Seeing Stars
Study: Bell, Hungerford et al. (n.d)

Summary

Lindamood-Bell collaborates with schools/districts using a Professional Learning Community model to customize an RtI design to best meet the aggregate learning needs of all students. We accomplish this within the mandates of IDEA, state and local education policies. Each partnership is unique depending on existent school/district variables. Lindamood-Bell’s partnership and Professional Learning Community (PLC) philosophy is built around two main RtI concepts necessary to transform schools academically. First, instructional methodologies are based on a theory of cognition. The process-based cognitive approach stimulates specific brain-based skills such as symbol imagery, concept imagery, and phonemic awareness. These underlying cognitive processes must be developed (Tier I) and/or remediated (Tier II & III) for all students to maximize their learning potential and benefit from standards-based instruction, strategies, materials, and curricula. Thus Lindamood-Bell adheres to and promotes a paradigm shift in how to best meet the cognitive and language processing needs of students, integrating both process and content/standards-based instruction. The skills addressed are foundational to all curricula and they cut across all standards. Second, while Lindamood-Bell’s research-proven instructional practices are necessary, they are insufficient without simultaneously controlling for certain components or practices within the school system and/or culture in which they are to be implemented. To achieve large scale and sustainable success, Lindamood-Bell collaborates with all levels of leadership, including the school board, district administration, and site-level leaders in evidence based practices. Lindamood-Bell’s approach is to work in a collaborative effort to address and improve the existing school framework, personnel, and practices all as applied to an RtI framework. Specifically, the main district and school leadership support components include sustained and embedded professional development, data analyses and accountability, differentiated instruction, leadership institutes, parent/community outreach, and a certification process for teachers. This model mirrors the conceptual framework of Response to Intervention (RtI). By incorporating a collaborative, problem-solving framework to increase student achievement, Lindamood-Bell’s Professional Learning Community model has been shown to meet the needs of all students and sustain results over time.

Target Grades:
K, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12
Target Populations:
  • Students with disabilities only
  • Students with learning disabilities
  • English language learners
  • Any student at risk for academic failure
Area(s) of Focus:
  • Phonological awareness
  • Phonics/word study
  • Comprehension
  • Fluency
  • Vocabulary
  • Spelling
  • Other: Oral & Written Language Expression
  • Spelling
  • Sentence construction
  • Planning and revising
Where to Obtain:
Gander Publishing
416 Higuera Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
(800) 233-1819
lindamoodbell.com
Initial Cost:
Contact vendor for pricing details.
Replacement Cost:
Contact vendor for pricing details.

