PowerPoint slide

Reading Problems: Assessment and Teaching Strategies, Seventh Edition

Combines new and time-tested approaches for helping struggling readers of all ages

The seventh edition of this well-respected text introduces multiple approaches to teaching students with reading problems and presents them in an accessible, balanced, and readable format. Reading Problems: Assessment and Teaching Strategies is practical, presenting many informal assessment tools and multicultural strategies, research on intervention programs, and extensive descriptions of tests.

This edition also includes updated information about laws focused on education, including the transition from No Child Left Behind to Race to the Top and the Ameri- can Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009. Response to Intervention (RTI) is also a continued focus in this revision. Finally, the book emphasizes teaching reading to Eng- lish language learners (ELLs) and including all students in general education classes.

What Is New to the Seventh Edition? ◆ Case studies for chapters 8, 11, and 12. ◆ Procedures for monitoring students' progress to meet Response to Intervention

requirements. ◆ Discussion of the impact of the Common Core State Standards on literacy

instruction and assessment. ◆ Coverage of the changes in procedures for identifying students who are quali-

fied for additional support services. ◆ Strategies to meet the needs of English Language Learners, especially in the

areas vocabulary development and academic vocabulary development. ◆ The integration of technology into literacy instruction and assessment. ◆ Information on collaboration between reading specialists/literacy coaches and

general education teachers. ◆ Coverage of the changing roles of reading specialists/literacy coaches. ◆ A continuing discussion of specific reading skills, including phonemic aware-

ness, word recognition skills, fluency, vocabulary development, comprehension of narrative and informational text, and the integration of reading and writing.

◆ A MyEducationLab interactive website (www.myeducationlab.com) created to accompany this edition that includes videos, simulations, case studies, arti- facts, activities, and more to help prepare students for teaching careers.

Reading Problems

This page intentionally left blank

Reading Problems Assessment and Teaching Strategies

7 E D I T I O N

Boston Columbus Indianapolis New York San Francisco Upper Saddle River Amsterdam Cape Town Dubai London Madrid Milan Munich Paris Montréal Toronto

Delhi Mexico City São Paulo Sydney Hong Kong Seoul Singapore Taipei Tokyo

Joyce Holt Jennings Northeastern Illinois University

JoAnne Schudt Caldwell Professor Emerita, Cardinal Stritch University

Janet W. Lerner Professor Emerita, Northeastern Illinois University

For related titles and support materials, visit our online catalog at www.pearsonhighered.com.

Copyright © 2014, 2010, 2006, 2002, 1996, 1989, 1983 Pearson Education, Inc.

All rights reserved. No part of the material protected by this copyright notice may be reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without written permission from the copyright owner.

To obtain permission(s) to use material from this work, please submit a written request to Pearson Education, Inc., Permissions Department, 501 Boylston St., Boston, MA 02116 or fax your request to 617-671-2290.

Between the time website information is gathered and then published, it is not unusual for some sites to have closed. Also, the transcription of URLs can result in typographical errors. The publisher would appreciate notification where these errors occur so that they may be corrected in subsequent editions.

Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data

Jennings, Joyce Holt. Reading problems: assessment and teaching strategies/Joyce Holt Jennings, Northeastern

Illinois University, JoAnne Schudt Caldwell, Professor Emerita at Cardinal Stritch University, Janet W. Lerner, Professor Emeritus, Northeastern Illinois University.—Edition: 7.

pages cm ISBN-13: 978-0-13-283780-4 ISBN-10: 0-13-283780-3

1. Reading disability. 2. Reading—Remedial teaching. I. Caldwell, JoAnne (JoAnne Schudt). II. Lerner, Janet W. III. Title.

LB1050.5.R53 2014 372.43—dc23

2013006574

Printed in the United States of America

10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 HAM 13 12 11 10

Credits appear on page 487, which constitutes an extension of the copyright page.

ISBN 13: 978-0-13-283780-4 ISBN 10: 0-13-283780-3

Vice President, Editor-in-Chief: Aurora Martínez Ramos

Acquisitions Editor: Kathryn Boice Editorial Assistant: Carolyn Schweitzer Associate Sponsoring Editor:

Barbara Strickland Executive Marketing Manager: Krista Clark Production Editor: Paula Carroll

Editorial Production Service: S4Carlisle Publishing Services

Manufacturing Buyer: Linda Sager Electronic Composition: S4Carlisle Publishing

Services Interior Design: S4Carlisle Publishing Services Photo Research: Jorgensen Fernandez Cover Designer: Jennifer Hart

About the Authors

Joyce Jennings is Chair of the Department of Literacy Education at Northeastern Illinois University. She is a Professor of Literacy Education, teaching primarily in the areas of assessment and instructional leadership. She has directed several professional devel- opment projects with school districts in the areas of literacy instruc- tion and leadership. Dr. Jennings serves on the Executive Board of Directors for the Chicago Area Reading Association. She is also on the Board of Directors for Boundless Readers, a not-for-profit orga- nization that provides resources and professional development in literacy for classroom teachers. Dr. Jennings was named to the Hall of Honor of the Illinois Reading Council for her work as co-editor of the council's journal.

Janet W. Lerner is professor emerita at Northeastern Illinois University, where she served as professor and chairperson of the Department of Special Education. She received the J.E. Wallace Wallin Special Education Lifetime Achievement Award from the Council of Exceptional Children. She was awarded the Romain P. Mackie Award from the Pioneers Division of CEC. Dr. Lerner served as a general education teacher, a special education teacher, and a reading specialist at the elementary, middle school, and high school levels. Dr. Lerner has authored and coauthored numerous journal articles and books: Learning Disabilities and Related Mild Dis- abilities (2012, Wadsworth Cengage Learning) and Young Children with Special Needs (2006, Allyn and Bacon). Dr. Lerner is currently an adjunct professor in the P.A.C.E. program at National Louis University.

JoAnne Schudt Caldwell is professor emerita at Cardinal Stritch University in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. She is the author or coauthor of seven titles including The Qualitative Reading Inventory-5 and Intervention Strategies to Follow Informal Reading Inventory Assessment. She has received the Outstanding Service Award from the Wisconsin State Reading Association, as well as the Wisconsin Teacher Educa- tor of the Year Award and an Achievement Award from Marquette University School of Education.

v

This page intentionally left blank

Contents

Preface xviii

1 Overview of Reading and Reading Problems 1

Introduction 2

Reading Problems: A National Dilemma 3 National Reading Levels 4 SAT and ACT Reading Scores Hit New Low 5 Reading Needs in Today’s World 5

Recent Influences on the Teaching of Reading 5 Response-to-Intervention 5 The National Reading Panel and the Components of Reading 7 Differentiated Instruction 8 Common Core Standards 10 Social Media and Reading 11

Key Elements of Teaching Reading 11 Early Literacy 11 Word Recognition 12 Reading Fluency 12 Reading Comprehension 12 Reading Vocabulary 13 Reading–Writing Connection 13 Enjoyment and Appreciation 14

Summary 14

References 15

2 Factors Associated With Reading Problems 18

Introduction 19

Neurological and Cognitive Factors 19 Differentiated Instruction 20 Working Memory 20 Cognitive Strategy Instruction 21

Environmental Factors 21 The Home Environment 21 The School Environment 23 The Social Environment 24 The Cultural Environment 24

vii

viii Contents

Emotional Factors 25

Intelligence and Intellectual Factors 26 Definitions of Intelligence 27 Cultural Bias in the Measurement of Intelligence 27 Using Intelligence Tests to Determine the Existence of a Reading Disability 27 Concerns About Using Intelligence Tests to Determine a Reading Disability 28

Language Factors 30 Oral and Written Language 30 Receptive and Expressive Language 31 Systems of Oral Language 31 Speech Problems and Language Disorders 33 English Language Learners (ELLs) 34

Physical Factors 34 Hearing Impairment 34 Visual Impairment 35 Gender Differences 37 Other Physical Problems 37

