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.