Effects of Dyad Reading Instruction on the Reading Achievement of Hispanic Third-Grade English Language Learners

This article was downloaded by: [University of Connecticut]On: 08 October 2014, At: 12:26Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH,UK

Bilingual Research Journal:The Journal of the NationalAssociation for BilingualEducationPublication details, including instructions forauthors and subscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/ubrj20

Effects of Dyad ReadingInstruction on the ReadingAchievement of HispanicThird-Grade English LanguageLearnersIsela Almaguer aa The University of Texas-Pan AmericanPublished online: 22 Nov 2010.

To cite this article: Isela Almaguer (2005) Effects of Dyad Reading Instruction on theReading Achievement of Hispanic Third-Grade English Language Learners, BilingualResearch Journal: The Journal of the National Association for Bilingual Education,29:3, 509-526, DOI: 10.1080/15235882.2005.10162849

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15235882.2005.10162849

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all theinformation (the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform.However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make norepresentations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness,or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and viewsexpressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, andare not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of theContent should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with

http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/ubrj20

http://www.tandfonline.com/action/showCitFormats?doi=10.1080/15235882.2005.10162849

http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15235882.2005.10162849

primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for anylosses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages,and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly orindirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of theContent.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes.Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan,sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone isexpressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found athttp://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 1

2:26

08

Oct

ober

201

4

http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

509Effects of Dyad Reading on ELL Reading Achievement

Effects of Dyad Reading Instruction on the ReadingAchievement of Hispanic Third-Grade English

Language Learners

Isela AlmaguerThe University of Texas-Pan American

Abstract

This study investigated the effects of a cooperative peer-assistedreading strategy, dyad reading instruction, on the reading achievementof Hispanic third-grade English language learners (ELLs).Specifically, dyad reading is unison reading of a “lead reader,” whoreads well, and an “assisted reader,” who does not read well,simultaneously reading aloud at a normal rate (Eldredge, 1995). Theparticipants in this study came from colonias, which arecharacterized as poverty-stricken semi-rural areas where peoplesettle and live (Sharp, 1998). The participants were 80 third-gradeELLs with 40 in the experimental group and 40 in the control group.A quasi-experimental nonrandomized pretest-posttest controlgroup research design was employed. An analysis of covariancewas used to analyze the data obtained. The results yielded by twoportions of the instrument were statistically significant on readingfluency and reading comprehension; however, the third portion ofthe instrument did not yield statistically significant results forreading comprehension. It is suggested that through a cooperativepeer-assisted reading strategy such as dyad reading, students willlearn from one another in this social context of reading.

Introduction

The National Research Council (1998) states that “reading is essential tosuccess in our society” (p. 17). Reading is also central to a child’s experiencesin school and in everyday life. Thus, teaching children to read is a major taskfor reading teachers today. Because children arrive in schools at differentreading developmental stages, reading teachers are faced with helping lesscapable readers improve their reading skills by providing the best readinginstruction possible. Teachers can benefit from peer-assisted learning strategies

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 1

2:26

08

Oct

ober

201

4

510 Bilingual Research Journal, 29: 3 Fall 2005

to help these less capable readers. Enright and McCloskey (1988) state that“using group paired and small group activities has shown an increase inacademic achievement” (p. 221). Utilizing peer-assisted strategies is importantparticularly for reading instruction because these strategies allow students toventure cooperatively on reading tasks and assist one another in the process.

Some researchers would argue that the majority of learning is shaped bysocial processes (Vygotsky, 1978). Learning to read through social interactionsbetween peers can be referred to as a form of cooperative learning. Over thepast years, an impressive body of research on practices based on the socialaspects of learning such as cooperative learning has been collected, suggestingthat students achieve more in cooperative learning groups than they do whenworking by themselves (Stevens, Madden, Slavin, & Farnish, 1987).

Cooperative learning methods are proposed as a major component ofbilingual education programs as well (Slavin, 1988) because of the rich contextfor language learning it provides. Using paired and small-group activitiesincreases the amount of meaningful and interesting language provided forEnglish language learners (ELLs) and increases the opportunities to use thetarget language (Enright & McCloskey, 1988). ELLs working cooperatively onassignments and projects with native English speakers increases theopportunities to hear and produce language and to negotiate meaning withothers (Carrrasquillo & Rodríguez, 1996). Furthermore, students’ self-esteem,intergroup relations, and ability to work with others are significantly enhancedthrough the use of cooperative learning (Slavin). Cooperative learning activitiesprovide a nonthreatening atmosphere in which ELLs are able to interact freelyand feel accepted and more confident about themselves, thus raising theirself-esteem (Carrasquillo & Rodríguez). In addition, Joyce, Weil, and Calhoun(2000) propose that cooperative learning is stimulating not only socially butalso intellectually. Thus, tasks using cooperative learning methods designedto enhance social interactions would also enhance academic learning.

