Running Head: !SIGHT WORDS AND COMPUTER ASSISTIVE

2y ago
9 Views
2 Downloads
4.35 MB
52 Pages
Last View : 2m ago
Last Download : 2m ago
Upload by : Jacoby Zeller
Transcription

Running Head: SIGHT WORDS AND COMPUTER ASSISTIVE INSTRUCTIONUsing Computer Assistive Instruction for English Language Learners: A Case StudyEastern Illinois UniversityJennieL.File

SIGHT WORDS AND COMPUTER ASSISTIVE INSTRUCTION2AbstractThe purpose of this study was to determine if the use of computer assistive instruction – andspecifically tablets and their applications (apps) – is an effective intervention to help EnglishLanguage Learners improve sight word acquisition. The participants were two Vietnamesesiblings, a second grader Isabella and kindergartener Ian (both pseudonyms). The Dolch SightWord Test was used as pretests and posttest to ascertain the number of Dolch sight words astudent can read. The second data source was an iPod app entitled 22Learn’s Sight Words. Thisapp contains games utilizing sight words and is designed to be both educational and fun. Resultsindicated using assistive technology did improve both students’ sight word knowledge.Isabella’s scores on the two Dolch Sight Words Tests indicated that she improved 32 words;went from a First Reader Level to a Second Reader Level. Her score for the posttest was 198words of the total 220 Dolch words. This level placed her higher than the average second gradestudent. She also improved at every level from PrePrimer through Third Grade. Ian’s scores onthe two Dolch Sight Words Tests indicate that he improved 20 words on the PrePrimer andPrimer lists, which are the appropriate lists for a kindergartner. Although he did not improve hisgrade level according to the scale on the Dolch test, he did improve on both of these levels. Hisposttest was 30 words of the 102 sight words on these two lists.Keywords: Sight words, computer assistive instruction, English language learners

SIGHT WORDS AND COMPUTER ASSISTIVE INSTRUCTION3Using Computer Assistive Instruction for English Language Learners:A Case StudyTwo English Language Learner (ELL) siblings, Isabella and Ian (both pseudonyms)speak Vietnamese at home and were falling behind in their reading skills. Each of theirclassroom teachers recommended the researcher of the current study to tutor them. Isabella’steacher asked the researcher to assist this second grader with her spelling, reading fluency, andsight words. At the beginning of these tutoring sessions, the researcher noticed that she wasstumbling on even some of the PrePrimer Dolch sight words, such as away and where. Ian’skindergarten teacher also requested the researcher to work with him on sight words. When theresearcher first started tutoring him, he only knew the PrePrimer word I. The researcher’sMacBook Air fascinated both of them, particularly Ian. He excitedly showed her his family’siPad. This experience sparked this research topic: Using Computer Assisted Instruction forEnglish Language Learners.The term English Language Learners is defined as students who speak another languageat home and either are enrolled in or could benefit from language assistance programs in publicschools (Zehler, Yin, Donovan, 2012). Isabella and Ian’s parochial school did not offer this typeof programs at the time the current study was conducted. Therefore, their teachers recommendedthe researcher to assist the students with their homework in place of their parents.This is a common scenario in the United States. In the 2010-2011 school year theNational Center of Education Statistics (2010) reported an estimated 4.7 million K-12 students orten percent of all public school students were ELLs. Additionally, the 2011 gap between theaverage National Assessment of Educational Progress reading scores between non-ELL and ELL

SIGHT WORDS AND COMPUTER ASSISTIVE INSTRUCTION4students was 46 points in fourth grade, 36 points in the eighth grade, and 44 points in the senioryear in high school (NCES, 2010).Studies show one of the best ways to improve ELL students’ reading skills is usingvocabulary instruction, which is important for both oral and written language (Lei, Berger, Allen,Plummer, Rosenberg, 2010). One way to develop vocabulary is to focus on sight words, whichare the most frequent words, found in reading text (Lei, et al., 2010). In fact, Tompkins (as citedin Cullen, Kessey, Alber-Morgan, & Wheaton, 2013) states that the Dolch sight words comprisemore that half of the words students encounter while reading. Although computer assistedinstruction (CAI) in education is not new, the advent of touch screens have brought newenthusiasm (Geist, 2011). Carly Shuler (2009) suggests that educators should consider apps toteach educational content to children as young as in preschool. Currently, there are not manystudies about iPads and Kindle touchscreen devices, especially in elementary education and withEnglish language learners (Geist, 2011).The intent of the current case study was to fill this gap. The purpose of this study was todetermine if the use of computer assistive instruction – and specifically tablets and theirapplications (apps) – is an effective intervention to help English Language Learners improvesight word acquisition. The participants were two ELLs, second grader Isabella and herkindergarten brother Ian (both pseudonyms), who were tutored by the researcher. Data wascollected for six weeks at a parochial school in a rural town in the Midwest. The next sectionwill provide a review of studies of sight words, computer assisted instruction, tablets, and mobileapps.

