University of Missouri - Saint Louis

The Graduate School

Announcement

An oral examination in defense of the dissertation for the degree

Doctor of Philosophy

Megan Franke
M.Ed. in Educational Administration, University of Missouri-St. Louis, January, 2000
M.Ed. in Counseling, University of Missouri-St. Louis, May, 1996
B.S. in Elementary Education, Bowling Green State University, August, 1965

Abstract

Six descriptive case studies were conducted to determine the relationship between participation in an intervention program of interlaced motor and phonological processing activities and reading performance. This idea evolved from research using functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (fMRI) and indicating that the temporoparietal regions in the left hemisphere of the brain are activated during phonological processing activities (Pugh et al., 2000; Simos et al., 2000). We also know that these posterior regions of the brain are under-activated in readers with phonological processing deficits (Shaywitz et al, 1998).

Perhaps with its extensive neural circuitry, the cerebellum, a center for motor control, also might be involved in cognitive functions such as phonological processing. If we consider that the posterior region of the brain helps to mediate phonological processing (Schmahmann & Pandya, 1997) and that under-activation of this region of the brain was evident in struggling readers (Pugh et al., 2000; Shaywitz et al., 1998; Simos et al., 2000), participation in an individualized intervention program of interlaced motor and phonological processing activities might facilitate reading performance.

To select the participants, a screening process involving reading, phonological processing, motor, and intelligence assessments was used. The six students chosen had average ability but were reading below grade level and exhibiting motor and balance delays. During the 15 week intervention, the students participated daily for 15 minutes. A mixed research method was employed using pre-post quantitative measures coupled with a reflective journal of field notes and observer comments that were qualitatively analyzed. A cross-case analysis was conducted.

After the interventions, the qualitative and quantitative testing results revealed varying degrees of progress. The greatest improvement was in the area of reading with all participants reading at or above grade level by the end of the four months. Most participants seemed to perform the phonological processing activities with more ease by the end of the intervention but change was not necessarily reflected in the phonological processing assessment. It is possible that the phonological processing assessment did not adequately detect change since it relied on aural presentation while the intervention activities were presented visually.

Defense of Dissertation Committee