enhancement (prep) - j-stage

The Japanese Association of Special Education

NII-Electronic Library Service

The JapaneseAssociation of Special Education

Jpn. J. Spec. Educ., 45 (6), 473-488, 2008.

Original Article

Reading Remediation for Japanese Children

With Reading DiMculties: PASS Reading

Enhancement Program (PREP)

Naoko HAMAI-MUROYA" and Hisao MAEKAWA*'

In the present study, a Japanese versioll of the PASS Reading EnhancementProgram (PREP) was prepared and administered on a pilot basis te 11 lst- to7th-grade chitdren with reading dilllculties, in order to examine its eflectiveness.

Word reading', reading abiiity, and cognitive functioning were tested belbre andafter a 6- to 12-menth remediation period. Nonparametric analyses and changes

in individual scores indicated improvement in word rcading, word idcntification,and successive processing on the cognitive scale. The$e results suggest that PREPremediation may lead to improvement of word-reading-related skills, as has been

previeusly rcported. This remediation m.ay be based on the enhancement of

cognitive functioning accomplished throug'h the remediatioll. Furthermore, a

casc observation suggested that these changes might be accompanied by in-

creased variation in and appropriateness of use of strategies for reading.

Key Words: reading diMculties, remediation program, PREP (PASS Reading Enhanceincnt Program), strategy, lst- to 7th-grade children with

reading ditliculties

Reading is an extremely important academic skill. A deficit in reading ability

may cause failure in a widc range of academic performances. In particular, children

whose reading scores are much lower than expected from their other academic

performances are limited in what they can achieve unless appropriatc educational

support is provided to them,

The concept of "Iearning

disabllities" was ofilcially authorized in Japan by the

Ministry of Educ;ation, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT) in 1999.

Befbre that, children in regular classes wbo had difficulties in specific academic areas

such as reading had hardly any opportunity to receive speciai educational support in

public elementary and middle schools, even though, in recent years, under the recent

re-conceptualization of "special

education," students with mild developmental disabil-

ities have bccn considered to be children who should specifically be cared for, and

remediation of students with reading disabilities has become big concern of teachers.

"Institute

of Disability Sciences, University of Tsukuba"Graduate

School ol' Comprehensive Human Sciences, University ot' Tsukuba

473 -




N. Hamai-Muroya ancl H. Maekawa

A MEXT survey of school teachers in 2002 suggested that 2.5% of Japanesechildren in public elementary and middle schools may have difficulties in literacy,that is, reading and writing skMs. The occurrence of dyslexia in Japan has beenreported to be lower than in Western countries (Makita, 1968). However, more recent

investigations have reported that many mere children seem to experience difficulties

in reading, and that eflective intervention is needed for them,

Deficits in decoding skill are supposed to be a characteristic of' individuals withdyslexia (DSM-IV; American Psychiatric Association, 1994). Catts, Hogan and Fey

(2003) reported that 70% of chiidren with reading disabilities showed poor decoding

skills. These authors suggest that development of decoding skill should be a i'unda-

mental step in reading remediation.

The PASS Reading Enhancement Program (PREP; Das, 1999; Das, 2eOO) is a

cognitive remedial program for children who have diMculty reading words or sen-

tences, This program is designed not only for children with reading disabilities who

have intellectual ability within the normal range, but also for children with intellectual

disabilities. The theoretical background of this program is based upon the PASS

(Planning, Attention, Simultaneous and Successive processes) model of cognitive

functioning (Das, Naglieri, & Kirby, 1994). Each of the eight tasks in PREP targets

improvement in either successive or simultaneous processing', both of which are

required for reading. PREP was designed to develop infbrmation processing through

verbalization of strategies. It is not direct instruction.

Several reports dealing with experirnental remediation using PREP have demon-

strated improvements in deceding skill in children with reading disabiHties (Carlson& Das, l997; Das, Mashra, & Pool, 1995; Parrila, Das, Kendrick, Papadopoulos, &

Kirby, 1999),

Although the effectiveness of PREP as a reading enhancement prograni has

been demonstrated in North American studies, it is not necessarily the case that the

same results could be obtaincd by administering a translated PREP program to

Japanese children, because of the differences between the language systems. The

Japanese language is comprised of three diflerent types of characters, hiragana,katakana, and kanji (Chinese characters). In eiementary school, children learnhiragana phonograms first. Children with reading difficulties tend to show failure in

reading hiragana characters at this poifit in the school curriculum. Since there is

similarity in terms of phonograrns between the reading systems of hiragana and

English, PREP might possibly be applicable for remediation of Japanese children

who have problems in reading hiragana syllables.

In the present study, we adopted PREP as the material for remediation of

Japanese children with reading difiiculties. The original PREP material in Eng'lish

was translated into Japanese and modified to adjust for features of the Japaneselanguage, The resulting Japanese-version of PREP is called J-PREP. An intervention was undertaken with 11 students, in order to examine whether

J-PREP was effective as a reading remediation program fbr Japanese-speakingchildren with learning difficulties. In addition to statistical anaiyses of the results,

-474-




Remediation fbr Children With Reading Difficulties

strategy development was examined through description of a case, in order to

understand the results of the statistical analyses better.

