2015
DOI: 10.1080/03004430.2015.1011150
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Examining the effects of adapted peer tutoring on social and language skills of young English language learners

Abstract: The purpose of this study was to examine the effects of adapted peer tutoring (APT) on social interactions and early language and literacy skills of pre-school-age children who were English language learners (ELLs). APT was the treatment for this study. Quasi-experimental group comparison design was applied. Two inclusive pre-school classrooms were randomly assigned as the experimental group and two other classrooms were assigned as the comparison group. A total of 75 children participated in this study. The E… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
4
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 6 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 29 publications
0
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Eight studies featured comparison groups with unaligned conditions and used standardised measures to determine children's breadth of receptive vocabulary outcomes, all of which elicited students' oral responses (Alvarez‐Marinelli et al, 2016; Carlo et al, 2004; Crevecoeur et al, 2014; Dockrell et al, 2010; Farver et al, 2009; Lesaux et al, 2010; Uchikoshi, 2006; Xu, 2015). Two studies compared a context‐only approach (5) for one group and a no treatment approach (Uchikoshi, 2006), or a treatment‐as‐usual approach (0), for the other (Alvarez‐Marinelli et al, 2016).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Eight studies featured comparison groups with unaligned conditions and used standardised measures to determine children's breadth of receptive vocabulary outcomes, all of which elicited students' oral responses (Alvarez‐Marinelli et al, 2016; Carlo et al, 2004; Crevecoeur et al, 2014; Dockrell et al, 2010; Farver et al, 2009; Lesaux et al, 2010; Uchikoshi, 2006; Xu, 2015). Two studies compared a context‐only approach (5) for one group and a no treatment approach (Uchikoshi, 2006), or a treatment‐as‐usual approach (0), for the other (Alvarez‐Marinelli et al, 2016).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Six studies (18%) did not report any information relating to EBs' SES, including more recent studies such as Alvarez-Marinelli et al (2016). Five studies (17%), including newer publications from August et al (2016) and Xu (2015), did not provide any quantitative data beyond narrative descriptions of participants such as 'low-income. '…”
Section: Socioeconomic Backgroundsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For example, Ulanoff and Pucci (1999) established baseline equivalence by employing statistical adjustments through regressing pretest L2 receptive scores on posttest scores. Of the four studies that did not meet baseline equivalence, three did not disclose any information relating to differences between conditions (e.g., Avila & Sadoski, 1996;Leacox & Jackson, 2014;Xu, 2015) and one used a non-meaningbased measure, a non-verbal, phonological ability measure, to create equivalence (i.e., Dockrell et al, 2010). Experimental studies that did not meet attrition standards were able to ensure comparable groups by making statistical adjustments to their post-attrition analytic sample (August et al, 2016;Vadasy et al, 2015).…”
Section: Baseline Equivalencementioning
confidence: 99%
“…Since phonological ability is related to decoding rather than comprehension‐oriented outcomes, its indication of participants' equivalence on vocabulary knowledge is extraneous (e.g., Goodrich & Lonigan, 2017). Additionally, there were three studies (e.g., Avila & Sadoski, 1996; Leacox & Jackson, 2014; Xu, 2015) that did not disclose the differences found on baseline equivalence measures. This information should always be reported in order to ensure transparency and exemplify ways in which variation across samples could exist and be accounted for.…”
Section: Implications For Designing Interventions To Meet Evidence St...mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Leung, 2015;Bowman-Perrott et al, 2019). Többféle területen, mint például az olvasás-szövegértés (Flores & Duran, 2016), a természettudományok (Ullah et al, 2018), a matematika (Alegre et al, 2019a) vagy az idegen nyelvek tanítása (Xu, 2015) során, de akár specifikusabb témákban, például az ápolóképzésben (Brannagan et al, 2013) is alkalmazható. A tutor általi tanulás kedvezően hat a tanulók tudásszintjére és készségeik fejlődésére.…”
Section: Tutor áLtali Tanulásunclassified