SIGHT WORDS AND COMPUTER ASSISTIVE INSTRUCTION5Sight Words, Computer Assisted Instruction, and Latest Educational Technology TrendsSight WordsVocabulary instruction, which is important for both oral and written language is one thebest ways to improve ELL students’ reading skills (Lei, Berger, Allen, Plummer, Rosenberg,2010). One way to develop vocabulary is to focus on sight words, which are the most frequentwords, found in reading text (Lei, et al., 2010). Also, Tompkins stated that Dolch sight wordsare more than fifty percent of the words in student reading text (as cited in Cullen, Kessey,Alber-Morgan, & Wheaton, 2013).Barth, Tolar, Fletcher, and Francis (2013) found sight word acquisition is also a majorinfluence on oral reading fluency. A study by Cullen et al. (2013) demonstrated the positiveconnection between sight words and oral reading fluency. Students with mild disabilities usingcomputer software successfully completed three 10-14 word lists in two to seven interventions ofabout 20 minutes.Computer Assisted Instruction (CAI)Macaruso and Rodman described computer assistive instruction as:In general, CAI is well suited as a supplementary aid to direct reading instruction.Computers are capable of presenting activities that are interesting and motivatingto children— including the use of pictorial displays and positive feedback.Children can work at their own pace and receive enough practice to support wordrecognition skills and eventually fluent text reading (Macaruso, & Rodman, 2008,p. 268).

SIGHT WORDS AND COMPUTER ASSISTIVE INSTRUCTION6Macaruso conducted three studies that have indicated that CAI is an effectiveintervention for reading skills among preschoolers, kindergartners, and English LanguageLearners (Macaruso, & Rodman, 2011a, 2011b; Marcuso & Walker, 2008).The participants in the Marcuso and Walker (2008) study were kindergarten studentsfrom six classes. The classes comprised of the morning and the afternoon class of three teachers.Each teacher had a treatment class and a control one. All students received the general readinginstruction. However, the treatment classes of 47 students received additional instruction onphonological awareness skills using Early Reading, a software program from Lexia LearningSystems. Also, the data of the four lowest level students in each class was analyzed to determineif CAI is effective for struggling readers. The researchers used the Dynamic Indicators of BasicEarly Literary Skills (DIEBELS) pretests and postests and the criterion-referenced GatesMacGinitie Reading Test, Level PR (Pre-Reading) after the study. The analysis of the DIEBELSpre and posttests showed no significant differences between the treatment and control groups foreither all the students or for the low level learners. However, the mean score and the GatesMacGinitie Reading Test scores for the oral language subtest were significantly higher for thetreatment group (Macaruso & Walker, 2008).Next Macaruso and Rodman (2011a) conducted two studies similar to the kindergartenstudy. Comparable to the Macaruso and Walker (2008) study, the first study included bothmorning and afternoon preschool classes of seven teachers. The Group Reading Assessment andDiagnostic Evaluation Level (GRADE) were given as a pre and posttest. The gains betweenGRADE pre and posttests showed a significant difference favoring the treatment group over thecontrol group.