Lindamood-Bell® Summary of Services and Fees (Average itemized breakout for full contract) a. Lindamood-Bell® Professional Development Workshops ($35,000 per year, up to 3 schools): Our organization provides the following Lindamood-Bell® Professional Development Workshops for district staff: One 2-day Seeing Stars® workshop; One 2-day Visualizing & Verbalizing® workshop; and One 1-day Introduction to Lindamood-Bell® School Partnerships workshop, which includes the initial RtI PD. The Seeing Stars® workshops will present the use of symbol imagery to stabilize phonemic awareness and help develop sight words, fluency and spelling. The Visualizing and Verbalizing® workshop will present the theory regarding the relationship of concept imagery to language comprehension and the practice of the specific steps of the Nancibell® Visualizing and Verbalizing® Program to develop vocabulary and oral and written language comprehension. The Introduction to School Services workshop will provide a presentation of a model of language processing that unifies decoding, encoding, vocabulary and comprehension ability all within an RtI framework. The sensory-cognitive functions that affect development of decoding and comprehension skills are presented through research and case studies. Participants learn to identify students in need of remediation. b. Consulting, Coaching, and Program Management ($125,000 per year, up to 3 schools): Lindamood-Bell provides direct, full-time, on-site coaching, mentoring, and program management for all instructional staff. This support is differentiated based on skill level of classroom and small-group teachers. A key component is to establish an organizational infrastructure that provides research-based intervention, body of- evidence services to comprehensively increase student achievement. c. Lindamood-Bell® Instructional Leader Certification Program ($15,000 per year, up to 3 schools): Lindamood-Bell’s Instructional Leader Certification Program is a rigorous professional development plan designed to prepare key instructional leaders to provide instruction and maintain a high quality, integrated, accountability-driven program for schools, again, all within an RtI framework. Candidates participate in on-going mentoring—the primary function of Lindamood-Bell® consulting staff within the schools throughout the year—and advanced workshops and professional development activities. A school’s certified instructional leaders will go on to sustain the model in perpetuity. Certification is competency based, and candidates must renew their certification annually. d. Leadership Institute ($3,000 per year, up to 3 schools) As part of the PLC partnership, Lindamood-Bell provides a two-day in-service for district leaders prior to the start of the partnership. Leaders learn the framework for the PLC process-based educational model, the fundamentals of the instruction methodologies to be used, how to use data to determine differentiated instructional needs, and how to monitor classroom and small group instruction. Emphasis is placed on principals as instructional leaders with specific responsibilities in monitoring program quality and fidelity. A shared vision of program goals and expectations is developed by school/district leadership and clearly communicated to all constituents, including teachers and parents. Leaders learn all aspects of Lindamood-Bell’s Response to Intervention framework and how to effectively manage this framework school wide. SECTION 1: BASIC INFORMATION e. INFORMS for Schools Orientation/Web-based data management ($3,000 per year, up to 3 schools) Teachers and administrators receive instruction and access to Lindamood-Bell’s web-based data management system. This system includes an automated test-scoring module that generates individualized real time student reports, progress monitoring data, and attendance tracking. This is a critical tool for schools/districts, as it allows for the management of the learning needs of very large numbers of students, using nationally-normed diagnostic evaluations to comprise the “body of evidence” necessary in an Response to Intervention model. This webbased system does not require the school/district to purchase any additional software or hardware. Access is included with Lindamood-Bell’s contract for services with the district. f. Test Administration Orientation and Support ($3,000 per year, up to 3 schools) Lindamood-Bell® staff will train school personnel in test administration for assessing student skill level in various components of reading and comprehension. Lindamood-Bell® staff will shadow and coach school personnel throughout the year to help manage the various stages of assessment, scoring and entering of data. g. Quality Control Visits and Meetings ($5,000 per year, up to 3 schools) Corporate director visits occur a minimum of three times a year to provide regular program monitoring, support, and review of key indicators as a part of a continuous plan for improvement. h. Data Analysis and Reporting ($9,000 per year, up to 3 schools) We understand the importance of accountability and decision-making based on data. We continually monitor and measure the efficacy of our services and programs through comprehensive data analyses. It is our goal to provide partners with timely data analyses and recommendations to maximize program quality, fidelity, and sustainability in the Lindamood-Bell® model. On a monthly basis, we report to site principals and to the district administration regarding the status and fidelity of the implementation. Throughout the year, we will also provide the district administration and school board the following four reports: 1. Needs Assessment Report (Fall) – includes pre-test results for at-risk students identified for Lindamood-Bell® instruction 2. Mid-Year Report (Winter) – includes pre and post-test results for students participating in Lindamood-Bell® instruction during the first semester 3. End-of Year Report (Summer) – includes pre and post-test results for all students participating in Lindamood-Bell® instruction during the school year 4. State Achievement Test Report (Fall of following year) – includes cohort analyses on state achievement test results i. Tips for Home/Community Outreach ($1,000 per year, up to 3 schools) Lindamood-Bell provides mutually agreed upon events for the families of students, each semester, including our Tips for Home presentation, to increase community awareness and involvement in the targeted schools. These events are a critical component behind the success of the Professional Learning Community. j. Total Sample Fees ($199,000 per year, up to 3 schools) Sample fees include all components and services listed above, all Lindamood-Bell® salaries, benefits, operational expenses, and workshop fees. Lindamood-Bell’s focus is professional development rather than direct instruction. Therefore, the above cost estimate for professional development will serve as the 3-year budget for a school. All students in the school will benefit from the provided professional development; therefore Lindamood-Bell does not price our services per pupil. The sample fees are based on the Lindamood-Bell® 3- Year partnership plan and may vary based on goals and objectives being met each year. The Professional Development design plan can be scaled-up and customized based on the need and size of the school. Please see below for sample number of teachers and students served by one Lindamood-Bell® consultant: -Up to 16 classroom teachers (K-12), serving up to 25 students per class. Up to 400 students served. -Up to 12 push-in/small-group intervention teachers (K-12), serving up to 12 groups at 5 students per group. Up to 60 students served. k. Additional Sample Fees for Materials ($55,000 minimum year 1; $15,000 minimum years 2 and 3): Instructional and testing materials must be purchased and received separately by the school. Instructional materials are available separately through Gander Educational Publishing® (800-554-1819) and testing materials are available separately through the various test publishers. Lindamood-Bell will provide a list of publishers and contact information for the school’s convenience.

Staff Qualified to Administer Include:
  • Special Education Teacher
  • General Education Teacher
  • Reading Specialist
  • Math Specialist
  • EL Specialist
  • Interventionist
  • Student Support Services Personnel (e.g., counselor, social worker, school psychologist, etc.)
  • Paraprofessional
  • Other:
Training Requirements:
1 week of initial training, then mentoring

Our plan for professional development is job-embedded, evidence-based, and tailored to meet the desired goals of a particular school or school system. The backbone of this approach is the implementation of an RtI-based Professional Learning Community (PLC), in which educators can collaborate around a particular methodology or approach, review and discuss student data, share and problem solve issues related to classroom practice, and learn collectively from their own research and experience. A core component of this work is to review teacher and school-wide efforts to improve student learning, including sheltered instruction, specific interventions, and student support systems. Through the use of our pedagogy and programs, teachers learn to ‘speak the same language’ when comparing progress of students within or across curricula or content areas. Ultimately, this process informs the delivery of standards-based instructional strategies and content-based instruction as well as the overall school or district plan for ongoing professional development.


