{\rtf1\ansi\ansicpg1252\cocoartf1671\cocoasubrtf500 {\fonttbl\f0\fmodern\fcharset0 Courier;} {\colortbl;\red255\green255\blue255;\red0\green0\blue0;\red34\green34\blue34;\red0\green0\blue233; } {\*\expandedcolortbl;;\cssrgb\c0\c0\c0;\csgenericrgb\c13333\c13333\c13333;\cssrgb\c0\c0\c93333; } \margl1440\margr1440\vieww28600\viewh15260\viewkind0 \deftab720 \pard\pardeftab720\sl280\partightenfactor0 \f0\fs24 \cf2 \expnd0\expndtw0\kerning0 This README.txt file was generated on 20190520 by Patience Stevens.\ \ \ -------------------\ GENERAL INFORMATION\ -------------------\ \ \ 1. Title of Dataset: \cf0 \kerning1\expnd0\expndtw0 Intervention study: knowledge enrichment, semantic organization and reading comprehension\ \cf2 \expnd0\expndtw0\kerning0 \ \ 2. Author Information\ \ First Author Contact Information\ Name: Patience Stevens\ Institution: Carnegie Mellon University\ Address: 4909 Frew St, Pittsburgh PA, 15213\ Email: pstevens@andrew.cmu.edu\ \ \ Second Author Contact Information\ Name: Catarina Vales\ Institution: Carnegie Mellon University\ Address: 4909 Frew St, Pittsburgh PA, 15213\ Email: cvales@andrew.cmu.edu\ \ \ Third Contact Information\ Name: Anna Fisher\ Institution: Carnegie Mellon University\ Address: 4909 Frew St, Pittsburgh PA, 15213\ Email: fisher49@andrew.cmu.edu\ \ \ Corresponding Author Contact Information\ Name: Patience Stevens\ Institution: Carnegie Mellon University\ Address: 4909 Frew St, Pittsburgh PA, 15213\ Email: pstevens@andrew.cmu.edu\ \ \ ---------------------\ DATA & FILE OVERVIEW\ ---------------------\ \ Directory of Files\ \ \ A. Filename: ReadMe.txt \ \ Short description: This file, explaining purpose of each file and providing metadata. \ \ \ B. Filename: SubSummary.csv \ \ Short description: \cf2 Spreadsheet containing information about all participating subjects, including word recognition and working memory scores. \cf2 \ \ \ C. Filename: \cf2 ExperimenterProtocols.pdf \ \cf2 \ Short description: \cf2 Detailed instructions to experimenters on administrating working memory, word recognition, reading comprehension and semantic organization tasks. Provides administrative details for each task. \ \cf2 \ \ D. Filename: \cf2 digit_WM_conditions.csv \cf2 \ \ Short description: \cf2 The number lists used in working memory task, including one backup list for each length, to be used as a repeated trial if subject gets first chance wrong. \ \cf2 \ \ E. Filename: \cf2 digitWMcodingsheet.pdf \cf2 \ \ Short description: \cf2 The sheet used by experimenters to track correct vs incorrect answers during working memory task. Scores were calculated as 2 points for every length of number list they got correct on the first try, and 1 point for every length of number list they got correct on the second try. Once they got two lists of the same length wrong, the task ended and their score was generated from accumulated points. \ \cf2 \ \ F. Filename: \cf2 PsychopyDigitWM.py \cf2 \ \ Short description: \cf2 File used for presentation of working memory task using the PsychoPy experiment presentation software. \ \cf2 \ \ G. Filename: \cf2 WordRecognitionTask.pdf \cf2 \ \ Short description: \cf2 Slides presented to subjects during word recognition task. Child read as many words as they could in 90 seconds. Next slide was presented as soon as the child had either read the current word aloud or said \'93pass\'94. Words and procedure align with the ASU Word Recognition Inventory (Morris et al., 2011). \ \cf2 \ \ H. Filename: \cf2 WordRecCodingSheet.pdf \cf2 \ \ Short description: \cf2 Sheet used by experimenters to track correct vs incorrect answers during word recognition task. \ \cf2 \ \ I. Filename: \cf2 readingstim.pdf \ \cf2 \ Short description: \cf2 All 6 versions of reading comprehension materials used for children. Versions were used to counterbalance ordering of passages and position of correct responses relative to foil responses across subjects. Comprehension questions were designed so as to have one of each of the following types of questions