Dyad reading is a type of cooperative learning method that can be usedto help children with reading. Evidence seems to be mounting that proposespoor readers can be helped to read better if they are assisted to read materialthat is too difficult for them to read fluently by themselves, especially whenthose reading experiences focus on the content of the text rather than on thewords (Eldredge, 1988). “Group assisted reading is a strategy intended toadapt dyad reading to groups of children who could not individually readgrade level material” (Eldredge, 1990, p. 126).

The purpose of this study was to describe the effect of dyad readinginstructions on the reading achievement of Hispanic third-grade ELLs. Dyadreading has not been investigated as an instructional strategy for ELLs becausestudies conducted on dyad reading have focused on native English speakers.Thus, there exists a need to note the effect such a cooperative peer-assistedreading strategy would have on this population.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 1

2:26

08

Oct

ober

201

4


Literature Review: Dyad Reading

Dyad reading is unison reading of a “lead reader,” who reads well, and an“assisted reader,” who does not read well. Dyad reading calls for theparticipants to simultaneously read aloud at a normal rate (Eldredge, 1995).Dyad reading has been shown to help the assisted reader, the student who isreading below grade level, improve reading fluency as well as readingcomprehension with assistance from the lead reader, the student reading at orabove grade level. “Dyad reading is an effective instructional tool to use withstudents who are unable to read books they want or need to read” (Eldredge,p. 130). Utilizing this cooperative peer-assisted reading strategy allows thesharing of reading experiences among students.

The original theoretical conception of dyad reading was based on theconcepts of Dr. R. G. Heckelman’s neurological impress method, which wasused in clinical settings to help disfluent readers in the early 1950s. Heckelman’sneurological impress method is described as a system of unison reading wherestudents and a teacher simultaneously read aloud at a normal rate (Heckelman,1969). In the mid-1980s, Eldredge modified Heckelman’s neurological impressmethod so it could be utilized in a regular classroom setting rather than aclinical one. He called this modified strategy dyad reading. Some of themodifications made to the original technique were that a lead reader replacedthe teacher. Also, an assisted reader who did not decode well was paired andworked with a different lead reader or buddy each week. In dyad teams, lesscapable readers were paired with and sat next to more capable readers whoread the text at a natural pace, avoiding word for word reading while theassisted reader read from the same text and repeated as many words as he orshe could throughout the process (Eldredge, 1988).

During the 1983 through 1986 school years, dyad reading was researchedin various elementary schools in the state of Utah focusing only on nativeEnglish speakers. In two studies completed by Eldredge (1988, 1990), studentsinvolved in dyad reading made greater achievement gains on readingcomprehension and vocabulary than the matched control students who werereceiving the basal instruction and placed in traditional reading groups.According to Eldredge, dyad reading helps poor readers decode better becausethey are provided with frequent exposures to print in texts along with a modelof the correct pronunciation. Being exposed to text along with its correctpronunciation, as well as reading phrases and sentences rather than individualwords, helps students discover that reading is a meaningful process andimproves reading comprehension (Eldredge, 1990). Eldredge (1995) suggestedthat “assisted reading strategies such as dyad reading, help readers decodebetter by providing them with extensive experiences seeing written wordswhile simultaneously hearing them pronounced. These repeated visual/auditory word recognition abilities in turn, improve reading comprehension”(p. 130). Curtis argued that “when verbal coding processes are slow or

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 1

2:26

08

Oct

ober

201

4


inefficient, they reduce the amount of attention available for other readingprocesses, thereby producing comprehension deficits” (as cited in Topping& Lindsay, 1992, p. 125). Word-by-word readers may not discover that readingis a meaningful process. According to the theory of automaticity (LeBerge &Samuels, 1974), good readers decode text automatically, so they are able tofocus more attention to the message that is being conveyed through the text.

There is a preponderance of empirical and clinical evidence that supportsthe relationship of fluent oral reading and overall reading ability (Carver &Hoffman, 1981; LeBerge & Samuels, 1974; Reutzel & Hollingsworth, 1993).Fluency has been shown to have a “reciprocal relationship” withcomprehension, with each enhancing the other. As reading developmentprogresses, the development of fluency is purported to be “a step in developingeffective and efficient readers” (Allington, 1983, p. 561). Research has alsodocumented the value of good models of fluent reading on students’ oralreading. The National Institutes of Child Health and Human Development(2000) examined the research on guided oral reading and reported that “repeatedoral reading procedures that included guidance from teachers, peers or parentshad a significant and positive impact on word recognition, fluency, andcomprehension across a variety of grade levels” (p. 12). Thus, utilizing dyadreading as a cooperative peer-assisted instructional strategy will help involvestudents in reading experiences they could not independently exercise andcan greatly benefit from.

The National Association for the Education of Young Children statesthat “children need opportunities to practice what they’ve learned about printwith their peers” (Neuman, Copple, & Bredekamp, 2000, p. 7). Through dyadreading, students are assisted in reading material that is too difficult to readon their own, and it provides a means for involving students in personallyinteresting material, which can in turn foster a positive attitude toward readingand help motivate students to read more (Eldredge, 1990). ELLs would havethe added benefit of increasing their second language through the socialinteractions.

