Hostname: page-component-5c6d5d7d68-wtssw Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-08-13T23:52:05.498Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The use of a structured literacy program to facilitate the inclusion of marginal and special education students into regular classes

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 February 2016

Yola Center  and
Louella Freeman
Yola Center*
Affiliation:
Macquarie University, New South Wales
Louella Freeman
Affiliation:
Macquarie University, New South Wales
*
Address for Correspondence: Dr. Yola Center. Macquarie University, Sydney, 2109
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

A preliminary study was carried out to evaluate the use of a whole class early literacy program with disadvantaged and at risk children. This program, Schoolwide Early Language and Literacy (SWELL) is based on an interactive-compensatory theory of literacy acquisition. Results indicated that by the end of kindergarten, children in SWELL schools outperformed their counterparts in control schools on tests measuring reading connected text but not on other early literacy measures. In addition, marginal children in the mainstream, including those targeted as having mild intellectual disability, were able to master partial phonetic cue reading, in contrast to marginal students in control schools who did not attain this skill. Follow-up studies indicated that by the end of Year 1, all children in SWELL schools outperformed their counterparts in control schools on four early literacy tests, but the effect of the fifth, reading connected text, was only evident in large disadvantaged schools. Marginal students who had received individualised Reading Recovery outperformed marginal students in SWELL schools and control schools who had received small group intervention on reading connected text and on reading pseudowords, but not on tests of segmentation, spelling and writing. No children classified as developmentally delayed received individualised Reading Recovery, but were included in both SWELL small class and control schools small group intervention. Further follow-up mid-way through Year 2, on marginal children only, no longer indicated any differences among the individualised Reading Recovery, SWELL small class or control schools small group. The implications of the use of a structured program such as SWELL, as a whole-class program and the most effective individualised program for inclusion of at risk students are discussed.

Type
Research Article
Information
Australasian Journal of Special Education , Volume 21 , Issue 1 , January 1997 , pp. 45 - 62
Copyright
Copyright © The Australian Association of Special Education 1997

