Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy 53(2) October 2009 doi:10.1598/JA AL.53.2.6 © 2009 International Reading Association (pp. 154 –163)
Delivering One-to-One Tutoring in Literacy via Videoconferencing Literacy instruction using videoconferencing technology can be an engaging and effective means to assist adolescents with comprehension.
154
Timothy T. Houge, Constance Geier
I
t has been estimated that as many as 70% of adolescents—students in grades 4–12—have difficulty reading in some manner and require direct, explicit instructional interventions to expand their word recognition, decoding, reading f luency, and comprehension skills (Biancarosa & Snow, 2006). These adolescents are unable to maintain grade level literacy skills because of such factors as limited experiences with our written language, transience and poverty, and lack of motivation and self-esteem. Unfortunately, there is no quick fix for adolescents who are experiencing difficulty with reading; however, research has indicated that these students experience success with research-based literacy interventions that are delivered inside a university-based reading clinic by graduate and undergraduate education majors (Houge, Peyton, Geier, & Petrie, 2007). The two main purposes of university-based reading clinics are to serve the community and to provide supervised instructional experiences for teacher candidates. Supervised instructional experiences help teacher candidates understand how to administer assessments and instruction that will improve students’ reading and writing abilities (Atkinson & Colby, 2006). These literacy instructional experiences carry common themes of instruction in f luency, word study, and comprehension, although each tutoring program allocates different amounts of time and implements a variety of instructional concepts for each of these areas of literacy (Coulter, 2004; Houge, Geier, & Peyton, 2008; Manset-Williamson & Nelson, 2005; Penney, 2002). Although one-to-one literacy instruction delivered in person is generally considered to be the most effective method of advancing students’ literacy skills, McKenna, Reinking, and Labbo (1999) challenged the conventional practice of bringing students to university-based reading clinics to receive intense literacy instruction. Because there are a limited number of students who can receive instruction in this way because of scheduling and transportation difficulties, McKenna and colleagues believed distance technology (often referred to as videoconferencing) was a foreseeable and promising medium for increasing the accessibility of one-to-one literacy instruction. Recently,
Distance Technology Distance education technology is experiencing exponential growth (National Center for Education Statistics, 2003). Indeed, there is a great deal of optimism about the potential of distance education technology ( Johnson, 2006; Larreamendy-Joerns & Leinhardt, 2006) and, until recently, this type of instruction has typically been asynchronous in nature. However, synchronous interaction through online chatting and videoconferencing has made it possible for students to feel as if they are part of a real classroom learning environment by providing immediate
contact, motivation, and clarification of meaning (Steeples, Jones, & Goodyear, 2002). With the availability of free software programs and the Internet, videoconferencing occurs with no satellite or long-distance charges. Webcams costing less than US$100 facilitate face-to-face meetings with people anywhere in the world. For those who desire audio in combination with video, a headset with a microphone allows individuals to collectively correspond with voice and images. In addition, the audio and visual components can be supplemented with written communication via a chatting module or a chalkboard feature, permitting both people to view messages as they are composed. As a result, the use of videoconferencing is on the rise. For example, it is used to assist with diagnosing physical ailments and prescribing treatment for people located in areas that do not have medical specialists (Bakalar, 2007; Barthelemy, 2007). The construction industry has used this technology to communicate, monitor, and control building construction (Nuntasunti & Bernold, 2002). Dell (2002) reported that school personnel have used videoconferencing to speak with authors, attend virtual fieldtrips, and facilitate school-to-school teacher partnerships (for information about the use of videoconferencing in schools, see www.gsn.org). In addition, videoconferencing has been used extensively for socialization. For example, the latest research in adolescents’ use of videoconferencing software for social interaction found that 57% of the 1,060 adolescents surveyed used webcams and 32% periodically integrated microphones (Peter, Valkenburg, & Schouten, 2007). Although videoconferencing is widely used in a variety of professions in various capacities, it has had little application at university-based reading clinics as a means to deliver one-to-one tutoring instruction to students who, to date, have not had the opportunity to access these services.