Summary 37

References 38

3 Gathering Data to Develop Students’ Literacy Profiles 41

Introduction 42

Information About the Environment 43 Home Environment 43 School Environment 46 Social and Cultural Environments 49

Information About the Individual 51 Emotional Information 51 Information About Potential (Intelligence) 52 Physical Information 52 Information About Language Development 55

Methods of Collecting Information 56 Interview and Questionnaire 56 Informal Talks 58 School Records and Materials 58 Observation During Reading Lessons 59

Summary 59

References 60

Contents ix

4 Norm-Referenced and Criterion-Referenced Assessments 62

Introduction 63

Using Both Formal and Informal Assessment 63 Norm-Referenced Tests 65 Criterion-Referenced Tests 65 Bias in Testing 66 Ethical Considerations 66 Scores on Norm-Referenced Tests 66 Standardization, Validity, and Reliability 68

Tests of General Reading Assessment 69 Group Survey Tests 69 Individual Survey Tests 72 Normed Oral Reading Tests 75

Diagnostic Reading Tests 76 Diagnostic Reading Batteries 76 Diagnostic Tests of Specific Areas 79

Measuring Factors Related to Reading 80 Measuring Vocabulary and Language Development 80

Measuring Intelligence 80 Using Intelligence Test Information in Reading Assessment 81 Intelligence Tests That Should Be Administered by Psychologists 82 Intelligence Tests That Can Be Administered by Teachers and Reading Specialists 85 Interpreting Intelligence Test Scores 87

Summary 87

References 88

5 Administering an Informal Reading Inventory 93

Introduction 94

Does the Student Have a Reading Problem and How Severe Is It? 94

What Is the General Area of the Reading Problem? 95 Problems With Emergent Literacy 95 Problems With Word Recognition Accuracy 95 Problems With Reading Fluency 95 Problems With Comprehension 96 Problems With Language and Meaning Vocabulary 96

x Contents

Overview of Informal Assessment Measures 96

The Informal Reading Inventory 97 Obtaining Answers to General Assessment Questions 98 Administering and Scoring the Informal Reading Inventory 98 Interpreting the Scores of the IRI 110 Special Issues and Options in Using IRIs 117

IRIs and Response-to-Intervention 120

Combining IRI Assessment With Think-Alouds 121

Summary 124

References 124

6 Providing Instruction and Intervention Strategies 127

Introduction 128

A New Perspective on Intervention: Grade-Level Competence 128

Successful Intervention Programs 131 Individual Intervention Programs K–5 131 Group Intervention Programs K–5 133 Intervention Structures 6–12 135 Classroom Interventions 136

Guidelines for Teaching Struggling Readers 138 Set High Expectations 138 Coordinate Intervention Instruction and Classroom Instruction 138 Use Read-Alouds to Expose Students to Higher-Level Text 139 Emphasize Reading for Meaning 139 Teach Students the Strategies That Good Readers Use 140 Make Assessment an Ongoing Component of Instruction 141 Provide a Balanced Instructional Framework 142 Provide a Consistent Instructional Structure and Use Time Effectively 142 Keep the Size of the Group as Small as Possible 143 Instructional Support for Struggling Readers and RTI 144

Summary 144

References 145

7 Early Literacy 149

Introduction 150

Early Literacy Concepts 150 Oral Language Development 151 Listening Comprehension 153

Contents xi

Print Knowledge 153 Environmental Print 154 Alphabet Knowledge 155 Phonemic Awareness 155 Short-Term Phonological Memory 158 Rapid Naming 159 Visual Memory 160 Visual Perceptual Skills 160

Strategies to Develop Early Literacy Concepts 161 Oral Language Development 161 Print Knowledge 165 Alphabetic Knowledge and Phonemic Awareness 167 Beginning Reading Vocabulary 170

Summary 170

References 171

8 Improving Word Knowledge: Word Recognition 174

Introduction 175

Stages of Word Recognition Development 175

Strategies for Identifying Words 176

Word Recognition and the Common Core Standards 177

Assessing Phonics Strategies 178 The Informal Reading Inventory 178 Tests of Phonics Patterns 179

Teaching Phonics Strategies 180 Letter–Sound Relationships 181 Organizing Phonics Instruction 182 Decoding Through Analogy 184 Combining Phonics and Meaning 185 Making Students Aware of Their Strategies 187 Dealing With Exceptions 187 Ideas for Practicing Phonics 187 Teaching Multisyllabic Words 188

Assessing Structural Analysis Strategies 191

Teaching Structural Analysis Strategies 192

Word Recognition Strategies and Response- to-Intervention (RTI) 193

Summary 194

Case Study 195

References 197

xii Contents

9 Improving Word Knowledge: Fluency 200

Introduction 201

The Role of Fluency in the Reading Process 201

Fluency and the Common Core Standards 203

Assessing Fluency 203 Listening to Students Read Orally 204 Determining Reading Rate 204 Timed Administration of Word Lists 206

General Guidelines for Fluency Development 206 Provide Models of Fluent Reading 206 Link Fluency Instruction to Meaning 207 Encourage Wide Reading 207 Avoid Unpracticed Oral Reading 207

Strategies for Developing Fluency in Context 208 Promoting Wide Reading of Easy Text 208 Using Patterned Books 208 Assisted Oral Reading 209 Structured Repeated Reading 212 Performance Reading 213 Making Oral and Silent Reading Effective 214

Strategies for Developing Sight Words in Isolation 216 Choosing Words for Instructional Focus 216 Guidelines for Teaching Sight Words 217 Strategies for Focusing on Words 217

Word Recognition Fluency and Response- to-Intervention (RTI) 219

Summary 220

Case Study 221

References 223

10 Vocabulary Development and Listening Comprehension 226

Introduction 227

Importance of Language to Reading 227 Problems With Language Development 227 Impact of Language Disability and Delay 227 Impact of Limited Experiences With Reading 228 Impact of Diverse Language Environments 228

Assessing Language Abilities 228 Informal Measures 229 Formal Measures 231

Contents xiii

Conditions That Foster Language Learning 232 Exposure to Rich Language 233 Active Participation 233 Planning for Vocabulary and Language Learning 233 Making Connections 234

Strategies for Fostering Language: Listening Comprehension 235 Reading Books to Students 235 Supplemented Shared Reading 237 Paired Story Reading 238 Directed Listening-Thinking Activity 238 Sentence Stretchers 239 Encouraging Verbal Expression 239

Strategies for Fostering Language: Meaning Vocabulary 241 Introducing Words Before Reading 242 Practicing and Reinforcing Meaning Vocabulary 244 Fostering Vocabulary Learning Through Rich Literate Experiences 246 Using Strategies to Figure Out Unknown Words 248

Using Poetry to Develop Language 255 Fostering the Development of Academic Vocabulary 256

Summary 257

References 258

11 Comprehension of Narrative Text 262

Introduction 263

Effective Reading Comprehension 263 The Purpose of Reading Is Comprehension 263 Comprehension Is an Active and Accurate Process 263 Comprehension Uses Background Knowledge 264 Comprehension Requires Higher-Level Thinking 265

Comprehending Narrative Materials 265 Narratives Inspire Imaginative Personal Responses 265 Narratives Have Story Organization 266

Assessing Abilities With Narrative Text 267 Measuring General Comprehension Ability 267 Judging the Comprehension of Specific Materials 268

A Strategic Approach to Teaching Reading Comprehension 270 Improving Comprehension Before Reading 271 Building Background Knowledge 271 Making Predictions About Text 272 Reading a Story to Students 275

Improving Comprehension During Reading 276 The Directed Reading-Thinking Activity 276 Monitoring Responses to Reading 279

xiv Contents

Making Mental Images 280 Constructing Content-Free Questions 282 Using Discussion Cards 283

Improving Comprehension After Reading 285 Comprehension Strategies That Develop an Understanding of Story Structure 285 Comprehension Strategies That Nurture Personal Response 289