Reading opportunities are essential to any effective reading program;thus, with dyad reading, children are able to assist one another with theirreading development. Additionally, ELL students are mixed with Englishproficient students so that students who are having difficulty reading thetextbook work alongside those who are reading at or above grade level(Carrasquillo & Rodríguez, 1996). When examining dyad reading, “the majorfocus is to improve the oral reading abilities of both members of the dyadteam” (Eldredge, 1995, p. 130). Because reading development is fosteredthrough active participation in reading with peers, Eldredge (1995) proposesthat “poor readers can significantly improve their decoding and readingcomprehension abilities when helped to read material too difficult for them toread by themselves” (p. 126). Furthermore, greater reading growths seems to

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 1

2:26

08

Oct

ober

201

4


occur when poor readers have the decoding burden removed from them andare given an opportunity to acquire essential comprehension skills andconcepts through their reading experiences (Eldredge & Quinn, 1988). Sincechildren are no longer struggling with decoding words, they can devote theirfull attention and mental energies to obtaining meaning from the text.

Background of the Study

Colonias

Due to a large influx of immigrants in the United States, there is anincreasing number of children who come from homes in which English is notthe primary language spoken. Further, 79% of these children are native Spanishspeakers of Hispanic origin (García, 2002). Consequently, they aredisproportionately likely to perform poorly in reading and in schools (VanHook & Fix, 2000).

The border regions are distinguished by a high poverty level and largenumber of Spanish speakers. An estimated 9 out of every 100 border Texanslive in a colonia. Sixty-eight percent of border region public school studentsare economically disadvantaged, and 77% are Hispanic ELLs (Sharp, 1998).Colonias are semi-rural and densely populated areas characterized by extremepoverty and many are located in areas alongside the United States and Mexicoborder, such as the Rio Grande Valley. These colonia areas are best describedas “subdivisions established in unincorporated areas” that lack such basicservices as paved roads, potable water, sewage connections, and electricity,and are “characterized by extreme poverty and population density” (Sharp, p.92). The average annual income for these colonia families is $7,000 to $11,000and typical households number five or more residents (Sharp).

Considering the environmental problems these children and their familiesface, preparing children for school in the home is not a primary concern. “Poorfamilies who cannot afford to buy books, computers, and other learningmaterials for their children lack the means to provide a rich home learningenvironment” (Sharp, 1998, p. 39). As a result, it becomes a challenge forcolonia schools to educate children. Because of the geographic location ofthe two participating schools, they were similar in regard to the high percentageof ELLs enrolled, as well as the high percentage of economically disadvantagedstudents. Due to the nature of the demographics of the participating schools,there was an interest in discovering the effect dyad reading instruction wouldhave on ELLs. Additionally, during the course of this study, in the 2002–2003school year, all third-grade students in the state of Texas were administeredthe new Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills (TAKS) in the spring. Ifthird-grade students did not pass the test, they would be retained in third

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 1

2:26

08

Oct

ober

201

4


grade. Therefore, success of these students was critical, and the teachersparticipating embraced dyad reading instruction as a technique that wouldfoster children’s reading abilities, especially in their second language, English.

English Language Learners

ELLs are those individuals who have a primary language other than Englishand are in the process of acquiring English as a second language. They mayalso sometimes be referred to as second-language learners. Most HispanicELLs come from homes in which they developed Spanish fluently and manyenter school with little or no prior exposure to the English language. Thus,ELLs need to be provided with many opportunities for varied communication.These opportunities for communication, whether in the classroom or in othersettings, not only help develop students’ language proficiency and subject-matter learning but also present an opportunity to acknowledge the strengthsin language and culture that students bring with them. ELLs need opportunitiesto talk and explore, especially in conjunction with reading and writing. Theselearners can benefit from classroom strategies, such as dyad reading, inenhancing their second-language development and proficiency.

The ability to read is highly valued and important for both economic andsocial advancement, yet a large number of children face difficulties in learninghow to read. According to the National Research Council (1999), “Failure tolearn to read adequately for continued school success is especially likelyamong poor children, among children who are members of racial minoritygroups, and among those whose native language is not English” (p. 5).Moreover, it is an educator’s responsibility to address the needs of ELLs andprovide sound educational practices in order to help students succeed in anincreasingly competitive economy. Therefore, if Hispanic ELLs develop theirsecond language through social interactions (Krashen, 2004), then involvementof these students in dyad reading groups would be beneficial for their readingachievement.

The purpose of the study was to describe the effect of dyad readinginstruction on the reading achievement of Hispanic third-grade ELLs. Thestudy addressed the following research question: What is the effect of dyadreading instruction on the reading fluency and comprehension of Hispanicthird-grade ELL students?

Method

Research Design

This study examined the efficacy of dyad reading in the context of teachingELLs. It employed a quasi-experimental nonrandomized pretest-posttest controlgroup research design and focused on the variables of reading comprehension

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 1

2:26

08

Oct

ober

201

4


and reading fluency. For each elementary school, six classrooms were stratified,and then two classrooms were randomly assigned to experimental and controlgroups based on the number of ELLs. Randomization was not practical becauseparticipants were already assigned to their classrooms.

