls (more so in grade 5 than grade 3) on near–transfer but not far–transfer measures of RC. This differential pattern of program effects for near– versus far–transfer measures raises questions about how tests of near–transfer and far–transfer are conventionally understood.
ISSN:0938-8982
1540-5826
DOI:10.1111/ldrp.12162