Tackling Two of the Most Important Unresolved Tasks in Reading Intervention

Trial statusNot yet recruiting
Trial phaseNot applicable
Trial typeInterventional
Biological sexAll
Age6-9
SponsorYork University

About this trial

An important question in education is how to help young children who struggle to learn to read despite being well-taught in their regular classrooms. Many of the children with low reading ability also come from disadvantaged backgrounds.

There is not a lot of evidence on how to support children with low reading ability become better readers. This is especially true when children still have low reading ability despite experiencing attempts to teach them in both their regular whole class and then in small groups. As a result, in this study we will explore the best ways of training teachers to use programs that we have developed to support reading for these children who have not responded well to earlier teaching (this is one of the tough jobs in our project title). These programs have several new elements. One element is teaching morphology. Morphology means shared word meanings such as the shared meanings between words like sign, design, signal, and signature. Another element is called set-for-variability. This means teaching children to have mental flexibility in using relationships between letters and sounds to read English. We will run our study to see whether including these new elements leads to children with low reading ability improving their reading. By doing this we will help children teachers and families and also contribute to a science of reading.

To achieve these goals, we will carry out two phases of study. In phase 1, we will randomly allocate 50 schools to one condition where we will teach morphology and 50 schools to the other condition where we will teach set-for-variability. In all schools we will also encourage teachers to teach children to use the relationships between letters and sounds to read words. This is called phonics. Doing such work and still having impact in a large number of schools is a major challenge. This is the second of the tough jobs referred to in our project title. In each school we will come in and train teachers of grade 1 and 2 children how to use our programs, and focusing on the children who have low reading ability. In the second part of the study, we will work with a smaller set of children in Grade 3 who still have low reading ability despite our earlier work. In this latter case the groups of children may be both smaller in number and the teaching may go on for longer to have an effect.

Eligibility criteria

This trial does not accept healthy volunteers

Qualifiers

Formal parent consent letter received

Child assent received

Screening phase data: We use 2 reading screening measures in a screening phase of the study. These are: Sight Word Reading Efficiency (real words) from the Test of Word Reading Efficiency (TOWRE-2; Torgesen et al., 2012), and the (Sight Word Reading Efficiency (real words) and Phonemic Decoding Efficiency (nonwords) from the Test of Word Reading Efficiency (TOWRE-2; Torgesen et al., 2012), and the Test of Silent Word Reading Fluency-2 (TOSWRF-2; Mather et al., 2014)). Two scores of 3 below a standard score of 90 includes a child in the study.

Disqualifiers

No parent consent

No child assent

Two scores of 3 NOT below a standard score of 90 includes a child in the study.

Teacher judgement that child not ready or suited for the intervention.

Trial design

Design model

Parallel

Treatments tested in this trial

  • Phonics plus morphology

    Behavioral

    This intervention trains teachers to teach phonics plus morphology to at-risk poor readers

  • Phonics plus set-for-variability

    Behavioral

    This intervention trains teachers to deliver phonics plus set-for variability to at-risk poor readers.

Treatment groups

637 Participants
are divided into 2 treatment groups
Group A: A. Phonics plus morphology instructionExperimental treatment 1 intervention
Group B: B. Phonics plus set-for-variability instructionExperimental treatment 1 intervention

Trial outcomes

Primary outcomes

1

The Castles & Coltheart 3

A research-standardised test of regular (phonically decodable such as 'chance') exception (words that contain letter-to-sound patterns that are not phonically decodable such as 'choir') and pseudowords (made up words such as 'jeaph')

Time frame
Change measure: Baseline and 6 months and 9 months
2

Morphological Awareness - Word Reading Task

A polysyllabic word reading test containing items such as 'signature' and 'disagreement'

Time frame
Change measure: Baseline and 6 months and 9 months
3

Set-for-variability

An oral language test of children's ability correct the pronunciation of exception words such as 'choir'

Time frame
Change measure: Baseline and 6 months and 9 months
4

Morphological analogies (inflected and derivational)

An oral test of morphological awareness

Time frame
Change measure: Baseline and 6 months and 9 months

Secondary outcomes

1

the Test of Silent Word Reading Fluency-2 (TOSWRF-2; Mather et al., 2014

A standardized measure of word reading accuracy

Time frame
Administered at screening test
2

Test of Word Reading Efficiency (TOWRE-2; Torgesen et al., 2012)

A standardized measure of word reading fluency

Time frame
Administered at screening test
3

Vocabulary

An oral language measure from the Wechsler Individual Achievement Test Canadian edition (Wechsler 2009).

Time frame
Administered at baseline only
4

Nonverbal Matrices

A standardised measure of Non-verbal reasoning from the Cognitive Assessment System (CAS2-Brief; Naglieri et al., 2014)

Time frame
Administered at baseline only

Other outcomes

Locations

This trial has no locations.

Sponsors and contacts

Click on the lead sponsor to view all of their trials.

York University

Lead sponsor

University of Alberta

Collaborator

Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada

Collaborator

Australian Catholic University

Collaborator

This trial is not recruiting at the moment. You can still explore other options: