Resultados del Análisis de Componentes Principales

One criticism made of some parent based reading programmes is that the impact of the intervention is measured only by parental opinion (Ellis, 1996). While parent views are an important perspective, comparing these with other sources of data in a process of triangulation strengthens the research by increasing the validity of the results (Fraenkel & Wallen, 2006).

5.4.1 Attitude Survey

Comparisons of the results of the reading attitude survey taken before and after the intervention were varied. Kevin’s results showed no statistically significant change. Adam and Naomi were both statistically significantly more negative towards both academic and recreational reading. Jack’s attitude toward reading in school was statistically significantly more negative but there was no significant change in his attitude towards recreational reading. Kevin and Adam’s results were contrary to the reported views of their parents who stated that by the end of the intervention their child appeared to be enjoying reading much more and

engaging in spontaneous self-directed reading more. They also reported that reading had become an enjoyable shared experience.

There are several possible explanations for these discrepant results. There could be some issues with the test tool. The test tool may not be a reliable tool for repeated measures over a relatively short time frame. There appears to be no published literature regarding this tool in relation to an optimal repeat schedule. However, one of the stated uses in the literature is for pre and post intervention comparison (McKenna & Kear, 1990) The items in the assessment tool relating to recreational reading do not specifically seek opinions about reading with a parent at home so the results may not be reflective of the children’s experiences of reading with their parent. Rather, the results reflect children’s attitude to reading as a whole. As this tool contains a four point Likert scale it may not be sufficiently sensitive to accurately measure shifts in attitude over a relatively short time frame. However, the test tool literature does address this point. McKenna and Kear (1990) state that a four point Likert scale is appropriate to use with children as it reduces confusion.

A range of external factors may have also affected both the first and final responses that the children chose. At the time of the initial survey I had no relationship with the children and a limited relationship with their parents. The survey was conducted at school. These factors could have contributed to the children initially choosing more positive responses in order to conform to their anticipated or implied expectations of adults within a school environment. At the time of the final survey I had built a relationship with Jack and Naomi (but not Kevin or Adam) through visits to their homes when they were present. This could have impacted the final scores for Jack and Naomi as they were more comfortable with me. Gwen believed that the initial survey completed by Naomi was highly inaccurate and the final survey more reflective of Naomi’s real

attitude. This point is supported by her comment when she viewed Naomi’s post-intervention data, “This seems more honest.”

Alternatively, the survey results might suggest that the children had not enjoyed reading with their parents as much as the parents had enjoyed it. One

explanation for this could be that the parents believed that their child would share their own positive attitudes toward the reading sessions they had had with their child. This may have occurred as they reported to me what they thought I wanted to hear in the coaching sessions. Alternatively, it could be that the parents saw their impact as positive because they were invested in the process of coaching their child.

Given that there is a wealth of research literature that comments on the strong correlation between enjoyment of reading and reading skill (Biddulph, 1983; Chapman & Tunmer, 1995; Clark & De Zoysa, 2011; Fletcher et al., 2012; McKenna & Kear, 1990; Ministry of Education, 2003, 2006) the lack of positive change in reading attitude as determined by the survey, is concerning.

5.4.2 Running Record

Comparison of the reading assessment results before and after the intervention reveal that all children appeared to be able to cope better with more challenging reading material after the intervention. During the intervention both Kevin and Adam’s reading age improved by 18 months and the goals of both were

achieved. This is beyond the expected growth over the five months of the intervention. Naomi had made six months growth in reading skills during the intervention. This is unlikely to be significant due to the duration of the intervention. Change in Jack’s instructional reading level was not able to be confidently measured due to his initial assessment being inconclusive.

5.4.3 Phonetic assessment

Comparison of the phonetic assessment data before and after the intervention provided a measure of growth in a reading related skill area. All children in the study improved their phonetic knowledge during the study. However, this growth is not beyond what might be expected given the duration of the intervention (Bear et al., 2004).