Instructional Research and Research Synthesis Russell Gersten Instructional Research Group & University of Oregon

Focus Findings that challenge folk wisdom Multiplicities of interpretation The human factor (J. Singer)

Interventions for Struggling Readers: Torgesen Research Addressed common myth: work on word reading is all struggling readers need Most importantly, addresses a wild card: long term “fix” for struggling readers in grades 3-9 A professional issue for me since 1969

A few issues that bubble over Homogeneous groups seem to work best for building foundational skills/ Heterogeneous for comprehension The right texts for students to read as they work on comprehension Limits of the strategy instruction model (Beck & McKeown) & limited understanding of need to possess relevant background knowledge (before activating) We can only hope for increments

Carlo et al: Cognates  Context: common feature of texts on teaching methods  Most useful for technical words and Latin roots (for Latin languages)  Ironies: English learners born in U. S. don’t have large tech vocabularies  Catch 22: They don’t always work  Does one teach awareness? Or really work on this ability

Thus the study  Findings open up new issues  Again, impact on words taught, NS on untaught cognates  Implication: More to build broad awareness? Not a big deal?  Deeper implications: Common finding for vocabulary instruction (depth, but not transfer)

The Research Synthesis: Part 1: Instructional Interventions  Strength: Does not overshoot the data  Points out that the adjustments are NOT CLEARLY EXPLAINED  Helps point out that these need to be focus of next wave of instructional research: experimental and observational/ descriptive

The Research Synthesis: Part 2: Language of Instruction  Politically controversial (unlike the first)  Raises issue of how each meta-analysis is an act of interpretation and decision rules (defining terms, classifying interventions, methodological inclusion) affect outcomes

My Two Cents Worth  RCT as gold standard is not enough  Though some methodological issues stressed, others ignored  Total confounding of teachers with intervention  Differential attrition  Use of covariates that are salient predictors (e.g. oral language has zero predictive validity)  Control for instructional time

A very different picture would emerge