for each passage: easy (to ensure the participant was paying attention), literal (only relying on things explicitly stated in the passage), inference (requiring an inference relying on background knowledge or connecting information from different parts of the text) or taxonomic-inference (requiring an inference dependent on taxonomic knowledge of a concept, e.g., \'93A cactus is a plant so it probably has roots\'94). \cf2 \ \ \ J. Filename: \cf2 ReadingScoreSheet.pdf \ \cf2 \ Short description: \cf2 Sheet used by experimenters to track correct vs incorrect answers during reading comprehension task. \cf2 \ \ \ K. Filename: \cf2 ReadingPassages_OrderCounterbalancing.pdf \cf2 \ \ Short description: \cf2 Provides information on what is counterbalanced and how across the 6 versions of the passage and question presentations for the reading comprehension task. Pre-reading questions to confirm lack of prior knowledge regarding content were asked in one of three scrambled orders during session 1 of both pre-test and post- test, and then asked in groups of four following their corresponding passage during session 2 of both pre-test and post-test. Passages were also read in one of three orders. Versions 4, 5, and 6 matched versions 1, 2, 3 in pre-question and passage sequence, but differed in the position of the correct response relative to foil responses. \ \cf2 \ \ L. Filename: \cf2 finaldat_preqs.csv \cf2 \ \ Short description: \cf2 Shows child responses for pre-questions (reading comprehension questions presented to children during first pre-testing session and first post-testing session, to determine their base rate of correctness on these questions prior to reading the passages). Pre-questions were presented in a different random order depending on the participant\'92s assigned version, with no sequence allowing more than two questions about the same passage in a row. Positioning of correct responses relative to lures within each question also varied across version. \ \cf2 \ \ M. Filename: \cf2 finaldat_postqs.csv \cf2 \ \ Short description: \cf2 Shows child responses for post-questions (the four reading comprehension questions for each passage were presented following the child\'92s reading aloud of that passage during pre-test session one and post-test session 2). Passages were presented in 6 different orders depending on the participant\'92s assigned version, as did the order of post-reading questions and the arrangement of response options for each question. \cf2 \ \ \ N. Filename: \cf2 code2corr.csv \cf2 \ \ Short description: \cf2 Provides the correspondence between child responses (e.g., \'93TL\'94 for \'93top left\'94 or \'93BR\'94 for \'93bottom right\'94) and the correct answer for each reading comprehension question, both prequestions (Q1, Q2, etc.) and postquestions (Damselflies3, Oregon2, etc.). The correct answer for a particular question varies based on the version of the passages and questions that a particular child received (see the preqs and postqs .csv files for each participant\'92s version). The \'93QID\'94 variable also provides the identity of each question (e.g. \'93O_L\'94 means the literal question for the Oregon passage, and \'93D_T\'94 means the taxonomic inference question for the Toebiters passage \'96 see the readingstim file description for the four types of comprehension questions). \ \cf2 \ \ O. Filename: \cf2 SpAMFoodImages.pdf \cf2 \ \ Short description: \cf2 Images on cards used in \'93Food\'94 trial of SpAM. Printed so that item name is on the back of the card. Half of items selected to maximize overlap with topics covered in instruction , other half not overlapping to look at effect of enrichment on items not directly addressed during classes. \ \cf2 \ \ P. Filename: \cf2 SpAMLivingThingsImages.pdf \cf2 \ \ Short description: \cf2 Images on cards used in \'93Living Things\'94 trial of SpAM. Printed so that item name is on the back of the card. Half of items selected to maximize overlap with topics covered in instruction, other