A synthesis of read-aloud interventions on early reading outcomes among preschool through third graders at risk for reading difficulties

A synthesis and meta-analysis of the extant research on the effects of storybook read-aloud interventions for children at risk for reading difficulties ages 3 to 8 is provided. A total of 29 studies met criteria for the synthesis, with 18 studies providing sufficient data for inclusion in the meta-analysis. Read-aloud instruction has been examined using dialogic reading; repeated reading of stories; story reading with limited questioning before, during, and/or after reading; computer-assisted story reading; and story reading with extended vocabulary activities. Significant, positive effects on children's language, phonological awareness, print concepts, comprehension, and vocabulary outcomes were found. Despite the positive effects for read-aloud interventions, only a small amount of outcome variance was accounted for by intervention type.     

Efficacy of a Reading Intervention for Middle School Students Identified with Learning Disabilities

This experimental study reports findings on the effects from a year-long reading intervention providing daily, 50-minute sessions to middle-school students with identified learning disabilities (n = 65) compared with similar students who did not receive the reading intervention (n = 55). All students continued to receive their special education services as provided by the school. Results indicated statistically significant findings favoring the treatment group for sight word reading fluency following intervention. Small effects were found for phonemic decoding fluency and passage comprehension. No other statistically significant differences were noted between groups. The findings suggest that while gains on word reading fluency resulted from the additional reading treatment, accelerating the reading performance of students identified with learning disabilities may be unlikely to result from a one-year, daily intervention provided to students in groups of 10-15.     

Indigenous knowledge and science revisited

This article provides a guided tour through three diverse cultural ways of understanding nature: an Indigenous way (with a focus on Indigenous nations in North America), a neo-indigenous way (a concept proposed to recognize many Asian nations’ unique ways of knowing nature; in this case, Japan), and a Euro-American scientific way. An exploration of these three ways of knowing unfolds in a developmental way such that some key terms change to become more authentic terms that better represent each culture’s collective, yet heterogeneous, worldview, metaphysics, epistemology, and values. For example, the three ways of understanding nature are eventually described as Indigenous ways of living in nature, a Japanese way of knowing seigyo-shizen, and Eurocentric sciences (plural). Characteristics of a postcolonial or anti-hegemonic discourse are suggested for science education, but some inherent difficulties with this discourse are also noted.

A synthesis of spelling and reading interventions and their effects on the spelling outcomes of students with LD

Previous research studies examining the effects of spelling and reading interventions on the spelling outcomes of students with learning disabilities (LD) are synthesized. An extensive search of the professional literature between 1995 and 2003 yielded a total of 19 intervention studies that provided spelling and reading interventions to students with LD and measured spelling outcomes. Findings revealed that spelling outcomes were consistently improved following spelling interventions that included explicit instruction with multiple practice opportunities and immediate corrective feedback after the word was misspelled. Furthermore, evidence from spelling interventions that employed assistive technology aimed at spelling in written compositions indicated positive effects on spelling outcomes.     

Racial self-categorization in adolescence: multiracial development and social pathways

Research on multiracial individuals is often cross-sectional, obscuring the fluid nature of multiracial self-categorization across time. Pathways of racial self-identification are developed from a nationally representative sample of adolescents aged 14-18, measured again 5 years later. A significant proportion of multiracial adolescents change racial self-identification across time. Youth who ever report being multiracial are 4 times as likely to switch self-identification as to report consistent multiracial identities. Across this time, more multiracial adolescents either add a racial category (diversify) or subtract one (consolidate) than maintain consistent multiracial self-categorization. Exploratory multinomial analyses show few differences between these pathways on select psychological and social characteristics. Results lend quantitative support to qualitative studies indicating the fluidity of racial self-categorization.     

The relative effects of group size on reading progress of older students with reading difficulties

This study reports findings on the relative effects from a yearlong secondary intervention contrasting large-group, small-group, and school-provided interventions emphasizing word study, vocabulary development, fluency, and comprehension with seventh- and eighth-graders with reading difficulties. Findings indicate that few statistically significant results or clinically significant gains were associated with group size or intervention. Findings also indicate that a significant acceleration of reading outcomes for seventh- and eighth-graders from high-poverty schools is unlikely to result from a 50 min daily class. Instead, the findings indicate, achieving this outcome will require more comprehensive models including more extensive intervention (e.g., more time, even smaller groups), interventions that are longer in duration (multiple years), and interventions that vary in emphasis based on specific students’ needs (e.g., increased focus on comprehension or word study).     

Where do ethical responsibilities in editing and publishing lie?

There are many ethical responsibilities in preparing and publishing a scientific paper. The various responsibilities of authors, referees, editors and publishers are considered. While editors and publishers have a responsibility to seek to identify unethical or fraudulent papers, this is not always possible and primary responsibility for the accuracy of papers must lie with the authors. Editors however have a greater responsibility to try to ensure ethical behaviour in the refereeing process and to draw referees’ attention to the privileged nature of the paper under review. The requirements for the ethical handling of papers by the editors and publishers are also discussed, as are recent developments in public interest in the question of ethics in publishing papers.