Method

ParticiPants

Eleven students participated in this study, 9 males and 2 females, including onefirst-grader, two second-graders, four third-graders, two fifth-graders, one sixth-

grader, and one seventh-grader. Profiles of the participants are in Table 1. The

participants were recruited because they were experiencing diMculty in reading at

schooi. Most of them were not intellectually impaired, but a few of thern rnight be out

of the normal range on intelligence scores.

Participants A to J attended regular classrooms, and all of them, except Ibr

Participant B, studied in a resource room at some time each week. Participant K was

in a special class for students with inteil,ectual disabilities. All the students were

identified by their teachers at their school or an adviser in an educational consulta-

tion at a university as having reading pcrfbrmance that was much poorer than would

be expected from their performance in other academic areas, such as mathematics or

oral comprehension,

Procedure

Pmparation of JL-PREP. PREP contains eight tasks, five of which are relating to

word reading, and three of which are tasks fbr training sentence reading (seeAppendix), Word reading-related tasks are Joining Shapes, Window Sequencing,

Connecting Letters, Transportation Matrices, and Related Memory. Sentence

reading-related tasks are Tracking, Shape Design, and Shapes and Objects.

Each of the eight tasks involves both a global component and a bridging

componcnt. The global component basically does not require students to read; the

bridging component is a curriculum-related task containing word- or sentence-

reading. Bridging tasks involve the same cognitive demands (simultaneous and

successive pro ¢ essing) as their rnatched global tasks (Das et al., l994; Das, 2000).

First, the English manual of the original PREP was translated into Japanese.Then, stimulus words and sentences were selected tbr the teaching materials, and

partially modified in order to suit the eharacteristic reading diMculties of the

Japanese language. The stimulus words used in the word-reading tasks were chosen

from the standard Japanese educational curriculum's fundamental words for first- to

third-graders. For some tasks of the J-PREP, we prepared two word sets, one of which

was concerned with word length, and the other, with phonological cemplexity, so that

instructors could choose the appropriatc set for each student;s nceds. Gradually as

the difliculty levei increases, longer words appear in the word-length set. At the

beginning of the task of di'Mculty level 1, stimulus words contain only 2 mora, such

as "asa"

Cmorning). Six-mora words, such as "denshi

renji" (microwave oven), appear

at dificulty level 3.

475




N. Hamai-Muroya and

TABLE 1 Profilesot'

H. Maekawa

Participants

Partici- Grade Parlt

WISC-IIIVIQ PIQ FIQRSS**Numbers

of

PREP Tasks'AdministeredDescription

ol' Participants' Reading

A

B

C

D

EF

G

H

I

J

K

1

2

2

B

Bs

3

5

5

6

7

63

106

94

82

9676

96 101

97

8S

95

81

89 89 88106 108 I08

50

82

58

68

57

50

7a

89

69

76

44

78

70

65

63

(46)

4B

46

39

57

41

35

32

32

8

7

8

8

87

8

8

8

4

3

Difficult to read text aloud all togctherl'Easy to lose the place in text when he/shc reads.

Can read hiragana characters; Makemanv errors to read words and sen- itences.T'end

to avoid reading; Adds or skips

letters when h ¢ /she reads,

aomprihends text with his/her own

impressien; Frequently asks about what

was said.

Difficult to read and wiite.

Inaccurate reading; Skips letters fre-

quently when he!she reads; Ha.s confu-sion in color name and right-and-leftdistinctionCan read hiragana characters; Spells outa sentence; Reading oi' complex syllables1ike you-on is difficult.

Can,not read with pauses following kuto-ten (marks that indicate punctuationsuch as conmia and period)Strongiy feels him/herseif poor in read-ing; Letter by letter' reading; Reading of'

tomplex syllab!es like you-on is not stable.

Can rcad hiragana or basic kan,ii;DiMculty in comprehension of the test

Can read most hiragana; Reading of

complex syilable like you-on is not stable,

"8

tasks: Joining Shapes, X4rindow Sequencing, Connecting Letters, Transportation

Matriccs, Related Memory, Tracking, Shape Design, Shapes and objects.

4 tasks U): Window Sequencing, Connecting Letters, Shapc Design, Shapes and

Objccts.

S tasks (K): Window Sequencing, C]onnecting Letters, Shape Dcsign,""

rcading standard score.

In the phono]ogical complexity set, phonological complexity increases as

difficulty Ievel progresses. At the beginning of the task at diMculty level 1, stimuluswords contain only sei-on (voiceless) sounds. After that, daku-on (voiced), han-daku-on (the p-sound in the kana syllabary), soku-on (syllables with long consonants),

cho-on (syllables with elongated vowels), yo-on (basic syllables modified by the

addition of ya, yu, or yo), and yo-cho-on (yo-on syllables with elongated vowels)

sounds gradually appear, as diMculty level increases to level 3).