Connecting the Literacy Experience 290 Conceptually Connected Instruction Using Themes 291 Studying Different Genres 291

Summary 293

References 293

Case Study 296

12 Comprehension of Informational Text 298

Introduction 299

Organization of Informational Text 299 Difficulties Presented by Informational Text 300 Importance of Informational Text 301

Informational Text and Grade-Level Competence 301

Informational Text and the Common Core Standards 301

Assessing Abilities With Informational Text Using the Informal Reading Inventory 303

Strategies for Helping Students Read Informational Text 304 Using Read-Alouds With Grade-Level Text 304 Content-Free Questions 307 Text Coding 309 Discussion Cards 311 Topic–Detail–Main Idea Strategy 313 Think-Aloud Strategy 315 Question–Answer Relationships 317

Strategies for Transforming Informational Text 318 Main Idea Grid 318 Idea-Mapping 319 Improving Comprehension of Informational Text and RTI 323

Summary 324

References 324

Case Study 326

Contents xv

13 Integrating Reading and Writing 329

Introduction 330

Importance of Teaching Writing 330

Assessing Writing 332

Writing Instruction 334 Writing Process 334 Supporting Students’ Writing 337

Personal Communication 339 Written Conversations 340 Personal Journals 341

Strategies for Integrating Reading and Writing 342 Writing and Reading Narrative Text 343 Writing and Reading Informational Text 349 Responding to Text 350

Writing With Poetry 355

Developing the Ability to Spell 357 Spelling Development 357 Spelling Assessment 358 Spelling Instruction 360

Handwriting 362

Summary 363

References 363

14 Literacy Instruction for Diverse Learners: English Language Learners, Literacy in a Culturally Diverse Society, Parents and Families, Adolescents and Adults With Reading Problems 368

Introduction 369

English Language Learners 369 Who Are ELLs? 369 Methods for Teaching ELL Students 370 Teaching Reading to ELL Students 370 Classroom Strategies for Teaching Reading to ELL Students 371

Literacy in a Culturally Diverse Society 372

The Important Role of Families and Parents in Fostering Literacy 375

You Read to Me and I’ll Read to You 375 Parent Workshops 375

xvi Contents

Adolescents With Reading Problems 376 Characteristics of Adolescents With Reading Problems 376 Special Considerations at the Secondary Level 377 Components of Effective Secondary Programs 377

Adults With Reading Problems 378 Postsecondary and College Programs 378

Summary 379

References 380

15 Literacy Instruction for Students With Special Needs 382

Introduction 383

Students With Disabilities 383

The Individuals With Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004 384

Response-to-Intervention 385

The Individualized Education Program 385 Contents of the IEP 385 Participants at IEP Meeting 386

Transition Services 386 Procedural Safeguards 386

Educational Environments 386

Learning Disabilities 387 Characteristics of Students With Learning Disabilities 387 Educational Settings for Students with Learning Disabilities 387 Eligibility of Students With Learning Disabilities for Special Education 388 Dyslexia 389

Providing Reading Instruction for Students With Special Needs 390 Adapting Standard Reading Methods for Students With Severe Reading Disabilities 390 Differentiated Instruction 392 Differences in Cognitive Processing 393 Multisensory Methods for Teaching Reading 393 Lindamood Phoneme Sequencing Program 396

Direct Instruction Reading Program 396

Summary 397

References 397

Contents xvii

16 Literacy Support as a Collaborative Process 400

Introduction 401

Changing Roles of Reading Specialists 401 Title I Programs 401 No Child Left Behind Act 403 American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 404 Race to the Top 404 Narrowing the Achievement Gap 404

Role of the Reading Specialist in Assessment 406 Evaluation of Student Performance 406 Individual Diagnostic Procedures 407

Role of the Reading Specialist in Instruction 409 Working With Classroom Teachers 409 Working With Other Professionals 409 Reading Specialists as Literacy Leaders 410 Providing Support for Teachers 410 Providing Support for Paraprofessionals 411 Serving as Liaison Between Teachers and Administrators 413 Serving on Student Services Teams 413 Serving on the Instructional Intervention Team 416 Working With Parents 418 Literacy Advocates in the Community 421

Summary 421

References 422

Appendix A 424

Appendix B 447

Test Index 462

Name Index 464

Subject Index 471

Photo Credits 487

The purpose of this book is to help the many children, adolescents, and adults who encounter difficulty with reading. Designed as a text for both undergrad- uate and graduate students, Reading Problems: Assessment and Teaching Strategies

guides prospective and present teachers in assessing and teaching students who are struggling with reading and writing.

Reading Problems is a comprehensive survey of teaching strategies, formal and informal assessment, theory, and research. The reader will find information both from the field of reading and from allied fields, such as special education, bilingual edu- cation, medical science, and policy studies. Together, these areas provide a coherent framework for helping students with reading problems.

The seventh edition of Reading Problems combines new approaches with time-tested ones to provide teachers a wide variety of approaches from which to choose. Recent research has clarified the reading process and substantiated effective instructional strategies. New insights provide a rich source of innovative diagnostic and teaching methods.

Most of all, we hope that Reading Problems will be a valuable resource for teachers. Hundreds of instructional strategies are presented for immediate use by teachers. Many of the strategies are illustrated by “Strategy Snapshots” depicting examples of actual classroom use. These snapshots are from our own experiences in working with students in the Literacy Centers at our universities and with teachers and students in schools.

Chapters 1 through 5 present general information about the reading process and students with reading problems, the use of interviews to obtain information about factors related to reading, and an overview of assessment, including formal and infor- mal assessment, with an emphasis on the vast amount of information gained through administering and analyzing the results of an informal reading inventory.

Chapter 1 provides an overview of reading and reading problems, including response-to-intervention (RTI). Chapter 2 discusses factors associated with reading and their impact on development. Chapter 3 provides suggestions for gathering background information and pertinent data about students. Chapter 4 includes information about current norm-referenced and criterion- referenced assessments either used by reading specialists or that may need to be interpreted by reading specialists. Chapter 5 includes a section on using informal reading inventories as an RTI assessment tool.

Chapter 6 describes successful reading intervention programs, including group and classroom instructional models. The chapter presents a new perspective on intervention: defining intervention success in terms of grade-level competence.

Preface

xviii

Preface xix

Chapter 6 also describes recent interventions designed specifically for addressing RTI components.

Chapters 7 through 13 provide in-depth information about language processes, including early literacy, word recognition, fluency, vocabulary development, compre- hension of narrative and informational text, and writing. Each chapter includes special tools for assessment in these areas followed by principles of teaching and practical instructional strategies.

Chapter 7 includes a section on word recognition and the Common Core State Standards initiative. It also addresses RTI and offers strategies that are appropriate for all three tiers.

Chapter 8 discusses fluency with regard to both the Common Core State Standards and RTI. It also includes a case study describing the assessment and instruc- tion of a third grader who experienced problems with fluency.

Chapter 9 includes instructional practices for improving word recognition and discusses the importance of fluency to successful reading.

Chapter 10 discusses the development of oral and reading vocabulary and its relationship to reading and writing. A new emphasis is the development of academic vocabulary and support for English learners in vocabulary development.

Chapter 11 presents strategies to support comprehension of narrative text, with a specific emphasis on mega-strategies that provide for integration of strategies to support comprehension before, during, and after reading. This chapter also provides a case study of a student who read below his chronological grade level in narrative text.

Chapter 12 relates comprehension of informational text to the Common Core State Standards and RTI. It also provides a case study of a student who read well below his chronological grade level in expository text.

Chapter 13 focuses on the integration of reading and writing, with an emphasis on the changes in writing instruction needed to align effectively with the Common Core State Standards.

Chapter 14 presents guidelines, strategies, and materials that have proven ef- fective for teaching in multicultural, multilingual, and multiage instructional settings.

Chapter 15 provides ideas for instructional options for students with special needs.