Participants

Participants in the study were 80 third-grade ELL students of Mexicandescent from two elementary schools in neighboring colonia areas in southTexas. There were 40 in the experimental group and 40 in the control group.The participants in this study were comparable in regard to socioeconomicstatus, ethnicity, dominant language, and reading fluency and readingcomprehension based on the results yielded from the pretest. They had varyinglevels of both fluency and proficiency in Spanish and English. Their languageproficiency was determined by a language proficiency assessment, LanguageAssessment Scales (LAS). They were labeled limited English proficient basedon the results of the LAS, which is administered to all non-native speakers ofEnglish (Duncan & Davila, 1986). The students involved in the study were ina transitional (early exit) bilingual program in which they began their studiesin their native language, Spanish, and were transitioned into mainstreamclassrooms at the end of second grade in order to develop English-languageskills. There were bilingual and native English speakers, those who came fromEnglish-speaking homes, heterogeneously mixed in the participatingclassrooms. The students received instruction in English throughout the entireday.

The current percentage of Hispanic ELL students attending theparticipating schools was approximately 90%. These were two of the largestschools in the district with a high need population that is attributed to thesurrounding colonias.

Instruments

In order to measure the effect of dyad reading instruction on the readingfluency and reading comprehension of Hispanic third-grade ELL students,the Comprehensive Reading Assessment Battery (CRAB) was used. Alternateforms of the CRAB were used as a pretest and posttest, and passages werecounterbalanced across treatment conditions. All of the folktales were usedan equal number of times and balanced as pretest and posttest and administeredto an equal number of children.

The CRAB made use of four 400-word traditional folktales, which wererewritten (Jenkins, Heliotis, Haynes, & Beck, 1986) to approximate a second-to third-grade readability level (Fry, 1968) while maintaining their theme. TheCRAB required students to read aloud one folktale for 3 minutes and thenanswer 10 comprehension questions. On a second folktale, they had 2 minutesto complete a cloze procedure, read aloud for 3 minutes, and then answer 10

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 1

2:26

08

Oct

ober

201

4


comprehension questions. The comprehension questions, which weredeveloped by Jenkins, Heliotis, Haynes, and Beck (1986), require short answersreflecting recall of information contained in idea units of high thematicimportance. In the folktale titled “A Test of Skill,” the following are examplesof the types of questions asked: How many sons did the chief have?What did the sons bring with them to the oak tree? A cloze procedure isprepared by omitting every specifically numbered word and having asyntactically and semantically correct word placed in the blank. This instrumentemployed a modified cloze procedure by leaving the first sentence intact;thereafter, every seventh word was replaced with a three-item multiple choicelisting, where only one item provided a semantically and syntactically correctreplacement. The CRAB generated the following three scores: (a) number ofwords read correctly, (b) number of comprehension questions answeredcorrectly, and (c) number of word replacements chosen correctly in the clozeprocedure. For the number of words read correctly, test-retest reliability rangesfrom .93 to .96 are reported (Fuchs, Deno, & Marston, 1983). Concurrentvalidity with the reading comprehension subtest of the Stanford AchievementTest is .91. For the correct answers to the questions posed on the CRAB,construct validity with the reading comprehension subtest of the StanfordAchievement Test is reported as .82. For the number of correct answers in thecloze procedure, concurrent validity with the reading comprehension subtestof the Stanford Achievement Test is .82 (Fuchs, Fuchs, & Maxwell, 1988).

Treatment

In this study, the students in the experimental group received dyadreading instruction in conjunction with regular language arts instruction withthe classroom teacher. During this time, the students in the experimental groupparticipated in dyad teams for 30-minute sessions every day with a total of 2hours and 30 minutes per week. Children in the experimental group did notreceive any extra time aside from 30 minutes daily out of the 90-minute dailyblock allotted for language arts instruction. Dyad reading instruction tookplace for 9 weeks during the fall of 2002.

The students were ranked based on their pretest reading performanceresults. The readers who read more fluently were the lead readers, while thereaders who read less fluently were the assisted readers. This list was split inhalf so that one list represented the weaker half of the readers or those with alower pretest score as the assisted readers, and the other the stronger half orthose with a higher pretest score as the lead readers. Students at the top of thelist were paired. Next, students ranked second on each list were paired to formthe dyads. Dyad reading took place at the same time daily. When a studentwas absent, the partner joined another group or read with the teacher. Dyadteams rotated every week.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 1

2:26

08

Oct

ober

201

4


The procedure developed by Eldredge (1995) was used to implementdyad reading instruction in the classroom. The students were first identifiedas lead readers or assisted readers. Lead readers and assisted readers werethen matched. The teams could choose any types of texts; as long as the leadreader could read the book, it could be used. The types of texts utilized duringthe dyad reading sessions varied but were not limited to fiction and thestudents could choose nonfiction texts, basal texts, novels, chapter books,picture books, poetry books, multicultural books, biographies, content-areabooks, or any other books of interest to them. The dyad members sat side byside and shared one book. The lead reader began to read the book in a naturalfluent manner while pointing to the words as they were being read, while theassisted reader read the text in unison with the lead reader while repeating asmany words throughout the reading of the book.