Method Participants Sixty-one adolescents (20 females and 41 males) experiencing deficiencies in one or more literacy components—word recognition, decoding, reading f luency,
D e l i v e r i n g O n e - t o - O n e Tu t o r i n g i n L i t e r a c y v i a V i d e o c o n f e r e n c i n g
McKenna and Walpole (2007) renewed the call for using technology at university-based reading clinics, underscoring the need for research investigating its effectiveness. The investigation of technology’s applications by clinicians, however, has proven to be a very complex endeavor. Researchers have not agreed on the extent to or manner in which technology should be applied in a one-to-one setting; thus, generalizations from the existing literature are tentative at best. The issue is further complicated by the uniqueness of adolescents’ instructional needs as well as the reading, writing, and classroom experiences that form their current level of literacy competency. Finally, because of the dynamic nature of reading clinics, technology application may be continually modified by the presence of individual students and the literacy concept being addressed. In spite of these complexities, it is important to continue to study the use of technology as a means of delivering one-to-one literacy instruction to those students whose schedules or locations interfere with receiving instruction in person. The purpose of this study, then, was to quantitatively determine the reading and spelling progress of adolescents who received one-to-one literacy instruction at our university-based reading clinic delivered via videoconferencing. Using pre- and posttest reading and spelling scores, we attempted to answer the following question: Was there a statistically significant difference between adolescents’ pre- and posttest reading and spelling scores after receiving 16 one-toone literacy tutoring sessions via videoconferencing technology?
155
and comprehension—were included in this study; all students were enrolled in grades 4–12, and all received 16 one-hour one-to-one literacy instructional sessions via videoconferencing. Many of these adolescents maintained sufficient proficiency in reading accuracy and f luency; however, they struggled with comprehending grade-level text attributable to low vocabulary or failure to use effective reading strategies. Of the 61 students, 44 received literacy instruction in their schools and 17 received literacy instruction in their homes. The 61 students in the study represented 10 different states; all students were registered by their parents who learned about the tutoring opportunity from other parents, teachers, or the university’s website.
Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy
53(2)
October 2009
Tutors
156
All tutors were undergraduate teacher candidates majoring in secondary, elementary, or special education and were enrolled in a required literacy practicum linked to a reading methods course. Although all of the tutors met the requirements for admission to teacher education, none had prior experience teaching students in grades 4–12. Prior to the first tutoring session, the director of the reading clinic provided tutors with approximately eight hours of training. Training focused on the administration and interpretation of the assessments, the central components of all literacy instruction, and specific instructional techniques. At the beginning of the semester, each tutor was randomly assigned an adolescent student. Each tutor provided instruction for his or her assigned student throughout all tutoring sessions. Prior to instruction, tutors administered assessments to identify their students’ reading and spelling skills. After reviewing the assessment information, tutors identified the specific literacy needs of their students and designed and implemented all literacy instruction.
Tutoring Sessions The tutoring sessions were one hour in length. Students in grades 4–8 received tutoring between 3:30 p.m. and 5:00 p.m. High school students received tutoring during a time that coincided with their open periods in the regular school day between 8:00 a.m.
and 3:00 p.m. The students who were tutored in their homes received instruction after they arrived home from school. The sessions followed a Monday/Wednesday or Tuesday/Thursday schedule to provide the tutors ample time to plan for instruction between each tutoring session. To ensure that each tutor had appropriately planned for instruction, the director of the reading clinic examined all lesson plans prior to implementation. In addition, the director offered suggestions, answered questions, and provided guidance by modeling effective literacy instruction and assisting with the selection of contemporary Young Adult Literature (YAL). Tutors were able to check out two copies of the guided oral reading text: one for their own use and a second copy for use by their students. These guided reading books were sent to the school or home along with a prepaid envelope used to return them upon completion.
Theoretical Framework The literacy intervention in this study can be classified as a blending of the cognitive process and sociocultural perspectives. The cognitive process concentrates on the student and stresses perceptual abilities, the limitations of memory, and the use of literacy strategies to promote the efficient processing of information while seeing students as active participants who construct meaning in terms of their own experiences. The socioculturalist views students as learning from more knowledgeable individuals; thus, reading and writing are seen as social processes in which tutors and tutees learn from one another. Students’ growth is determined by the social and cultural context (one-to-one tutoring) in which learning occurs. Both perspectives are important and add to our understanding of language and literacy (Stone, 2004).