Chapter 16 discusses current trends in the roles of reading specialists or literacy coaches as aligned with recent changes in educational law and policies, as well as the collaborative nature of assessment and instruction in schools.

New to this Edition

Key changes to the seventh edition include:

Discussion of the transition from No Child Left Behind to Race to the Top and the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009. Case studies for Chapters 8, 11, and 12. Procedures for monitoring students’ progress to meet RTI requirements.

xx Preface

Impact of the Common Core State Standards initiative on literacy instruction and assessment. Changes in procedures for identifying students who are qualified for additional support services. Strategies to meet the needs of English learners, especially in the areas of vo- cabulary development and academic vocabulary development. Integration of technology into literacy instruction and assessment. Collaboration between reading specialists/literacy coaches and general educa- tion teachers. Changing roles of reading specialists/literacy coaches. A continuing discussion of specific reading skills, including word recognition skills, fluency, vocabulary development, comprehension of narrative and infor- mational text, and the integration of reading and writing.

MyEducationLab is an online homework, tutorial, and assessment product designed to improve results by helping students quickly master concepts, and by providing educa- tors with a robust set of tools for easily gauging and addressing the performance of individuals and classrooms.

MyEducationLab engages students with high-quality multimedia learning expe- riences that help them build critical teaching skills and prepare them for real-world practice. In practice exercises, students receive immediate feedback so they see mis- takes right away, learn precisely which concepts are holding them back, and master concepts through targeted practice.

For educators, MyEducationLab provides highly visual data and performance analysis to help them quickly identify gaps in student learning and make a clear con- nection between coursework, concept mastery, and national teaching standards. And because MyEducationLab comes from Pearson, it’s developed by an experienced part- ner committed to providing content, resources, and expertise for the best digital learn- ing experiences.

In Preparing Teachers for a Changing World, Linda Darling-Hammond and her colleagues point out that grounding teacher education in real classrooms—among real teachers and students and among actual examples of students’ and teachers’ work—is an important, and perhaps even an essential, part of training teachers for the complexi- ties of teaching in today’s classrooms.

In the MyEducationLab for this course educators will find the following features and resources.

Advanced Data and Performance Reporting Aligned to National Standards Advanced data and performance reporting helps educators quickly identify gaps in stu- dent learning and gauge and address individual and classroom performance. Educators

Preface xxi

easily see the connection between coursework, concept mastery, and national teach- ing standards with highly visual views of performance reports. Data and assessments align directly to national teaching standards, including the International Reading Association (IRA) Standards for Reading Professionals 2010, and support reporting for state and accreditation requirements

Study Plan Specific to Your Text MyEducationLab gives students the opportunity to test themselves on key concepts and skills, track their own progress through the course, and access personalized Study Plan activities.

The customized Study Plan is generated based on students’ pretest results. Incorrect questions from the pretest indicate specific textbook learning outcomes the student is struggling with. The customized Study Plan suggests specific enriching activities for particular learning outcomes, helping students focus. Personalized Study Plan activities may include eBook reading assignments and review, practice, and enrichment activities.

After students complete the enrichment activities, they take a posttest to see the concepts they’ve mastered or areas where they still may need extra help.

MyEducationLab then reports the Study Plan results to the instructor. Based on these reports, the instructor can adapt course material to suit the needs of individual students or the entire class.

Assignments and Activities Designed to enhance students’ understanding of concepts covered in class, these assignable exercises show concepts in action (through videos, cases, and/or student and teacher artifacts). They help students deepen content knowledge and synthesize and apply concepts and strategies they have read about in the book. (Correct answers for these assignments are available to the instructor only.)

Building Teaching Skills and Dispositions These unique learning units help students practice and strengthen skills that are essential to effective teaching. After examining the steps involved in a core teaching process, stu- dents are given an opportunity to practice applying this skill via videos, student and teacher artifacts, and/or case studies of authentic classrooms. Providing multiple opportunities to practice a single teaching concept, each activity encourages a deeper understanding and application of concepts, as well as the use of critical thinking skills. After practice, students take a quiz that is reported to the instructor gradebook and performance reporting.

IRIS Center Resources The IRIS Center at Vanderbilt University (http://iris.peabody.vanderbilt.edu), funded by the U.S. Department of Education’s Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP), develops training enhancement materials for preservice and practicing teachers. The Center works with experts from across the country to create challenge-based

xxii Preface

interactive modules, case study units, and podcasts that provide research-validated in- formation about working with students in inclusive settings. In your MyEducationLab course we have integrated this content where appropriate.

Teacher Talk This feature emphasizes the power of teaching through videos of master teachers, with all telling their own compelling stories of why they teach. Each of these featured teachers has been awarded the Council of Chief State School Officers Teachers of the Year award, the oldest and most prestigious award for teachers.

Activities A+RISE activities provide practice in targeting instruction. A+RISE®, developed by three-time Teacher of the Year and administrator Evelyn Arroyo, provides quick, research-based strategies that get to the “how” of targeting instruction and making content accessible for all students, including English language learners.

A+RISE® Standards2Strategy™ is an innovative and interactive online resource that offers new teachers in grades K–12 just-in-time, research-based instructional strategies that:

Meet the linguistic needs of English language learners (ELLs) as they learn content Differentiate instruction for all grades and abilities Offer reading and writing techniques, cooperative learning, use of linguistic and nonlinguistic representations, scaffolding, teacher modeling, higher-order thinking, and alternative classroom ELL assessment Provide support to help teachers be effective through the integration of listening, speaking, reading, and writing along with the content curriculum Improve student achievement Are aligned to Common Core Elementary Language Arts standards (for the literacy strategies) and to English language proficiency standards in WIDA, Texas, California, and Florida.

Grammar Tutorial The Grammar Tutorial provides content extracted in part from The Praxis Series™ On- line Tutorial for the Pre-Professional Skills Test: Writing. Online quizzes built around spe- cific elements of grammar help students strengthen their understanding and proper usage of the English language in writing. Definitions and examples of grammatical concepts are followed by practice exercises to provide the background information and usage examples needed to refresh understandings of grammar, and then apply that knowledge to make it more permanent.

Children’s and Young Adult Literature Database The Children’s and Young Adult Literature Database offers information on thousands of quality literature titles, and the associated activities provide experience in choosing appropriate literature and integrating the best titles into language arts instruction.

Preface xxiii

Literacy Portraits Year-long case studies of second graders—complete with student artifacts matching each video clip, teacher commentary, and student and teacher interviews—track the month- by-month literacy growth of five second graders. Students will meet English-learner Rakie, struggling readers Rhiannon and Curt-Lynn, bilingual-learner Michael, and grade-level-reader Jimmy, and travel with them through a year of assessments, word- study instruction, reading groups, writing activities, buddy reading, and more.

Course Resources The Course Resources section of MyEducationLab is designed to help students put together an effective lesson plan; prepare for and begin a career; navigate the first year of teaching; and understand key educational standards, policies, and laws.

It includes the following:

The Lesson Plan Builder is an effective and easy-to-use tool that students can use to create, update, and share quality lesson plans. The software also makes it easy to integrate state content standards into any lesson plan. The Certification and Licensure section is designed to help students pass licen- sure exams by giving them access to state test requirements, overviews of what the tests cover, and sample test items. The Certification and Licensure section includes the following:

State Certification Test Requirements: Here, students can click on a state and be taken to a list of state certification tests. Students can click on the Licensure Exams they need to take to find:

Basic information about each test Descriptions of what is covered on each test Sample test questions with explanations of correct answers

National Evaluation Series™ (NES) by Pearson: Here, students can see the tests in the NES, learn what is covered on each exam, and access sample test items with descriptions and rationales of correct answers. Students can also purchase interactive online tutorials developed by Pearson Evaluation Systems and the Pearson Teacher Education and Development group. ETS Online Praxis Tutorials: Here students can purchase interactive on- line tutorials developed by ETS and by the Pearson Teacher Education and Development group. Tutorials are available for the Praxis I exams and for select Praxis II exams.

