The Effects of MindPlay Virtual Reading Coach (MVRC) on the Spelling Growth of Students in Second Grade
| dc.contributor.advisor | Mather, Nancy | en |
| dc.contributor.author | Sherrow, Breanna Lynn | |
| dc.creator | Sherrow, Breanna Lynn | en |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2015-07-21T16:23:49Z | en |
| dc.date.available | 2015-07-21T16:23:49Z | en |
| dc.date.issued | 2015 | en |
| dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/10150/560804 | en |
| dc.description.abstract | First, this study was conducted to determine the effects of MVRC on the spelling development of second-graders. Second, this study sought to determine if spelling trajectories vary by gender, English Language Learner (ELL) enrollment and/or Special Education (SPED) enrollment. Lastly, students' spelling tests were evaluated with two different spelling scoring methods: traditional standardized scoring, correct and incorrect, and Curriculum-Based Measurement-spelling (CBM), correct letter sequences, to determine which method was more sensitive to growth from pre-test to post-test. Students were pre-tested and post-tested with two measures from the Woodcock-Johnson IV Achievement, Test 3: Spelling and Test 16: Spelling of Sounds. Participants included 159 students, 83 students were enrolled in the experimental condition and 76 students were enrolled in the comparison condition. Using a multilevel model for repeated measures, the researcher estimated the between group-model analyses for Test 3: Spelling and Test 16: Spelling. Students who participated in the experimental condition, receiving MVRC, had significantly different spelling scores than their peers in the comparison group. For Test 3: Spelling, the experimental group increased on average by 1.786 words compared to the comparison group. For Test 16: Spelling of Sounds, the experimental group increased on average by 1.741 words compared to the comparison group. Student spelling trajectories did vary by gender, ELL enrollment, and SPED enrollment. However, these differences were not found to be significant. Neither traditional scoring norCBM-spelling scoring was found to be the more sensitive scoring method for growth for both tests. Instead, CBM-spelling was more sensitive for Test 3: Spelling, while traditional scoring was more sensitive for Test 16: Spelling of Sounds. | |
| dc.language.iso | en_US | en |
| dc.publisher | The University of Arizona. | en |
| dc.rights | Copyright © is held by the author. Digital access to this material is made possible by the University Libraries, University of Arizona. Further transmission, reproduction or presentation (such as public display or performance) of protected items is prohibited except with permission of the author. | en |
| dc.subject | spelling | en |
| dc.subject | spellling development | en |
| dc.subject | web-based reading intervention | en |
| dc.subject | Special Education | en |
| dc.subject | curriculum-based measurement spelling | en |
| dc.title | The Effects of MindPlay Virtual Reading Coach (MVRC) on the Spelling Growth of Students in Second Grade | en_US |
| dc.type | text | en |
| dc.type | Electronic Dissertation | en |
| thesis.degree.grantor | University of Arizona | en |
| thesis.degree.level | doctoral | en |
| dc.contributor.committeemember | Liaupsin, Carl | en |
| dc.contributor.committeemember | Umbreit, John | en |
| dc.contributor.committeemember | Sammons, Janice | en |
| dc.contributor.committeemember | Mather, Nancy | en |
| thesis.degree.discipline | Graduate College | en |
| thesis.degree.discipline | Special Education | en |
| thesis.degree.name | Ph.D. | en |
| refterms.dateFOA | 2018-05-17T20:06:32Z | |
| html.description.abstract | First, this study was conducted to determine the effects of MVRC on the spelling development of second-graders. Second, this study sought to determine if spelling trajectories vary by gender, English Language Learner (ELL) enrollment and/or Special Education (SPED) enrollment. Lastly, students' spelling tests were evaluated with two different spelling scoring methods: traditional standardized scoring, correct and incorrect, and Curriculum-Based Measurement-spelling (CBM), correct letter sequences, to determine which method was more sensitive to growth from pre-test to post-test. Students were pre-tested and post-tested with two measures from the Woodcock-Johnson IV Achievement, Test 3: Spelling and Test 16: Spelling of Sounds. Participants included 159 students, 83 students were enrolled in the experimental condition and 76 students were enrolled in the comparison condition. Using a multilevel model for repeated measures, the researcher estimated the between group-model analyses for Test 3: Spelling and Test 16: Spelling. Students who participated in the experimental condition, receiving MVRC, had significantly different spelling scores than their peers in the comparison group. For Test 3: Spelling, the experimental group increased on average by 1.786 words compared to the comparison group. For Test 16: Spelling of Sounds, the experimental group increased on average by 1.741 words compared to the comparison group. Student spelling trajectories did vary by gender, ELL enrollment, and SPED enrollment. However, these differences were not found to be significant. Neither traditional scoring norCBM-spelling scoring was found to be the more sensitive scoring method for growth for both tests. Instead, CBM-spelling was more sensitive for Test 3: Spelling, while traditional scoring was more sensitive for Test 16: Spelling of Sounds. |