Schools which have successfully implemented a Lindamood-Bell® Professional Learning Community model have utilized a system-wide protocol for measuring student growth, teaching quality and relevance, and overall fidelity of the school improvement process. This process is guided by site leaders and decision makers who will regularly review key indicators, and adjust the goals and benchmarks necessary to support students, teachers, and administrators in meeting annual yearly progress (AYP) and school improvement goals.

Access to Technical Support:
Mandatory
Recommended Administration Formats Include:
  • Individual students
  • Small group of students
Minimum Number of Minutes Per Session:
55
Minimum Number of Sessions Per Week:
5
Minimum Number of Weeks:
8
Detailed Implementation Manual or Instructions Available:
Yes
Is Technology Required?

Program Information

Descriptive Information

Please provide a description of program, including intended use:

Lindamood-Bell collaborates with schools/districts using a Professional Learning Community model to customize an RtI design to best meet the aggregate learning needs of all students. We accomplish this within the mandates of IDEA, state and local education policies. Each partnership is unique depending on existent school/district variables. Lindamood-Bell’s partnership and Professional Learning Community (PLC) philosophy is built around two main RtI concepts necessary to transform schools academically. First, instructional methodologies are based on a theory of cognition. The process-based cognitive approach stimulates specific brain-based skills such as symbol imagery, concept imagery, and phonemic awareness. These underlying cognitive processes must be developed (Tier I) and/or remediated (Tier II & III) for all students to maximize their learning potential and benefit from standards-based instruction, strategies, materials, and curricula. Thus Lindamood-Bell adheres to and promotes a paradigm shift in how to best meet the cognitive and language processing needs of students, integrating both process and content/standards-based instruction. The skills addressed are foundational to all curricula and they cut across all standards. Second, while Lindamood-Bell’s research-proven instructional practices are necessary, they are insufficient without simultaneously controlling for certain components or practices within the school system and/or culture in which they are to be implemented. To achieve large scale and sustainable success, Lindamood-Bell collaborates with all levels of leadership, including the school board, district administration, and site-level leaders in evidence based practices. Lindamood-Bell’s approach is to work in a collaborative effort to address and improve the existing school framework, personnel, and practices all as applied to an RtI framework. Specifically, the main district and school leadership support components include sustained and embedded professional development, data analyses and accountability, differentiated instruction, leadership institutes, parent/community outreach, and a certification process for teachers. This model mirrors the conceptual framework of Response to Intervention (RtI). By incorporating a collaborative, problem-solving framework to increase student achievement, Lindamood-Bell’s Professional Learning Community model has been shown to meet the needs of all students and sustain results over time.

The program is intended for use in the following age(s) and/or grade(s).

not selected Age 0-3
not selected Age 3-5
selected Kindergarten
selected First grade
selected Second grade
selected Third grade
selected Fourth grade
selected Fifth grade
selected Sixth grade
selected Seventh grade
selected Eighth grade
selected Ninth grade
selected Tenth grade
selected Eleventh grade
selected Twelth grade


The program is intended for use with the following groups.

selected Students with disabilities only
selected Students with learning disabilities
not selected Students with intellectual disabilities
not selected Students with emotional or behavioral disabilities
selected English language learners
selected Any student at risk for academic failure
not selected Any student at risk for emotional and/or behavioral difficulties
not selected Other
If other, please describe:

ACADEMIC INTERVENTION: Please indicate the academic area of focus.

Early Literacy

not selected Print knowledge/awareness
not selected Alphabet knowledge
not selected Phonological awareness
not selected Phonological awarenessEarly writing
not selected Early decoding abilities
not selected Other

If other, please describe:

Language

not selected Expressive and receptive vocabulary
not selected Grammar
not selected Syntax
not selected Listening comprehension
not selected Other
If other, please describe:

Reading

selected Phonological awareness
selected Phonics/word study
selected Comprehension
selected Fluency
selected Vocabulary
selected Spelling
selected Other
If other, please describe:
Oral & Written Language Expression

Mathematics

not selected Computation
not selected Concepts and/or word problems
not selected Whole number arithmetic
not selected Comprehensive: Includes computation/procedures, problem solving, and mathematical concepts
not selected Algebra
not selected Fractions, decimals (rational number)
not selected Geometry and measurement
not selected Other
If other, please describe:

Writing

not selected Handwriting
selected Spelling
selected Sentence construction
selected Planning and revising
not selected Other
If other, please describe:

BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTION: Please indicate the behavior area of focus.

