英语论文网

CHAPTER FOUR RESULTS &DISCUSSION

For the first research question, the scores of the experimental group both on thepretest and immediate post-test were used to examine the differences in student resultsduring the twenty-eight weeks. The second and the third research questions wereaddressed by collecting scores from the two groups both on the immediate post-testand two months later’ delayed post-test. SPSS multiple independent measures t testswere used to analyze the data from each test. Independent t tests aided in determiningthe significance of the difference between the mean scores on pretest and post-testwithin group and between groups as well. A significance level of p< .05 was used.

4.1 Results of Hypothesis 1
Tables 4.1 through 4.4 examined the differences between the pretest andpost-test of the experimental group (THRASS) both on Phonological Awarenessmeasures and Literacy Skills measures. Performance both on pretest and post-testwere used to analyze the effects of the THRASS-based phonics instruction. Table 4.1presented a comparison of Phonological Awareness measures on the pretest andpost-test mean scores and the standard deviation scores. Table 4.2 is theIndependent-Samples T-Test comparing Phonological Awareness measures of thepretest scores to the post-test scores. Table 4.3 presented a comparison of LiteracySkills measures on the pretest and post-test mean scores and the standard deviationscores. Table 4.4 is the Independent-Samples T-Test comparing the literacy measuresof the pretest scores to the post-test scores. A significance level of p <.05 wasutilized.

.......

conclusion

After the experimental research, students in the study who received dailysystematic phonics training showed significantly improvement in their phonologicalawareness and literacy skills, and their decoding and encoding processes werestrongly impacted on all measures of phoneme awareness as well as reading andspelling skills. In contrast, the overall performance of the students who were taughtusing a regular (incidental, non-systematic) phonics instruction lagged significantlybehind that of THRASS-based phonics group both on the immediate post-test and theupcoming test. Hence one can see that the students under a systematic phonicsprogram in this study achieved better than their peers who only received the regularphonics instruction. It was also concluded that a systematic explicit phonics programhad a longer lasting effect on students’ phonological awareness and literacyattainment, and help students learn a self teaching technique from it. In addition,verbal evaluations by the students about the intervention were extremely positive andthey felt more self confident and they showed great enjoyment in a dynamic andlively classroom atmosphere. Consequently, the findings provided strong support forthe efficacy of the systematic explicit phonics program provided by THRASS.
............
References (omitted)