Higher pretest cognitive flexibility predicted greater decoding gains and compensated for lower pretest alphabet knowledge¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · causal r2 · q3
Currency · newest study 2023 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i? Students with higher pretest cognitive flexibility made significantly greater gains on both decoding measures (taught-letter and Word Attack). → Vadasy 2023 q3 i? A significant interaction between pretest cognitive flexibility and pretest alphabetics appeared on all three reading measures, with the positive effect of cognitive flexibility apparent for children with lower pretest alphabetics. → Vadasy 2023 (2)

Evidence¶

Vadasy 2023¶

Vadasy, P. F., & Sanders, E. A. (2023). Cognitive flexibility + phonics intervention effects on reading gains. Reading Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1080/02702711.2023.2166636

q3 · i? · causal · r2

In the multilevel gain models, pretest cognitive flexibility uniquely predicted gains on both decoding measures; the article reports students with higher pretest cognitive flexibility "made significantly greater gains on the two decoding measures." No effect size is printed for this predictor.

"students with higher pretest cognitive flexibility made significantly greater gains on the two decoding measures – both taught-letter (experimenter) and norm-referenced (Word Attack)."

Vadasy 2023 (2)¶

Vadasy, P. F., & Sanders, E. A. (2023). Cognitive flexibility + phonics intervention effects on reading gains. Reading Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1080/02702711.2023.2166636

q3 · i? · causal · r2

The models included treatment-by-covariate and covariate interactions; the article reports "a significant interaction was observed between pretest cognitive flexibility and alphabetics on all three reading measures," which the authors interpret as cognitive flexibility compensating in part for limited pretest alphabet knowledge.

"a significant interaction was observed between pretest cognitive flexibility and alphabetics on all three reading measures: the positive effect of pretest cognitive flexibility was apparent for children with lower pretest alphabetics."

Discussion¶

Learner Variables¶

• Executive Function — predictor: learners who differ on it differ in outcomes
• Alphabet Knowledge and Print Awareness — moderator: an instructional effect differs with it
• Decoding — outcome: instruction changes it

Related Claims¶

• Executive function performance significantly predicts semantic fluency in preschool children — the general claim this finding bears on, with the studies behind it

• Children's executive function at the beginning of pre-kindergarten predicts growth in mathematics achievement across the pre-kindergarten year — the general claim this finding bears on, with the studies behind it

• Pretest, attendance, and EB status showed distinct covariate effects on specific literacy outcomes — related
• Embedded cognitive flexibility practice showed no overall advantage over phonics alone on growth in decoding, encoding, or cognitive flexibility — related
• Only the discussion of the Flex vs. Plain phonics trial reports that, for students with full week-6 attendance, Flex showed greater gains than Plain on taught-letter alphabetics, decoding, and word reading; its results report no treatment differences or interactions — related
• Cognitive flexibility training added to phonemic awareness training produces significantly greater growth in cognitive flexibility than phonemic awareness training alone in kindergarten and first-grade students — related
• School meditation studies show significant improvements on several cognitive functioning measures, though effects vary by measure and study — related
• Children with lower pre-test executive function and social cognition skills improve more, while attendance, teacher involvement, age and school year do not predict gains — related