- 476

--




Remediation fbr Children With Reading Difliculties

In the sentence tasks, all the kanji characters used were ones taught in the first

grade of elementary school in Japan. In the next step, paper-based material was prepared, similar to the original

PREP, and then computer-based teaching materials were prepared for the Japaneseversion. In the computer version, the pictures, words, and sentences of the teaching

materials and the work space were shown on the computer dispLay, For example, in

Transportation Matrices, picture cards of vehicles appeared on the computer display

and turned over when a card was clicked on the display. This system replaced having

an instructor put cards on a desk and manipulate them by hand. The computer

version was designed so that an instructor could administer the remediation programto students in a resource room having only a persoflal computcr and an instruction manual.

7'1?st sthedule. To evaluate the efficacy of the translated and modified J-PREPfbr Japanese students with reading difficulties, the Das-Naglieri Cognitive Assessment

System (DN-CAS; Naglieri & Das, 1997), a word decoding task and a non-word

decoding task (Hosokawa, Muroya, Futakami, & Maekawa, 2e04), and a TK-style

reading test (Kitao, 1984) were given to the children before and at'ter the remediation

period, as pre- and posttests.

For analysis of the Cognitive Assessment System test data, standard scores on

planning, attention, simultaneous, and successive, and full scores were examined.

For the decoding tasks, the children read aloud a list of 40 three-mora real words

or 40 three-rnora non-words, as fast as they could. Reading time fbr the list and the

number of reading errers made were recorded.

For the reading test, scores (1 to 10) were given on five subtests. The children

were asked to find and circle as many nouns as they could in 2 minutes in real

sentences (word identification subtest: WI) or meaningless sentences (wordidentification from non-sentence subtest: WI-n) written in hiragana characters

(approximately 28X 15 syllables).

For the sentence cornprehension subtest, the ehildren were required to choose an

appropriate word to fi11 in a blank in a sentence. On the rneaning memory subtest,

the children were asked to recognize the meaning of' sentences that had been shown

earlier. For the int'erence subtest, the children read short stories and answered

questions relating to the stories.

Remediation Procedure. Remediation using J-PREP was undertaken at five ele-

mentary schools, one middle school, and 2 consultation rooms for children with

disabilities. Participants received the remediation procedure either from school

teachers who were trained in instructing J-PREP, or university graduate or under-

graduate students who were majoring in areas related to special support education.

The intervention took ffom 6 to 12 months, dcpending on the case.

Befbre starting, the instructor chose the J-PREP tasks to be used fbr remediation,

taking into account the profile of each student, such as the student's reading level,

strengths and weaknesses in infbrmation processing style, or intellectual ability. Also,

the schooPs schedule was a major concern, because class lessons in the resource room

were often cancelled because of other activities at the school or national holidays. In

477-




N. Hamai-Muroya and H. Maekawa

those cases, supplementary lessons were not provided.

The number of tasks that the students completed varied from three to eight

(Table 1). All the J-PREP sessions were done individuaUy,

The children took the pretests at the beginning of a series ofJ-PREP sessions,

were given remediation using J-PREP, and then took the posttests.

The procedure used for J-PREP instruction was based on a translation of the

English-language manual.

Data anaipsis. Non-parametric analyses comparing the pre- and posttest mea-sures were conducted in order to examine improvement in cognitive aspects, decodingskMs, and reading skills, such as word identification from meaningfu1 or meaningless

sentences, sentence comprehension, meaning memory, and inferences.

Cbse clascription. In addition to the statistical analyses, the behavior of Partici-

pant B was described in regard to the strategies that he used. Because in interventionprocess in PREP children develop strategies required for reading, observation of hisstrategies was important and helpfu1 in understanding the process of his progress inreading skills.

B could read all the hiragana syllables, but could not read words. This is a

typical reading problem that PREP targets. Moreover, because the present authorswere directly in charge of B's remediation, he could be observed in detail. For thesereasons, B was selected fbr the case description reported below.

Results

Pre- and Posttests

Means and standard deviations of the scores are shown in Table 2. Wilcoxon'ssigned rank test was performed in order to examine changes in the test scores betweenthe pre- and posttests. Because age and intellectual ability varied to a large extentamong the children who participated in the present study, a nonparametric test was

used to analyze the data. Furthermore, the changes in each individual between thepre- and posttests were examined, in order to check on the statistical results in detail

(Figs. 1, 2, and 3).

