Formal Research

A. Group One

The first group to be taught using Kid-Friendly Computation series for math, and Easy-for-Me™ Reading, which included SnapLetters™, Alphabet Tales, SnapWords®, Easy-for-Me™ Books, and a multisensory approach to learning to read, consisted of small groups of 4- to 5-year-olds attending half-day sessions during the 2000-2001 academic year.

Formal testing in April included:

1. Phonics Mastery Inventory

• Blends & Digraphs
• Number of Syllables
• Base Words & Affixes
• Plurals
• Vowel Teams
• Two Consonant Endings

2. Features Spelling

3. John’s Basic Reading Inventory

• Graded Word Lists - Form A
• Oral Reading Passages - Form A

In the results of this battery of testing, the lowest reader was 2nd grade, while the highest level reader was 4th grade.

 

B. Group Two

The second group, a public school kindergarten class, started incorporating some Child1st materials and approaches in November of 2000. The children attended two full days and a half-day on Fridays, with the teacher reporting that her actual usable/productive time with the students totaled about 2 half-days. The materials used included SnapWords® and Easy-for-Me™ Children’s Readers Set A Books, while the other products were not fully implemented. Testing involved sight word recognition as mandated by the district, reading the Easy-for-Me™ Books, which required both decoding and sight word fluency, and writing words and sentences from oral dictation by an adult.

January Testing:

By January 24, 2001, children had progressed through the teaching sequence and had begun reading the books, following the mini-lesson inside the covers. They could write words and sentences from dictation, with Book 1 completed on January 24, 2001, Book 2 on January 25, 2001, and they were on Book 6 by February 7, 2001. All words on assessments were spelled correctly. Assessments on reading and writing were based on both decodable words and sight words.

February Testing:

The assessment focused on sight word recognition using the district-supplied word list for the school year, which comprised 17 words required for kindergarten.

Results:

After only 3 months, out of 21 children, 11 could read all 17 words, 3 could read 16, 2 could read 14, 2 could read 12, 1 could read 10, 1 could read 9, and 1 read 3.
*I was thinking that some sort of visual chart, such as a pie chart, to show this data would be nice.

Spring assessments were not available to me; however, I do have letters that each student wrote to their future first-grade teacher as a way of introducing themselves. The language used in these letters included final silent E as in “like”, digraphs SH and TH, OY, ING, OO as in “good”, “food”, “pool”, “foot”, and sight words were generally spelled correctly. Additionally, LL as in “ball”, AY as in “play”, OW as in “how” were used. Almost every child spelled “have” as “hav” and complete sentences were formed.

  

C. Group Three

Sarah Major supervised five kindergarten classrooms in an at-risk/Title 1 school with total immersion. The student group faced numerous challenges, including poverty, language barriers, learning issues, behavior challenges, retention, and stressors at home. Each teacher had one aide and taught both whole group and small group lessons.

Materials utilized:

SnapLetters™, an early version of Alphabet Tales, SnapWords®, Easy-for-Me™ Books, and an outline of the Easy-for-Me™ Reading Program.

October testing:

After only 2 months, children were tested on a combination of 20 decodable words and sight words. They were also asked to write words from dictation. Achievement varied significantly from classroom to classroom, depending on the teacher and the level of classroom control exhibited.

November testing:

Assessments from October were repeated to measure progress.

Classes	#1 - 17 students, 6 sped	#2 – 19 students, 5 sped	#3 – 17 students, 6 sped	#4 – 18 st., w/10 sped	#5 – 18 st., w/ 10 sped
Oct	6 read 15-20 words 4 read 10-14 4 read 5-9 2 read 3 words	5 read 15-20 3 read 10-14 5 read 5-9 5 read 0-4 words	9 read 15-20 5 read 10-14   3 read 2-4 words	8 read 15-20 7 read 10-14 3 read 5-9	9 read 15-20 2 read 10-14 4 read 5-9 3 read 3-4 words
Nov	14 read 15-20 2 read 10-14 words	10 read 15-20 1 read 10-14 4 read 5-9 4 read 1-4 words	12 read 19-20 2 read 10-14 2 read 7-9 1 read 3 words	15 read 15-20 3 read 10-12	6 read 15-20 4 read 10-14 4 read 5-9 2 read 3 words

*Data is not available from spring testing. Teacher 3 reported via email that I would be astonished at how the kids were reading.

Classes 2 and 5 exhibited poor classroom control. In the other 3 classrooms, children were engaged and progressing.

 

D. Group Four

TITLE 1 small groups

This group consisted of Title 1 Small Groups. SnapLetters™, SnapWords®, and Sounds & Their Spelling Patterns approaches were utilized for remediation in a school with approximately 65 at-risk students from kindergarten to seventh grade (not already in Special Education). To qualify for the Title 1 program, students could not meet the criteria for Special Education and had to be failing or significantly below grade level in reading. The format consisted of small groups meeting 2-3 times a week for 20 or 30 minutes each session. I have mid-year (February) and year-end (May) scores for grades 1 through 7.

Testing utilized:

Johns Passages and Words Lists.

