Using a Randomized Alternating Treatment Design to Assess Intervention Effectiveness in an EFL Lebanese Context - A pilot study

♦ Anita Ibrahim Sharaf *

- نبذة عن البحث:

استخدام العلاج بالتناوب العشوائي

لتقييم فعالية التدخل في تعليم اللغة الإنجليزية كلغة أجنبية

(دراسة تجريبية)

تهدف الدراسة إلى الكشف عن أثر استراتيجيتي القراءة المتكررة والاستماع إلى النصّ في تحسين أداء القراءة الجهرية لدى عيّنة من طلاب المرحلة الابتدائية، وذلك عبر تطبيق تصميم تدخلات متناوبة معدلة في منهجية التحليل التجريبي الموجز (alternating treatment design).تكوّنت العيّنة من أربعة طلاب لبنانيين أكملوا أخيرًا، سنتهم في الصف الثالث الابتدائي، وكانوا معرضين لخطر فشل القراءة، فعالجت الدراسة الآثار المترتبة على فائدة إدماج التغذية الراجعة والقراءة المتكررة في تعليم القراءة وأثر اعتماد هذه المنهجية في اختيار أفضل التدخلات. وقد خلصت الدراسة إلى عدة نتائج وتوصيات يمكن البناء عليها والاستفادة منها في أعمال بحثيّة وتطبيقية.

- الكلمات المفاتيح: تدخلات القراءة، تصميم العلاج بالتناوب، اختبارات التوزيع العشوائي، متعلمو اللغة الإنجليزية، التحليل البصري

***

- Abstract:

Listening passage preview and repeated reading are evidence-based strategies that have enhanced reading accuracy and fluency. Nevertheless, scant research has been conducted to assess the effects of these strategies in EFL elementary classes in Lebanon. In this study, a modified alternating treatments design was applied in a brief experimental analysis methodology. Four students who had recently completed their third-grade year and were at risk of reading failure constituted the participants of this study. Findings revealed that the outcomes differed between students. We found that strategies integrating repeated repetition and error correction outperformed the listening passage preview strategy in improving oral reading fluency for some participants. In both intervention conditions, however, all students improved their oral reading fluency levels from the baseline to the final readings. Implications of the utility of incorporating modeling and practice in reading instruction and examining differential effects of interventions on student performance are discussed.

- Keywords: 

reading interventions, alternating treatment design, randomization tests, English language learners, visual analysis

***

* أنيتا إبراهيم شرف : باحثة لبنانية، تعدّ أطروحة دكتوراه في التربية – المعهد العالي للدكتوراه – الجامعة اللبنانية

*ANITA Ibrahim SHARAF: Lebanese University, Education Department, Beirut, Lebanon

References

· Alqraini, F. (2017). Single-case experimental research: A methodology for establishing evidence-based practice in special education. International Journal of Special Education, 32(3), 551–566.

· Chu, S., & Flores, S. (2011). Assessment of English Language Learners with Learning. 244–248. https://doi.org/10.1080/00098655.2011.590550

· Cooksley, M., & Robinson, V. (2010). The student achievement decline at sixth grade and the practices impacting achievement. 3424826, 161-n/a.

· Daly, E. J., Bonfiglio, C. M., Mattson, T., Persampieri, M., & Foreman-Yates, K. (2006). Refining The Experimental Analysis of Academic Skills Deficits: Part II. Use of Brief Experimental Analysis to Evaluate Reading Fluency Treatments. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 39(3), 323–331. https://doi.org/10.1901/jaba.2006.13-05

· Daly, E. J., Lentz, F. E., & Boyer, J. (1996). The Instructional Hierarchy : A Conceptual Model for Understanding the Effective Components of Reading Interventions. 11(4), 369–386.

· Deno, S. L., Fuchs, L. S., Marston, D., & Shin, J. (2001). Using curriculum-based measurement to establish growth standards for students with learning disabilities. In School Psychology Review (Vol. 30, Issue 4, pp. 507–524).

· Didion, L., Toste, J. R., Benz, S. A., & Shogren, K. A. (2021). How Are Self-Determination Components Taught to Improve Reading Outcomes for Elementary Students With or At Risk for Learning Disabilities? Learning Disability Quarterly. https://doi.org/10.1177/0731948721989328

· Guzel-Ozmen, R. (2011). Evaluating the effectiveness of combined reading interventions on improving oral reading fluency of students with reading disabilities. Electronic Journal of Research in Educational Psychology, 9(3), 1063–1086.