Externalizing Behavior

not selected Physical Aggression
not selected Verbal Threats
not selected Property Destruction
not selected Noncompliance
not selected High Levels of Disengagement
not selected Disruptive Behavior
not selected Social Behavior (e.g., Peer interactions, Adult interactions)
not selected Other
If other, please describe:

Internalizing Behavior

not selected Depression
not selected Anxiety
not selected Social Difficulties (e.g., withdrawal)
not selected School Phobia
not selected Other
If other, please describe:

Acquisition and cost information

Where to obtain:

Address
416 Higuera Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
Phone Number
(800) 233-1819
Website
lindamoodbell.com

Initial cost for implementing program:

Cost
Unit of cost

Replacement cost per unit for subsequent use:

Cost
Unit of cost
Duration of license

Additional cost information:

Describe basic pricing plan and structure of the program. Also, provide information on what is included in the published program, as well as what is not included but required for implementation (e.g., computer and/or internet access)

Lindamood-Bell® Summary of Services and Fees (Average itemized breakout for full contract) a. Lindamood-Bell® Professional Development Workshops ($35,000 per year, up to 3 schools): Our organization provides the following Lindamood-Bell® Professional Development Workshops for district staff: One 2-day Seeing Stars® workshop; One 2-day Visualizing & Verbalizing® workshop; and One 1-day Introduction to Lindamood-Bell® School Partnerships workshop, which includes the initial RtI PD. The Seeing Stars® workshops will present the use of symbol imagery to stabilize phonemic awareness and help develop sight words, fluency and spelling. The Visualizing and Verbalizing® workshop will present the theory regarding the relationship of concept imagery to language comprehension and the practice of the specific steps of the Nancibell® Visualizing and Verbalizing® Program to develop vocabulary and oral and written language comprehension. The Introduction to School Services workshop will provide a presentation of a model of language processing that unifies decoding, encoding, vocabulary and comprehension ability all within an RtI framework. The sensory-cognitive functions that affect development of decoding and comprehension skills are presented through research and case studies. Participants learn to identify students in need of remediation. b. Consulting, Coaching, and Program Management ($125,000 per year, up to 3 schools): Lindamood-Bell provides direct, full-time, on-site coaching, mentoring, and program management for all instructional staff. This support is differentiated based on skill level of classroom and small-group teachers. A key component is to establish an organizational infrastructure that provides research-based intervention, body of- evidence services to comprehensively increase student achievement. c. Lindamood-Bell® Instructional Leader Certification Program ($15,000 per year, up to 3 schools): Lindamood-Bell’s Instructional Leader Certification Program is a rigorous professional development plan designed to prepare key instructional leaders to provide instruction and maintain a high quality, integrated, accountability-driven program for schools, again, all within an RtI framework. Candidates participate in on-going mentoring—the primary function of Lindamood-Bell® consulting staff within the schools throughout the year—and advanced workshops and professional development activities. A school’s certified instructional leaders will go on to sustain the model in perpetuity. Certification is competency based, and candidates must renew their certification annually. d. Leadership Institute ($3,000 per year, up to 3 schools) As part of the PLC partnership, Lindamood-Bell provides a two-day in-service for district leaders prior to the start of the partnership. Leaders learn the framework for the PLC process-based educational model, the fundamentals of the instruction methodologies to be used, how to use data to determine differentiated instructional needs, and how to monitor classroom and small group instruction. Emphasis is placed on principals as instructional leaders with specific responsibilities in monitoring program quality and fidelity. A shared vision of program goals and expectations is developed by school/district leadership and clearly communicated to all constituents, including teachers and parents. Leaders learn all aspects of Lindamood-Bell’s Response to Intervention framework and how to effectively manage this framework school wide. SECTION 1: BASIC INFORMATION e. INFORMS for Schools Orientation/Web-based data management ($3,000 per year, up to 3 schools) Teachers and administrators receive instruction and access to Lindamood-Bell’s web-based data management system. This system includes an automated test-scoring module that generates individualized real time student reports, progress monitoring data, and attendance tracking. This is a critical tool for schools/districts, as it allows for the management of the learning needs of very large numbers of students, using nationally-normed diagnostic evaluations to comprise the “body of evidence” necessary in an Response to Intervention model. This webbased system does not require the school/district to purchase any additional software or hardware. Access is included with Lindamood-Bell’s contract for services with the district. f. Test Administration Orientation and Support ($3,000 per year, up to 3 schools) Lindamood-Bell® staff will train school personnel in test administration for assessing student skill level in various components of reading and comprehension. Lindamood-Bell® staff will shadow and coach school personnel throughout the year to help manage the various stages of assessment, scoring and entering of data. g. Quality Control Visits and Meetings ($5,000 per year, up to 3 schools) Corporate director visits occur a minimum of three times a year to provide regular program monitoring, support, and review of key indicators as a part of a continuous plan for improvement. h. Data Analysis and Reporting ($9,000 per year, up to 3 schools) We understand the importance of accountability and decision-making based on data. We continually monitor and measure the efficacy of our services and programs through comprehensive data analyses. It is our goal to provide partners with timely data analyses and recommendations to maximize program quality, fidelity, and sustainability in the Lindamood-Bell® model. On a monthly basis, we report to site principals and to the district administration regarding the status and fidelity of the implementation. Throughout the year, we will also provide the district administration and school board the following four reports: 1. Needs Assessment Report (Fall) – includes pre-test results for at-risk students identified for Lindamood-Bell® instruction 2. Mid-Year Report (Winter) – includes pre and post-test results for students participating in Lindamood-Bell® instruction during the first semester 3. End-of Year Report (Summer) – includes pre and post-test results for all students participating in Lindamood-Bell® instruction during the school year 4. State Achievement Test Report (Fall of following year) – includes cohort analyses on state achievement test results i. Tips for Home/Community Outreach ($1,000 per year, up to 3 schools) Lindamood-Bell provides mutually agreed upon events for the families of students, each semester, including our Tips for Home presentation, to increase community awareness and involvement in the targeted schools. These events are a critical component behind the success of the Professional Learning Community. j. Total Sample Fees ($199,000 per year, up to 3 schools) Sample fees include all components and services listed above, all Lindamood-Bell® salaries, benefits, operational expenses, and workshop fees. Lindamood-Bell’s focus is professional development rather than direct instruction. Therefore, the above cost estimate for professional development will serve as the 3-year budget for a school. All students in the school will benefit from the provided professional development; therefore Lindamood-Bell does not price our services per pupil. The sample fees are based on the Lindamood-Bell® 3- Year partnership plan and may vary based on goals and objectives being met each year. The Professional Development design plan can be scaled-up and customized based on the need and size of the school. Please see below for sample number of teachers and students served by one Lindamood-Bell® consultant: -Up to 16 classroom teachers (K-12), serving up to 25 students per class. Up to 400 students served. -Up to 12 push-in/small-group intervention teachers (K-12), serving up to 12 groups at 5 students per group. Up to 60 students served. k. Additional Sample Fees for Materials ($55,000 minimum year 1; $15,000 minimum years 2 and 3): Instructional and testing materials must be purchased and received separately by the school. Instructional materials are available separately through Gander Educational Publishing® (800-554-1819) and testing materials are available separately through the various test publishers. Lindamood-Bell will provide a list of publishers and contact information for the school’s convenience.

