Gillon (2000) aimed to evaluate the effects of phonological awareness intervention on the phonological awareness ability and observe transfer effects to word recognition and reading comprehension performance.

• A. Quantitative
• B. Qualitative
• C. Mixed methods
• D. Case study

Answer: (C)

This question tests research design choices when a study aims to measure an intervention’s impact while also understanding how those gains transfer to other reading skills. To assess both the extent of improvement in phonological awareness and the way that improvement translates into word recognition and reading comprehension, a design that combines numeric outcome data with descriptive or contextual information is most appropriate. A mixed-methods approach lets you quantify changes (through pre/post tests or standardized measures) and also capture how those changes play out in real reading tasks (through observations, work samples, or interviews). This provides a fuller picture of both effect size and transfer mechanisms.

Using only quantitative methods would show how big the changes are but might miss how those changes actually influence reading processes. Using only qualitative methods would give depth about experiences and context but wouldn’t yield measurable evidence of intervention effects. A case study focuses narrowly on a single or very small number of cases and isn’t inherently designed to generalize intervention effects or systematically measure outcomes across participants.