half not overlapping to look at effect of enrichment on items not directly addressed during classes. \ \cf2 \ \ Q. Filename: \cf2 foodSpAMsample.pdf \cf2 \ \ Short description: \cf2 An example of data obtained via the Spatial Arrangement Method measuring semantic organization for the food item set. Subjects were instructed to place items that were \'93the same kind of thing\'94 closer together and items that were \'93different kinds of things\'94 further apart (see ExperimenterProtocols.pdf for more detail). A gray box is added to conceal subject ID and testing time point. \ \ \ \cf2 R. Filename: \cf2 livingthingsSpAMsample.pdf \cf2 \ \ Short description: \cf2 An example of data obtained via the Spatial Arrangement Method measuring semantic organization for the living things item set. Subjects were instructed to place items that were \'93the same kind of thing\'94 closer together and items that were \'93different kinds of things\'94 further apart (see ExperimenterProtocols.pdf for more detail). A gray box is added to conceal subject ID and testing time point.\cf2 \ \ \ S. Filename: \cf2 finaldat_SpAM.csv \cf2 \ \ Short description: \cf2 The positioning of all items from all participants for both image sets. Includes participant ID, pre-test or post-test, image set, item & grid coordinates. \ \cf2 \ \ T. Filename: \cf2 SpAMgroupings.pdf \cf2 \ \ Short description: \cf2 The taxonomic and thematic groupings of items for each image set used in the Spatial Arrangement Method. These were used to approximate degree of taxonomic and thematic organization by individual subjects (e.g. taxonomic \'93score\'94 was calculated as mean(unrelated items\'92 pairwise distances) \'96 mean(taxonomically related items\'92 pairwise distances). \ \cf2 \ \ \pard\pardeftab720\partightenfactor0 \cf2 Additional Notes on File Relationships, Context, or Content: \ \ \pard\pardeftab720\ri0\partightenfactor0 \cf0 \kerning1\expnd0\expndtw0 BACKGROUND\ul \ \ulnone Prior research has indicated that semantic organization (as measured by tasks such as semantic fluency and categorization tasks), may contribute to reading comprehension abilities (Nation & Snowling, 1998; Nation & Snowling, 1998; Nouwens et al., 2017). In this study, we aimed to examine whether knowledge enrichment experiences brought into a classroom context would (1) increase the taxonomic organization of concepts relevant to the enrichment topic and (2) correspondingly improve reading comprehension for passages on related concepts. Such a finding could strengthen the evidence for a causal link between semantic organization and reading comprehension. Prior knowledge enrichment interventions (specifically a summer camp at a zoo) had been shown to increase children\'92s taxonomic organization (Unger & Fisher, 2019), although not in a classroom context. Semantic organization was assessed using the Spatial Arrangement Method (see Unger et al., 2016) and reading comprehension was assessed using bespoke passages designed by the researchers to maximize overlap with enrichment intervention content. \ \pard\pardeftab720\ri0\partightenfactor0 \cf0 \ul \ulc0 \ \pard\pardeftab720\ri0\qj\partightenfactor0 \cf0 \ulnone DESIGN\ul \ \ulnone 50 children were recruited from 3 public charter schools prioritizing underserved minorities in a northeastern American city. Two third-grade classrooms were recruited from each school. One classroom was assigned to the experimental condition, one to the control condition, in each school. All participating children\'92s working memory and word recognition skills were measured prior to the reading comprehension and semantic organization pretests. During pre-test session 1, they were administered pretest questions for the subsequent session\'92s reading comprehension (to determine the children\'92s baseline knowledge of answers to those questions). The Spatial Arrangement Method, a semantic organization assessment, was then administered, for two image sets (food and living things). The order in which the images sets were tested was counterbalanced across subjects. During pre-test session 2, six experimenter-designed reading passages were presented to participants to read aloud, and comprehension questions were asked after each passage was read. Then two days of hour-long enrichment opportunities were hosted by educators from a local botanical conservatory. Enrichment days were always within one week of each other. Finally, post-testing followed the same 2-session structure as pre-testing: pre-reading questions and semantic organization assessed on day 1, reading and post-reading questions on day 2.