Program Specifications

Setting for which the program is designed.

selected Individual students
selected Small group of students
not selected BI ONLY: A classroom of students

If group-delivered, how many students compose a small group?

   2-6

Program administration time

Minimum number of minutes per session
55
Minimum number of sessions per week
5
Minimum number of weeks
8
not selected N/A (implemented until effective)

If intervention program is intended to occur over less frequently than 60 minutes a week for approximately 8 weeks, justify the level of intensity:

Does the program include highly specified teacher manuals or step by step instructions for implementation?
Yes

BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTION: Is the program affiliated with a broad school- or class-wide management program?

If yes, please identify and describe the broader school- or class-wide management program:

Does the program require technology?
Yes

If yes, what technology is required to implement your program?
not selected Computer or tablet
not selected Internet connection
not selected Other technology (please specify)

If your program requires additional technology not listed above, please describe the required technology and the extent to which it is combined with teacher small-group instruction/intervention:
Teachers and administrators receive instruction and access to Lindamood-Bell’s web-based data management system including an automated test-scoring module that generates individualized real time student reports, progress monitoring data, and attendance tracking.

Training

How many people are needed to implement the program ?

Is training for the instructor or interventionist required?
Yes
If yes, is the necessary training free or at-cost?

Describe the time required for instructor or interventionist training:
1 week of initial training, then mentoring

Describe the format and content of the instructor or interventionist training:
Our plan for professional development is job-embedded, evidence-based, and tailored to meet the desired goals of a particular school or school system. The backbone of this approach is the implementation of an RtI-based Professional Learning Community (PLC), in which educators can collaborate around a particular methodology or approach, review and discuss student data, share and problem solve issues related to classroom practice, and learn collectively from their own research and experience. A core component of this work is to review teacher and school-wide efforts to improve student learning, including sheltered instruction, specific interventions, and student support systems. Through the use of our pedagogy and programs, teachers learn to ‘speak the same language’ when comparing progress of students within or across curricula or content areas. Ultimately, this process informs the delivery of standards-based instructional strategies and content-based instruction as well as the overall school or district plan for ongoing professional development.

What types or professionals are qualified to administer your program?

selected Special Education Teacher
selected General Education Teacher
selected Reading Specialist
selected Math Specialist
selected EL Specialist
selected Interventionist
selected Student Support Services Personnel (e.g., counselor, social worker, school psychologist, etc.)
not selected Applied Behavior Analysis (ABA) Therapist or Board Certified Behavior Analyst (BCBA)
selected Paraprofessional
not selected Other

If other, please describe:

Does the program assume that the instructor or interventionist has expertise in a given area?
No   

If yes, please describe: 


Are training manuals and materials available?
Yes

Describe how the training manuals or materials were field-tested with the target population of instructors or interventionist and students:
Schools which have successfully implemented a Lindamood-Bell® Professional Learning Community model have utilized a system-wide protocol for measuring student growth, teaching quality and relevance, and overall fidelity of the school improvement process. This process is guided by site leaders and decision makers who will regularly review key indicators, and adjust the goals and benchmarks necessary to support students, teachers, and administrators in meeting annual yearly progress (AYP) and school improvement goals.