The Multimedia Index aggregates resources in MyEducationLab by asset type (for example, video or artifact) for easy location and retrieval.

Visit www.myeducationlab.com for a demonstration of this exciting new online teaching resource.

Support Materials for Instructors

The following resources are available for instructors to download on www.pearsonhighered.com/educators. Instructors enter the author or title of this book,

select this particular edition of the book, and then click on the “Resources” tab to log in and download textbook supplements.

Instructor’s Resource Manual and Test Bank (0-13-283791-9). The Instructor’s Resource Manual and Test Bank include key points, topics for discussion, activities, assignments, short-answer questions, and multiple-choice questions. It also provides several case studies with accompanying questions.

PowerPoint™ Presentation (0-13-283790-0). Designed for teachers using the text, the PowerPoint™ Presentation consists of a series of slides that can be shown as is or used to make handouts. The presentation highlights key concepts and major topics for each chapter.

MyEducationLab Correlation Guide (0-13-338652-X). This guide connects chapter sections with appropriate assignable exercises on MyEducationLab.

CourseSmart ebook and Other eBook Options Available

CourseSmart is an exciting new choice for purchasing this book. As an alternative to purchasing the printed book, you may purchase an electronic version of the same content via CourseSmart for reading on PC or Mac, as well as Android devices, iPad, iPhone, and iPod Touch with CourseSmart Apps. With a CourseSmart eBook, readers can search the text, make notes online, and bookmark important passages for later review. For more information or to purchase access to the CourseSmart eBook, visit http://www.coursesmart.com. Also look for availability of this book on a number of other eBook devices and platforms.

Acknowledgments

Many people have contributed to this book. We wish to thank the reading profes- sionals who have deepened and extended our understanding of issues and strategies by taking the time to answer personal inquiries. We thank the graduate students, undergraduate students, and children we have worked with for giving us feedback on instructional strategies. The staff at Allyn and Bacon, including Aurora Martínez Ramos, Barbara Strickland, and Michelle Hochberg, provided invaluable assistance in developing this manuscript. The feedback and guidance from our editor, Beth Jacobson, is greatly appreciated.

Also, we acknowledge the valuable input of the following reviewers of this man- uscript: Erica Bowers, California State University, Fullerton; Emily Binks-Cantrell, Texas A&M University; and Donna M. Harkins, University of West Georgia.

Joyce Holt Jennings JoAnne Schudt Caldwell Janet W. Lerner

xxiv Preface

1 C H A P T E R

Overview of Reading and Reading Problems

Introduction

Reading Problems: A National Dilemma National Reading Levels SAT and ACT Reading Scores

Hit New Low Reading Needs in Today’s World

Recent Influences on the Teaching of Reading

Response-to-Intervention The National Reading Panel and the

Components of Reading Differentiated Instruction

Common Core Standards Social Media and Reading

Key Elements of Teaching Reading Early Literacy Word Recognition Reading Fluency Reading Comprehension Reading Vocabulary Reading–Writing Connection Enjoyment and Appreciation

Summary

1

2 C H A P T E R 1

Strategy Snapshot 1.1 Children With Reading Problems

Each student with a reading problem is unique. The causes and characteristics of the reading problem are different for each student. To illustrate these variations, we describe five students who were in our reading clinic.

Jason. Jason’s mother began to suspect that her son was not developing in a normal fashion during his early years. He was later than other children in sitting by himself, in crawling, and in walking. He was slow to talk, and his speech was difficult to understand. Jason’s concerned parents took several measures to help him, including obtaining speech therapy, participating in a motor training program, and delaying his entrance to school by enrolling him in a pre- school program for an extra year. These steps did not eliminate Jason’s problems. At the age of 11, when he was in the fifth grade, Jason entered our reading center. By this time, he was falling behind his classmates, both socially and academically. While the rest of the class read from a literature series, Jason was struggling with an easy-to-read book.

Diane. Diane was born to a substance-addicted mother. At age 8, she was brought to our reading center by her grandmother. Diane was identified by her school as a special education student, and she had extreme difficulty reading even the simplest material. Her teachers were confounded and frustrated with her poor achievement in reading and by her lack of self- discipline. They had given up even attempting to teach Diane to read.

Ilya. Ilya was a child in a family of struggling Russian immigrants. He did not go to kinder- garten because his parents were unable to help him. Ilya was intelligent and able, but he was not proficient in English. By the time he entered the reading center at the end of first grade, he was a half a year behind his classmates.

Teaching reading IS rocket science. – Louisa Moats, 1999

Introduction

The purpose of this book is to assist all teachers who work with children who have read- ing problems. We provide many instructional strategies and assessment tools to help teachers understand reading problems and instruct students in their struggle to read. To do something well, people must enjoy doing it, and so we offer guides for teachers to inspire a love of reading. We include many references to children’s literature and in- structional materials that will help students realize the wealth of information and enjoy- ment that reading offers. Many struggling readers have learned from the strategies we present in this book. We hope that the students you teach also will benefit from them.

Who has a reading problem? To answer this question, we relate the stories of several students who were brought to our reading center because they were encoun- tering difficulty in reading. Strategy Snapshot 1.1 describes five students who have reading problems.

Overview of Reading and Reading Problems 3

Students who have serious difficulty in learning to read face many adverse con- sequences. For many, the situation is heartbreaking. Reading problems can be dev- astating for students and their families. In school, these children are forced to face their inadequacies day after day. As failing students, they are often rejected by teach- ers and peers. In their academic classes, students with reading problems are assigned textbooks that they cannot read, and they are given homework they cannot do. A common consequence is that the failing student turns to misbehavior, or the student may simply give up, displaying a trait called “learned helplessness.” It is not surpris- ing that poor readers often suffer from low self-esteem. As these children mature, they often find that the doors to personal enrichment and career opportunities are closed to them.

Educators, parents, physicians, and psychologists, as well as society in general, share a concern about individuals who do not learn to read. However, the primary responsibility for reading instruction belongs to teaching professionals. The teacher is the coordinator and deliverer of instructional services, the person most able to help poor readers. Throughout our nation, hundreds of thousands of classroom teachers, reading teachers, and special education teachers assist these students, helping them read better and enjoy reading.

Reading Problems: A National Dilemma

Although teaching is a personal activity, professionals should recognize the overall situation of reading problems in our nation. What are the costs of reading problems from a national perspective? If children in a modern society do not learn to read, they cannot succeed in life. Without the ability to read, opportunities for academic and occupational success are severely limited. Society suffers when citizens cannot read adequately. People with low reading levels comprise many of those who drop out of high school, the unemployed, the poor, and those convicted of crimes. The problems of the nation’s schools, the growth of poverty, and the loss of family values all show an association with poor reading.

Gail. Gail’s mother became concerned when her daughter’s once-excellent grades began to fall in fourth grade. She was having difficulty in science and social studies. Gail was confused by the difficult words, sentences, and concepts in her textbooks.

Roy. Roy was an adolescent who was classified as a special education student by his school. He had many learning problems. He could not do his homework. Despite his teacher’s best efforts, he entered high school at a second-grade reading level. He came to the reading center when he was unable to pass the written examination for a driver’s license. For Roy, coming for assistance was a desperate cry for help before he completed high school.

Reflective Questions: 1. In what ways are these five children different? 2. In what ways are these five children similar?

4 C H A P T E R 1

A few generations ago, people managed to get along reasonably well in the business and social worlds without literacy skills, but this is no longer possible in to- day’s world. Students face more mandatory tests required by federal, state, and local laws than ever before. Periods of compulsory education are longer, and students need diplomas and degrees to obtain jobs. These hurdles, as well as the necessity of filling out application forms and taking licensing examinations, make life for the poor reader uncomfortable and, indeed, full of impassable barriers.

