The purpose of the Preschool Intervention for Embodied Storytelling (PIES) study was to evaluate the efficacy of a drama-based story time intervention on at-risk preschool students’ emotion knowledge, story retell and story comprehension skills. Six classrooms with 44 students were randomly assigned into drama-based intervention and dialogic reading control groups. After four weeks of intervention sessions twice per week, students’ emotion knowledge and story retell skills were assessed with distal measures. During the program, students’ comprehension of the stories was evaluated weekly. Participants did not show significant main effects on any measures, however investigation of simple effects revealed differences in gains over time for intervention students in their story retell skills. Despite lack of significance, effect sizes for story retell were promising. Mean differences in story comprehension skills were consistently in favor of the intervention group for the duration of the program. Teacher participants showed an increase in their positive perceptions of drama-based instruction, but their own use of these strategies at story time was variable before and after observing the PIES program. Drama based instruction through PIES may be a favorable intervention strategy for preschool students as they develop narrative skills that are a prerequisite for future reading comprehension success.

The purpose of this study was to examine the relationship between writing motivation and performance for students in grades three to five, and whether scores differed based on students’ language status, gender, or grade level. Three student language groups were included: (1) emergent bilingual students currently receiving services for English language development (ELD); (2) reclassified bilingual students who had exited ELD programs; and (3) native English-speaking students. The district administered a performance measure and a motivational measure to participating students (N = 1126). Intrinsic and self-regulatory motivation scores were significantly higher for emergent bilingual students (intrinsic M = 2.07; self-regulatory M = 2.48) and reclassified bilingual students (M = 1.99; M = 2.71) than their native English-speaking peers (M = 1.67; M = 2.30). On extrinsic motivation for writing, reclassified bilingual students (M = 2.69) scored significantly higher than both emergent bilingual students (M = 2.49) and native English speaking student (M = 2.57). Fourth and fifth graders scored significantly higher than third graders on extrinsic (M = 2.68, 2.74, 2.31, respectively) and self-regulatory motivation (M = 2.53, 2.59, 2.21 respectively), while only fourth graders scored significantly higher than third graders on intrinsic motivation (M = 1.90, M = 1.76). The only significant difference by gender was found on extrinsic motivation, where girls (M = 2.67) scored higher than boys (M = 2.53). On the district writing test, native English speaking students (M = 5.15) scored significantly higher than both reclassified (M = 4.95) and emergent bilingual students (M = 3.94). Reclassified bilingual students scored significantly higher than emergent bilingual students. In terms of grade, gender, and performance, fifth graders (M = 5.58) scored significantly higher than fourth (M = 4.56) and third graders (M = 4.31), and girls (M = 5.07) scored significantly higher than boys (M¬ = 4.64). Finally, after accounting for significant variance in district writing scores according to language status, gender, and grade (R2 = .22), the motivational incentives for writing significantly predicted an additional 1% of the variance. Findings are discussed according to the Writer(s)-Within-Community model (Graham, 2018).

It is widely accepted that mentorship between people of similar backgrounds and slightly different ages is a mutually beneficial partnership (e.g., Angelique, Kyle, & Taylor, 2002; Yomtov, 2017). Mentoring relationships exist in many forms across the education spectrum, from middle school students interacting with their younger peers to the popular “Big-Little system” adopted by fraternity and sorority groups in U.S. colleges and universities, and beyond educational settings throughout the working world. However, one place where mentoring has received relatively less attention, from researchers as well as from practitioners, is in undergraduate student leadership-focused organizations at the college level.

An explanatory sequence mixed methods design was used to examine the effects of choice on the writing performance and motivation of college students (n = 242). The randomized control trial was followed by semi-structured interviews to determine the perceptions students (n = 20) held on the experiment as well the importance of choosing writing topics in college writing assignments. The effects of choice were tested as part of a real writing assignment that was included in nine sections of an introductory special education course. Results from hierarchical linear modeling (HLM) analyses found choice had a statistically significant negative effect on holistic writing quality, number of words written, and intrinsic writing motivation. Findings from the semi-structured interviews provided context for understanding the unexpected quantitative results.

Children with dyslexia have difficulty learning to read. The purpose of this study was to investigate whether the use of simultaneous multisensory structured language (multisensory) instruction promoted better letter name and sound production, word reading, and word spelling for second grade children with typical development (TD; N=6) or with dyslexia (DYS; N=5) than structured language instruction alone. The use of non-English graphemes (letters) to represent two pretend languages were used to control for children’s lexical knowledge.

A multiple baseline, multiple probe across subjects single-case design, paired with an alternating treatments design, was used to compare the efficacy of multisensory and structure language interventions. Participant’s graphed data was visually analyzed and individual Tau-U and weighted Tau-U effect sizes were calculated for the outcome variables: letter name production, letter sound production, word reading, and word spelling.

Both interventions had an overall effect for participants with TD and DYS, though for individual participants intervention effects varied across outcome variables. However, the multisensory intervention did not provide a clear advantage over the structured intervention for participants with TD or DYS.