is reading instruction evidence-based? analyzing teaching practices using t-patterns
Clicks: 271
ID: 156625
2018
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This
article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score —
reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
Reader Engagement
Emerging Content
30.0
/100
271 views
66 readers
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
EmergingRanked #477 of 1,131 articles by views in accounts of chemical research
Most read
Least read
Bar heights use a square-root scale. Only the 120 most-read articles are drawn; the journal has 1,131 in total.
Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet mintedCreate a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.
5
SUSD
one-off · no wallet required
Abstract
The main goal of this study was to analyze whether primary teachers use evidence-based reading instruction for primary-grade readers. The study sample consisted of six teachers whose teaching was recorded. The observation instrument used was developed ad hoc for this study. The recording instrument used was Match Vision Studio. The data analysis was performed using SAS, GT version 2.0 E, and THEME. The results indicated that the teaching practices used most frequently and for the longest duration were: feedback (i.e., correcting the student when reading); fluency (i.e., individual and group reading, both out loud and silently, with and without intonation); literal or inference comprehension exercises (i.e., summarizing, asking questions); and use of educational resources (i.e., stories, songs, poems). Later, we conducted analyses of T-Patterns that showed the sequence of instruction in detail. We can conclude that <50% of the teaching practices used by the majority of teachers were based on the recommendations of the National Reading Panel (NRP). Only one teacher followed best practices. The same was the case for instructional time spent on the five essential components of reading, with the exception of teacher E., who dedicated 70.31% of class time implementing best practices. Teaching practices (i.e., learners' activities) designed and implemented to exercise and master alphabetic knowledge and phonological awareness skills were used less frequently in the classroom.
| Reference Key |
surez2018frontiersis
Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using
SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
|
|---|---|
| Authors | ;Natalia Suárez;Carmen R. Sánchez;Juan E. Jiménez;M. Teresa Anguera |
| Journal | accounts of chemical research |
| Year | 2018 |
| DOI |
10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00007
|
| URL | |
| Keywords |
Citations
No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org
Comments
No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.