It is said that the “Children must learn to read so that later they can read to learn.” The ability to read is a basic requirement for all academic subjects. Failure in school subjects can often be traced to inadequate reading skills. Poor reading leads to many kinds of problems. Poor readers have fewer opportunities for gainful employ- ment. Youth who drop out of high school have twice the unemployment rate, they have few opportunities for continued training, and they often lack the qualifications for postsecondary school or college (Cameto, Knokey, & Sanford, 2013; Wagner, Newman, Cameto, Levine & Garza, 2006).

National Reading Levels How serious are problems of illiteracy in the United States? National longitudinal studies show that more than 17.5% of the nation’s schoolchildren, or about 1 million children, will encounter reading problems in the crucial first 3 years of their schooling (Lerner & Johns, 2012; Lyon, 2003; National Reading Panel, 2000). Accumulating evidence shows that many U.S. schoolchildren are not mastering essential reading skills. The National Assessment of Education Progress (NAEP) is a national test that follows student learning. NAEP (2011) results show that more than 67% of fourth- grade students performed below proficient reading levels. These problems persisted in eighth grade, with 76% of students reading below proficiency levels. More than 10% of fourth-grade children could not even participate in the NAEP test because of their severe reading difficulties. According to the NAEP reports (2011), 26% of fourth graders are unable to read at even a basic level. Among 17-year-olds, only 33% were able to understand complex information, and only 3% were reading at the high- est level of understanding (NAEP, 2011; National Reading Panel, 2000). Moreover, reading books is on a decline. Only 57% of Americans read a book in 2002 (National Endowment for the Arts, 2004). Overall, the statistics about illiteracy are dismal. Stud- ies from the National Longitudinal Transition Study (Wagner et al., 2006) show that the following:

◆ Eighty-five percent of delinquent children and 75% of adult prison inmates are illiterate.

◆ Ninety million adults are, at best, functionally literate. ◆ The cost to taxpayers of adult illiteracy is $224 billion a year in terms of welfare

payments, crime, job incompetence, lost taxes, and remedial education. ◆ U.S. companies lose nearly $40 billion annually because of illiteracy. ◆ Adults on the lowest level of the literacy scale comprise 44% of the population

and are more likely to live in poverty than adults at higher levels of literacy.

Overview of Reading and Reading Problems 5

SAT and ACT Reading Scores Hit New Low The SAT scores in the areas of reading and writing fell in 2011, according to the College Board officials (2013). In fact, the reading and writing scores on the SAT were the lowest ever recorded. The reading scores in 2011 fell to 497 from 500 in 2010. These data indicate that many students are not ready for college. This is the lowest score since 1972 (Banchero, 2011). Education Week reported a 3-point decline in critical reading for the year 2011 (Adams, 2011). The ACT reported that only 25% of all high school graduates who took the exam were ready for college (Banchero, 2011).

Reading Needs in Today’s World In today’s world, high technology and automation have spurred a demand for highly trained people. Because jobs rapidly become obsolete, the process of retraining is a necessity. Workers in every occupation will have to retrain themselves to prepare for new jobs many times during their work careers. The ability to read efficiently is a key tool for retraining and maintaining employment.

With fewer jobs available for unskilled and semiskilled workers, they are likely to end up being chronically unemployed. Moreover, the lack of reading skills among large numbers of young adults threatens to divide society deeply between the highly literate and a low-income, low-achieving underclass unequipped for educational and professional advancement.

Recent Influences on the Teaching of Reading

Recent events and movements have an influence on the teaching of reading. These include current laws, important national studies, and contemporary philosophies about teaching. In this section, we describe several of these influences: (a) response-to- intervention (RTI), (b) the National Reading Panel and the components of reading, (c) differentiated instruction, (d) common core standards, and (e) the influence of social media.

Response-to-Intervention Response-to-intervention (RTI) offers a relatively new approach to instruction and as- sessment in reading, as well as in other academic subjects. RTI is advocated by the U.S. Department of Education in the Individuals with Disabilities Act (IDEA) of 2004 and in the regulations for this law (2006). RTI is an instructional method for all students in general education and requires that schools use an evidence-based or research-based instructional method that is supported by research. An underlying assumption of RTI is that students will learn to read and reading problems will be resolved by using an evidence-based method of reading instruction.

Evidence-based instruction is described in the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act of 2001 as instructional programs that apply rigorous, systematic, and objective

6 C H A P T E R 1

procedures to obtain valid knowledge that is relevant to the development of instruc- tion. According to NCLB, evidence-based programs have to be objective, valid, reliable, systematic, and research based.

In the classical approach to reading assessment, an evaluation of a student en- countering a reading difficulty is the initial step to determine the nature of the stu- dent’s reading problem. (See Chapter 4 and Chapter 5.) RTI differs from the classical approach to reading assessment. It first provides instruction, and an assessment or evaluation occurs only if the student does not respond successfully to the intervention or instructional method after several levels or tiers of instruction. Each tier of inter- vention provides increasing levels of intensity of instruction taught in smaller groups (Fuchs & Fuchs, 2006; Hughes & Dexter, 2011). The underlying expectation of RTI is that the evidence-based instruction will reduce the prevalence of reading failure.

There are a number of models or versions of RTI, as well as suggested num- bers of tiers or levels of instruction for RTI. A common approach, however, is to use three tiers of instruction, which are described here (Division for Learning Disabilities, 2007).

The RTI process begins with Tier 1, which is high-quality instruction (or evidence-based intervention) that is given to all students in the general education class. Students who do not respond adequately to the high-quality instruction in the general education class go to Tier 2. In Tier 2, students are taught with the evidence-based program but with increasing intensity, in a smaller group of children, and with the use of supplemental programs. Students who do not respond successfully in Tier 2 go to Tier 3. In Tier 3, children are taught with the evidence-based program with even greater intensity in even smaller groups, and more instructional and behavioral supports (Division for Learning Disabilities, 2007).

Tiers of Intervention. As noted, the RTI model highlights the concept of tiers of intervention. Different models of RTI use different numbers of tiers (or levels of intervention). Many schools use three tiers of intervention, which are described here (Division for Learning Disabilities, 2007).

◆ Tier 1. Tier 1 intervention is high-quality instruction delivered to all students in the general education classroom. High-quality instruction uses a method that is judged as a scientifically based or evidence-based program.

◆ Tier 2. Tier 2 is for students who are not progressing (responding) adequately in Tier 1. Students in Tier 2 are given additional high-quality instruction in a smaller group and supplemental instructional programs. Students who respond positively to the intervention in Tier 2 return to the general education class. Students who do not respond to Tier 2 intervention go into Tier 3.

◆ Tier 3. In Tier 3, students are given even more intensive intervention using evidence-based methods in smaller groups, more instructional and behavioral supports, supplemental instructional programs, and more probes of progress. Students who respond adequately to this intervention go back to Tier 2 and eventually to Tier 1. Students who do not respond adequately may be recom- mended for a comprehensive evaluation or assessment.

Overview of Reading and Reading Problems 7

The three tiers of intervention are illustrated in Figure 1.1. Additional information about teaching strategies for RTI is provided in Chapter 6,

Providing Instruction and Intervention Strategies. It is significant to note that the Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP) re-

leased a memo clarifying that RTI cannot delay timely initial evaluations for special educa- tion services (OSEP, 2011). Parents have expressed concern that RTI is slowing down the initial evaluation of their children. The Department of Education explains that although RTI can be part of the comprehensive evaluation of a student, it cannot be used to delay the initial evaluation or to stand as the entire evaluation.

The National Reading Panel and the Components of Reading The National Reading Panel, a commission of reading scholars, was assigned by Con- gress to conduct an evidence-based assessment of the research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction. Finding that over 100,000 research studies on reading had been published since 1966, the National Reading Panel established stringent criteria for the inclusion of research studies in its evidence-based assessment (National Reading Panel, 2000). To order a free copy of the National Reading Panel report, go to www.nationalreadingpanel.org.

