Examining the Effects of Home- and School-Based Early Reading Intervention During the COVID-19 Pandemic on Struggling Readers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This dissertation includes two studies that examine the effects of home- and school-based reading intervention during the COVID-19 pandemic in a group of Grade 1 to 3 struggling readers. The first study examined whether different parent- and teacher-related factors had an effect on at-risk children’s reading development during the first six months of the COVID-19 pandemic. Seventy Grade 1 English-speaking Canadian children (28 females, 42 males; Mage = 6.60, SD = 0.46) who were at-risk for reading difficulties were administered word and pseudoword reading, nonverbal IQ, and phonological awareness tasks before the school closures (February 2020; Time 1). Reading tasks were administered again when they returned to school in September 2020 (Time 2). In April-May 2020, their parents (n = 70) and teachers (n = 40) filled out a questionnaire on the home literacy environment and the frequency of teaching reading and providing reading materials, respectively. Results of multilevel regression analyses showed that children’s reading enjoyment and home learning activities predicted both word and pseudoword reading at Time 2. Differentiation of instruction for struggling readers also predicted children’s pseudoword reading at Time 2. These findings reinforced the important role of parents in their children’s early reading development particularly when the typical agents of instruction (i.e., teachers) have less time and opportunities to interact with their students because of the pandemic. The second study examined if we could improve struggling readers’ reading performance by delivering two theory-driven reading interventions (i.e., phonics + set for variability and phonics + morphology) and whether phonics + set for variability would lead to better results in irregular word reading than phonics + morphology. We recruited 352 Grade 2 and 3 struggling readers (166 males, 186 females; Mage = 7.67 years, SD = .68) from four school divisions in Alberta, Canada, who received intervention in small groups (2-4 children), 4 times a week, 30 minutes each lesson, for 15 weeks. Results of hierarchical linear modeling showed that there was a significant effect of intervention from pre-test to post-test and delayed post-test with large effect sizes in all reading outcomes. There was no significant difference between the two intervention conditions in irregular word reading. These findings suggest that theory-driven intervention can have a positive impact on children’s reading performance in early grades. However, about a quarter of our participants did not respond to the intervention which suggests that they would need additional and perhaps more intense intervention. Overall, this dissertation provides important insight into the home- and school-based reading intervention practices during COVID-19. Our findings add to those of previous studies of the pandemic that examined the home literacy environment by providing preliminary evidence that home learning activities during school closures influenced at-risk children’s reading skills. It also adds to a growing body of intervention research aimed to address learning losses due to COVID-19 by showing that explicit, systematic, and intensive instruction can improve the reading performance of struggling readers when intervention is delivered with a high level of fidelity.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".