Untitled

The BrainWise Curriculum 433Table 19-2 Means and Standard Deviations for Performance on the TOL-Rand Stroop Tests for Three Age Groups and for the Pre-Intervention andPost-Intervention Sessions.Pretest Posttest Pretest PosttestAge Group TOL–R TOL–R Stroop Stroop5th Grade 13.60 15.40 –.56 1.31n = 10 (4.72) (5.02) (7.44) (4.26)Middle School 16.60 18.90 –2.98 1.35n = 10 (5.85) (6.57) (7.80) (4.25)High School 21.93 21.93 4.65 7.42n = 14 (4.43) (4.80) (5.72) (6.75)Note: The TOL–R score is number correct out of possible 30 points. The Stroop scorereflects the degree to which the individual can inhibit the reading response in order tomake the color naming response. As the score increases in a negative direction, thisindicates increasingly poor inhibition (a longer time than would be predicted by readingand naming speeds alone). As the score increases in a positive direction, this indicatesincreasingly effective inhibition.With regard to the Stroop test, a positive score indicates better inhibition duringthe conflict task, and a negative score indicates poor inhibition. There was asignificant increase from the pretest (mean of .369) to the posttest (mean of 3.36).There was also a significant effect of Age Group, with the mean performance ofeach age group as follows: elementary school, .376; middle school, –.813; highschool, 6.032. Again, the high school group’s inhibition was superior to that ofboth the middle school and elementary school groups, which did not differ. TheIntervention by Age Group interaction was not significant, consistent with theresults for the TOL–R test. The Stroop scores were also positively correlated fromthe pre- to posttest sessions (r = .60), indicating adequate test–retest reliability.Given the wide individual differences in performance, both across and withinage groups, a preliminary examination of within-person change in scores wasconducted. An improvement in number correct on the TOL–R and a change in amore positive direction in the Stroop inhibition score were examined for eachstudent. Of the entire sample of 34 students, 16 showed improvement on both tests;6 showed improvement in the TOL–R only; 6 showed improvement in Stroop only;2 showed decline in the Stroop only; and 4 showed decline in both tests. Therefore,28 of 34 (82%) demonstrated improved performance on at least one of themeasures, and 16 of 34 (47%) showed improvement on both measures.It is important to point out that all or some portion of this improvement may bedue to maturation and cognitive development that occurred during the 6 monthsthat elapsed between the pretests and posttests. In light of the absence of a matchedcontrol group in this preliminary study, the degree to which maturation accountedfor the significant changes in performance could not be examined directly. However,