\ \pard\pardeftab720\ri0\partightenfactor0 \cf0 \ ENRICHMENT INTERVENTION DETAILS\ Bees & Pollination Enrichment: During this session, educators from a local botanical conservatory conducted games and activities related to bees, their roles within a hive, insects, pollination and flowers. Additionally, the impact of bees on their ecosystems and on humans particularly was discussed in detail.\ Watershed Enrichment: During this session, educators from a local botanical conservatory conducted games and activities related to related to watersheds, freshwater and saltwater ecosystems, fish anatomy, and the importance of water habitat conservation. Additionally, the dynamics of food webs and how damage to one species can impact an entire ecosystem was discussed in detail.\ \ FINDINGS\ul \ \ulnone The data showed no effect of the enrichment intervention on semantic organization or reading comprehension as measured by the aforementioned assessments. However, within testing sessions there were some significant findings. In the spatial arrangement measurement of semantic organization, there was a significant effect of type of relationship between items on their pairwise distances, with pairs that were both thematically and taxonomically related placed closest, followed by taxonomic, thematic and unrelated pairs, in that order. This pattern of results replicated for both the living things set and the food set. In the reading comprehension task, question type (easy, literal, inference or taxonomic) was a predictor of correctness, with easy questions answered correctly most frequently, followed by literal questions. Inference and taxonomic questions proved the most difficult with about equal correctness. There was also a weak correlation between \'93thematic score\'94 (the difference in average distance between thematically related items and unrelated items in the spatial arrangement method) and overall reading comprehension. \ \pard\pardeftab720\sl280\partightenfactor0 \cf2 \expnd0\expndtw0\kerning0 \ ACKNOWLEDGMENTS\ \pard\pardeftab720\ri0\sl276\slmult1\partightenfactor0 \cf0 \kerning1\expnd0\expndtw0 Many thanks to Anna Vande Velde, Kristen Boyle and Melissa Pocsai for their assistance in data collection. Additional thanks to Cecilia Mastrogiacamo, Rea Isaac, Isabel Rozario, Zhuyi (Elaine) Xu, and Graciela Garcia for coding these data from original response sheets and images.\ \pard\pardeftab720\sl280\partightenfactor0 \cf2 \expnd0\expndtw0\kerning0 \ \ \pard\pardeftab720\partightenfactor0 \cf2 REFERENCES\ \pard\pardeftab720\ri0\partightenfactor0 \cf0 \kerning1\expnd0\expndtw0 Morris, D., Bloodgood, J. W., Perney, J., Frye, E. M., Kucan, L., Trathen, W., & Schlagal, R. (2011). Validating craft knowledge: An empirical examination of elementary-grade students\'92 performance on an informal reading assessment. The Elementary School Journal, 112(2), 205-233.\ \pard\pardeftab720\ri0\partightenfactor0 \cf3 Nation, K., & Snowling, M. J. (1998). Semantic processing and the development of word-recognition skills: Evidence from children with reading comprehension difficulties.\'a0Journal of memory and language,\'a039(1), 85-101.\cf0 \ \cf3 Nation, K., & Snowling, M. J. (1999). Developmental differences in sensitivity to semantic relations among good and poor comprehenders: Evidence from semantic priming.\'a0Cognition,\'a070(1), B1-B13.