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Adams, M.J. (1990). Beginning to read. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Andrews, S. (1989). Psycholinguistics and reading acquisition the argument for decoding. The NSW Journal of Special Education, 10,15–20.Google Scholar
Beck, I.L. (1981). Reading problems and instructional practices. In MacKinnon, G.E. & Waller, T.G. (Eds.), Reading research: Advances in theory and practice, vol. 2 (pp 53–94). New York:Academic Press.Google Scholar
Belsky, J., & MacKinnon, C. (1994). Transition to school: Developmental trajectories and school experiences. Early Education and Development, 5,106–119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bryant, P.E., & Goswami, U. (1987). Beyond grapheme-phoneme correspondence. Cahiers de Psychologie Cognitive, 7,439–443.Google Scholar
Byrne, B., & Fielding-Barnsley, R. (1995). Evaluation of a program to teach phonemic awareness to young children: A 2- and 3-year follow-up. Journal of Educational Psychology, 87,488–503.Google Scholar
Center, Y., & Freeman, L. (1997). A trial evaluation of SWELL (Schoolwide Early Language and Literacy Program for at risk and disadvantaged children. International Journal of Disability, Development and Education, 44,21–39.Google Scholar
Center, Y., & Freeman, L. (under review). Examining the effects of two early literacy programs.Google Scholar
Center, Y. & Freeman, L.B. (1994). Emergent literacy manual. North Ryde, NSW: Macquarie University.Google Scholar
Center, Y. & Freeman, L.B. (1995). Becoming literate manual. North Ryde, NSW: Macquarie University Google Scholar
Center, Y. & Freeman, L.B. (1996a) Towards literacy competence manual. North Ryde, NSW: Macquarie University.Google Scholar
Center, Y. & Freemen, L.B. (1996b). The SWELL tutor manual. North Ryde, NSW: Macquarie University.Google Scholar
Center, Y. Wheldall, K., & Freeman, L. (1992). Evaluating the effectiveness of Reading Recovery: A critique. Educational Psychology, 12, 263–274.Google Scholar
Center, Y. Wheldall, K., Freeman, L.B., Outhred, L., & McNaught, M. (1995). An evaluation of Reading Recovery. Reading Research Quarterly, 30, 240–263.Google Scholar
Chall, J.S. (1989). Learning to read. The great debate twenty years later. Phi Delta Kappan, 70, 521–538.Google Scholar
Chall, J.S. (1983). Stages of reading development. New York: McGraw Hill.Google Scholar
Clay, M.M. (1979; 1985). The early detection of reading difficulties (3rd ed.). Auckland: Heineman.Google Scholar
Deno, S.L., Mirkin, P.K., & Chiang, B. (1982). Identifying valid measures of reading. Exceptional Children, 49, 36–45.Google Scholar
Dunn, L.M., Smith, J.O., & Dunn, L.M. (1981). Peabody language development kits - Revised. Circle Pines, MN: American Guidance Service.Google Scholar
Edelsky, C. (1992). A talk with Carol Edelsky about politics and literacy. Language Arts, 69, 324–329.Google Scholar
Ehri, L.C. (1989). The development of spelling knowledge and its role in reading acquisition and reading disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 22, 356–365.Google Scholar
Gilmore, A., Croft, C., & Reid, N. (1981). Burt word reading test - New Zealand revision. Wellington: New Zealand Council for Educational Research.Google Scholar
Glynn, T., Crooks, T., Bethune, N., Ballard, K., & Smith, J. (1989). Reading Recovery in context. Wellington: New Zealand Department of Education.Google Scholar
Goodman, K. (1976). Reading: A psycholinguistic guessing game. In Singer, H. & Ruddell, R.B. (Eds.), Theoretical models and processes of reading (2nd ed.). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.Google Scholar
Gough, P. (1976). One second of reading. In Singer, H., & Ruddell, R.B. (Eds.), Theoretical models and processes of reading (2nd ed.). Newark, DE: Intemational Reading Association.Google Scholar
Hiebert, E. (1994). Reading Recovery in the United States: What difference does it make to an age cohort? Educational Researcher, 23(9), 15–25.Google Scholar
Juel, C. (1988). Learning to read and write: A longitudinal study of 54 children from first through fourth grades. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80, 437–447.Google Scholar
Liberman, I.Y., & Liberman, A.M. (1992). Whole language versus code emphasis: Underlying assumptions and their implications for reading instruction. In Gough, P.B., Ehri, L.C., & Treiman, R. (Eds.), Reading acquisition. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Mann, V.A. Tobin, P., & Wilson, R. (1987). Measuring phonological awareness through the invented spellings of kindergartenchildren. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 33, 365–391.Google Scholar
McKenna, M.C., Stahl, S.A., & Reinking, D. (1994). A critical commentary on research, politics, and whole language. Journal of Reading Behavior, 26, 211–233.Google Scholar
Mittler, P. (1995). Education for all or for some? International principles and practice. Australasian Journal of Special Education, 19 (2), 5–15.Google Scholar
Nicholson, T. (1992). Reading wars: A brief history and an update. International Journal of Disabilities, Development and Education, 39 (3), 173–184.Google Scholar
Pinnell, G.S., Lyons, C.A., Deford, E.E., Bryk, A.S., & Seltzer, M. (1994). Comparing instructional models for the literacy education of high-risk first graders. Reading Research Quarterly, 29, 8–39.Google Scholar
Plourde, L. (1995). Classroom Listening and Speaking (CLAS). Arizona: Psychological Cooperation.Google Scholar
Rumelhart, D.E. (1977). Toward an interactive model of reading. In Dornic, S. (Ed). International Symposium on Attention Performance. Stockholm, NJ: Halsted Press.Google Scholar
Shanahan, M., & Barr, R. (1995). Reading Recovery: An independent evaluation of the effects of an early instructional intervention for at-risk learners. Reading Research Quarterly, 30, 958–996.Google Scholar
Share, D.L., & Stanovich, K.E. (1995). Cognitive processes in early reading development: A model of acquisition and individual differences. Issues in education: Contributions from educational psychology, 1,1–57.Google Scholar
Slavin, R.E., Madden, N.A., Dolan, L.J., Wasik, B.A., Ross, S.M., & Smith, J.S. (1994). ‘Whenever and wherever we choose.’ The replication of Success for All. Phi Delta Kappan, April, 639–647.Google Scholar
Slavin, R.E., Madden, N.A., Karweit, N.L., Dolan, L., & Wasik, B. (1992). Success for All: A relentless approach to prevention and early intervention in elementary schools. Arlington, VA: Educational Research Service.Google Scholar
Smith, F. (1971). Understanding reading: A psycholinguistic analysis of reading and learning to read. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.Google Scholar
Stanovich, K.E. (1980). Toward an interactive-compensatory model of individual differences in the development of reading fluency. Reading Research Quarterly, 16, 32–71.Google Scholar
Stanovich, K.E. (1984). The interactive-compensatory model of reading: A confluence of developmental, experimental and educational psychology. Remedial and Special Education, 5, 11–19.Google Scholar
Stanovich, K.E. (1993). Romance and reality. The Reading Teacher. 47, 280–290.Google Scholar
Stanovich, K.E. (1994). Constructivism in reading education. The Journal of Special Education, 28, 259–274.Google Scholar
Tangel, D.M., & Blachman, B.A. (1995). Effect of phoneme awareness instruction on the invented spelling of first-grade children: A one-year follow-up. Journal of Reading Behaviour, 27, 153–185.Google Scholar
Treiman, R. (1993). Beginning to spell. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Vandervelden, M.C., & Siegel, L.S. (1995). Phonological recoding and phoneme awareness in early literacy: A developmental approach. Reading Research Quarterly, 30, 854–875.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Waddington, N.J. (1988). Diagnostic reading and spelling tests. Australia: Waddington Educational Resources.Google Scholar
Wasik, B.A., & Slavin, R.E. (1993). Preventing early reading failure with one-to-one tutoring. A review of five programs. Reading Research Quarterly, 23, 179–200.Google Scholar
Yopp, H.K. (1988). The validity and reliability of phonemic awareness tests. Reading Research Quarterly, 23,159–177.Google Scholar