1 / 22

Jack Mostow, Jessica Nelson, Martin Kantorzyk, Donna Gates, and Joe Valeri Project LISTEN

How does the amount of context in which words are practiced affect fluency growth? Experimental results. Jack Mostow, Jessica Nelson, Martin Kantorzyk, Donna Gates, and Joe Valeri Project LISTEN www.cs.cmu.edu/~listen Carnegie Mellon University.

holt
Download Presentation

Jack Mostow, Jessica Nelson, Martin Kantorzyk, Donna Gates, and Joe Valeri Project LISTEN

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. How does the amount of context in which words are practiced affect fluency growth? Experimental results Jack Mostow, Jessica Nelson, Martin Kantorzyk, Donna Gates, and Joe Valeri Project LISTEN www.cs.cmu.edu/~listen Carnegie Mellon University This work was supported by the Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education, through Grant R305A080628 to Carnegie Mellon University. The opinions expressed are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views of the Institute or U.S. Department of Education.

  2. Connected text builds fluency better than readingisolated words.Why? – which reading processes transfer to new text?

  3. Within-subject, within-story experiment design Before story, preview 5 hardest new words • Preview = 1. Tutor shows; 2. Child reads; 3. Tutor reads. • Hardest = longest (# letters) • New = word root not seen before in Reading Tutor Independent variable: amount of context • No-exposure control; isolation; bigram; phrase; sentence • Randomize assignment of word to treatment and order Outcome: first encounter of word in story • Help = whether child clicks on word to hear it or a hint • Latency = pause before word • Production = time to say word

  4. (Simulated) example (starring you!)

  5. Instructions

  6. Preview in isolation Answers

  7. Preview in sentence white

  8. Preview in phrase bell

  9. Preview in bigram pulled

  10. Read story (yes, you!)

  11. Outcome = encounter word in story

  12. Outcome = encounter word in story

  13. Outcome = encounter word in story

  14. Outcome = encounter word in story

  15. Summary of 5 trials in example

  16. Analysis of 3958 completed trials(112 2nd and 3rd graders, 332 distinct target words) Outcome measures • % accepted by ASR as read correctly • % child clicked for help • % latency > 10 ms | accepted without help • Log latency per letter if > 10 ms • Log production time per letter Predictors in linear mixed effects regressions • Treatment (fixed) • Word (random) • Child (random) • Time (7 to 1274 seconds) since preview (fixed)

  17. Results from 3958 completed trials(112 2nd and 3rd graders, 332 distinct target words) Outcome measures • % accepted by ASR as read correctly • % child clicked for help • % latency > 10 ms | accepted without help • Log latency per letter if > 10 ms • Log production time per letter Predictors in linear mixed effects regressions • Treatment (fixed) • Word (random) • Child (random) • Time (7 to 1274 seconds) since preview (fixed) : n.s. (98-99%) : lower for phrase : bigram, phrase?, sentence :n.s. :n.s.

  18. Preview in phrase or sentence reduced help requests at first encounter in story % child clicked for help

  19. Preview in bigram, phrase, or sentence reduced likelihood of hesitations … % latency > 10 ms when no help

  20. … but preview was n.s. for hesitation duration Latency per letter when > 10 ms

  21. Conclusionsfor 1st encounter of “hard” word in story: Preview in phrase or sentence reduced help requests. Preview in bigram, phrase, or sentence reduced hesitations … but not their duration. Rosow Hypothesis: if retrieval fails, just decode.

  22. Questions?

More Related