Do you provide fidelity of implementation guidance such as a checklist for implementation in your manual?

Can practitioners obtain ongoing professional and technical support?
Yes

If yes, please specify where/how practitioners can obtain support:

Mandatory

Summary of Evidence Base

Please identify, to the best of your knowledge, all the research studies that have been conducted to date supporting the efficacy of your program, including studies currently or previously submitted to NCII for review. Please provide citations only (in APA format); do not include any descriptive information on these studies. NCII staff will also conduct a search to confirm that the list you provide is accurate.

Study Information

Study Citations

Bell, N., Hungerford, D., Flowers, D. L., Worthington, P. & Fitler, R. Improved decoding in poor readers following development of symbol imagery. To obtain: Report available through contacting Lindamood-Bell

Participants Full Bobble

Describe how students were selected to participate in the study:
Students in grades 3-5 from two comparable Title I schools in nearby school districts who were identified as “at risk” or “not proficient” based on state standards testing from the previous year. The schools, located in nearby districts in the same state, were identified from a list of similar schools based on size, ethnicity and state reading test results. Both schools used the same Houghton-Mifflin basal curriculum. Demographic variables were similar between the program school (EXP) and the control school (CONT) except that the number eligible for Free and Reduced-Price Lunch was slightly larger in the CONT group. Lists of qualifying students were prepared for each grade at each school and the lists were randomly ordered. At the program school, students were screened in numerical order from the random list until the total number of available instructional slots were filled. At the control site, fifteen students per grade were similarly randomly selected for screening. Students were then identified who met criteria using a tiered process (described next). The randomization scheme was successful in matching the EXP and CONT groups on mean pre-instructional skills (standard scores between groups were not different, p > .05).

Describe how students were identified as being at risk for academic failure (AI) or as having emotional or behavioral difficulties (BI):
A tiered screening approach was used to identify students who would exhibit appropriate need for the instruction. Subjects eligible for participation met study thresholds in three criterion areas: word recognition, text reading fluency, and receptive vocabulary. A basal vocabulary score excluded cognitively or English language impaired students who would not fit into a homogeneous instructional group. In the first step, the reading subtest from the Wide Range Achievement Test-Fourth Edition was given to all third grade students. WRAT4 reading was also given to all fourth and fifth grade students who performed “Proficient” and “Below Proficient” on the reading portion of the previous year’s state standards reading test that is first administered at the end of grade three. From that pool, those who also scored at or below a standard score of 92 (30th percentile) on WRAT4 reading were advanced to the next step. In the second step, students who scored at or below the 25th percentile on the fluency portion of the Gray Oral Reading Test, Fourth Edition and who scored above a standard score of 70 (2nd percentile) on the Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test, Fourth Edition were retained and administered further testing of reading and oral language.

ACADEMIC INTERVENTION: What percentage of participants were at risk, as measured by one or more of the following criteria:
  • below the 30th percentile on local or national norm, or
  • identified disability related to the focus of the intervention?
%

BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTION: What percentage of participants were at risk, as measured by one or more of the following criteria:
  • emotional disability label,
  • placed in an alternative school/classroom,
  • non-responsive to Tiers 1 and 2, or
  • designation of severe problem behaviors on a validated scale or through observation?
%

Specify which condition is the submitted intervention:
In the attached report, the program school (EXP) received instruction using the Seeing Stars®: Symbol Imagery for Phonemic Awareness, Sight Words and Spelling.

Specify which condition is the control condition:
In the attached report, the control school is identified as CONT.

If you have a third, competing condition, in addition to your control and intervention condition, identify what the competing condition is (data from this competing condition will not be used):

Using the tables that follow, provide data demonstrating comparability of the program group and control group in terms of demographics.

Grade Level

Demographic Program
Number
Control
Number
Effect Size: Cox Index
for Binary Differences
Age less than 1
Age 1
Age 2
Age 3
Age 4
Age 5
Kindergarten
Grade 1
Grade 2
Grade 3 11 12 0.03
Grade 4 16 15 0.15
Grade 5 10 11 0.00
Grade 6
Grade 7
Grade 8
Grade 9
Grade 10
Grade 11
Grade 12

Race–Ethnicity

Demographic Program
Number
Control
Number
Effect Size: Cox Index
for Binary Differences
African American 3 1 0.88
American Indian
Asian/Pacific Islander
Hispanic 5 9 0.33
White 29 28 0.31
Other

Socioeconomic Status

Demographic Program
Number
Control
Number
Effect Size: Cox Index
for Binary Differences
Subsidized Lunch 23 35 0.75
No Subsidized Lunch 14 3 1.27

