Discussion
The results indicate that on the basis of the results from the ANOVA the null hypothesis was accepted. Effect size measures indicated small differences between the means of scores for the two groups. Based on these results, there appears to be little carry-over effect of exposure to STS/VP in first grade to scores on assessments in second grade. However, this does not mean the results would be similar for other forms of data, CBM probes, for example. There are several possible explanations for the present results.
First, it may be that there is little residual effect of STS/VP exposure in first grade to second grade literacy achievement. Pairing STS/VP with typical literacy instruction has been shown to be helpful to some children in the regular education classroom, especially when skills such as phonemic awareness and decoding are being developed. Much of the positive effects have to do with the instructional efficacy with which the teacher uses STS/VP. Not all teachers use this technique. Therefore, not all children are exposed to this adjunctive instruction. It seems, however, from our data that this exposure may not be as important to the overall literacy progress. This may be the case when literacy progress is measured by District-wide assessment.
Second, it may be that other forms of assessment might be more sensitive to measurement of a residual effect. This might be the case if measurement was made repetitively during literacy instruction rather than three times per year. Teachers undoubtedly have these types of data, used to make informed decisions about progress monitoring. CBM probes are an example of such data sources. We do suspect that some children may continue to benefit from early exposure of STS/VP, even through second grade.
Third, there is a change in the emphasis of literacy programs, probably beginning around second grade. Many early skills, such as phonemic awareness and decoding, for example, are assumed. As new vocabulary is introduced through the literacy curriculum, the retrieval of these skills becomes important. It could be that assessments, such as those used in this school district, assume previous skill development rather than measuring it.
Finally, we do encourage more investigation into the longevity of STS/VP as an adjunct to literacy development. Many of the people who attend professional development meetings designed to teach this technique are employed in the regular education setting. Practice Based Evidence (PBE) studies documenting the experience of those attendees would be valuable in charting the longevity of STS/VP benefit. It is through that type of study, the effect that the addition of a gestural system to typical auditory-visual sound/letter development can be determined. It may be the effect is dependent on the efficacy with which an individual teacher employs STS/VP. These studies document “real world” solutions. Sharing that information would be very important, whether in published form, or between colleagues at a school.