The teachers of the students in the experimental group attended a half-day orientation and teacher training of dyad reading instruction that includeda demonstration of the strategy as well as a peer teaching session. The peerteaching session helped ensure that the teachers became very familiar withthe strategy by working together and coaching each other and therebyexpressing any concerns or questions about it before the actualimplementation. During the time of the treatment, the teachers’ role was tocirculate around the room while observing the interactions and giving guidanceand support to the dyad teams as needed. On occasion, when a dyad teammember was absent, the teacher read with the other team member.

The students in both the experimental group and the control groupreceived the current school district-mandated language arts instruction forthe language arts block. The language arts instruction consisted of Rigby’sBalanced Literacy curriculum and a district-adopted basal reading curriculumpublished by Scott Foresman. Students participated in a variety of holisticliteracy strategies, for example, reading aloud and writing aloud, shared readingand shared writing, guided reading and guided writing, and independentreading and independent writing based on Rigby’s balanced literacy. Thiswas taught within the context of their district-adopted basal curriculum.Students were taught through a series of decodable text with emphasis onphonics skills and grammar skills practice.

In order to ensure that the treatment was consistently implemented,student attendance records were verified to ensure that students in both theexperimental group and control group were in attendance for 91% of the dyadreading instruction sessions conducted during the period of the study. Theschools were visited weekly during the treatment time to verify that theexperimental group and control group received the treatment and regularclassroom instruction, respectively. A dyad reading instruction treatmentfidelity instrument was used to help ensure that the treatment was carried out

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 1

2:26

08

Oct

ober

201

4


∆

∆

∆

∆

∆

∆

appropriately and that participants in the study, lead reader, assisted reader,and classroom teacher were following their roles consistently. Finally,anecdotal records were gathered.

Results

The 95% confidence level (p < .05) was used as the criterion level fordetermining statistical significance. An effect size of one-third of a standarddeviation ( = 0.33) was used as the criterion for educational significance. Thehypotheses underlying the present study were that participation in dyadreading instruction would yield higher overall achievement in reading fluencyand reading comprehension than those who did not participate in dyad readinginstruction. Table 1 presents the results of the analysis of covariance forreading fluency based on the words read per minute from the CRAB. Theanalysis of covariance yielded an F-ratio of 64.16 that is statistically significant(p < .001) and an effect size ( = 0.74) that is nearly three fourths of a standarddeviation and is considered educationally significant. Table 1 also indicatesthat the adjusted mean obtained for the experimental group (257.32) isstatistically significantly higher than the adjusted mean for the control group(197.21). Therefore, the research hypothesis is accepted that supports thatdyad reading instruction had a greater impact on their reading fluency ascompared to the control group.

Table 1 also indicates the results obtained for reading fluency using apost hoc analysis, specifically a Tukey Gap Test. When lead and assistedreaders were compared, the pairwise comparisons yielded a mean differencethat is not statistically significant (p = .219) and an effect size ( = 0.21) that isnot educationally significant. When lead readers and students in the controlgroup were compared, the pairwise comparisons yielded a mean that isstatistically significant (p < .001) and an effect size ( = 0.87) that is educationallysignificant. When assisted and control readers were compared, the pairwisecomparisons yielded a mean difference that is statistically significant(p < .001) and an effect size ( = 0.61) that is educationally significant. Theresults of the pairwise comparisons suggest that both lead and assistedreaders’ reading fluency benefited from their involvement in dyad readinginstruction as compared to the control group.

Table 2 presents the results of the analysis of covariance for readingcomprehension based on comprehension questions. The analysis ofcovariance yielded an F-ratio of 10.68 that is statistically significant(p = .002), and an effect size ( = 0.60) that is more than a half of a standarddeviation and is considered educationally significant. Table 2 also indicatesthat the adjusted mean obtained for the experimental group (3.98) is statisticallysignificantly higher than the adjusted mean obtained for the control group(2.96). Therefore, the research hypothesis is accepted that supports that dyad

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 1

2:26

08

Oct

ober

201

4


Table 1

Results Obtained from Analysis of Covariance for Reading Fluency

Note. Lead: lead reader; Assisted: assisted reader; Control: control group.

∆

∆

∆

reading instruction had a greater impact on their reading comprehension basedon the comprehension questions as compared to the control group.