As shown in Figure 1.1, the two major components of reading are word rec- ognition and reading comprehension. Word recognition has the subcomponents of phonological awareness and fluency. Reading comprehension includes the subcompo- nents of vocabulary and enjoyment of reading. Each of these components of reading is discussed in this book (see Table 1.1). The National Reading Panel (2000) concluded that instructional reading programs must include these components to be considered evidence-based reading programs:

1. Phonemic awareness 2. Phonics

Components of Reading

Word Recognition

Reading Comprehension

Phonological Awareness

Reading Fluency

Reading Vocabulary

Reading Enjoyment

FIGURE 1.1 Components of Reading

8 C H A P T E R 1

3. Fluency 4. Vocabulary 5. Text comprehension

Differentiated Instruction Differentiated instruction offers another approach for reading assessment and in- struction. Differentiated instruction proposes that teaching should be geared to each student’s way of learning and interests. Instead of using a standardized ap- proach for all students, the specific needs and characteristics of each individual stu- dent are taken into consideration. One of the biggest mistakes teachers make is to treat everyone equally when it comes to learning. Children process information differently from one another: Some form images, others form words, and still others form sentences. Differentiated instruction takes each student’s individual needs into account (Tomlinson & Inbeau, 2010). The basic underlying beliefs for differenti- ated instruction include the following ideas:

◆ No two children are alike. ◆ No two children learn in an identical way. ◆ It is not possible to treat everyone the same when it comes to learning. ◆ An enriched environment for one student is not necessarily an enriched environ-

ment for another.

In the general education classroom, there will be differences among students in their prior knowledge about a subject, in the skills they already possess, in their motivation to learn, and in their proficiency with English. When teachers take such differences into account, they can make adaptations to the curriculum and use a vari- ety of teaching and learning strategies. Teachers can provide tasks at varied levels of difficulty, give students varying degrees of support, arrange groups to meet student

TABLE 1.1 Components of Reading

Component Chapter

Word Recognition Chapter 8: Improving Word Knowledge: Word Recognition

Reading Comprehension Chapter 11: Comprehension of Narrative Text

Chapter 12: Comprehension of Informational Text

Phonological Awareness Chapter 7: Early Literacy Reading Fluency Chapter 9: Improving Word Knowledge: Fluency Reading Vocabulary Chapter 10: Vocabulary Development and Listening

Comprehension

Overview of Reading and Reading Problems 9

needs, and vary time allotments for different students (Bender, 2006; Tomlinson, Brimijoin, & Navaez, 2008; Tomlinson & Inbeau, 2010; Tomlinson & McTighe, 2006).

Differentiated instruction offers a way to understand each child. This approach emphasizes that children do not respond to a one-size-fits-all curriculum; instead, they need teaching that responds to their personal talents, interests, strengths, proclivities, and cognitive ways of processing information. Children process information differ- ently from one another. Differentiated instruction takes the child’s individual needs into account in planning instruction (Tomlinson, 2003). Table 1.2 summarizes consid- erations in differentiated instruction.

In many ways, differentiated instruction is similar to basic ideas in teaching spe- cial education students, especially students with learning disabilities. Special education seeks to find the way to teach each unique, exceptional student. However, differentiated instruction applies to all children in the classroom (Tomlinson, 2003; Tomlinson & Inbeau, 2010; Tomlinson & McTighe, 2006).

Differentiated instruction for teaching reading requires that the implementation looks different for each student and each assignment. In teaching reading, teachers should:

1. Use diagnostic assessments to determine individual student readiness. Informal or formal assessments can be used. For example, the teacher can give a pretest, ques- tion students about their background knowledge, or use a KWL chart to discover what students already know, what they want to know, and what they have learned about a topic. (See Chapter 12 for a discussion of KWL charts.)

2. Determine individual student interest. For example, use an interest inventory and/or include students in the planning process. Teachers can ask students to tell what specific interests they have and use these interests to develop lessons.

3. Identify student learning styles and environmental preferences. Use a learning style inventory, ask students how they learn best, and observe student activities. To identify environmental preferences, determine if students work best in large or small groups. What environmental factors might inhibit student learning?

TABLE 1.2 Considering Differentiated Instruction

◆ Know the student’s interests. Try to use those interests in teaching the student and incorporate them into the curriculum.

◆ Know the student’s learning preference. How does the student like to learn—visually, auditorily, or by doing things such as building something or creating art?

◆ Know the student’s learning pace or rate. Does the student like to do things quickly? Does the student need extra time to process what is being learned?

◆ What are the student’s personal interests? How can these interests be incorporated into the curriculum?

◆ What talents does the student have—athletics, music, debate, playing chess, art? How can they be brought into curriculum?

◆ What is the student’s level of English proficiency? Is the student an English language learner (ELL)? Can the student’s facility with a native language be used in instruction?

10 C H A P T E R 1

Common Core Standards The Common Core State Standards Initiative is a state-led effort coordinated by the National Governors Association Center for Best Practices (NGA Center) and the Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO). The standards were devel- oped in collaboration with teachers, school administrators, and experts to provide a clear and consistent framework to prepare our children for college and the workforce (CCSSO, 2013).

These standards define the knowledge and skills students should have within their K–12 education careers so that they will graduate high school and be able to suc- ceed in entry-level, credit-bearing academic college courses and in workforce training programs.

Characteristics of the standards are as follows:

◆ Are aligned with college and work expectations; ◆ Are clear, understandable, and consistent; ◆ Include rigorous content and application of knowledge through high-order

skills; ◆ Build upon strengths and lessons of current state standards; ◆ Are informed by other top-performing countries so that all students are pre-

pared to succeed in our global economy and society; and ◆ Are evidence-based.

Reading Common Core Standards

◆ The standards establish a “staircase” of increasing complexity in what students must be able to read so that all students are ready for the demands of college- and career-level reading no later than the end of high school. The standards also require the progressive development of reading comprehension so that students advancing through the grades are able to gain more knowledge from whatever they read.

◆ Through reading a diverse array of classic and contemporary literature as well as challenging informational texts in a range of subjects, students are expected to build knowledge, gain insights, explore possibilities, and broaden their perspective. Because the standards are building blocks for successful classrooms, but recognize that teachers, school districts, and states need to decide on appropriate curriculum, they intentionally do not offer a reading list. Instead, they offer numerous sample texts to help teachers prepare for the school year and allow parents and students to know what to expect at the beginning of the year.

◆ The standards mandate certain critical types of content for all students, includ- ing classic myths and stories from around the world, foundational U.S. docu- ments, seminal works of American literature, and the writings of Shakespeare. The standards appropriately defer the many remaining decisions about what and how to teach to states, districts, and schools.

Overview of Reading and Reading Problems 11

Social Media and Reading Social media today has an influence on even very young children. Four-year-old Bradley was observed in a barber’s chair, waiting for his haircut. Most 4-year-olds are fidgety and apprehensive when getting a haircut, but Bradley was smiling and happily antici- pating his mohawk-style haircut. When the barber finished and handed him a mirror, Bradley flashed a big smile. Bradley’s mother came up and clicked a photo with her cell phone. Bradley admonished her with the words, “Don’t put that picture on your Facebook.”

Children today are actively participating in blogs, YouTube, Facebook, Twitter, and other social network media. How does social media affect learning, reading, and writing? Advocates of social learning point out that we are all social beings, so social learning is a more natural way of learning. It certainly provides an alternative to the traditional structured learning. Many children are learning reading and writing skills through Facebook. They may have as many as 1,000 Facebook friends. The question teachers have to ask is how to harness this social media interaction to improve reading skills (Herff Jones Achievement Series, 2011).