Das-JVaglieri Cogrnitive Assessment SNstem (DJV:-CAS,} Tlast

Significantiy higher posttest performances were found for the successive scale

component (Wilcoxon's Z=-2.l38, P<.e5) and the fu11 scale scores (Z=-2.I42,P<.05). Scores on the planning scale (Z=-1.558, P=.lI9) and the simultaneous

scale (Z== -1.582, P==.114) were not statistically significant, although the perfor-mance of individual students appeared to show progress between the pre- and

posttests (Fig. I). The pianning scale scores of Student G decreased 1l points fromthe pre- to the posttest, and that might have resulting in the planning scale score

results not being significant. Significant diflerences were not found on the attention

measure.

-478-



The JapaneseAssociation of SpecialEducation

Remcdiation forChildrenWithReading Difliculties

TABLE2 Meansand Standard Deviations for Pre-andPosttest

MeasuresPretest PosttestM SD M soWilcoxon's a P value

DN-CAS

Ptanning Simultaneous

Attention

Successive

Full Scale

91.378.382.069.771.613.316220.6I7.5IB.996.587.682.577.681A13.316.22Ll16.6I6.6-l.558

-1.582

-O,153

-2,138

-2,142

O.ll9O.114O,878O.033*O.032*

Decoding

Word decoding (RT) Non-word decoding (RT) Word decoding (ER) Non-word decoding (ER)

73.999.1

2.5

9.0

56.043,9

2,9

6.8

5LO83.6

1.0 3,8

25.326.5

1.8 4.9

-2.578

-I.201

-2.395

-2.501

O.OIO*O.230O.O17*O.O12*

Reading Test

WI -

meaningful

WI -

meaningless

Sentence comprehension

Meaning memory

Inference

RSS

4.9 3.I

3.3 4.6

3.940.1

2,72.l1,52.61.39.2 6.4･ 5.4

4.3 4.6

3.744.7

1.72.82.0l.51.79.8-L811

-2.207

-1,552

-O,175

-O.I07

-1.997

O.070te,o27*O.l2IO.861e.915O.046*

WI == word identificatienl*p<,05,

tp<.10.

RSS=reading standardscore.

145ots

130eco

115YS

100[S

85coco

70co<

55a

40

FIG.

.IVbtes.

1 Individual Cegnitive Measurement Performance

Cegnitive Assessment System (DN-CAS) Letters A-K refer to participants in the study,

on the

F+Ai+B+c-X-D+E--O-F+G=erH

//,-.-I

･-JI-m-K

Das-Naglieri

- 479 -





Decoding Measures

Significant difibrences were found on reaction time for word decoding (Z==-2.578,

P<.05) and number of words read incorrectly from both the real word list

(.{r= -2.395,

P<.05) and the non-word list (Z= -2.501,

P<.05). The mean reaction

time fbr word decoding was 73.9 seconds (standard deviation, SD= 56.0) and 51.0

seconds (SD=25.3) ibr the pre- and the posttest, respectively. The mean number of

errors on the real word list was 2.5 (SD:=2.9) and 1.0 (SD=1.8) on the pre- and

posttests, respectively, and 9.0 (SD=6.8) and 3.8 (SD=4.9) on the pre- and posttestnon-word list. According to Hosokawa et al. (2004), mean reaction time of third

graders (N=24) without disabilities was 27,9 seconds (SD=5.6) for real-word lists

and 55.2 seconds (SD=16.5) for non-word list. The mean number of errors was

O.2 (SD ==O.4) tbr real words and 1.2 (SD=1,1) for non-words.

Reading Ability

Participants A, F, G, and K could not take the reading test for the fbllowing

reasons: the participant's age was outside of the range fbr the test (A), the test

scheduling problem (F), and the reading test was too effbrtful tbr the students

(G, K), Differenees were found on both word identification tasks (Z=

- 1.81 1, P<.1O fbr

meaningfu1 sentences; Z=-2.207, P<.05 for meaningless sentences) and overall

reading standard scores (Z=-1.997, P<.05). The mean grade scores of word

identification from meaningfui sentences were 4.9 (SD==2.7) and 6.4 (SD=1.7) forpre- and posttests, respectively. The mean grade scores fbr identification of words

from meaningless sentences were 3.1 (SD=2.1) and 5.4 (SD=2.8) for the pre- and

posttests, respectively. The mean standard scores tbr reading were 40.1 (SD=9.2)and 44.7 (SD==9.8) fbr the pre- and posttests, respectively. However, significant

2506o

2eo8･e

lsoF-

.S ioopo2'

so

o

FIG.

l

i

III-

N--M

--- -l. Isi xx "eL="it

-

-

-

oLap ca oaWD

eLaPcoemnon-WD

25

20

m 15tst-

10

5

o

Mtes.

'-x---

-

2 Individual Reaction Perfbrmance and

Errors fbr Word and Non-Word Decoding

Letters A-K refcr to panicipants in the study;

-48e-

t lt!

