The effect of tutoring group size on reading performance in at-risk emergent readers

The purpose of this study was to examine the effects of group size on reading performance, for at-risk Title 1 students, in both a small group (4 students) and one-to-one tutoring setting. A nonequivalent pretest-posttest experimental design was used along with a case study approach. Sixteen of the lowest performing first grade students, as measured by the Observational Survey, were randomly selected to participate in a Reading Recovery intervention setting. Four of the sixteen students were randomly placed in a one-to-one setting and the other twelve students were placed in one of three small groups of four students each. The rest of the first grade students were used as the control group.;The qualitative data within the case study showed that within the group setting, the students were exposed to and had a greater opportunity for modeling as a means of assistance, and therefore, a greater chance for observational learning to take place. The opportunities for both modeling and feeding back represented over 1/3 of all scaffolding comments (36.3%) made during the small group interactions, compared to 32.3% for the individual.;The quantitative data showed that on the pre and post tests scores for both experimental groups there was no difference in the average growth of each group and that the overall post test scores were both within the average range of the rest of the control group's average score. The average post test score for all of the experimental groups was 82.6% and for the control group it was 87.5%. The average growth from pretest to post test of all of the experimental groups was 42.7% while for the control group, the average growth was 27.6%.;The case study approach analyzed the type and frequency of teacher-student interactions within two selected experimental groups (one group of four and one individual) to see if modeling and observational learning were present. Six video taped lessons were made and transcribed in order to categorize the following six means of assistance or scaffolding comments: modeling, feeding back, contingency management, questioning, instructing and cognitive structuring.