Avaliação de um programa computadorizado de ensino de leitura e escrita de palavras com dificuldades ortográficas

• Ano de defesa: 2021
• Autor(a) principal: Tamiozzo-Fonseca, Priscila Mainardi
• Orientador(a): Souza, Deisy das Graças de
• Tipo de documento: Dissertação
• Tipo de acesso: Acesso aberto
• Idioma: por
• Instituição de defesa: Universidade Federal de São Carlos; Câmpus São Carlos
• Programa de Pós-Graduação: Programa de Pós-Graduação em Psicologia - PPGPsi
• Palavras-chave em Português: Aquisição de leitura e escrita; Emparelhamento com o modelo; Avaliação de programa; Alunos do ensino fundamental; Programa de aprendizagem
• Palavras-chave em Inglês: Acquisition of reading and writing; Matching-to-sample; Program evaluation; Elementary school students; Learning program
• Área do conhecimento CNPq: CIENCIAS HUMANAS::PSICOLOGIA; CIENCIAS HUMANAS::PSICOLOGIA::PSICOLOGIA DO ENSINO E DA APRENDIZAGEM::APRENDIZAGEM E DESEMPENHO ACADEMICOS; CIENCIAS HUMANAS::PSICOLOGIA::PSICOLOGIA DO ENSINO E DA APRENDIZAGEM::ENSINO E APRENDIZAGEM NA SALA DE AULA; CIENCIAS HUMANAS::PSICOLOGIA::PSICOLOGIA DO ENSINO E DA APRENDIZAGEM::PROGRAMACAO DE CONDICOES DE ENSINO; CIENCIAS HUMANAS::PSICOLOGIA::PSICOLOGIA EXPERIMENTAL::PROCESSOS DE APRENDIZAGEM, MEMORIA E MOTIVACAO; CIENCIAS HUMANAS::PSICOLOGIA::PSICOLOGIA DO ENSINO E DA APRENDIZAGEM; CIENCIAS HUMANAS::PSICOLOGIA::PSICOLOGIA EXPERIMENTAL
• Link de acesso: https://repositorio.ufscar.br/handle/ufscar/14848

The curriculum Learning to Read and Write in Small Steps (In Portuguese, Aprendendo a Ler e a Escrever em Pequenos Passos - ALEPP) aims to teach the reading and writing of Portuguese language words. ALEPP is organized in modules for online, individualized application, through a software platform (Computer Individualized Teaching Manager – In Portuguese, Gerenciador de Ensino Individualizado por Computador - GEIC). This study aimed to evaluate Module 2 of ALEPP, which aims to teach words with complex syllables involving digraphs and consonant clusters. The module programming includes 20 teaching units consisting of four steps per unit and four words per step, totaling 80 programmed steps (320 words). The programming includes teaching and assessment steps. The evaluations include: Module pre- and post-test and learning probes for all units (multiple baseline design across teaching units). Furthermore, each teaching step includes a pre- and a post-test and the schedule includes criteria that ensure that the student only progresses from one step to another if they reach excellence (100% correct answers for the words taught in the step); on the other hand, a step can also be omitted if the student obtains 100% correct answers in the pre-test. The main teaching tasks in all steps are 1) matching-to-sample between dictated and printed words (word recognition) and 2) dictation with constructed response. The present evaluation focused on programming efficiency, measured by the levels of learning achieved and the pace of the students' journey through the teaching steps. Data for analysis, related to the application by teachers or interns, were extracted from GEIC, in the period from 2017 to 2020. Sixty-two elementary school students, aged between seven and 14 years, who completed Module 2 were identified. Comparing the average data from the initial and final evaluation, the average percentage of correct answers increased from 63 to 91% in the dictation tasks and from 82 to 91% in the word recognition tasks. In the dictation task performed in the pre- and post-tests of the teaching steps, the average percentage increased from 86 to 96% of correct answers, whereas for word recognition there was a ceiling effect (high percentages from the beginning). Not all students completed all the teaching steps, as they met the criteria in the pre-test. Four students performed from 11 to 20% of the programmed steps, 11 students from 21 to 30%, 18 students from 31 to 50%, 13 students from 51 to 60%, 13 students from 61 to 70%, and three students performed from 71 to 80% of steps. The average number of steps performed was 35.3 (range from 9 to 64) and the average number of months to complete the module was 11 months (range from 5 to 16). The program proved to be efficient for teaching irregular words in the Portuguese language, as shown by the high percentages of correct answers in the final evaluation and post-test of the Module. It also proved to be viable for application in the school environment. However, it was observed that the variability in the input repertoire meant that many students did not need to perform all the programmed steps and, even so, the application time was long, which was arduous for students. Future studies may investigate the effects of Module 2 on students with a lower input repertoire. It is also suggested to evaluate a reduced version of the Module.