Instructional Framework The instructional framework of each lesson comprised research-based literacy activities: word study (learning strategies to decode polysyllabic words), reading f luency (instruction aimed at improving accuracy, rate, and prosody), vocabulary (implicit and explicit attention to word recognition and spelling), comprehension strategies (reading and discussing contemporary
Instruction with morphemes also took place during this time as a Although brief, means of assisting adolescents with this guided fluency awareness of a word’s meaning and words that are related in meaning. instruction assisted Adolescents were taught common adolescents with Latin prefixes, suffixes, and roots retaining their focus and eventually, for some, common Greek forms (Henry, 2003). on, and awareness Following this instruction of, each aspect of and practice of writing and readfluency—accuracy, ing words, adolescents were asked rate, and prosody— to write two sentences dictated to them containing words they had throughout the just studied. This practice was desemester. signed to provide an opportunity for students to transfer vocabulary spelling and usage inside the context of a sentence so as to teach, review, and reinforce the orthographic patterns of English. To assist each adolescent with constructing meaning during guided oral reading using contemporary YAL, tutors were instructed to apply the instructional approach titled Questioning the Author (Beck, McKeown, Hamilton, & Kucan, 1997). During this instructional practice (generally lasting 15–20 minutes), tutors posed questions such as, Do you think the character understood the consequences of his actions? or How do things look for the character at this point? All of the contemporary YAL used by the tutors was narrative, and each student was able to read the literature with a minimum of 90% accuracy. Our intent was to actively engage students with interesting and motivating reading materials. That is, to create a curriculum experience during reading instruction that was motivating enough to generate student involvement. Next, adolescents spent 5–10 minutes completing a written retelling of the portion of text that they read during the guided oral reading instruction. These writings were used to assess adolescents’ understanding of the text as well as provide profiles of their success in writing and identify any areas needing improvement. Written retellings are one method of bringing the reading–writing relationship together (Hidi & Anderson, 1986).
D e l i v e r i n g O n e - t o - O n e Tu t o r i n g i n L i t e r a c y v i a V i d e o c o n f e r e n c i n g
YAL; Boardman et al., 2008) as well as writing and tutor read-alouds. Each tutoring session began with repeated reading practice that lasted approximately five minutes. The repeated reading process required adolescents to reread 100–160 word passages selected from the contemporary YAL book that had been read during guided oral reading in an earlier tutoring session. Between each rereading, tutors provided feedback on performance, including correction of errors. After three attempts, the rereading opportunities ended whether the adolescents had met their words-correctper-minute goals or not. Although brief, this guided f luency instruction assisted adolescents with retaining their focus on, and awareness of, each aspect of f luency—accuracy, rate, and prosody—throughout the semester (Rasinski, Blachowicz, & Lems, 2006) Next, adolescents were asked to summarize or retell a portion of the book they were assigned to read. This active cognitive process aided in the development of comprehension, oral language, and sense of story structure. It also enabled the adolescents to reconstruct their reading assignments, which entailed thinking about story events and arranging them in sequence (Hidi & Anderson, 1986). Approximately 15–20 minutes were dedicated to word study or vocabulary instruction. Word study instruction included teaching the orthography of words—how to translate printed text into pronunciation and word meanings. This polysyllabic word study was designed and modeled after Greene’s (2004) research validated program, Language! A Literacy Intervention Curriculum. Tutors provided instruction on a syllable type, then asked adolescents to accurately spell (and, in some cases, read) monosyllabic words that contained this syllable structure as well as polysyllabic words that contained the same syllable type. Adolescents were taught to see the syllables in words as they attempted proper pronunciations. If their initial attempt at pronouncing a polysyllabic word did not match any word in their oral language, they were encouraged to change their division of the word to establish an alternate pronunciation that matched their oral vocabulary or, instead, a pronunciation that appeared to make the most sense to them.
157
Finally, tutors spent five to eight minutes reading aloud to their students from a contemporary YAL selection. Tutors were instructed to engage in a dialogue with their students analyzing words and their meanings, summarizing sections of the story, and evaluating the literature to facilitate further understanding. Ultimately, our read-aloud opportunities were meant to foster a love of reading texts that portray multicultural characters, actions, and events that closely mirror those of students (Readence, Bean, & Baldwin, 1998). See Figure 1 for a sample lesson plan from a typical tutoring session.
Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy
53(2)
October 2009
Assessments
158
For the purpose of our research, we elected to use the Gray Oral Reading Test-4 (GORT-4) and the Test of Written Spelling-4 (TWS-4). These assessment tools were chosen because they provided our tutors with a measurement of students’ reading accuracy, f luency, comprehension, and spelling skills; allowed tutors to attain information about their students’ reading and spelling strengths and weaknesses; and documented students’ progress after receiving 16 one-to-one literacy tutoring sessions. These assessments are appropriate for students aged 6 years 0 months through 18 years 11 months. Each assessment is divided into two parallel forms (A and B) intended to be used when administering preand postassessments. While administering the GORT-4, tutors asked the adolescents to read aloud short stories that ranged in difficulty from level 1 to level 14. Tutors recorded the time it took for their students to read each story; in addition, tutors determined the number of miscues (e.g., substitutions, additions, and omissions) the adolescents made while reading aloud. Immediately following the reading of a story, the adolescents were asked five multiple-choice comprehension questions. The accuracy (words read correctly), f luency (obtained from converting the time and accuracy), and comprehension (questions answered correctly) scores were obtained by following the administration and scoring procedures established by the authors. The procedures for the TWS-4 entailed having the adolescents spell words from a preestablished list of words. These words were sequenced in order of
difficulty; for example, yes is the first word and liaison is the last word on Form A. The tutors pronounced the word in isolation, then read the word in a sentence that contained the word, and finally pronounced the word in isolation again. Adolescents were asked to write the words dictated by their tutors. One point was awarded for each word spelled correctly; no credit was awarded for words spelled incorrectly. Beginning and ending procedures were, again, established by the authors.
Videoconferencing Technology The videoconferencing portion of our tutoring center was supported, in part, by a Preparing Tomorrow’s Teachers to Use Technology grant from the U.S. Department of Education. Grant funds allowed us to lend each school and home site a webcam and headset. Once the initial connection was established, the students linked to our tutoring center at the scheduled times to begin their one-hour tutoring sessions. We experienced minimal technology difficulties; however, a technology staff member was present during each initial connection and remained on call to troubleshoot minor technology difficulties (e.g., loss of audio, video, or chalkboard capabilities) that occurred during subsequent sessions.
Our Observations Our observations of videoconferencing tutoring sessions have assured us that informal exchanges have not been sacrificed. For example, we have often observed tutors and their students smiling at one another or laughing about experiences from their daily lives or events that have occurred in the books they are reading. Informal conversations, via videoconferencing technology or telephone, with parents of students receiving tutoring at home have revealed additional benefits of videoconferencing tutoring. For example, a parent living in a metropolitan area with access to tutoring services conducted in person considered distance tutoring a more viable option because of the time saved driving to and from tutoring sessions twice each week. Another parent described the reluctance of her adolescent son to attend tutoring sessions in person; he was, however, willing to participate in tutoring
Sample Lesson Plan
3:30 p.m.–3:35 p.m. Repeated Reading
Oral Retelling 3:35 p.m.–3:50 p.m. Word Study/Vocabulary N
Focus of the Day:
Objective: At the end of the lesson, Austin will be able to identify and define the root struct/stru inside words and correctly spell words with this root.
N
N
3:55p.m.–4:15 p.m. Guided Oral Reading Worth (LaFaye, 2006)
Austin will be asked to retell Ch. 3 of Worth (LaFaye, 2006).
In this lesson I will introduce the root struct/stru by speaking and writing words that contain this root. Austin will learn that struct/stru means to build. Some of the words I will say and have Austin write and others I will write and have Austin pronounce. I will continue to incorporate syllabication as a means of practicing the spelling and identification of syllables within polysyllabic words. N These are the words that will be used in my instruction: N
1. construct (com-, together) [to build up] 2. constructive (-ive, of, relating to, belonging to) [helping to construct] 3. destruction (de-, reverse the action of; undo) (-tion, the act of) [the act or process of destroying something] 4. indestructible (in-, not) (de-, reverse the action of; undo) (ible, capable of being) [impossible or very difficult to destroy] 5. obstruct (ob-, to, toward) [to block] 6. obstruction (-ion, n.-forming suffix meaning the act of) [anything that obstructs; hindrance] 7. obstructionist (-ist, n.-forming suffix meaning a person who does, makes, or practices) [anyone who obstructs progress] 8. instruct (in-, in, upon) [to communicate knowledge to; teach; educate] 9. instructor (-or, n.-forming suffix meaning a person or thing that) 10. structure (-ure, act or result of being) [something built or constructed] 11. restructure (re-, back or again) (-ure, act or result of being) [to change the way in which something is organized or arranged] 12. superstructure (super-, over, above, on top of) [a structure built on top of another]
Goals: 1. Austin will understand that struct/stru means to build. 2. Austin will develop confidence in identifying and spelling words that contain the root struct/ stru.