· HaardÖrfer, R., & Gagné, P. (2010). The use of randomization tests in single-subject research. Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities, 25(1), 47–54. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088357609350745

· Hawkins, R. O., Marsicano, R., Schmitt, A. J., McCallum, E., & Musti-Rao, S. (2015). Comparing the efficiency of repeated reading and listening-while-reading to improve fluency and comprehension. Education & Treatment of Children, 38(1), 49–70. https://doi.org/10.1353/etc.2015.0005

· Kena, G., Musu-Gillette, L., Robinson, J., Wang, X., Rathbun, A., Zhang, J., Wilkinson-Flicker, S., Barmer, A., & Velez, E. D. (2015). The Condition of Education 2015. U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1–279. http://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/72578/

· Kim, M. K., Bryant, D. P., Bryant, B. R., Park, Y., Kyung, M., Bryant, D. P., Bryant, B. R., & Park, Y. (2016). A Synthesis of Interventions for Improving Oral Reading Fluency of Elementary Students with Learning Disabilities. 4387 (August). https://doi.org/10.1080/1045988X.2016.1212321

· Kim, M. K., Bryant, D. P., Bryant, B. R., Park, Y., Kyung, M., Bryant, D. P., Bryant, B. R., & Park, Y. (2017). Preventing School Failure : Alternative Education for Children and Youth A synthesis of interventions for improving oral reading fluency of elementary students with learning disabilities. Preventing School Failure, 61 (2), 116–125. https://doi.org/10.1080/1045988X.2016.1212321

· Klubnik, C., & Ardoin, S. P. (2010). Examining immediate and maintenance effects of a reading intervention package on generalization materials: Individual verses group implementation. Journal of Behavioral Education, 19 (1), 7–29. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10864-009-9096-3

· Kratochwill, T., & Levin, J. (2010). Enhancing the Scientific Credibility of Single-Case Intervention Research: Randomization to the Rescue. Psychological Methods, 15 (2), 124–144. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0017736

· Kratochwill, T. R., Hitchcock, J., Horner, R. H., Levin, J. R., Odom, S. L., Rindskopf, D. M., & Shadish, W. R. (2010). SINGLE‐CASE DESIGN TECHNICAL DOCUMENTATION. In Works Clearinghouse website: http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/pdf/wwc_scd.pdf. (Issue December).

· Levin, J. R., Ferron, J. M., & Gafurov, B. S. (2014). Improved randomization tests for a class of single-case intervention designs. Journal of Modern Applied Statistical Methods, 13 (2), 2–52. https://doi.org/10.22237/jmasm/1414814460

· Levin, J. R., Ferron, J. M., & Gafurov, B. S. (2018). Comparison of randomization-test procedures for single-case multiple-baseline designs. 21 (5), 290–311.

· Manolov, R., Gast, D. L., Perdices, M., & Evans, J. J. (2014). Single-case experimental designs: Reflections on conduct and analysis. Neuropsychological Rehabilitation, 24 (3–4), 634–660. https://doi.org/10.1080/09602011.2014.903199

· Michiels, B., & Onghena, P. (2019). Randomized single-case AB phase designs: Prospects and pitfalls. Behavior Research Methods, 51 (6), 2454–2476. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-018-1084-x

· Noell, G. H., Duhon, G. J., Gatti, S. L., & Connell, J. E. (2002). Consultation, follow-up, and implementation of behavior management interventions in general education. School Psychology Review, 31(2), 217–234. https://doi.org/10.1080/02796015.2002.12086152

· OECD. (2016). PISA 2015 Results (Volume I): Excellence and Equity in Education. In Pisa: Vol. I. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264266490-en

· Sanatullova-allison, E., & Robison-young, V. A. (2016). Overrepresentation : An Overview of the Issues Surrounding the Identification of English Language Learners with Learning Disabilities. 31 (2), 145–152.

· Scarborough, A. C. (2012). Using empirically validated reading strategies to improve middle school students’ reading fluency of classroom textbooks. Dissertation Abstracts International Section A: Humanities and Social Sciences, 73 (6-A), 2021. http://ezproxy.lib.utexas.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=psyh&AN=2012-99230-180&site=ehost-live

· Skinner, C. H. (2004). Single-subject designs: Procedures that allow school psychologists to contribute to the intervention evaluation and validation process. Journal of Applied School Psychology, 20 (2), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1300/J370v20n02_01

· Solari, E. (2014). Longitudinal prediction of 1st and 2nd grade English oral reading fluency in ELL. Journal of Adolescence, 74 (4), 274–283. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits

· Stoner, G., Scarpati, S. E., Phaneuf, R. L., & Hintze, J. M. (2019). Using Curriculum-Based Measurement to Evaluate Intervention Efficacy. 75–83.

· Strickland, W., Boon, R., & Spencer, V. (2013). The Effects of Repeated Reading on the Fluency and Comprehension Skills of Elementary-Age Students with Learning Disabilities (LD), 2001-2011: A Review of Research and Practice. Learning Disabilities: A Contemporary Journal, 11(1), 1–33.

· Swanson, H. L., Kong, J., Petcu, S. D., & Asencio Pimentel, M. F. (2020). Can Difficulties in Language Acquisition and Specific Learning Disabilities Be Separated Among English Learners? Exceptional Children, 86 (3), 293–309. https://doi.org/10.1177/0014402919893931

· Wolery, M., Gast, D. L., & Ledford, J. R. (2014). Comparison designs. In Single case research methodology (pp. 297-345). Routledge.

الحداثة (Al Hadatha) – ع. 227 - س. 30 - ربيع Spring 2023

ISSN: 2790-1785