\cf0 \ \cf3 Nouwens, S., Groen, M. A., Kleemans, T., & Verhoeven, L. (2018). The role of semantic retrieval in children's reading comprehension development in the upper primary grades.\'a0Journal of Research in Reading,\'a041(3), 597-614.\cf0 \ \cf3 Unger, L., Fisher, A. V., Nugent, R., Ventura, S. L., & MacLellan, C. J. (2016). Developmental changes in semantic knowledge organization.\'a0Journal of experimental child psychology,\'a0146, 202-222.\cf0 \ \cf3 Unger, L., & Fisher, A. V. (2019). Rapid, experience-related changes in the organization of children\'92s semantic knowledge.\'a0Journal of experimental child psychology,\'a0179, 1-22.\cf0 \ \pard\pardeftab720\sl280\partightenfactor0 \cf2 \expnd0\expndtw0\kerning0 \ \ \ \ \ -----------------------------------------\ DATA DESCRIPTION FOR: SubSummary.csv\ -----------------------------------------\ \ \ \ 1. Number of variables: 17\ \ \ 2. Number of cases/rows: 50\ \ \ 3. Variable List\ \ Example. Name: Gender \ Description: Gender of respondent\ M = Male\ F = Female\ N = Did not respond \ \ A. Name: Subject ID\ Description: Letter and number used as participant label for this study.\ \ \ B. Name: Condition\ Description: Experimental or control condition. Control condition also received the intervention, following post1Date testing. \ E = Experimental\ C = Control\ \ \ \pard\pardeftab720\sl280\partightenfactor0 \cf2 C. Name: Missed1\ Description: Indicates whether the participant missed one of the two intervention sessions.\ No = present for both intervention sessions\ Yes = absent for one intervention session\ \ \ D. Name: prepreDate\ Description: Date of pre-pre-testing session, during which working memory and word recognition are assessed.\ \ \ E. Name: pre1Date\ Description: Date of first pre-testing session, during which semantic organization task and pre-reading comprehension questions were administered.\ \ \ F. Name: pre2Date\ Description: Date of second pre-testing session, during which reading and post-reading comprehension questions were administered.\ \ \ G. Name: Rich1Date\ Description: Date of first enrichment intervention session.\ \ \ H. Name: Rich2Date\ Description: Date of second enrichment intervention session.\ \ \ I. Name: post1Date\ Description: Date of first post-testing session, during which semantic organization task and pre-reading comprehension questions were administered. \ \ \ J. Name: post2Date\ Description: Date of second post-testing session, during which reading and post-reading comprehension questions were administered. \ \ \ K. Name: DOB\ Description: Date of birth of participant. \ \ \ L. Name: Gender\ Description: Gender of participant\ M = Male\ F = Female\ N = Did not respond\ \ \ M. Name: Version\ Description: Counterbalancing version of reading materials - indicates ordering of passages, questions, and relative positions of question response images. \ \ \ N. Name: FirstSpAM\ Description: Image set used for first trial of spatial arrangement semantic organization task. Order assigned randomly for each participant.\ F = food set\ LT = living things set\ \ \ O. Name: WR\ Description: Participant\'92s score on Word Recognition task. \ \ \ P. Name: WM\ Description: Participant\'92s score on Working Memory task. \ \ \ \ \pard\pardeftab720\sl280\partightenfactor0 \cf2 \ \ --------------------------\ METHODOLOGICAL INFORMATION\ --------------------------\ \ 1. Software-specific information:\ \ Name: PsychoPy2\ Version: 1.85.2\ System Requirements: none \ Source Repository URL: {\field{\*\fldinst{HYPERLINK "https://github.com/psychopy/psychopy/releases"}}{\fldrslt \cf4 \ul \ulc4 \outl0\strokewidth0 \strokec4 https://github.com/psychopy/psychopy/releases}}\ Developer: Jonathan Peirce, Jeremy Gray, Sol Simpson, Jonas Lindelov, Yaroslav Halchenko, Erik Kastman, Michael MacAskill, Hiroyuki Sogo\ Product URL: {\field{\*\fldinst{HYPERLINK "https://www.psychopy.org/about/overview.html"}}{\fldrslt \cf4 \ul \ulc4 \outl0\strokewidth0 \strokec4 https://www.psychopy.org/about/overview.html}}\ \ \ 2. Dates of data collection: 20171201 to 20180330\ \ \ \ }