+A+B+c-X-D+E+F+G--fi-

H I,--J-m-K

:

Number of Reproduction

WD:=word decoding,




Remediation for Children With Reading DiMculties

improvement was not found on sentence comprehension, meaning rnemory, or

inference,

Case DescriPtion

Participant B. Participant B (see Table 1) had been identified at the publichealth examination when he was a 18-months old as having a delay in early language

development, and after that, attended group therapy for children at risk of' develop-mental delay. He said his first meaningfu1 word when he was 18 months old. He

experienced difficulty in reading words written in hiragana characters, even though

he could read individual hiragana characters when he was in the first grade.Specifically, he oftcn lailed to read you-on and soku-on sounds, a frequently observed

feature of children's reading disabilities in Japanese, His speech was fluent but

rambling,

Cl) Rernediation Schedule: Seven tasks from the J-PREP were administered,

taking one year, from September when he was in the second grade to the next

September. Because it was not possible to take more than one year fbr the application

of J-PREP, the Tracking task was omitted, taking into account his cognitive feature

and the time available, Because his profile on the Kauiman Assessment Battery fbr

Children (K-ABCI Kauiman & Kauiman, 1983) indicated that his simultaneous

processing (115± 8) was significantly stronger than successive processing (90± 9)

(P<.Ol), the task that aims at simultaneous processing was omitted. Participant B

spent about 30 minutes once a week in individual lessons from J-PREP, and he

appeared to enjoy them.

(2) Perfbrmance: The criterion for progressing to the next level on a task was

10

.g

,9iS4o 3 2 1

+B+c

DEH

J

FIG. S Individual Perfbrmanccs on Reading Subtests

IVbtes, WI=word idcntification from meaningfu1 selltences; WI-n=word identi-

fication from meaningless sentences; SC=sentence comprehension;

MM == meaning memory; INF =･,:･･inferenees,

Letters B-E and H:J refer to participants in the study.

- 481



The JapaneseAssociation of SpecialEducation

TABLES BriefTask

N. Hamai-Muroya and H.

Deseription (modified frorn

Maekawa

ll. ayward,Das, & Janzen, 2007)

Task Global Component Bridgin,g Component

aonnecting letters

(Successive)ahildren are required to followlines of diflering colors to findwhich letters on the left side of the

page are connected to letters on

the right side of the page, Eachstimulus eard has five letter pairs,Children write or say the letter

pairs. Children then repcat this

procedure; however, the lines con-necting letters are now in blackink. At the highest kwe! of

diMculty, the stirnulus cards hayeconnecting lines in black ink and

include distractor 1ines,

Stimulus cards hav¢ colored lineswith Ietters on the left and rightsides of the line and dispersedalong the lme to fomi words.

Children connect thc letters and

say or write the word spelled bythe letters.

Shapes and objects

(Simultaneous)Children categorize a group gopictured cornmon ob.iects into oneof three abstract shapes that the

object most closely resembles.

Children, read, with or withouti'acihtator support, a series ot'

phrases or sentences written on

stimuLus cards and place the cards

into one of three categorics pro-vided on wiitten worksheets. Fur-thermere, one card in the series

ivi11 not fit a categoryl children

must also identify which card doesnot fit the categories.

having more than 80% of the answers correct. Wc decided that Participant B should

discontinue the global task of Window Sequencing and the Bridging task of Trans-

portation Matrices halfKvay through, because his performance did not reach the

required level. Other than that, he was able to complete all the items in each task,

Among the tasks that Participant B completed were Connecting Letters, which

fbcused on successive processing, and Shapes and Objects, which fbcused on simulta-

neous. His performance was analyzed in order to examine his strategy development.

Connecting Letters (see Table 3, partial!y copied from Hayward, Das, & Janzen,2007): This was the first task of the J-PREP that he worked on. On the global task,

he used line eolor as a cue. At Level 1, he put both index fingers on the syllables at

each end of the colored line after a glance, and did not trace the lines with his eyes

when connecting the syllables.

At Level 2, he put his fingers on the syllables on both sides of the Iine when he

sounded out the answer. Even after an instructor used a Level-2 prompt, promptinghim to trace the line with his finger, he did not trace the lines as carefu11y as the

instructor had prompted him to do, and failed to connect the syllables on both side

of the line. Instead, he used exclusion to answer the items at the end of the series.

At Level 3, he used his hand to cover syllables that he had already finished

answering, so that he could easily find the remaining items. Also, it was observed that

･- 482 -




Rernediation for Children With Reading DiMculties

he spoke aloud the process that he was using to solve the problem (e.g., C`I

should

follow the Iine. So, go straight here.").

On the bridging task, he traced the lines with his eyes and spelled out each

syllables while putting his fingers on the syllables. At Level 1 and 2, he guessed the

words from the first onc or two syllabies. He also used line color as a cue in Level 2,

At Level 3, he traced the lines with his eyes and spelled out each syllable. He also

used line color as a cue, but did not guess words.

Shapes and Objects (see Tablc 3): On the global task, he examined each picture

very carefully in erder to categorize them. When he categorized a picture incorrectly,

the instructor prompted him with the namc of the shape, and he then pointed out a

characteristic common te all pictures in that category by himself.