Table 2 also indicates the results obtained for reading comprehensionusing a post hoc analysis, specifically a Tukey Gap Test. When lead andassisted readers were compared, the pairwise comparisons yielded a meandifference that is not statistically significant (p = .938) and an effect size thatis not educationally significant ( = 0.07). When lead and control-groupreaders were compared, the pairwise comparisons yielded a mean that isstatistically significant (p = .023) and an effect size that is educationally

Analysis of covariance

Source Sum ofsquare

df Meansquare

F p

Group 72225.63 1 72225.63 64.16 < .001

Readingfluency

572580.53 1 572580.53 508.60 < .001

Error 86686.85 77 1125.80

Means

Group NPretest Posttest Adjusted

meanM SD M SD

Experimental 40 142.10 67.87 259.18 101.34 257.32 0.74

Control 40 139.19 66.42 195.35 81.46 197.21

Total 80 140.64 66.73 227.26 96.83

Pairwise comparisons

Comparison Mean difference p

Lead-assisted 21.22 .219 0.21

Lead-control 70.90 < .001 0.87

Assisted-control 49.68 < .001 0.61

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 1

2:26

08

Oct

ober

201

4


Table 2

Results Obtained From Analysis of Covariance for Reading Comprehension

Note. Lead: lead reader; Assisted: assisted reader; Control: control group.

∆

∆

∆

∆

significant ( = 0.65). When assisted and control-group readers were compared,the pairwise comparisons yielded a mean difference that is statisticallysignificant (p = .044) and an effect size that is educationally significant ( =0.56). The results of the pairwise comparisons suggest that both lead andassisted readers’ reading comprehension benefited from their involvement indyad reading instruction as compared to the control group.


Source Sum ofsquare

df Meansquare

F p

Group 20.74 1 20.74 10.68 .002

Readingcomprehension

165.74 1 165.74 85.35 < .001

Error 149.53 77 1.94

Means


meanM SD M SD

Experimental 40 1.99 1.65 4.18 2.28 3.98 0.60

Control 40 1.60 1.26 2.76 1.71 2.96

Total 80 1.79 1.47 3.47 2.12

Pairwise comparisons

Comparison Mean difference p

Lead-assisted .17 .938 0.07

Lead-control 1.12 .023 0.65

Assisted-control .95 .044 0.56

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 1

2:26

08

Oct

ober

201

4


Table 3 presents the results of the analysis of covariance for readingcomprehension based on the cloze procedure. The analysis of covarianceyielded an F-ratio of 1.13 that is not statistically significant (p = .291) and aneffect size that is not educationally significant ( = 0.22). Table 3 alsoindicates that the adjusted mean obtained for the experimental group (7.24) isnot statistically significantly higher than the adjusted mean obtained for thecontrol group (6.41). Therefore, the research hypothesis is not accepted. Dyadreading instruction did not have a significant impact on their readingcomprehension based on the cloze procedure of the instrument. However,although statistical significance was not attained, there was a difference thatfavored students who received dyad reading instruction as compared to thecontrol group.

∆

Table 3

Results Obtained From Analysis of Covariance for ReadingComprehension as Measured by the Cloze Procedure


Source Sum ofsquare

df Meansquare

F p

Group 13.46 1 13.46 1.13 .291

Readingcomprehension

400.97 1 400.97 33.70 < .001

Error 916.13 77 11.90

Means


meanM SD M SD

Experimental 40 4.03 3.33 7.50 4.36 7.24 0.22

Control 40 3.30 2.93 6.15 3.85 6.41

Total 80 3.66 3.14 6.83 4.14

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 1

2:26

08

Oct

ober

201

4


Discussion and Implications

This study was designed to assess the effects of a peer-assisted readingstrategy, namely dyad reading, as an intervention on the reading achievementof ELLs, specifically reading fluency and reading comprehension. Varioustypes of cooperative group or paired experiences have proven to be highlyeffective in accelerating the achievement of reading and language skills ofelementary students (Slavin, 1987). In addition, there is significant evidenceto document the advantages of social interaction in learning a second language(Carrasquillo & Rodríguez, 1996) Due to the scarcity of current researchfocusing on the efficacy of utilizing dyad reading as an instructional approachin the context of ELLs, there was a need to discover the impact such a peer-assisted cooperative strategy would have. As found in this study, second-language learners, such as ELLs, learn through social interactions; thus,involvement of these students in dyad reading groups is beneficial for theirreading achievement. Thus, an implication of this study may be that socializingthe reading experience is beneficial. Short and Pierce’s conclusion alsosupports this, saying that “reading among peers has long been reported as avalid approach to socialize the act of reading and in turn enrich the personalbenefits received” (as cited in Hatt, 1993, p. 23).

There is much research that supports learning to read within socialcontexts. Most of the research that has examined group assisted instructionhas focused on programs where a more able reader functions as the tutor anda less able reader functions as the tutee in a cooperative reading pair (Topping,1989). Topping considered the value of these types of cooperative readingexperiences as effective strategies to enhance reading performance. Similarly,this study has demonstrated a favorable impact of dyad reading on ELLs’reading fluency and reading comprehension adding to the literature that claimsthe benefits of utilizing cooperative paired reading strategies to positivelysupport learning to read within social contexts.

