Advertisement

Selecting the Best Evaluation Tool: Which is Better? Why? The 2009–2010 Group Report

  • William D. Harpine
  • Christopher D. Bell
  • Sarah Stevens
Chapter

Abstract

Children who come from low socioeconomic neighborhoods or who lack certain socioeconomic advantages may be at risk for school failure. Of all academic skills, reading is particularly associated with success in school and in life. Camp Sharigan and the Reading Orienteering Club (ROC) are two group-centered prevention programs designed to employ group process to enhance children’s motivation to read while developing their reading skills. Results of an 8-month small-group study showed significant improvement in such critical reading skills as spelling, reading, comprehension, and sight words. While the ROC program showed success, the question of assessment is also an issue. Which assessment test would be best to measure success with the at-risk students? Two testing procedures were analyzed: Wide Range Achievement Test (WRAT-4) and the Howard Street reading assessment packet. The Howard Street packet gave a more accurate assessment of reading ability with at-risk students from low socioeconomic neighborhoods. Suggestions are offered for further research in developing and testing programs for preventing reading failure.

Keywords

Reading failure Low socioeconomic neighborhoods Reading assessment WRAT-4 Howard Street Group-centered prevention programs After-school programs At-risk children Group process Cohesion Reading Academic performance 

Notes

Acknowledgments

  1. 1.

    Special appreciation to Keri Weed, Ph.D. and Sarah Stevens, Ph.D., University of South Carolina Aiken, for allowing their students to work on the project.

     
  2. 2.

    A special thank-you to St. John’s United Methodist Church in Aiken for providing community volunteers and financial sponsorship, and for allowing us to use their classroom space for this project. Thank-you also to the Rotary of Aiken and other community sponsors for their financial support.

     
  3. 3.

    Portions of this research presented at the 118th Annual Convention of the American Psychological Association at San Diego, California. August 13, 2010.

     
  4. 4.

    William D. Harpine, Ph.D., is Distinguished Professor of Communication Emeritus at the University of South Carolina Aiken. Christopher D. Bell was Assistant Professor of Psychology at Augusta State University. Sarah Stevens was Assistant Professor of Psychology at the University of South Carolina Aiken.

     
  5. 5.

    At the time of this research, Christopher Bell was in the Department of Psychology at Augusta State University and Sarah Stevens was in the Department of Psychology at University of South Carolina Aiken.

     

References

  1. Clanton Harpine, E. (2008). Group interventions in schools: Promoting mental health for at-risk children and youth. New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Clanton Harpine, E. (2009). Erasing failure in the classroom, vol. 3: The Reading Orienteering Club, using vowel clustering in an after-school program. North Augusta, SC: Group-Centered Learning.Google Scholar
  3. Clanton Harpine, E. (2010). Erasing failure in the classroom, vol. 1: Camp Sharigan, a ready-to-use group-centered intervention for grades 1–3 (2nd ed.). Aiken, SC: Group-Centered Learning.Google Scholar
  4. Clanton Harpine, E., & Reid, T. (2009). Enhancing academic achievement in a Hispanic immigrant community: The role of reading in academic failure and mental health. School Mental Health, 1, 159–170.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s12310-009-9011-zCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Durlak, J. A., Mahoney, J. L., Bohnert, A. M., & Parente, M. E. (2010). Developing and improving after-school programs to enhance youth’s personal growth and adjustment: A special issue. American Journal of Community Psychology, 45, 285–293.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10464-010-9298-9CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Granger, R. C. (2010). Understanding and improving the effectiveness of after-school practice. American Journal of Community Psychology, 45, 441–446.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10464-010-9301-5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Groth-Marnat, G. (2009). Handbook of psychological assessment (5th ed.). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.Google Scholar
  8. Morris, D. (1999). The Howard Street tutoring manual: Teaching at-risk readers in the primary grades. New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  9. Morris, D., Tyner, B., & Perney, J. (2000). Early steps: Replicating the effects of a first-grade reading intervention program. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92, 681–693.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Perney, J., Morris, D., & Carter, S. (1997). Factorial and predictive validity of first graders’ scores on the Early Reading Screening Instrument. Psychological Reports, 81, 207–210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. US Department of Education. (2009). 21st Century community learning centers. Retrieved July 12, 2010, from http://www.ed.gov/programs/21stcclc/index.html
  12. Wandersman, A., & Florin, P. (2003). Community interventions and effective prevention. American Psychologist, 58, 441–448.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.58.6-7.441CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • William D. Harpine
    • 1
  • Christopher D. Bell
    • 2
  • Sarah Stevens
    • 1
  1. 1.University of South Carolina AikenAikenUSA
  2. 2.Augusta State UniversityAugustaUSA

Personalised recommendations