TY - JOUR
T1 - Planning facilitation and reading comprehension
T2 - Instructional relevance of the pass theory
AU - Haddad, Frederick A.
AU - Evie Garcia, Y.
AU - Naglieri, Jack A.
AU - Grimditch, Michelle
AU - McAndrews, Ashley
AU - Eubanks, Jane
PY - 2003/9
Y1 - 2003/9
N2 - The purpose of this study was to evaluate whether instruction designed to facilitate planning would have differential benefit on reading comprehension depending on the specific Planning, Attention, Simultaneous, and Successive (PASS) cognitive characteristics of each child. A sample of 45 fourth-grade general education children was sorted into three groups based on each PASS scale profile from the Cognitive Assessment System (CAS). The groups did not differ by CAS Full Scale standard score, chronological age, gender, or pretest reading comprehension scores. After each child's pretest reading comprehension instructional level was determined, a cognitive strategy instruction intervention was conducted. The children completed a reading comprehension posttest at their respective instructional levels after the intervention. Results showed that children with a Planning weakness (n = 13) benefited substantially (effect size of 1.52) from the instruction designed to facilitate planning. Children with no weakness (n = 21; effect size = .52) or a Successive weakness (n = 11; effect size of .06) did not benefit as much. These results support previous research suggesting that PASS profiles are relevant to instruction.
AB - The purpose of this study was to evaluate whether instruction designed to facilitate planning would have differential benefit on reading comprehension depending on the specific Planning, Attention, Simultaneous, and Successive (PASS) cognitive characteristics of each child. A sample of 45 fourth-grade general education children was sorted into three groups based on each PASS scale profile from the Cognitive Assessment System (CAS). The groups did not differ by CAS Full Scale standard score, chronological age, gender, or pretest reading comprehension scores. After each child's pretest reading comprehension instructional level was determined, a cognitive strategy instruction intervention was conducted. The children completed a reading comprehension posttest at their respective instructional levels after the intervention. Results showed that children with a Planning weakness (n = 13) benefited substantially (effect size of 1.52) from the instruction designed to facilitate planning. Children with no weakness (n = 21; effect size = .52) or a Successive weakness (n = 11; effect size of .06) did not benefit as much. These results support previous research suggesting that PASS profiles are relevant to instruction.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0344497420&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0344497420&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1177/073428290302100304
DO - 10.1177/073428290302100304
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:0344497420
SN - 0734-2829
VL - 21
SP - 282
EP - 289
JO - Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment
JF - Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment
IS - 3
ER -