3:50 p.m.–3:55 p.m. Sentence Dictation
Austin (pseudonym) will read a 135-word passage from Ch.3 so I may measure fluency progress. We need to work on all three areas of Austin’s fluency—rate, accuracy, and prosody. He tends to read with very little tonal expression and frequently stumbles over unfamiliar words.
N
N N
I will state the following sentences for Austin to write. 1. The superstructure obstructed the view of the instructor. 2. The obstructionist was seen obstructing the destruction of the structure. We will continue reading Worth (LaFaye, 2006), Chapter 4, Dunce Goes to School. Examples of questions I will ask: Page 23: “Pa stared at her, his hands still on the spoon.” Question: From what the author has told us previously, why do you think Pa is staring at her? Does the author tell us why? Anticipated answer: He is upset with how Nate’s mother is treating their adopted son John. He knows that John works hard for the family, and that she doesn’t appreciate him. The author did not come out and tell us why Pa was staring at her, but I feel that it could be assumed that he is disappointed in her decision making and judgments. Page 24: “Especially since He and I weren’t exactly on speaking terms these days.” Question: From what the author has told us about Nathanial, why do you think Nate has not been praying like his mother has? Anticipated answer: I think he doesn’t pray as much because he is upset with God. He probably feels that God has made him a cripple on purpose. Follow-up question: Why do you think the author tells us this now? Anticipated answer: Right before they sat down to eat, Nate saw John Worth sitting outside by himself. I think Nate is jealous that John is now working in his place and that his father is more worried about John getting fed then he is about Nate’s health. Also, I think he brings it up now because his whole family was praying before their meal.
D e l i v e r i n g O n e - t o - O n e Tu t o r i n g i n L i t e r a c y v i a V i d e o c o n f e r e n c i n g
Figure 1
159
(continued)
Figure 1
Sample Lesson Plan (Continued) Page 25: “A soddie on the south end of town, the place looked like earth had grown a wart or something.” Question: What type of word is soddie and why did the author compare it to a wart? Anticipated answer: Soddie is a word the author used to describe the school house that Nate is going to attend. The author used this word because the school was built of sod bricks. I think the author decided to compare the school to a wart because it is similar to a wart which is an outgrowth of the skin; thus, the school appears to look like an outgrowth of the earth. Page 26: “The other boys closed in round me as I hobbled toward the door, saying, ‘“How do, Wood? What brings you to town, Wood?’” Question: From what the author has told us previously about Nate’s family, why do you think the boys were calling him Wood? Anticipated answer: If you remember, Nate’s family survived on the tinker trade. They gained most of their valuables by fixing other people’s belongings. They called him Wood because his family dragged wood across the prairie to build their home once they got to Nebraska. They received the wood from tinkering. Page 27: “But those folks knew things I didn’t have a clue on.” Question: The author mentioned a couple of things that made Nate uncomfortable once he was in class. What were these insecurities and why? Anticipated answer: He was insecure that he couldn’t read or write better or as equal as most of the kids in school. This made him uncomfortable because he wasn’t even able to do these tasks as well as even the youngest kids in school. Page 28: “They tore up the new Cordimas kids from Greece just on account of having peculiar names.” Question: Why do you think the author tells us this now? Anticipated answer: I think the author told us this to describe how cruel kids can be by teasing other kids. The author was trying to describe the experience of school for children that were not considered typical by the other children, like Nate or the Cordimas kids.
October 2009
Page 29: “He got to spend the day with Pa watching rabbits and I had to sit in a room of kids who hated me, looking like the dunce that I am.” Question: What type of word is dunce? Anticipated answer: Dunce is a word that describes an unintelligent person or someone who is a slow learner.
Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy
53(2)
Follow-up question: Now that you know what dunce means, do you think the author selected a suitable title to this chapter (Dunce Goes to School)? Anticipated answer: I think the title is suitable from the perspective of Nate, because he feels that all the other kids know more than he does. 4:15p.m.–4:25 p.m. Written Retelling 4:25p.m.–4:30 p.m. Tutor Read Aloud The Absolute True Diary of a Part-Time Indian Alexie (2007)
N
I will ask Austin to write a short retelling (3–4 sentences) of chapter four. After he is done we will edit his writing.
We will continue reading Alexie’s (2007) The Absolute True Diary of a Part-Time Indian, beginning with Chapter 5 Hope Against Hope. N Examples of questions I will ask: N
Page 40: “My dad doesn’t even cheer for his favorite teams or players. He doesn’t react mu+h to the games at all.” Question: From what the author has told us previously, why do you feel that Junior’s dad doesn’t react much to the games that he watches with Junior? Anticipated answer: I think he doesn’t react much because all the drinking he does makes him depressed to the point that he doesn’t even care who wins the game.
160
(continued)
Figure 1
Sample Lesson Plan (Continued) Page 40: “I almost gagged when I said that.” Question: Why do you think the author decided to have Junior refer to that after commenting on his sister’s dream?
sessions delivered to his home via videoconferencing. Numerous parents have also expressed an appreciation for the opportunity to observe their child’s literacy instruction. A parent from a rural area of our state commented that her 12-year-old daughter enjoyed reading more since she began receiving videoconferencing tutoring; she felt the tutoring was an excellent experience for her child. And finally, the parent of a 14-year-old boy felt compelled to share how prior to tutoring her son felt there was not a single book in the library that interested him; however, near the end of the tutoring program, he remarked several times that he hoped his tutor would not be upset that he was so far ahead in reading their guided reading book Things Not Seen (Clements, 2006) because it was so good. Although these examples involved tutoring sessions conducted in the home, we have documented similar examples for those students receiving tutoring services via videoconferencing in their schools. For example, two students, on two separate occasions, who did not attend school because of illness did, in fact, choose to return to school for their one-hour tutoring sessions later in the day. In addition, a school administrator in a small, rural school shared that an adolescent with chronic absenteeism always attended school on the days his tutoring sessions were scheduled; another administrator reported that a student whose tutoring was scheduled to begin at 8:00 a.m. consistently arrived at school 30 minutes early on those days.
Summary of Our Results The focus of the present study was an attempt to quantitatively determine whether there was a statistically significant difference between adolescents’
(grades 4–12) pre- and posttest reading and spelling scores after receiving 16 one-to-one literacy tutoring sessions via videoconferencing technology. In particular we looked at adolescents’ scores on standardized reading (GORT-4) and spelling (TWS-4) assessments that were administered prior to and following 16 onehour tutoring sessions. The adolescents who were administered the GORT-4 (n = 61) ranged from 9–18 years of age with a mean age of 14.8. A comparison of their pre- and posttest scores indicated statistically significant growth in all three areas: accuracy (t(60) = 6.65, p < 0.05), f luency (t(60) = 5.15, p < 0.05), and comprehension (t(60) = 2.70, p < 0.05; see Table 1). The adolescents who were administered the TWS-4 (n = 50) also ranged from 9–18 years of age; however, their mean age was 15.3. A comparison of their pre- and posttest scores indicated statistically significant growth (t(49) = 4.84, p < 0.05; see Table 2).
Discussion Findings from this study suggest that one-to-one literacy instruction via videoconferencing technology can be an engaging and effective means to assist adolescents with comprehension while reading with appropriate accuracy and f luency. The analysis of the GORT-4 and TWS-4 scores demonstrated that adolescents with varying reading and spelling abilities and levels of prior knowledge made significant pre- to posttest score gains. Although the sample size precludes the ability to draw strong conclusions, this exploratory study identified several factors associated with successful outcomes. Some of the important factors for successful implementation of one-to-one literacy instruction
D e l i v e r i n g O n e - t o - O n e Tu t o r i n g i n L i t e r a c y v i a V i d e o c o n f e r e n c i n g
Anticipated answer: I think the author referred to that not because Junior didn’t care about his sister’s dream, but because he felt that Indians didn’t have the privilege to become famous.
