Research Seminar – 5710

My research group (Missy, Beth, Linda, Ginger, and myself) has completed our research and the power point that we will use for our presentation is uploaded below.  Also linked is the final Comp. 2 paper will all article reviews and bibliography.

Early Reading Intervention Presentation

Research Article Summaries Final Paper

I have completed the final draft of my Comprehensive Exam Part 1 for your review.  It is uploaded below.  I am looking forward to your feedback!

 Comp Ex. Part 1

Below are links to the four articles that I have reviewed for our group research.  Inserted below the link to the article (or article title) is my uploaded review.

Early Reading Intervention for English Language Learners at Risk for Learning Disabilities: Student and Teacher Outcomes in an Urban School

Article Review 4

Beginning Reading Intervention as Inoculation or Insulin: First Grade Reading Performance of Strong Responders to Kindergarten Intervention

Article Review 3

Responsiveness of Students with Language Difficulties to Early Intervention in Reading

Article Review 2

I am also reading the following article by D. Morris but it is not linked:

       Morris, D. (2007).  One-to-one reading intervention in the primary grades: An idea that must evolve to survive.  In B. Taylor & J. Ysseldyke (Eds.), Effective instruction for struggling readers, K-6 (pp. 19-36).  New York: Teachers College Press.

Article Review 1

5 Comments »

  1. trathenwr said

    Melissa,

    Great articles for your topic.

    Woody Trathen

  2. trathenwr said

    I sent you an email with comments on your first review.

    Woody Trathen

  3. trathenwr said

    Melissa,

    I read your first draft of your exam (through assessment). One change–wayward punctuation:

    to place my students in reading groups. . I would typically use these first two sections of the

    Otherwise, no changes. In answer to your questions:

    You may treat IRI and word flash as other possible assessments.

    I do not think your assessment section is “too much detail,” although there is a lot of specific detail. Going forward with the rest of your response, you do not need to go into this much detail. But, I would not change what you have written.

    I like what you are planning to do with the rest of this exam response.

    Woody Trathen

  4. trathenwr said

    Melissa,

    Reviewed your summary of article 2 and thought you were spot on. One edit: After MANCOVA you need “to” determine

    No need to explain MANOVA or MANCOVA–these are just the appropriate statistical tests with this
    experimental design. You reporting of the results is accurate.

    Well done.

    Woody Trathen

  5. trathenwr said

    Melissa,

    Your comprehensive exam question 1 is very specific and detailed. Your voice is clear and authentic. I would not change a thing. Nice work. You have passed the comp. exam question 1.

    All 4 or your article reviews are great. I appreciate your thoroughness.

    Woody Trathen

RSS feed for comments on this post · TrackBack URI

Leave a comment