In this study, dyad reading instruction produced statistical as well aseducational gains in reading fluency and reading comprehension asdemonstrated specifically from the comprehension questions portions of theCRAB. As discussed earlier, fluency and comprehension share thecommonality of enhancing students’ ability to gain meaning from their readingexperiences. By developing fluency in reading, students will have a greateropportunity to gain meaning from the text and in turn help enrich their readingcomprehension. With improved reading abilities, students may also feel moreenjoyment in reading and see it as a personally satisfying activity.

When looking at the impact on reading comprehension based on thecloze procedure of the same instrument, dyad reading did not demonstrate afavorable impact nor was it statistically or educationally significant. Themodified cloze procedure requires students to read silently and to identify

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 1

2:26

08

Oct

ober

201

4


correct word choices for semantically and syntactically correct sentencecompletion for every seventh word of each passage read. This activity is amore cognitively demanding task than oral reading and answering ofcomprehension questions aloud. Higher cognitive abilities are required toread silently while selecting the correct word choice than oral tasks. Also,students may not have been as frequently exposed to this type of test formatand thus unfamiliarity with it may have resulted in no statistical significanceattained.

Often ELLs may tend to be shy or reluctant about speaking out becauseof a poor command of English. By using a peer-assisted cooperative approachsuch as dyad reading, ELLs receive constant modeling and feedback of correctpronunciation and intonation in reading. By pairing a more skilled reader anda less skilled reader, the skilled reader demonstrates appropriate inflection,reading rate and pausing for the less-skilled reader. Moreover, the less skilledreader has repeated exposure to text as well as a role model of fluent reading(Mathes, Fuchs, Fuchs, Henley, & Sanders, 1994). In relation to thedevelopment of reading skills, cooperative peer reading has been found toimprove the reading ability of both tutor and tutee (Barbetta, Miller, Peters,Heron, & Cochran, 1991; Topping, 1998; Winter, 1996).

In addition, the benefits of pairing more capable and less capable readersare important. As stated by Good and Brophy (as cited in Allington, 1990),low-achieving readers typically receive fewer opportunities to read than high-achieving readers. Dyad reading would then give low-achieving readers moreopportunities to interact and read with a more capable reader. The time spentreading together would also be beneficial for both tutors and tutees by allowingthem class time to read natural texts (e.g., fiction, poetry, non-fiction, picturebooks, poetry, etc.) cooperatively. Furthermore, the advantages are apparentfor both members of the dyad, tutor and tutee. The tutor gets an opportunityto provide support, guidance, and academic assistance to another student aswell as being responsible for his own learning (Hedin, 1987). The tutee benefitsas well from the social context of learning by receiving the one-to-oneinteraction, feedback, and praise often neglected in the classroom providedby the lead reader. This in turn can help take pressure off of the teacher byallowing him or her more time to meet classroom needs, while ensuringindividual attention for the low-achieving reader. Many educators neglect theuse of peers as powerful agents for increasing reading achievement andimproving attitudes and self-concepts (Johnson & Johnson, 1975). Pairedreading can improve language skills as well as help motivate students to readon their own.

The results of this study clearly support peer interactions in readingsituations through the use of dyad reading. With second-language learnersthere is an added benefit to using dyad reading instruction because it will aidin improving their reading fluency and comprehension by allowing the time

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 1

2:26

08

Oct

ober

201

4


reading aloud that may not be afforded to them because of the time constraintsof the classroom. Furthermore, the peer interactions will also help foster theirsecond-language development. With too much emphasis on scripted programsand drilling skills, ELLs often have very little time and few opportunities fornatural reading in the context of the classroom. In order for students to becomemore effective readers, we must provide them with more opportunities forreading. Further, these opportunities for reading of natural texts will helpimprove students’ attitude and self-concept toward learning to read. Thefindings in this study acknowledge that an improvement in reading fluencyand reading comprehension can be achieved through the use of dyad readingas a peer-assisted cooperative learning strategy by allowing participantsopportunities to enjoy natural reading. All participants can reap the overtbenefits of dyad reading.

References

Allington, R. L. (1983). Fluency: The neglected goal. Reading Teacher, 36,556–561.

Allington, R. L. (1990). Poor readers don’t get to read much in reading groups.Language Arts, 57(8), 872–875.

Barbetta, P. M., Miller, A. D., Peters, M. T., Heron, T. E., & Cochran, L. L.(1991). Tugmate: A cross age tutoring program to teach sight vocabulary.Education and Treatment of Young Children, 14(1), 19–37.

Carrasquillo, A. L., & Rodríguez, V. (1996). Language minority students inthe mainstream classroom. Avon, England: Multilingual Matters.

Carver, R. P., & Hoffman, J. V. (1981). The effect of practice through repeatedreading on gain in reading ability using a computer-based instructionalsystem. Reading Research Quarterly, 16, 374–390.

Curtis, M. E. (1980). Development of components of reading skill. Journal ofEducational Psychology, 72(5), 656–669.

Duncan, S. E., & Davila, E. A. (1986). PreLAS English/Español. Monterrey,CA: CTB/McGraw Hill.