Status in the fall by grade level:

• 1st Grade: Students struggled with reading and decoding, lacking essential kindergarten skills.
• 2nd Grade: Students were either below pre-primer level or at pre-primer level, with some unable to read anything at all.
• 3rd – 5th Grade: Students were at least two grade levels behind, with the gap widening in higher grades.
• 6th Grade: Many students read at a second-grade level and struggled with comprehending content across subjects.

* Notably, behavior problems in grades three and above were associated with academic difficulties. 

In May, administrative reports indicated a significant decrease in referrals to special education and office-reported behavior issues, reflecting positive outcomes from the program implementation.

Spring testing results by grade showing independent reading level/instructional reading level:

 *4 6th graders and 1 7th grader                              **these two children repeated 1st grade

Independent/instructional:	Grade 1	Grade 2	Grade 3	Grade 4	Grade 5	Grades 6-7*
pp/-	2**students	1
p/1	8	2
1/2	5		1
2/3	1	3	2
3/4			6	1
4/5			3
5/6			1	2	5
6/7			2	4	1	5
7/8				1

 

 

E. Group Five

CLASSROOMS GRADE 1 AND GRADE 2, 2004-2006.

From 2004 to 2006, classrooms in both first and second grades faced significant challenges in an at-risk school environment. The setting included total inclusion, with no classroom aides available. Students enrolled in these classrooms represented a diverse range of backgrounds and needs, including those who had repeated a grade, English for Speakers of Other Languages (ESOL) students, and individuals with multiple learning disabilities and behavior disorders. Assessments were conducted using Fox in the Box and DIBELS (Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills). FOX assessments were administered by the classroom teachers, while DIBELS assessments were conducted by another staff member.

GRADE 1: DIBELS tests from Fall and Spring, benchmarks listed at top of column for spring testing

Student	Description	Words	PSF fall/sprg  35	NWF fall/sprg 40	ORF fall/sprg 35
1	Repeating 1st grade, ESOL, dyslexia	600	21/40	38/70	20/42
2		700	36/33	30/125	17/96
3	Shy, very deliberate in her work	600	24/16	45/42	15/55
4	Scores from Fall – child moved away		51/	48/	20/
5	Started year late, very low skills	600	40/44	24/62	4/56
6		700	56/58	45/102	28/98
7	Child with very difficult home setting	700	51/38	31/102	5/61
8		700	47/11	36/60	15/63
9	Really struggled for everything he learned	600	44/34	15/79	7/81
10	ESOL	600	51/37	40/105	4/75
11	ESOL, severe speech problem	0-100	1/35	0/24	5/15
12	ESOL, shy, deliberate	600	43/40	37/49	11/44
13	ESOL, new to USA	200	9/35	10/21	1/20
14		800	52/45	48/102	29/104
15	ESOL, mental health issues	600	9/30	29/87	3/63
16		800	47/49	31/126	6/59
17	Scores from Fall – child moved away	700	51/	69/	24/

 

Words lists 1-8: 100 words on each. Lists attached to end of this document. “Words” column shows the numbers of words they mastered during the year. They did this independently, only coming to the teacher to be tested for knowledge.

Some challenges of this school year were the three hurricanes that hit beginning in August. Students missed a number of school days, and several were displaced in the storms. The school building was damaged and repair was on-going for several months.

GRADE 2: 10 students looped up from 1st grade

(Student 7, who had the most labels of any student in the school, was on grade level by November as demonstrated by DIBELS and FOX testing. He is the most dramatic example of the benefit received from the multisensory approach.)  

Grade 2: DIBELS FALL and SPRING SCORES by student – targets identified for each category:

Student	details	NWF fall  50	NWF spring 50	ORF fall  44	ORF spring 90	Peabody Pict. Vocab.*	Errors/total items viewed
1	Muscular dystrophy, SLD, held back 2x	21	43	3	10	10-11	15/96
2	AIP	32	77	39	85	12-16	27/144
3	ESL, shy, too many absences, should not do timed tests	37/51	54	11/39	60	12-16	43/144
4	ESL	10/40	79	1/29	79	8-9	18/84
5	Very dreamy	42	95	45	105	12-16	32/132
6	ESL, held back, severe dyslexia,IEP	38/27	56	20/55	108	12-16	27/120
7	ESL, SLD, speech	84	148	48	91	17-adult	49/156
8		45/55	74	15/55	108	12-16	25/132
9	Transferred in. No fall testing		205		134	17-adult	52/168
10	ESL	109	201	69	132	12-16	25/144
11		31/122	182	6/73	111	17-adult	45/168
12	Cannot do nonsense words. Great reader.	36/47	50	15/90	140	12-16	27/144
13	Came in Apr. No fall testing. IEP		45		72	12-16	18/132
14	1st reader in family. Cannot do nonsense words	15/53	49	7/115	191	8-9	11/84
15	ESL	40/98	181	4/77	148	12-16	23/132
16		48/109	143	29/97	147	12-16	15/122
17	IEP	76	156	88	123	10-11	13/108
18	ESL, IEP	29/112	224	3/75	125	8-9	35/84
Comments: Those students who looped up from 1st grade have a slash mark before the score showing scores in Fall of 1st grade. Ex: 1st grade fall score/ 2nd grade fall score						*Chronological age compared to others of their same age.	408 total items: 34 sets of 12

 

*Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test – measure of receptive vocabulary

The class as a whole had well-developed writing skills, using paragraphs and topic sentences with supporting sentences.