Project Follow Through

1. Educators may have an opportunity to improve the overall achievement scores of students by including strategies designed to enhance their phonemic awareness skills. Phonemic awareness has been identified as an essential precursor to reading. Many children suffer from a condition called central auditory processing disorder. Students suffering from this disorder have difficulty distinguishing between phonemes. This study will be conducted to determine the effectiveness for developing phonemic awareness skills in early readers. The primary goal for developing the phonemic awareness skills in children is to establish and solidify those dendrites in the brain to allow for reading to become just as natural a process as conversation. Using methods to improve the phonemic awareness skills of students, thereby strengthening the neurological infrastructures that allows for the transaction of data within the language areas of the brain, may improve the comprehension skills for those students. If the comprehension skills of students become improved, then their performance on achievement tests may also improve.

4. Project Follow Through • An educational study conducted in the 1970s included 79,000 children in 180 communities and examined a variety of educational programs and philosophies to learn how to improve the education of disadvantaged children. U.S. Department of Education, 1995

5. Teaching Children to Read • Lyon (1997) states that teaching children to read is the most fundamental responsibility for educators. At least 30 to 40 percent of children have difficulty learning to read. Dropping out of school, retention, and special education referrals may be attributed to the poor reading skills of students. • Lyon (1997) also goes on to say that by using effective prevention and early intervention programs, poor readers can increase their reading skills by 85 to 95 percent.

6. Auditory Processing Disorder • Approximately 4 million U. S. students suffer from this condition. • Greenwald (1999) said that many children suffer from a condition called central auditory processing disorder. Students suffering from this disorder have difficulty distinguishing between phonemes and particularly between consonants like b, d and p, which can pass by in milliseconds during normal conversation.

7. Reasons For This Disorder • Children from socially and economically disadvantaged backgrounds appear to be particularly vulnerable in strictly whole language classrooms because they do not receive as much informal letter-sound instruction at home as compared to their middle-class peers. Grossen and Carmine, 1990; Grossen, Lee and Johnson, 1995

8. Brain Based Learning • Reading involves 3 different brain systems • Visual processes • Auditory processes • Speech processes Aukerman, R.C., 1972; Crick, F., 1994; Gordon, B, 1995; Livermore, B., 1996; Neimark, J., 1995; Parnell, D., 1996

9. Areas of the BrainInvolved in Reading (Visual) Karl Wernicke (1848-1905) Paul Broca (1824-80) Please notice the link between the Wernicke’s and Broca’s Areas

10. Areas of the BrainInvolved in Reading (Auditory) Please notice the link between the Wernicke’s and Broca’s Areas

11. Central Auditory Processing Disorder The Wernicke’s area works in conjunction with the Broca’s area, which is involved with speech and hearing. The arcuate fasciculus is an essential area of the brain required for normal speech and language function.

12. The Treatment Phonological Awareness

13. Phonological Awareness • Griffith and Olson (1992) defined phonological awareness as the ability for readers to distinguish and manipulate the smallest sounds in the English language that can change its meaning. The smallest recognizable speech sounds in language are called phonemes. Phonemes create syllables which then can be put together to create words. As an example, “ox” is made up of three phonemes- /aa/, /k/. and /s/. The English language contains 44 phonemes. (page 9)

14. School A School B

15. Comparisons of Reading Scoresin Two Tennessee Elementary Schools Between Students Receiving and not Receiving Specialized Training in Phonemic Awareness Raymond L. Hatfield II

16. Presentation Topics • Type of Research • Population • Data • Data Analysis • Pretest Results • Posttest Results • Conclusion

17. The Research • Two-Group Experimental Design • Random Sampling • Pre and Post Testing • Treatment included specialized phonemic awareness training • Statistical Analysis Scientific Learning

18. Population (Independent/Predictor Variables) pp. 63, 70 School A • 195 Students (K-5) • School B • 335 Students (K-5) • Total Population 530 • Group A (control group) • 54 Students (1-3 = 263) • Group B (experimental group) • 55 Students (1-3 = 318) Demographic Markers Free/Reduced Lunches Transient Students Similar Socioeconomic Status

19. Data (Dependent/Criterion Variables) • Data were collected using the Brigance Diagnostic Comprehensive Inventory of Basic Skills (P. 64 ¶ 2) • Pretest and Posttest • Given at the beginning and end of the 2001-02 school year

20. Data Analysis • It will be necessary to judge the difference of the mean averages between both groups relative to the spread or variability of their achievement scores (p. 66). • The t-test is an analysis tool that may be used to determine if the means of two groups are statistically different.

21. Probabilistic Equivalence(Pretest) p. 71 • Achieved through random assignment • With α=.05 we expect to observe a pretest difference of 5 times out of 100.

22. Subtest Explanation p. 20

25. Pretest Conclusion • Based on the data retrieved between the two groups, it may be concluded that both groups are Probabilistically Equivalent.

26. Hypotheses (Posttest Results) pp. 67, 75 • Tested at the .05 level of significance • Stated in the null form

30. Comparisons

31. Posttest Results • Based on the outcome of the t-test • For the purposes of this study, it may be concluded that there are no significant differences indicated across all subtests • With exception given to the 2nd grade sentence writing subtest • All null hypotheses are accepted

32. Conclusion • There were no differences in the achievement levels between the two statistically equivalent groups of students. • There may be a possibility for latent effects. • Therefore, further research is recommended.