EFFECT OF LANGUAGE! LIVE CURRICULUM ON U.S. MIDDLE SCHOOL STUDENTS’ LEXILE SCORES BASED ON GRADE LEVEL AND DIFFERENTIATED INSTRUCTION

Authors

  • Antonio P Gutierrez de Blume Ph.D., Department of Curriculum, Foundations, and Reading, Georgia Southern University, Statesboro, United States
  • Lina B Soares Ph.D., Department of Middle Grades and Secondary Education, Georgia Southern University, Statesboro, United States
  • Ashley Snyder Ed.D., Department of Middle Grades and Secondary Education, Georgia Southern University, Statesboro, United States

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.20319/pijtel.2022.63.2947

Keywords:

Blended Learning, Educational Interventions, Reading Comprehension, Lexile

Abstract

The purpose of the present investigation was to examine the effect of the Language Live! reading intervention on reading comprehension (Lexile level) in a sample of middle school students from the United States (N = 133) who were deemed ineffective readers. Students were either in the Strategic Group (i.e., reading comprehension below one grade level, n = 71) or the Intensive Group (i.e., reading comprehension below two grade levels, n = 62). Due to the severity of their reading difficulties, students in each group received a different reading curriculum. The grade x treatment type interaction was not significant. Nevertheless, the treatment type main effect suggested that students in the Strategic Group outperformed students in the Intensive Group regarding Lexile level proficiency, and the grade level main effect showed that the lowest Lexile level was evident in 6th grade while the highest was among 8th grade. Findings indicated the utility of the Language Live! educational intervention for struggling readers.

References

Allington, R. L. (2009). What at-risk readers need. Educational Leadership, 68(6), 40-45. https://www.ascd.org/el/articles/what-at-risk-readers-need

Amendum, S. J., Bratsch-Hines, M., & Vernon-Feagans, L. (2017). Investigating the efficacy of a web-based early reading and professional development intervention for young English learners. Reading Research Quarterly, 53(2), 155-174. https://doi.org/10.1002/rrq.188

Archer, L. E. (2010). Lexile reading growth as a function of the starting level in at‐risk middle school students. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 54(4), 281-290. https://doi.org/10.1598/JAAL.54.4.6

Austin, C. R., Wanzek, J., Scammacca, N. K., Vaughn, S., Gesel, S. A., Donegan, R. E., and Engelmann, M.L. (2019). The relationship between study quality and the effects of supplemental reading interventions: A meta-analysis. Exceptional Children, 85(3), 347-366. https://doi.org/10.1177/0014402918796164

Benner, G. J., Kutash, K., Nelson, J. R., & Fisher, M. B. (2013). Closing the achievement gap of youth with emotional and behavioral disorders through multi-tiered systems of support. Education and Treatment of Children, 36(3), 15-29. https://doi.org/10.1353/etc.2013.0018

Bennett, J. G., Gardner, R., Cartledge, G., Ramnath, R., & Council, M. R. (2017). Second-grade urban learners: Preliminary findings for a computer-assisted, culturally relevant, repeated reading intervention. Education and Treatment of Children, 40(2), 145-186. https://doi.org/10.1353/etc.2017.0008

Biancarosa, G. (2012). Adolescent literacy: More than remediation. Educational Leadership, 69(6), 22-27. http://sshspd.pbworks.com/w/file/fetch/59899249/Adolescent%20Literacy%20More%20than%20Remediation.pdf

Bippert, K. (2019). Perceptions of technology, curriculum, and reading strategies in one middle school intervention program. Research in Middle Level Education Online, 42(3), 1-22. https://doi.org/10.1080/19404476.2019.1565600

Bippert, K. & Harmon, J. (2017). Middle school teachers’ perceptions of computer-assisted reading intervention programs. Reading Psychology, 38(2), 203-230. https://doi.org/10.1080/02702711.2016.1245691

Bishop, P., & Harrison, L. (2020). The successful middle school: This we believe (5th ed.). Association for Middle Level Education.

Brooks-Yip, M. & Koonce, J. B. (2010). Taking another look at struggling adolescent readers. Language Arts Journal of Michigan, 26(1), 33-37. https://doi.org/10.9707/2168-149X.1015

Desplaces, D., Blair, C. A., & Salvaggio, T. (2015). Do e-learning tools make a difference? Results from a case study. The Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 16(4), 23-34. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1143792

Flynn, L. J., Zheng, X., & Swanson, H. L. (2012). Instructing struggling older readers: A selective meta-analysis of intervention research. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 27(1), 21-32. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5826.2011.00347.x

Georgia Department of Education. (2018). College and career ready performance index. https://www.gadoe.org/CCRPI/

Georgia Department of Education. (2018). Georgia milestones assessment system.