Disability Status

Demographic Program
Number
Control
Number
Effect Size: Cox Index
for Binary Differences
Speech-Language Impairments 2 5 0.58
Learning Disabilities 7 2 0.91
Behavior Disorders
Emotional Disturbance
Intellectual Disabilities
Other 3 1 0.88
Not Identified With a Disability 25 30 0.15

ELL Status

Demographic Program
Number
Control
Number
Effect Size: Cox Index
for Binary Differences
English Language Learner 6 7 0.04
Not English Language Learner 31 31 0.31

Gender

Demographic Program
Number
Control
Number
Effect Size: Cox Index
for Binary Differences
Female 14 17 0.08
Male 23 21 0.27

Mean Effect Size

0.43

For any substantively (e.g., effect size ≥ 0.25 for pretest or demographic differences) or statistically significant (e.g., p < 0.05) pretest differences between groups in the descriptions below, please describe the extent to which these differences are related to the impact of the treatment. For example, if analyses were conducted to determine that outcomes from this study are due to the intervention and not demographic characteristics, please describe the results of those analyses here.

Design Half Bobble

What method was used to determine students' placement in treatment/control groups?
Systematic
Please describe the assignment method or the process for defining treatment/comparison groups.
This controlled study employed randomly selected students within two schools. Seventy-five students in grades 3-5 from two comparable schools in nearby school districts were identified as “at risk” or “not proficient” based on state standards testing from the previous year. Eligible students (identified through serial screening as previously described) filled available slots in small group groups of 2-6 students matched for severity of deficit. Pre-and post- treatment assessments, carried out by experienced examiners, provided evidence of change over the treatment period. At one of the schools, small group instruction was implemented 90 min/day, five days/week throughout the fall semester (approximately 13-15 weeks, depending on the timing of baseline and endpoint testing), administered by three trained instructors (one certified teacher and two instructional aides) under supervision by a Lindamood-Bell® expert. Fidelity monitoring was through supervised oversight by the on-site consultant. Student progress was monitored using AIMsweb and Star testing as well as by daily notes made by the Lindamood-Bell® instructors and the consultant. Student progress and consultant’s observations in sessions determined pacing through the program and recommendations for exiting or changing the program focus. At the control school, instruction was business as usual. Specifically, all 3rd grade students received one hour of daily reading instruction in the classroom, and 4th and 5th grade students received small-group instruction for half of the ninety minutes daily devoted to Language Arts instruction. Children identified as at risk for reading failure, based on words read per minute, received either SPIRE (EPS) or Soar to Success (Houghton-Mifflin) supplemental instruction. The two schools used the same basal readers

What was the unit of assignment?
Other
If other, please specify:
Students within each school

Please describe the unit of assignment:

What unit(s) were used for primary data analysis?
not selected Schools
not selected Teachers
selected Students
not selected Classes
not selected Other
If other, please specify:

Please describe the unit(s) used for primary data analysis:

Fidelity of Implementation Empty Bobble

How was the program delivered?
not selected Individually
selected Small Group
not selected Classroom

If small group, answer the following:

Average group size
4
Minimum group size
2
Maximum group size
6

What was the duration of the intervention (If duration differed across participants, settings, or behaviors, describe for each.)?

Weeks
14.00
Sessions per week
5.00
Duration of sessions in minutes
90.00
What were the background, experience, training, and ongoing support of the instructors or interventionists?
Tier 3 instructors implementing the Lindamood-Bell® program were a certified teacher and two instructional aides. Prior to the beginning of the project, all three attended a two-day professional development workshop led by a Lindamood-Bell® trainer. They also attended a day of additional training in test interpretation, student grouping and progress monitoring, instructional pacing, and lesson planning. Teachers who have not lead students through a semester or more of instruction require an expert consultant’s assistance for pacing and devising lesson plans that efficiently address the needs of the students. This assistance, with observation and modeling, was provided in the program by an Lindamood- Bell® consultant who was in the building daily.

Describe when and how fidelity of treatment information was obtained.
Fidelity monitoring was obtained through regular observation and modeling by the on-site consultant.

What were the results on the fidelity-of-treatment implementation measure?
The on-site consultant compiled notes on a score card based on at least two observations per week. The fidelity monitoring approach undertaken by Lindamood-Bell primarily includes objective data regarding instruction in the various Tiers. Inter-coder agreement is not applicable in this instance, as consensus is achieved by the on-site evaluators. The following variables were used as fidelity measures. Recommendations: # students per group= 5 or less; teacher program proficiency level= 3/4; minutes per day of instruction= 60-90; days per week of instruction= 5; coach visits per week= 1; group PLC meetings per month= 1 Groups meeting recommendations (1st semester): # students per group= 89%; teacher program proficiency level= 100%; minutes per day of instruction= 89%; days per week of instruction= 100%; coach visits per week= 100%; group PLC meetings per month= NA Groups meeting recommendations (2nd semester): # students per group= 100%; teacher program proficiency level= 100%; minutes per day of instruction= 100%; days per week of instruction= 100%; coach visits per week= 100%; group PLC meetings per month= 70%

Was the fidelity measure also used in control classrooms?