On the bridging task, he read the important part of each sentence or found key

words, which enabled him to minimize the effort of reading. At Level 2 (there was no

Level 3 on this task), he judged the category by identifying a feature of zhe sentence

that was comrnon with the category name (e.g., "Ball

play is children's amusement,

so it goes in the category `children's

play'"), He also used exclusion to categorize some

items when he could not decide.

Discussion

In the present study, the PASS reading enhancement program (PREP) was

translated into Japanese U-PREP) and modified so that it would be suitable fbr

childrcn with reading diMculties in Japanese.

Decoding Related Skilts

To investigate the efllcacy of remediation using J-PREP, reading related scores

were compared between pre- and posttests. Statistical analyses indicated that there

may have been improvement in word-level measures, such as reaction time of word

reading, the number of reading errors on word and non-word lists, and word

identification tasks of reading test (Table 2, Fig. 2, Fig. 3),

Prior studies applied PREP to children with decoding difficulties (Das et al.,

1995), children receiving special support from a national fund for students who had

been educationally deprived (Carlson & Das, 1997), and first-graders with reading

diMculties (Parrlla et al., 1999), and examined the changes in the children's decoding

skills after thc remediation period. The results of those studies indicated significant

improvement, especially on the word attack measurc, which is a test ot' non-real word

decoding.

The results of the present study are consistent with these studies, although there

were procedural diflerences, in that our decoding task demanded reading of a list of

words, instead or separate words.

Many ehildren with reading dirnculties experience failure in decoding (Wolf &

Bowers, 1999). Especially, a deficlency in reading nonsense werds is believed to be

based on poor phonological processing, which is a typical indicator of a reader with

--

4B3 -

NII-Electronic




N. Hamai-Muroya and II. Maekawa

difficulties (Rack, Snowling, & Olson, 1992). Otherwise, poor successive processingability has shown to be a characteristic of decoding problems <Hayward et al., 2007).

Since five of the eight PREP tasks aimed at cognitive training of successive process-ing, it would seem reasonable that the children's successive scale scores on the

Cognitive Assessment System test would improve significantly at the posttest aftcr the

remediation period (see Table 2, Fig. 1). From this evidence, it is estimated that

improvement of word decoding-related skills could be derived from improvement in

cognitive processing, such as suceessive processing,

A possible explanation of why the reaction times for non-word decoding were not

significantly shortened, although the number of errors was significantly reduced,

could be that the children developed strategy use through the J-PREP remediation.

If children applied a strategy on thc non-word decoding measure such, as `CihlIow

the

syllable sequence carefu11y" or "make

the souncl internally", they would take some-

what longer, and so would not be unreasonable that their reaction times were not

significantly shortened. To support this hypothesis, two examiners who had adminis-

tered the posttest reported anecdotally that the children obviously looked at and/or

sounded out the words or sentences on the test sheet carefully, compared with their

behavior as seen on the pretests.

The children were asked to find and circle nouns in real (WI) or meaningless

(WI-n) sentences, written in approximately 28 × 15 hiragana characters. Six of the

seven students who took that reading test showed progress in grade score on the word

identification tasks (Fig. 3). Some examiners reported infbrmally that students had

traced each line more fluently and carefully than on the pretest.

Some ef the children had relatively lower VIQ score. For examp!e, it was

estimated that Participant G may experience some dilllculties in verbal comprehen-

sion, vocabulary, or verbal expression. Nevertheless, her word reading errors were

reduced, and an improved attitude about using a strategy was seen at posttest, so that

this experience rnay help her read other words and sentences,

Reading Abilities

Text-level reading measured by sentence comprehension, meaning memory, and

inference was not significantly improved. Those three subtests require students to

choose the optimal answer from between two choices. Examiners reported anecdotally

that the children had read the sentences and questions more attentively and tried

harder to find correct answer on the posttest compared with the pretest. So, it is

possible that the pretest scores of some of the students did not validly refiect the

children's real ability on those three subtests because the task was too demanding for

them.

Stratagy Development

PREP aims at the developrnent of information processing strategies, such as

successive or simultaneous processing. Participant B's strategy on the global task of

Connecting Letters at level 1 was te use line color as a cue. This was indeed not the

- 484 -




Remediation fbr Children With Reading Dirnculties

strategy that we had expected, but we did not correct him. Rather, he was promptedto trace the lines with his eyes or fingers, as described in the instruetion manual, OnLevels 2 and 3, hc made usc of exclusion, using his hands or fingers to cover syllables

or indieate syllables to bc read, and also used thinking-aloud strategies. On the

following bridging task, he traced the Iines with his eyes and guessed at the words,

spelling thom out, in addition to using line color cues or manual manipulation. Onthe Shapes and Objects task, which was the last task of his J-PREP remediation, hedeveloped the strategy of sounding out the categorizing process on the global taskand then used it also on the bridging task.