Georgia Department of Education. (2018). Georgia Milestones State Results Spring 2018. http://www.gadoe.org/Curriculum-Instruction-and-Assessment/Assessment/Documents/Milestones/Statewide%20Scores/EOG/Georgia_Milestones_Spring_2018_State_Results.pdf

Georgia Department of Education. (2020). Lexile framework for reading. https://www.gadoe.org/Curriculum-Instruction-and-Assessment/Assessment/Pages/Lexile-Framework.aspx

Georgia Department of Education. (2020). Georgia student growth model. https://www.gadoe.org/Curriculum-Instruction-and-Assessment/Assessment/Pages/Georgia-Student-Growth-Model.aspx

Guthrie, J. T., & Klauda, S. L. (2014). Effects of classroom practices on reading comprehension, engagement, and motivations for adolescents. Reading Research Quarterly, 49, 387-416. https://doi.org/10.1002/rrq.81

Halverson, L. R., & Graham, C. R. (2019). Learner engagement in blended learning environments: A conceptual framework. Online Learning, 23(2), 145-178. http://dx.doi.org/10.24059/olj.v23i2.1481

Horn, M. B., & Fisher, J. F. (2017). New faces of blended learning. Educational Leadership, 74(6), 59-63. https://www.ascd.org/el/articles/new-faces-of-blended-learning

Horn, M. B., & Staker, H. (2011). The rise of K-12 blended learning. Innosight Institute.

Hu, M., Arnesen, K., Barbour, M. K., & Leary, H. (2019). A newcomer’s lens: A look at K-12 online and blended learning in the Journal of Online Learning Research. Journal of Online Learning Research, 5(2), 123-144. https://members.aect.org/pdf/Proceedings/proceedings19/2019/19_15.pdf

Lennon, C., & Burdick, H. (2004). The Lexile framework as an approach for reading measurement and success. MetaMetrics. http://cdn.lexile.com/cms_page_media/135/The%20Lexile%20Framework%20for%20Reading.pdf

Malacapay, M. C. (2019). Differentiated instruction in relation to pupils’ learning style. International Journal of Instruction, 12(4), 625-638. https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2019.12440a

Miciak, J., Roberts, G. Taylor, W. P., Solis, M., Ahmed, Y., Vaughn, S., & Fletcher, J. M. (2017). The effects of one versus two years of intensive reading intervention implemented with late elementary struggling readers. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 33(1), 24-36. https://doi.org/10.1111/ldrp.12159

Moats, L., Macpherson, J., & Weiser, B. (2017). Language Live research foundation. https://www.voyagersopris.com/docs/default-source/literacy/language-live/ll-research-foundation-2017-web.pdf?sfvrsn=b7171ecf_2

National Center for Education Statistics. (2019). The nation’s report card. Explore results from the NAEP reading assessment. Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. https://www.nationsreportcard.gov/reading_2017/nation/scores?grade=8

Rasheed, F., & Wahid, A. (2018). The theory of differentiated instruction and its applicability: An e-learning perspective. International Journal of Technical and Non-Technical Research, 9(4), 193-202.

Roberts, G., Rane, S., Fall, A., Denton, C. A., Fletcher, J. M., & Vaughn, S. (2016). The impact of intensive reading intervention on level of attention in middle school students. Journal of Clinical Child & Adolescent Psychology, 44(6), 942-953. https://doi.org/10.1080/15374416.2014.913251

Schechter, R. L., Kazakoff, E. R., Bundschuh, K., Prescott, J. E., & Macaruso, P. (2017). Exploring the impact of engaged teachers on implementation fidelity and reading skill gains in a blended learning program. Reading Psychology, 36(6), 553-579. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02702711.2017.1306602

Stockard, J., Wood, T. W., Coughlin, C., & Rasplica Khoury, C. (2018). The effectiveness of direct instruction curricula: A meta-analysis of a half century of research. Review of Educational Research, 88(4), 479-507.

Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2013). Using multivariate statistics (6th ed.). Pearson.

Tomlinson, C. A., & Imbeau, M.B. (2013). Differentiated Instruction: An integration of theory and practice. In Irby, B. J., Brown, G., Lara-Alecio, R., & Jackson, S. (Eds.), The Handbook of Educational Theories (pp.1097-1117). Information Age Publishing.

Vacca, R. T., Mraz, M., & Vacca, J. L. (2020). Content area reading: Literacy and learning across the curriculum. (13th ed.). Pearson.

Voyager Sopris Learning. (2014). Language! Live Overview [Video]. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z4e1biyZles&feature=youtu.be

Downloads

Published

2022-11-15

How to Cite

Gutierrez de Blume, A. P., Soares, L. B., & Snyder, A. (2022). EFFECT OF LANGUAGE! LIVE CURRICULUM ON U.S. MIDDLE SCHOOL STUDENTS’ LEXILE SCORES BASED ON GRADE LEVEL AND DIFFERENTIATED INSTRUCTION. PUPIL: International Journal of Teaching, Education and Learning, 6(3), 29–47. https://doi.org/10.20319/pijtel.2022.63.2947