SIGHT WORDS AND COMPUTER ASSISTIVE INSTRUCTION7The second study conducted by Macaruso and Rodman (2011a) used larger samples ofkindergarten participants with more low performers. Analysis of the GRADE scores showed asignificance gain for the treatment group but no gain for the control group. Both treatment andcontrol groups for low performers showed posttest gains in Letter Naming.In another similar study, Macaruso’s participants were kindergarten English LanguageLearners from Ennis, Texas who were enrolled in a bi-lingual program with English theprominent language spoken for language arts instruction. This study had a unique component.While the treatment group was receiving additional instruction on phonological awareness skillsusing Early Reading, the control group was independently using a computer software programentitled Key Skills, which was a combination of math and reading activities. This change in thestructure of the study which no longer studied the effectiveness of CAI, but the effectiveness ofcomputer instruction with structured support versus no structured support. The mean gain scorefor the treatment was significantly higher while the control group improvement was notsignificant (Macaruso & Rodman, 2011b).In addition to Macaruso’s and his colleagues’ studies, benefits of supplemental CAI havebeen shown with African American students (Cullen, Keesey, Alber-Morgan, & Wheaton, 2013;Gibson, Carttledge, & Keyes, 2011). The study was conducted on eight African American firstgraders whose DIEBEL pretest scores showed “some risk” or “at risk” for the possibility ofreading failure. Five students’ scores placed them in the “some risk” range and three were in “atrisk”. All eight students participated in the supplemented CAI intervention using ReadNaturally. Results showed that all participants made improvement in their oral reading fluencywith five of the eight improving their risk factor by one level.

SIGHT WORDS AND COMPUTER ASSISTIVE INSTRUCTION8Lastly, the software program Kurweil 3000 was utilized as a practice intervention forimproving sight word acquisition for four African American fourth graders with mild disabilities.The sight words to include in the practice sessions were first determined by a Dolch sight list andtheir reading level on the Terra Nova assessment. Three word lists of 10-14 sight words werecreated for each student with a ratio of 50 percent known words to 50 percent unknown words.After a practice session, each student was assessed by reading aloud the words on a Power Pointpresentation set to change slides every three seconds. Three of the students successfullycompleted their three word lists and also read up to 80 percent of these sight words up to fourmonths later (Cullen et al., 2013).Latest Educational Technology TrendsThe internationally recognized New Media Consortium (NMC) Horizon Report – 2012Higher Education Edition, created by an advisory board of international education andtechnology, identifies emerging trends that they believe will h

The Dolch Sight Word Test was used as pretests and posttest to ascertain the number of Dolch sight words a student can read. The second data source was an iPod app entitled 22Learn’s Sight Words. This app contains games utilizing sight words and is designed to be both educational and fun. Results

Related Documents:

Sight Words You will need to add all the sight words that were taught in the pre-primer. To update the list of current sight words, do the following: 1. ToolsOn the menu, point to Sight Words, and then click Update Sight Words. The Update Sight Words dialog box appears. The list of sight words is displayed. It should be empty at this point. 2.

-Write sentences using the sight words and underline them. Learning Warm-Up Using Sight Words in Sentences-Read sight words at the top of the page at least 2 times-Write sentences using the sight words and underline them. Learning Warm-Up Using Sight Words in Sentences-Rea d sight words at the t op of the page at least 2 times-Write sentences .

57 Sight Word: by Sight Words-4 58 Consonant Blend "gl" L-Blends 59 Word Family: -ud Word Families-4 60 Consonant Blend "pl" L-Blends 61 Sight Word: of Sight Words-4 62 Independent Reading: Letter Bump (Level D) IR-Level D 63 Sight Word: one Sight Words-4

Sight Distance 4.1 INTRODUCTION Sight distance is the length of roadway visible to a driver. The three types of sight distance common in roadway design are intersection sight distance, stopping sight distance, and passing sight distance.

What are sight words? Sight Word Assessment Assessment and Progress Monitoring for the Dolch 220 Sight Words Make, Take & Teach Sight words a

Sight words, Greek root Sight words, Greek root ann/ Sight words, Gk Roots audi/ Sight words, Gk Roots graph/ anti, and academic enn, and academic astro, and academic fract, and academic vocabulary vocabulary vocabulary vocabulary 1. confession 1. pathways 1. auditorium 1. autograph 2. apology 2. tracks 2. auditory 2. biography

Lexia Core Reading Teacher’s anual 109 start of second half Level 16 Sight Words 7 The goal of this activity is for students to automatically recognize regular and irregular high-frequency sight words. Students identify and construct dictated sight words in isolation, complete dictated phrases with sight words, and

up and as a follow-up to the 11th World Trade Organization (WTO) Ministerial Conference (MC11) in December 2017. At MC11 in Buenos Aires, differences on digital commerce could not be bridged. Views were signifi- cantly opposed. Discussions were heated. While negotiators cannot reach compromise let alone consensus, the digital economy continues to grow very fast, with major economic and .