Measures and Results

Measures Targeted : Full Bobble
Measures Broader : Full Bobble

Study measures are classified as targeted, broader, or administrative data according to the following definitions:

  • Targeted measures
    Assess outcomes, such as competencies or skills that the program was directly targeted to improve.
    • In the academic domain, targeted measures typically are not the very items taught but rather novel items structured similarly to the content addressed in the program. For example, if a program taught word-attack skills, a targeted measure would be decoding of pseudo words. If a program taught comprehension of cause-effect passages, a targeted measure would be answering questions about cause-effect passages structured similarly to those used during intervention, but not including the very passages used for intervention.
    • In the behavioral domain, targeted measures evaluate aspects of external or internal behavior the program was directly targeted to improve and are operationally defined.
  • Broader measures
    Assess outcomes that are related to the competencies or skills targeted by the program but not directly taught in the program.
    • In the academic domain, if a program taught word-level reading skill, a broader measure would be answering questions about passages the student reads. If a program taught calculation skill, a broader measure would be solving word problems that require the same kinds of calculation skill taught in the program.
    • In the behavioral domain, if a program taught a specific skill like on-task behavior in one classroom, a broader measure would be academic performance in that setting or on-task behavior in another setting.
  • Administrative data measures apply only to behavioral intervention tools and are measures such as office discipline referrals (ODRs) and graduation rates which do not have psychometric properties as do other, more traditional targeted or broader measures.

Click here for more information on effect size.


What populations are you submitting outcome data for?
not selected Full sample
not selected Students at or below the 20th percentile
not selected English language learners
not selected Racial/ethnic subgroups
not selected Economically disadvantaged students (low socioeconomic status)
Targeted Measure Reverse Coded? Reliability Relevance Exposure
Broader Measure Reverse Coded? Reliability Relevance Exposure
Administrative Data Measure Reverse Coded? Relevance

Posttest Data

Targeted Measures (Full Sample)

Measure Sample Type Effect Size P

Broader Measures (Full Sample)

Measure Sample Type Effect Size P

Administrative Measures (Full Sample)

Measure Sample Type Effect Size P

Targeted Measures (Subgroups)

Measure Sample Type Effect Size P

Broader Measures (Subgroups)

Measure Sample Type Effect Size P

Administrative Measures (Subgroups)

Measure Sample Type Effect Size P
For any substantively (e.g., effect size ≥ 0.25 for pretest or demographic differences) or statistically significant (e.g., p < 0.05) pretest differences, please describe the extent to which these differences are related to the impact of the treatment. For example, if analyses were conducted to determine that outcomes from this study are due to the intervention and not pretest characteristics, please describe the results of those analyses here.
Please explain any missing data or instances of measures with incomplete pre- or post-test data.
If you have excluded a variable or data that are reported in the study being submitted, explain the rationale for exclusion:
None were excluded.
Describe the analyses used to determine whether the intervention produced changes in student outcomes:
Paired t-tests were employed for within group pre-post instruction comparisons. One-way Analysis of Variance established that pre-test age-referenced standard scores did not differ between the groups on any measure of reading skill; therefore, Analysis of Variance was used to determine if changes in standard scores differed between the groups.

Additional Research

Is the program reviewed by WWC or E-ESSA?
WWC & E-ESSA
Summary of WWC / E-ESSA Findings :

What Works Clearinghouse Review

Beginning Reading

Effectiveness: LiPS® was found to have potentially positive effects on comprehension and mixed effects on alphabetics for beginning readers.

Studies Reviewed: 2 studies met standards out of 8 studies total.

Full Report

Early Childhood Education

Effectiveness: As of December 2005 no studies of Lindamood Phoneme Sequencing® (LiPS®) were found that fell within the scope of the Early Childhood Education review protocol and met WWC design standards. Therefore, the WWC is unable to draw any research based conclusions about the effectiveness or ineffectiveness of Lindamood Phoneme Sequencing® (LiPS®) to improve outcomes in this area.

Studies Reviewed: N/A

Full Report

Students with a Specific Learning Disability

Effectiveness: LiPS® was found to have potentially positive effects on alphabetics, reading fluency, and math, no discernible effects on reading comprehension, and potentially negative effects on writing for students with learning disabilities.

Studies Reviewed: 1 study meets standards out of 2 studies total.

Full Article

Evidence for ESSA

No studies met inclusion requirements.

How many additional research studies are potentially eligible for NCII review?
0
Citations for Additional Research Studies :

Disclaimer

Most tools and programs evaluated by the NCII are branded products which have been submitted by the companies, organizations, or individuals that disseminate these products. These entities supply the textual information shown above, but not the ratings accompanying the text. NCII administrators and members of our Technical Review Committees have reviewed the content on this page, but NCII cannot guarantee that this information is free from error or reflective of recent changes to the product. Tools and programs have the opportunity to be updated annually or upon request.