At the beginning of his J-PREP remediation, the strategies that he used were not

necessarily reasenable and eflbctive tbr accomplishing tasks. Rather, he did not even

attempt to use strategies at first, But during the J-PREP sessions, the varicty of hisstrategy use gradually developed, and by the end of the remediation, more appropri-

ate strategies for conducting the tasks came to be choscn.

Conclusions

The results of the present study suggest that J-PREP may bc eflective forimproving word reading in Japanese children with reading difficulties. This was

supported by both statistical analyses and the observed improvement in individualreading-related skills and abilities after remediation.

The observed improvement in word reading might possibly be based on

improvement in the cognitive base that underlies the reading process, such as

successive processing. Enhancement of cognitive functioning could be postulated tobe due to the development of information processing strategies. Ifso, then the method

tbr evaluating strategy development should be examined further to ensure that, Also,further investigations should be done that include a control group that does not

receive remediation. Such an experimental comparison is strongly needed to confirm

the present results,

Anecdotal observations of one of the participants in the present study suggested

that his strategy use developed in terms of variation and appropriateness.

In conclusion, J-PREP may be useful for remediation of reading diMculties in

Japanese children. Although some mincr issues remain befbre J-PREP could be used

extensively, many children with reading difficulty may benefit from J-PREP which.

might enhance their reading ability through the interaction bctween the children and

the administrator, mediated by J-PREP.

Acknowledgements

We are very gratefuI to members of Project J-PREP at the Maekawa Lab at the

University of Tsukuba. For several years, more than 30 meinbers have engaged insuch processes as manual translation, preparation ofJ-PREP materials, and remedia-

tion of children with reading difficulty.

- 485

-



The JapaneseAssociation ofSpecial Education

N. Hamai-Muroya and H, Maekawa

References

American Psychiatric Association (1994) Diagnostic and statistical manual of mentat czasorders

(4th ed.). Author: Washington, DC.Carlson, J. S, & Das, J. P, (1997) A process approach to remediation word decoding

deficiencies in Chapter 1 children. Learning DisabiliCJ, Qptarterly, 20, 93-102.

Catts, H. W., Hogan, T. P., & Fey, M, E, (200S) Subgrouping poor readers un the basis of

individual differences in reading-relatcd abilitics. .lburnal of Leaming Disabilities, S6, 151-164.Das, J. P. (1999) llt4ss reading' enhancement Pragram. Sarka Educational Resources, Deal, NJ.Das, J. P. (2000) PREP: A cognitive remediation program in theory and practice. Deeveiop-

mental Disabitilies Butletin, 28, 83-96,Das, J. P., Mashra, R. K., & Pool, J. E. (1995) An experiment on cognitive rcmediation of

word-reading dirnculty. .lhumal of Learning Disabilities, 28, 66-79.Das, J. P., Naglieri, J. A., & Kirby, J. R, (1994) Assessment of cagnitieve precesses: 7-he Pt4ss

theonyy of inteUigence. Allyn & Bacon, Boston, Massachusetts.Hayward, D., Das, J, P., & Janzen, T. (2007) Innovativc program for improvement in

reading through cognitive enhancement: A remediation study of Canadian First

Nations children. JTburnal of Learning Disabilities, 40, 443-457.Hosokawa, M,, Muroya, N., Futakami, S., & Maekawa, H. (2004) Phonological and

auditoTy infbrmation processing in children with rcading dienculties. .laPanese .lburnal of Learning Dtgabiklies, 13, ]51-162. (in Japanesc)Kaufman, A. S. & Kauiman, N. L. (198B) thofman Assessment Batte,:y -for C;eildren Cil-ABq. Circle Pines, Minnesota, Ameriean Guidance Servicc, Inc. Oapanese edition)Kitao, N, (1984) TKLslyle Reading Abik'ty Diagnostic Tlast. Taken Publishing, Tokyo. (in Japanese)Makita, K. (1968) The rarity of reading disability in Japanese children. American Jburnal of Orthopsychiatrp, 38, 599-614.Naglicri, J. A. & Das, J. P. (1997) Das-JVlr,gtien' Cl)gnitiwe Assessment opstem. Riverside

Publishing, Itasca, I-nois.

Parrila, R. K., Das, J, P., Kendrick, M. E., Papadopoulos, T. C., & Kirby, J. R. (1999) Eflicacy of a cognitive reading rernediation program ibr at-risk children in grade 1.

Devetopmental Disabilities Bulletin, 27, 1-38.Rack, J, P,, Snowling, M. J,, & Olson, R. K. (1992) Thc nonword reading defieit in

developental dysLexia. Reading Research Q4arterly, 27, 28-53.Wolg M. & Bewers, P. G, (1999) Thc double-deficit hypothesis for the developmental

dyslexias, JIburnal qf' Educational Il!ychotogy, 91, 4･15-438.