Eldredge, J. L. (1988). Improving the reading comprehension skills of poorreaders. Reading Horizons, 29, 35–42.

Eldredge, J. L. (1995). Teaching decoding in holistic classrooms. Engle-wood Cliffs, NJ: Merrill/Prentice Hall.

Eldredge, J. L. (1990). Increasing the performance of poor readers in the thirdgrade with a group assisted strategy. Journal of Educational Research,84, 69–77.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 1

2:26

08

Oct

ober

201

4


Eldredge, J. L., & Quinn, D. W. (1988). Increasing reading performance oflow-achieving second graders by using dyad reading groups. Journal ofEducational Research, 82, 40–46.

Enright, D. S., & McCloskey, M. L. (1988). Integrating English: DevelopingEnglish language and literacy in the multilingual classroom. New York:Addison-Wesley.

Fry, E. (1968). A readability formula that saves time. Journal of Reading, 11,513–516.

Fuchs, L. S., Deno, S. L., & Marston, D. (1983). Improving the reliability ofcurriculum-based measures of academic skills for psycho educationaldecision-making. Diagnostique, 8, 135–149.

Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., & Maxwell, L. (1988). The validity of informal readingcomprehension measures. Remedial and Special Education, 9, 20–28.

García, E. (2002). Student cultural diversity: Understanding and meeting thechallenge (3rd ed.). New York: Houghton Mifflin.

Hatt, C. (1993). Shared reading, shared learning. The New England ReadingAssociation Journal, 29, 42–47.

Heckelman, R. G. (1969). A neurological-impress method of remedial-readinginstruction. Academic Therapy, 4, 277–282.

Hedin, D. (1987). Students as teachers: A tool for improving school. SocialPolicy, 17, 42–47.

Jenkins, J. R., Heliotis, J. D., Haynes, M. D., & Beck, K. (1986). Does passivelearning account for disabled readers’ comprehension deficits in ordinaryreading situations? Learning Disability Quarterly, 9, 69–75.

Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1975). Learning together and alone. UpperSaddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Joyce, B., Weil, M., & Calhoun, E. (2000). Models of teaching. Boston:Allyn & Bacon.

Krashen, S. D. (2004). The power of reading: Insights from the research (2nded.). Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

LaBerge, D., & Samuels, S. J. (1974). Toward a theory of automatic processingin reading. Cognitive Psychology, 6, 193–223.

Mathes, P. G., Fuchs, D., Fuchs, L. S., Henley, A. M., & Sanders, A. (1994).Increasing strategic reading practice with Peabody Classwide Peer Tutoring.Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 9, 44–48.

National Institutes of Child Health and Human Development. (2000). Report ofthe national reading panel: Teaching children to read—an evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and itsimplications for reading instruction. Bethesda, MD: National Institutesof Health.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 1

2:26

08

Oct

ober

201

4


National Research Council. (1998). Preventing reading difficulties in youngchildren. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

National Research Council. (1999). Starting out right. Washington, DC: NationalAcademy Press.

Neuman, S. B., Copple, C., & Bredekamp, S. (2000). Learning to read andwrite. Washington, DC: National Association for the Education of YoungChildren.

Reutzel, D. R., & Hollingsworth, P. M. (1993). Effects of fluency training onsecond graders’ reading comprehension. Journal of EducationalResearch, 86, 325–331.

Sharp, J. (1998). Bordering the future: Challenge and opportunity in the Texasborder region. (Publication No. 96-599). Austin: Texas Comptroller ofPublic Accounts.

Slavin, R. E. (1987). Cooperative learning and the cooperative school. EducationalLeadership, 45, 7–13.

Slavin, R. E. (1988). Cooperative learning and student achievement. EducationalLeadership, 46 (2), 31–33.

Stevens, R. J., Madden, N. A., Slavin, R. E., & Farnish, A. M. (1987). Coope-rative integrated reading and composition: Two field experiments. ReadingResearch Quarterly, 22, 433–454.

Topping, K. (1989). Peer tutoring and paired reading: Combining two powerfultechniques. The Reading Teacher, 42, 488–494.

Topping, K. (1998). Paired learning in literacy. Peer assisted learning. London:Lawrence Erlbaum.

Topping, K., & Lindsay, G. (1992). The structure and development of the pairedreading technique. Journal of Research in Reading, 15, 120–136.

Van Hook, J., & Fix, M. (2000). A profile of the immigrant student population.In J. Ruiz de Velasco, M. Fix, & B. Chu Clewell (Eds.), Overlooked andunderserved: Immigrant students in U.S. secondary schools. Washington,DC: Urban Institute.

Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higherpsychological processes. M. Cole, V. John-Steiner, S. Scribner, & E.Souberman (Eds.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Winter, S. (1996). Paired reading: Three questions. Psychology in Practice, 12,182–190.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 1

2:26

08

Oct

ober

201

4

Documents

Effects of Dyad Reading Instruction on the Reading Achievement of Hispanic Third-Grade English Language Learners