Can a non-phonics based intervention scheme enable children who are falling behind in literacy to make better progress than normal classroom teaching? : a pilot/feasibility study

• Main Author: Davis, Louise A.
• Other Authors: Brooks, Greg
• Published: University of Sheffield 2018
• Subjects: 370
• Online Access: https://ethos.bl.uk/OrderDetails.do?uin=uk.bl.ethos.745669

The aim of this study was to investigate whether a non-phonics-based intervention, Fischer Family Trust (FFT) Wave 3, might help children in Years 1 and 2 who were falling behind in literacy to catch up with their peers. The study consisted of an ‘outer’ and an ‘inner’ study. The outer study was a pilot/feasibility study (PFS) which investigated whether the quantitative approach used in the inner study would be suitable for scaling up to investigate the research questions. The inner study was a quantitative evaluation of FFT Wave 3. It consisted mainly of a randomised control trial (RCT) using standardised literacy tests, supplemented by a number of non-standardised assessments. A small (n=24) two-armed RCT lasting 10 weeks was undertaken in a state primary school in Derbyshire. Standardised tests of reading comprehension (primary outcome), of spelling and of oral word and sentence reading (secondary outcomes), were administered to both groups pre and post, and after the control group had received the intervention. At pre- and post-tests both groups answered an attitudes questionnaire, and the intervention group provided one-sentence writing samples, and their reading ages were estimated (exploratory outcomes). Results for the primary and secondary outcomes fell into a confusing pattern, and were inconclusive, and results for the exploratory outcome of attitudes to reading were null. Results for the exploratory outcomes of reading ages and writing showed statistically significant gains, but could not be considered definitive because no parallel data were gathered from the control group. Thus the inner, quantitative study failed to show conclusively whether the FFT Wave 3 intervention had real impact. On the other hand, the PFS successfully showed that, with adjustments, a quantitative, mainly RCT, approach could be a suitable method for assessing a non-phonics-based intervention.