Norfolk Psychological Service: Summary Report
Background
Norfolk Psychological Service drew up plans for a ten week trial of Lexia phonics-based reading software. The purpose of the trial was to determine the impact of Lexia reading software on pupils in Years 2 and 3 who were struggling with the acquisition of literacy skills.
The trial set out to answer the following questions:
- What impact can the software have on
- Reading Age
- Spelling Age
- Phonic skills
- Motivation
- Self Esteem
- Which pupils will benefit most from the software?
- Are there differences in outcome when used with pupils in Years 2 and 3
The project sample
Data was collected from 40 pupils in Years 2 and 3 across 13 schools
- 60% of the project sample had reading ages below 5 years.
- 87.5% of the project sample had reading ages below 6 years.
- 73% were boys
- 27% were girls
The average discrepancy across the sample between Reading Age and Chronological Age at the outset of the trial was 32.9 months.
Outcomes of the trial
Gains in Reading Age over a 10 week period:
- Average gains in Reading Age across the sample = 6.38 months
- Average gains in Reading Age in Year 2 = 5.6 months
- Average gains in Reading Age in Year 3 = 6.6 months
- 69.2% pupils made Ratio Gains* of 1 or more
- 46.1% pupils made Ratio Gains of 2 or more
- 38.4% pupils made Ratio Gains of 3 or more
Gains in Spelling over a 10 week period:
- Average gains in Spelling Age across the sample = 0.2y
- Average gains in Spelling Age in Year 3 = 0.2y
- Average gains in Spelling Age in Year 2 = 0.2y
Improvement in phonic knowledge:
- 88% showed gains in knowledge of Consonant Blends and Digraphs
- 79% showed gains in knowledge of Segmenting and Blending skills
- 97% showed improvements when reading phonically regular words (cvc, ccvc, ccvcc)
*Ratio gain (RG) is the gain in reading age made by a pupil on a reading test during a chronological time span, expressed as a ratio of that time span; that is, ratio gain equals reading age in months divided by chronological time in months.
Feedback from pupils
| YES | NO | |
|---|---|---|
| Do you like using the Lexia program? | 91% | 9% |
| Has it helped you become a better reader? | 91% | 9% |
| Would you like to continue using it? | 83% | 17% |
Feedback from Teachers and Teaching Assistants
What impact has Lexia Reading Software had on:
| Noted improvements | No improvement | |
|---|---|---|
| Reading ability | 88% | 12% |
| Spelling ability | 88% | 12% |
| Phonic knowledge | 100% | - |
| Confidence | 100% | - |
| Attitude to reading | 88% | 12% |
| Independence in classroom | 44% | 56% |
Will you continue to use Lexia?
100% of people asked said yes.
Would you recommend it to colleagues?
100% of people asked said yes.
Conclusions
- The data collected from the 13 schools suggested that the reading software can be an effective program to support pupils who are struggling to acquire literacy skills.
- It was generally agreed that 10 weeks was too short a timescale to fully evaluate the potential of the program. The summer term was not considered to be the optimum time for such an intervention to be sustained without interruptions.
Advisory support teachers and colleagues felt the software helped them gain important diagnostic information about their pupils’ learning. - Teaching assistants enjoyed their involvement in the program and valued the opportunity to gain expertise in a new piece of reading software.
- Despite the short intervention period, the average Reading Age of 6.38 months (Ratio Gain of 2+) was encouraging especially when considering the low levels of literacy of the 40 pupils in the sample (87.5% had reading ages below 6 years).
- The sample included pupils with behavioural difficulties, pupils with specific difficulties (Dyslexia), and those with more generalised learning difficulties.
- It is interesting to note that 72.5% of the sample were boys. The computer program offered an alternative approach which proved to be successful.
- Most schools were pleased to have had the opportunity to participate in the trial, and were enthusiastic about the potential of the program.