描述不同教学支持层次的教育工作者的知识

IF 2.1 3区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION, SPECIAL
Susan B. Porter, Timothy N. Odegard, Melissa McMahan, Emily A. Farris
{"title":"描述不同教学支持层次的教育工作者的知识","authors":"Susan B. Porter,&nbsp;Timothy N. Odegard,&nbsp;Melissa McMahan,&nbsp;Emily A. Farris","doi":"10.1007/s11881-021-00242-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Translating the research base on effective reading instruction to the classroom has been a challenge. The delivery of these instructional methods requires practical skills coupled with an understanding of the aspects of language being taught. The purpose of this study was to explore the level of literacy knowledge of the English language held by educators who provide instruction to students in the primary grades. Data from 1369 classroom teachers, 74 reading interventionists, and 131 special educators comprising the analytic sample were collected as part of a training initiative in a US state. Participating educators completed a 50-item test of phonological sensitivity, phonemic awareness, decoding, encoding, and morphology. Multiple regression analyses confirmed differences in the levels of knowledge observed between the groups of educators. Reading interventionists demonstrated greater knowledge than classroom teachers and special educators in the total proportion of correct responses and across each domain. Classroom teachers demonstrated greater knowledge than special educators in phonological sensitivity and decoding but did not differ from each other in phonemic awareness, encoding, or morphology knowledge. Special educators provide intervention to students with the most severe forms of reading disabilities, yet they had the lowest level of knowledge. In contrast, reading interventionists, who provide intervention within general education, had the highest levels of knowledge. These findings suggest a need to elevate the knowledge of special educators and consider reading interventionists’ role in supporting students identified with a specific learning disability in reading.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":47273,"journal":{"name":"Annals of Dyslexia","volume":"72 1","pages":"79 - 96"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2021-08-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1007/s11881-021-00242-0","citationCount":"4","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Characterizing the knowledge of educators across the tiers of instructional support\",\"authors\":\"Susan B. Porter,&nbsp;Timothy N. Odegard,&nbsp;Melissa McMahan,&nbsp;Emily A. Farris\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s11881-021-00242-0\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Translating the research base on effective reading instruction to the classroom has been a challenge. The delivery of these instructional methods requires practical skills coupled with an understanding of the aspects of language being taught. The purpose of this study was to explore the level of literacy knowledge of the English language held by educators who provide instruction to students in the primary grades. Data from 1369 classroom teachers, 74 reading interventionists, and 131 special educators comprising the analytic sample were collected as part of a training initiative in a US state. Participating educators completed a 50-item test of phonological sensitivity, phonemic awareness, decoding, encoding, and morphology. Multiple regression analyses confirmed differences in the levels of knowledge observed between the groups of educators. Reading interventionists demonstrated greater knowledge than classroom teachers and special educators in the total proportion of correct responses and across each domain. Classroom teachers demonstrated greater knowledge than special educators in phonological sensitivity and decoding but did not differ from each other in phonemic awareness, encoding, or morphology knowledge. Special educators provide intervention to students with the most severe forms of reading disabilities, yet they had the lowest level of knowledge. In contrast, reading interventionists, who provide intervention within general education, had the highest levels of knowledge. These findings suggest a need to elevate the knowledge of special educators and consider reading interventionists’ role in supporting students identified with a specific learning disability in reading.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47273,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Annals of Dyslexia\",\"volume\":\"72 1\",\"pages\":\"79 - 96\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-08-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1007/s11881-021-00242-0\",\"citationCount\":\"4\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Annals of Dyslexia\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"95\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11881-021-00242-0\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"教育学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION, SPECIAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of Dyslexia","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11881-021-00242-0","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SPECIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

摘要

将基于有效阅读教学的研究成果转化到课堂一直是一项挑战。这些教学方法的实施需要实用技能,同时还要理解所教语言的各个方面。本研究的目的是探索为小学学生提供教学的教育工作者所掌握的英语识字知识水平。作为美国一个州培训计划的一部分,收集了1369名课堂教师、74名阅读干预者和131名特殊教育工作者的数据,构成分析样本。参与的教育工作者完成了一项50项的语音敏感性、音位意识、解码、编码和形态学测试。多元回归分析证实了教育工作者群体之间知识水平的差异。阅读干预主义者在正确回答的总比例和各个领域表现出比课堂教师和特殊教育工作者更大的知识。课堂教师在语音敏感性和解码方面表现出比特殊教育者更多的知识,但在音位意识、编码或形态学知识方面没有差异。特殊教育工作者为有最严重阅读障碍的学生提供干预,但他们的知识水平最低。相比之下,在普通教育中提供干预的阅读干预主义者拥有最高水平的知识。这些发现表明,有必要提高特殊教育工作者的知识,并考虑阅读干预主义者在支持有特定学习障碍的学生阅读方面的作用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Characterizing the knowledge of educators across the tiers of instructional support

Translating the research base on effective reading instruction to the classroom has been a challenge. The delivery of these instructional methods requires practical skills coupled with an understanding of the aspects of language being taught. The purpose of this study was to explore the level of literacy knowledge of the English language held by educators who provide instruction to students in the primary grades. Data from 1369 classroom teachers, 74 reading interventionists, and 131 special educators comprising the analytic sample were collected as part of a training initiative in a US state. Participating educators completed a 50-item test of phonological sensitivity, phonemic awareness, decoding, encoding, and morphology. Multiple regression analyses confirmed differences in the levels of knowledge observed between the groups of educators. Reading interventionists demonstrated greater knowledge than classroom teachers and special educators in the total proportion of correct responses and across each domain. Classroom teachers demonstrated greater knowledge than special educators in phonological sensitivity and decoding but did not differ from each other in phonemic awareness, encoding, or morphology knowledge. Special educators provide intervention to students with the most severe forms of reading disabilities, yet they had the lowest level of knowledge. In contrast, reading interventionists, who provide intervention within general education, had the highest levels of knowledge. These findings suggest a need to elevate the knowledge of special educators and consider reading interventionists’ role in supporting students identified with a specific learning disability in reading.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Annals of Dyslexia
Annals of Dyslexia Multiple-
CiteScore
4.90
自引率
8.70%
发文量
25
期刊介绍: Annals of Dyslexia is an interdisciplinary, peer-reviewed journal dedicated to the scientific study of dyslexia, its comorbid conditions; and theory-based practices on remediation, and intervention of dyslexia and related areas of written language disorders including spelling, composing and mathematics. Primary consideration for publication is given to original empirical studies, significant review, and well-documented reports of evidence-based effective practices. Only original papers are considered for publication.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信