| Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools. |
The Research-to-Practice Ball GameClasswide Peer Tutoring and Teacher Interest, Implementation, and ModificationsPatricia F. Vadasy is a research associate at the Washington Research Institute in Seattle. Her research interests include early intervention to prevent reading disability, instructional design of beginning reading instruction, and implementation issues in translating research to practice.
Joseph R. Jenkins is a professor in the College of Education at the University of Washington. His research interests include assessment and instruction of children with mild disabilities and literacy learning.
Lawrence R. Antil will be receiving his doctorate in education from the University of Washington. His research interests are influences on teacher use of research-based practices and reading and writing instruction for students with disabilities
Norris B. Phillips is research assistants at the Washington Research Institute. Address: Patricia F. Vadasy, Washington Research Institute, 150 Nickerson St., Suite 305, Seattle, WA 98109.
Kathleen Pool is research assistants at the Washington Research Institute. Address: Patricia F. Vadasy, Washington Research Institute, 150 Nickerson St., Suite 305, Seattle, WA 98109. This study examined teachers' receptivity to, and the factors that influence their use of, a practice new to classroom teachers for including students with learning disabilities, classwide peer tutoring (cwpt; fuchs, mathes,' fuchs, 1993). Cwpt is a whole-class approach that uses teacher-orchestrated procedures and peer-mediated practice to supplement reading instruction. forty-four teachers in eight elementary schools participated; 29 teachers in a high-support group received honoraria and access to release time and technical assistance in order to learn about cwpt and how to implement it; 15 teachers in a low-support group received only a copy of the cwpt manual. all teachers attended a 40-minute presentation on cwpt that provided an overview on its components and benefits. measures included surveys administered before and after the initial presentations, observations midpoint in teachers' implementation of cwpt, interim interviews and logs, and a follow-up interview and observation of a subgroup of four imple-mentors. the survey responses of 44 teachers were analyzed and the six implementors were observed and interviewed. results indicated that level of support did not significantly influence teacher interest in or use of cwpt. all implementors made some modifications in the cwpt procedures. discussion focuses on factors that might have influenced teacher Interest in cwpt, their implementation rates, and reasons for teachers' modifications of the practice.
Remedial and Special Education, Vol. 18, No. 3,
143-156 (1997) This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||