Appendix

DescriPtion of Global and Bri(iging 71asks (modified from Das et al., 1995)

Each item has three levels of prompts; each task has a criterion Ievel, with a

parallel form to administer if the criterion is not met; and each item is followed by

486 -




Remediatioll for Children With Reading DiMeulties

discussion of the strategies used.

.lbining shopes-GlobaL In this task, the students use a printed arrangement or

shapes: rows of triangles, squares, and hexagons alternating with rows of circles. They

have four rules to fbllow, one being that straight lines must always pass through a

cirele. They listen to directions instructing them to join specific shapes and then jointhem, fbllowing the rules. The Level I task begins with threc rows of geometric figures

and one set of instructions, changing by the end of Levcl 3 to seven rows of geometricfigures and three sets of instructions.

JIbining shmpes-Bridiging. This task parallels the global task and looks much like a

word-search puzzle. The students tbllow rules similar to those for the global task,

joining lettcrs diagonally to form words. Again, they are asked to identify the word.

mandbzv seguencing-GlobaL In this task, a series of colored circles and squares is

shown to the students one at a time, through a window. Using the required shapes

with no distracters, the students then reproduce the sequence, Level 1 has only one

color, Levcl 2, only one shape, and Level 3, variation in both color and shape.

uando[v seeuencing-Britiging. The identical fbrmat is used tbr this task, with

students seeing the syllables of a word in sequence through the window, They then

reproduce the word with the individual syllables and identify the word.

(]Z}nnectitzg letters-Global and bndging. This is described in Table 3.

71ransportation-GlobaL In this task, students are shown a strip of pictures of

diflerent vehicles. After they look at thc full strip, and then at each picture individu-

ally in its place on the matrix, the pictures are covered. Students must reproduce the

order with individual pictures on a blank matrix. The cQrrect pictures are mixed in

with five distracters. Level 1 eontains six items, with ibur pictures per item. Level 2contains six items, three with four pictures and three with six pictures. Level 3

contains six items with six pictures fbr each. Patterns change from simple to more

complex, with type of vehicle and color creating a pattern.

ftansportation-Britiging. In this task, a series of carcls with individual words is

placed in front of students. Related words are arranged in alternating or more

complex patterns. The students are helped to read the words, if necessary; then they

repeat them a number of times. After the words have been removed, the students

repeat them in order, Early items contain four words, increasing to a maximum of

eight at the end of Levet 3. The students look at the word cards in order, fbllowing

each item, and pick out the related pairs, with discussion of the pattern used,

Related memot:y set-Global, In this task, outlines of the front ofthree anirnals are

displayed, The students are then shown the back of one of the animals, with an

intervening space, and must verbally identify and justify which animal front matchcs

that back. At Level 1, animals with stripes and spots are included; by Level 3, many

animals that look very similar are used.

RelaIed memozy set-Britiging In this task, students are shown three word begin-nings on one side of a page, with one word ending on the other side of the page. The

studcnts verbally identify which beginning fits with the ending letters to make a word,

without physically putting the front and back units together. The words are separated

487 -





into onset, rhyme units, and syllable units,

TYacking-GlobaL A map containing identical houses with numbers, identical

trees with Ietters, and a street grid is displayed about an arm's length from the

students. The students are then given three cards, each containing a picture of a

difi'erent house and the minimal street grid necessary to allow identification of a

specific house. The time required by students te identify the house number or tree

letter for all three cards is recorded. Three sets of three cards are presented in this

format. Children then go through a training process involving three different strat-

egies and, after that, repeat the process with the nine original cards. Levels 1 and 2use houses and trees, respectively. In Level 3, a map with only squares containing

Ietters and lines connecting them to the starting point is displayed. The cards the

students see have the same line and box configurations, but with the letters rnissing.

They identify the letters.

7'blacking'-BriZigiirg. In this task, a map of the West Edmonton mall, is displayed

with various symbols, such as book stores being identificd by a colored book symbol.

The students arc given a story card containing a list of tasks to be accomplished.

They are required to cornpletc the imaginary tasks by planning and demonstrating

the most efltictive route. Level 2 involves a line drawing ofa playground. The students

read a story about three boys at the playground and have to identify from various

positional cues where one of the boys is hiding, Level 3 uses the West Edmonton mall

map again, with more complex tasks.

Shope design-Clobat. In this task, an arrangement of geometric shapes is dis-

played for 5 seconds. Students are given the shapes, and is then asked to reproduce

the design. Each level consists of' six items.

S)hope design-Britilgitzg. Students read cards describing animals in diflbrentrelational positions. They then position the anirnals in the correct configuration. Level1 has positions on one plane, Level 2 on two planes. In Level 3, a picture setting is

displayed fbr the students, They listen to a story, and then place the animals in the

correct position in the setting, based on the description in the story.

shopes and objects-Global and briciging. [l]his is described in Table 3.

-Received

December l2, 2007; Accepted February 23, 2008-

- 4SB

-

enhancement (prep) - j-stage

Documents