Etiology of teacher knowledge and instructional skills for literacy at the upper elementary grades

Abstract:
The purpose of this research was to study the etiology of teacher knowledge about and factors that influence implementation of evidence-based reading and writing interventions at the upper elementary grade levels. Five data sources are used in this study: first, we used teacher surveys about their pre-service preparation on reading comprehension and literacy practices gathered during a recent cluster randomized control trial on a reading comprehension intervention conducted with 280 fourth and fifth-grade teachers and their classroom students. We also conducted focus group interviews with 43% of the teachers and observed 90% of the teachers once during the implementation years. For writing, we used data collected from 32 teachers during a 3-year design project for a teacher-led computer-supported writing intervention. We also collected data from groups of school administrators using structured interviews during both studies. Finally, we conducted an artifact review of school curricula and posted professional development (PD) plans. Our results show that in both reading comprehension and writing, all teachers reported not receiving sound evidence-based pre-service preparation and they were not currently employing any evidence-based approaches. Most teachers reported using the basal reading series with very little variation from the lesson scope and sequence. Teachers and administrators frequently reported that skills were being taught in isolation (e.g., skill of the week is summarizing) and that writing was neglected. The interviews showed very interesting patterns of curricula decision-making by school administrators and these findings were further confirmed through the artifact reviews. Based on these results, we recommend that any review of teacher practices focus also on administrator decision-making and school level factors that are driving what happens in the classrooms. The review showed that the teachers themselves do not feel empowered to learn and deliver evidence-based literacy practices and feel constrained by the system.
Author Listing: Kausalai Kay Wijekumar;Andrea L Beerwinkle;Karen R Harris;Steve Graham
Volume: 69
Pages: 5-20
DOI: 10.1007/s11881-018-00170-6
Language: English
Journal: Annals of Dyslexia

ANNALS OF DYSLEXIA

ANN DYSLEXIA

影响因子:2.1 是否综述期刊:否 是否OA:否 是否预警:不在预警名单内 发行时间:- ISSN:0736-9387 发刊频率:3 issues per year 收录数据库:Scopus收录 出版国家/地区:- 出版社:Springer Nature

期刊介绍

Annals of Dyslexia is an interdisciplinary, peer-reviewed journal dedicated to the scientific study of dyslexia, its comorbid conditions; and theory-based practices on remediation, and intervention of dyslexia and related areas of written language disorders including spelling, composing and mathematics. Primary consideration for publication is given to original empirical studies, significant review, and well-documented reports of evidence-based effective practices. Only original papers are considered for publication.

阅读障碍年鉴是一个跨学科的,同行评审的期刊,致力于阅读障碍的科学研究,其共病条件;以及基于理论的实践,对诵读困难和相关领域的书写语言障碍,包括拼写,写作和数学的补救和干预。出版的主要考虑因素是原始的实证研究、重要的综述和基于证据的有效实践的有据可查的报告。只有原创论文才被考虑发表。

年发文量 18
国人发稿量 3
国人发文占比 16.67%
自引率 9.5%
平均录取率 -
平均审稿周期 -
版面费 US$2890
偏重研究方向 Multiple-
期刊官网 https://www.springer.com/11881/?utm_medium=display&utm_source=letpub&utm_content=text_link&utm_term=null&utm_campaign=HSSR_11881_AWA1_CN_CNPL_letpb_mp
投稿链接 https://www.editorialmanager.com/andy/

质量指标占比

研究类文章占比 OA被引用占比 撤稿占比 出版后修正文章占比
88.89% 25.00% 0.00% 5.00%

相关指数

{{ relationActiveLabel }}
{{ item.label }}

期刊预警不是论文评价,更不是否定预警期刊发表的每项成果。《国际期刊预警名单(试行)》旨在提醒科研人员审慎选择成果发表平台、提示出版机构强化期刊质量管理。

预警期刊的识别采用定性与定量相结合的方法。通过专家咨询确立分析维度及评价指标,而后基于指标客观数据产生具体名单。

具体而言,就是通过综合评判期刊载文量、作者国际化程度、拒稿率、论文处理费(APC)、期刊超越指数、自引率、撤稿信息等,找出那些具备风险特征、具有潜在质量问题的学术期刊。最后,依据各刊数据差异,将预警级别分为高、中、低三档,风险指数依次减弱。

《国际期刊预警名单(试行)》确定原则是客观、审慎、开放。期刊分区表团队期待与科研界、学术出版机构一起,夯实科学精神,打造气正风清的学术诚信环境!真诚欢迎各界就预警名单的分析维度、使用方案、值得关切的期刊等提出建议!

预警情况 查看说明

时间 预警情况
2024年02月发布的2024版 不在预警名单中
2023年01月发布的2023版 不在预警名单中
2021年12月发布的2021版 不在预警名单中
2020年12月发布的2020版 不在预警名单中

JCR分区 WOS分区等级:Q1区

版本 按学科 分区
WOS期刊SCI分区
WOS期刊SCI分区是指SCI官方(Web of Science)为每个学科内的期刊按照IF数值排 序,将期刊按照四等分的方法划分的Q1-Q4等级,Q1代表质量最高,即常说的1区期刊。
(2021-2022年最新版)
REHABILITATION Q1
EDUCATION, SPECIAL Q1

关于2019年中科院分区升级版(试行)

分区表升级版(试行)旨在解决期刊学科体系划分与学科发展以及融合趋势的不相容问题。由于学科交叉在当代科研活动的趋势愈发显著,学科体系构建容易引发争议。为了打破学科体系给期刊评价带来的桎梏,“升级版方案”首先构建了论文层级的主题体系,然后分别计算每篇论文在所属主题的影响力,最后汇总各期刊每篇论文分值,得到“期刊超越指数”,作为分区依据。

分区表升级版(试行)的优势:一是论文层级的主题体系既能体现学科交叉特点,又可以精准揭示期刊载文的多学科性;二是采用“期刊超越指数”替代影响因子指标,解决了影响因子数学性质缺陷对评价结果的干扰。整体而言,分区表升级版(试行)突破了期刊评价中学科体系构建、评价指标选择等瓶颈问题,能够更为全面地揭示学术期刊的影响力,为科研评价“去四唯”提供解决思路。相关研究成果经过国际同行的认可,已经发表在科学计量学领域国际重要期刊。

《2019年中国科学院文献情报中心期刊分区表升级版(试行)》首次将社会科学引文数据库(SSCI)期刊纳入到分区评估中。升级版分区表(试行)设置了包括自然科学和社会科学在内的18个大类学科。基础版和升级版(试行)将过渡共存三年时间,推测在此期间各大高校和科研院所仍可能会以基础版为考核参考标准。 提示:中科院分区官方微信公众号“fenqubiao”仅提供基础版数据查询,暂无升级版数据,请注意区分。

中科院分区 查看说明

版本 大类学科 小类学科 Top期刊 综述期刊
教育学
3区
REHABILITATION
康复医学
2区
EDUCATION, SPECIAL
特殊教育学
2区
2021年12月
升级版
教育学
4区
REHABILITATION
康复医学
3区
EDUCATION, SPECIAL
特殊教育学
3区
2020年12月
旧的升级版
教育学
3区
REHABILITATION
康复医学
3区
EDUCATION, SPECIAL
特殊教育学
3区
2022年12月
最新升级版
教育学
3区
REHABILITATION
康复医学
1区
EDUCATION, SPECIAL
特殊教育学
1区