161
Table 1
Means, Standard Deviations, and t Tests for Accuracy, Fluency, and Comprehension on the GORT-4
Measure
Mean and Standard Deviation
Accuracy
Fluency
Comprehension
Pretest
Posttest
t
M
34.90
12.71
6.65*
SD
12.71
12.23
M
64.80
69.72
SD
22.94
22.08
M
35.62
38.52
SD
9.69
9.84
5.15*
2.70*
N = 61 *p < .05
Table 2
Means, Standard Deviations, and t Tests for Accuracy on the TWS-4
Measure
Mean and Standard Deviation
Accuracy
Pretest
Posttest
t
M
21.52
24.88
4.84*
SD
10.49
10.64
Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy
53(2)
October 2009
N = 50 *p < .05
162
via videoconferencing include (a) maintaining lesson plans with direct and explicit accuracy, f luency, comprehension, and spelling instruction, (b) enrolling a reading specialist to supervise and support tutors, (c) providing appropriate training for tutors, (d) integrating contemporary YAL during guided reading and read alouds, and (e) assuring that technology includes audio, video, and chalkboard features. Findings from this study indicate that the interactive and social nature of tutoring and the use of contemporary YAL provide a supportive atmosphere that motivates students to participate during tutoring sessions by actively processing the texts and responding to tutors’ questions. In summary, the use of videoconferencing technology to deliver one-to-one literacy instruction to adolescents, who are geographically distributed and who may find it difficult or impossible to attend tutoring sessions in person, demonstrated improved reading and spelling scores. Although the development of one-to-one literacy instruction via videoconferencing technology is currently at an early stage,
such instruction shows great promise. Future studies that systematically compare the learning outcomes and task engagement between adolescents and their tutors are important next steps in determining the efficacy of tutoring via videoconferencing. Through continued empirical investigations of the cognitive and social consequences of one-to-one tutoring for adolescents delivered via videoconferencing technology, literacy instruction can be refined to further support adolescents’ literacy skills and active literacy engagement. Continued research on the application of one-toone literacy instruction to adolescents’ performance in the classroom may also inform content area teachers regarding literacy instruction and learning materials that are consistent with the way in which adolescents process information. A greater awareness of the relationship between one-to-one literacy instruction and reading and spelling performance can be used to improve instruction for adolescents by clarifying specific ways to read, navigate, and comprehend our written language. Identifying the conditions that facilitate
References Atkinson, T.S., & Colby, S.A. (2006). Who’s teaching, who’s learning? Analyzing the professional growth of graduate student tutors. Mentoring & Tutoring: Partnership in Learning, 14(2), 227–245. doi:10.1080/13611260500493642 Bakalar, R. (2007). Patient empowerment: Next generation telemedicine services. Future Healthcare: The Journal of Medical Innovation, 1(2), 56–60. Barthelemy, J.E. (2007). The latest in visual imaging technologies: Saving time, money and lives. Future Healthcare: The Journal of Medical Innovation, 1(2), 62–66. Beck, I.L., McKeown, M.G., Hamilton, R.L., & Kucan, L. (1997). Questioning the author: An approach for enhancing student engagement with text. Newark, DE: International Reading Association. Biancarosa, C., & Snow, C.E. (2006). Reading next—A vision for action and research in middle and high school literacy: A report to Carnegie Corporation of New York (2nd ed.). Washington, DC: Alliance for Excellent Education. Boardman, A.G., Roberts, G., Vaughn, S., Wexler, J., Murray, C.S., & Kosanovich, M. (2008). Effective instruction for adolescents struggling readers: A practice brief. Portsmouth, NH: RMC Research Corporation, Center on Instruction. Coulter, G. (2004). Using one-on-one tutoring and proven reading strategies to improve reading performance with adjudicated youth. Journal of Correctional Education, 55(4), 321–333. Dell, L.A. (2002, March). Connecting K–12 and higher ed. Paper presented at the 2002 Ohio Learning Network conference, Cincinnati, OH. Retrieved June 29, 2007, from www.oln. org/conferences/OLN2002/OLN2002papers.php Greene, J.F. (2004). Language! A literacy intervention curriculum. Longmont, CO: Sopris West. Henry, M.K. (2003). Unlocking literacy: Effective decoding & spelling instruction. Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes. Hidi, S., & Anderson, V. (1986). Producing written summaries: Task demands, cognitive operations, and implications for instruction. Review of Educational Research, 56(4), 473–493. Houge, T.T., Geier, C., & Peyton, D. (2008). Targeting adolescents’ literacy skills using one-to-one instruction with research-based practices. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 51(8), 640–650. doi:10.1598/JAAL.51.8.3 Houge, T.T., Peyton, D., Geier, C., & Petrie, B. (2007). Adolescent literacy tutoring: Face-to-face and via webcam technolog y. Reading Psychology, 28(3), 283 –300. doi:10.1080/02702710601186399 Johnson, G.M. (2006). Synchronous and asynchronous text-based CMC in educational contexts: A review of recent research. TechTrends, 50(4), 46–53. doi:10.1007/s11528-006-0046-9
Larreamendy-Joerns, J., & Leinhardt, G. (2006). Going the distance with online education. Review of Educational Research, 76(4), 567–605. doi:10.3102/00346543076004567 Manset-Williamson, G., & Nelson, J.M. (2005). Balanced, strategic reading instruction for upper-elementary and middle school students with reading disabilities: A comparative study of two approaches. Learning Disability Quarterly, 28(1), 59–74. doi:10.2307/4126973 McKenna, M.C., Reinking, D., & Labbo, L.D. (1999). The role of technology in the reading clinic: Its past and potential. In P.B. Mosenthal & D.H. Evensen (Eds.), Advances in reading/ language research: Reconsidering the role of the reading clinic in a new age of literacy (pp. 347–364). Stanford, CT: JAI Press. McKenna, M.C., & Walpole, S. (2007). Assistive technology in the reading clinic: Its emerging potential. Reading Research Quarterly, 42(1), 140–145. doi:10.1598/RRQ.42.1.6 National Center for Education Statistics. (2003). Distance education at degree-granting postsecondary institutions: 2000–2001 (Publication No. NCES 2003-017). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office. Nuntasunti, S., & Bernold, L.E. (2002). Beyond webcam: A site-website for building construction (Publication No. PB2002-108230). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office. Penney, C.G. (2002). Teaching decoding skills to poor readers in high school. Journal of Literacy Research, 34(1), 99–120. doi:10.1207/s15548430jlr3401_4 Peter, J., Valkenburg, P.M., & Schouten, A.P. (2007). Precursors of adolescents’ use of visual and audio devices during online communication. Computers in Human Behavior, 23(5), 2473–2487. Rasinski, T.V., Blachowicz, C.L.Z., & Lems, K. (2006). Fluency instruction: Research-based best practices. New York: Guilford. Readence, J.E., Bean, T.W., & Baldwin, R.S. (1998). Content area literacy: An integrated approach (6th ed.). Dubuque, IA: Kendall/ Hunt. Steeples, C., Jones, C., & Goodyear, P. (2002). Beyond e-learning: A future for networked learning. In C. Steeples & C. Jones (Eds.), Networked learning: Perspectives and issues (pp. 323–342). London: Springer-Verlag. Stone, C.A. (2004). Contemporary approaches to the study of language and literacy development: A call for the integration of perspectives. In C.A. Stone, E.R. Silliman, B.J. Ehren, & K. Apel (Eds.), Handbook of language and literacy: Development and disorders (pp. 3–24). New York: Guilford.
Young Adult Literature Cited Alexie, S. (2007). The absolutely true diary of a part-time Indian. New York: Hachette. Clements, A. (2006). Things hoped for. New York: Philomel. LaFaye, A. (2006). Worth. New York: Aladdin.
Houge teaches at Northern State University, Aberdeen, South Dakota, USA; e-mail
[email protected]. Geier also teaches at Northern State University; e-mail
[email protected].
D e l i v e r i n g O n e - t o - O n e Tu t o r i n g i n L i t e r a c y v i a V i d e o c o n f e r e n c i n g
successful delivery of one-to-one literacy instruction and understanding how these processes compare with conventional tutoring will result in a more comprehensive framework for conceptualizing personalized instruction for adolescents.
163