Some school districts ban the use of Facebook and other social media sites. The reasoning is that students post inappropriate information about fellow students on Facebook that can be harmful. Other school districts stress that it is important to teach safe behavior and educate minors to participate in online activities responsibly, ethically, and safely. These school districts believe that there are many educational benefits for teacher–student communication through social media. They provide a means for giving out assignments, offering homework support, and engaging in one- on-one learning. Several suggestions for using social media such as Facebook in teach- ing reading are as follows:

◆ Have students share book reports and recommend books. ◆ Develop a book club. ◆ Create a forum to share opinions about characters in a book. ◆ Create a forum to share opinions about favorite authors. ◆ Have students express and organize ideas with “mind maps” to expand literacy. ◆ Have students explore the use of social “clouds” through wordle (www.wordle

.net). For example, students can try making a collage with reading words. ◆ Send homework assignments to students.

Key Elements of Teaching Reading

In this section, we briefly review some of the key elements of teaching reading. Each of these elements is discussed in greater detail in specific chapters of this book.

Early Literacy The young child learns many concepts as an emergent reader. In the early stages of lit- eracy development, young children develop facility with oral language, concepts about

12 C H A P T E R 1

print, alphabet knowledge, awareness of phonemic sounds in language, letter–sound correspondence, and beginning reading vocabulary. Such knowledge is usually learned in the preschool and kindergarten years, but students with reading problems may still be mastering emergent literacy skills long after these ages. Early literacy is discussed in detail in Chapter 7.

Word Recognition To read any text, students must recognize the words written on the page. Several strategies are used to recognize words, including (1) phonics (ability to match letters with their sound equivalents), (2) structural analysis (ability to recognize the parts of unknown words, such as prefixes and affixes), and (3) context clues (skills in recog- nizing clues in the sentences to help recognize a word). Accurate word recognition is often difficult for struggling readers. Word recognition accuracy is discussed in Chapter 8.

Reading Fluency In addition to recognizing words accurately, students need to read them quickly and fluently, otherwise reading will be labored and not enjoyable, and students will lose the meaning of the text. Reading fluency is recognized today as the “missing ingredient” in instruction for struggling readers. Fluency is discussed in Chapter 9.

Reading Comprehension Comprehension is the essence of the reading act. The many levels of comprehending include drawing on background experiences, literal comprehension, higher-level com- prehension, and the ability to study and learn from text. To comprehend material ef- fectively, readers require some background knowledge. The background that students already have enables them to build bridges to new reading experiences and connect what they read to what they know.

The different levels of comprehension are strongly related:

Literal comprehension, or understanding the information stated directly in the text, is one type of comprehension. However, even here, the good reader picks and chooses, remembering the most important facts. Readers are likely to focus on facts that are familiar to them. Higher-level comprehension. Formulating the central thought of a passage is con- sidered part of higher-level comprehension. The main thought constructed is a little different for each of us. We actively participate in the reading process by constructing meaning. Another form of higher-level thinking consists of the inferences or the implied information we draw from the text. The experienced reader will draw many inferences.

Overview of Reading and Reading Problems 13

Critical or evaluative thinking is also a part of higher-level comprehension. As you read, you develop a point of view and evaluate the information in light of your thinking and experiences.

In school, students are often called on to study (gain information) from their textbooks. The use of books, manuals, directions, and many other materials continues throughout adult life. Thus, the ability to study is important in school and daily life.

Students with reading problems need work in many areas of comprehension and studying. As mentioned earlier, they do not construct meaning effectively in their minds, for example, the way we did when we constructed a central thought for this section of the chapter.

In addition, low-level readers are particularly at risk in content-area subjects, such as science, social studies, and health. In these areas, the reading is expository, or focuses on giving information rather than telling a story.

This book deals with two types of comprehension. Narrative comprehension in- volves reading and understanding material such as stories and novels and is discussed in Chapter 11. Informational comprehension involves reading and understanding mate- rial that conveys information, such as science or social studies textbooks. The compre- hension and study of informational materials is also covered in Chapter 12.

Reading Vocabulary To read a text effectively, the reader must understand its sentence structures and word meanings, yet readers can certainly read something without understanding every word. In fact, using the comprehension processes, readers are able to increase their vocabulary as they read.

For effective reading, students need a knowledge of word meanings and language. As one reads, the reader also acquires new word meanings and gains experience with lan- guage. The more students read, the more word meanings and language they acquire. Thus, teachers need to encourage students with reading problems to read as much as possible.

The language we understand is the natural limit of our reading ability. Meaning vocabulary is an extremely important factor in reading, particularly in intermediate and upper grades. Students with reading problems lag behind their average-achieving peers in both language development and meaning vocabulary. Many motivating ideas to help build the language and vocabulary of low-achieving readers are provided in Chapter 10.

Reading–Writing Connection The inclusion of writing as a part of reading may seem strange, yet, as we read, we mentally construct thought. In other words, we compose, or write, in our minds. As we read, we are constructing our own meaning. We are always composing, so reading actually involves “writing.”

Reading a passage involves composing in our minds. However, when students actually take pencil in hand and write down their thoughts, they learn even more

14 C H A P T E R 1

about reading. Trying to spell gives them insights into sound–symbol relation- ships, or phonics. When students create their own writing, it shows them that somebody actually writes what is read and that they can write, too. Thus, students acquire a sense of control over reading. Chapter 13 discusses the reading–writing connection.

Enjoyment and Appreciation People do what they enjoy and appreciate. For the reading act to be complete, the reader’s interest must be engaged. Suggestions for helping students with reading prob- lems enjoy reading are found throughout this book. Many different strategies and materials are given that you can use to motivate your students.

Summary

Teachers bear the primary responsibility for instructing students who have reading problems. Reading problems are associated with difficulties in life, including poverty, unemployment, and problems with the law. Because they lack skills, individuals with reading problems often are unable to train for jobs in an increasingly technological society.

A substantial portion of the U.S. school population has reading problems. Some students receive help through Title I programs, some students receive special educa- tion services through the provisions of IDEA, and some receive services through state or locally funded programs. Many students with reading problems, however, receive no special help.

Response-to-intervention (RTI) is a relatively new approach to teaching reading and other academic skills in schools. This approach is a tiered approach in which stu- dents are taught with evidence-based materials in Tier 1 (the general education class); students who do not respond to instruction in Tier 1 go to Tier 2, where evidence- based instruction is given more intensively and in smaller groups. Students who do not respond well in Tier 2 go to Tier 3. In Tier 3, the evidence-based program is taught to children with greater intensity and in even smaller groups.

The National Reading Panel (2000) concluded that instructional read- ing programs have to include these components to be considered evidence- based reading programs: phonemic awareness, phonics, fluency, vocabulary, text comprehension.

The Common Core State Standards Initiative is a state-led effort coordinated by the NGA Center and the CCSSO that aims to provide a consistent framework that will prepare all students for college and the workforce.

Differentiated instruction looks at each student in terms of different traits and attributes and teaches each child in light of the student’s strengths and weaknesses.

Several elements are key in reading. They include early literacy skills, word recognition skills, reading fluency, reading vocabulary, comprehension, the reading– writing connection, and the enjoyment and appreciation of reading.

Overview of Reading and Reading Problems 15

References Aaron, P., Joshi, R., Gooden, R., & Bentum, K. (2008). Diagnosis and treatment of reading disabilities based

on the component model of reading. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 41(1), 67–84. Aaron, P. G., Joshi, R. M. M. & Williams, K. A. (1999). Not all reading problems are alike. Journal of Learning

Disabilities, 32(2), 120–127. Aaron, P., & Kotvah, H. (1999). Component model-based remedial treatment of reading difficulties. In

I. Lundberg, E. Tonnessen, & I. Austad (Eds.), Dyslexia: Advances in theory and practice (pp. 221–244). Boston: Kluwer.

Adams, C. (2011, September 14). SAT scores fall as number of test-takers rises. Education Week, 1–3. Banchero, S. (2011). SAT reading, writing scores hit low. Wall Street Journal. Retrieved from http://online.wsj

.com/article/SB10001424053111904491704576571060049856724.html. Bender, W. (2006). Differentiating instruction for students with learning disabilities. Arlington, VA: Council for

Exceptional Children. Blackorby, J., & Wagner, M. (1997). The employment outcomes of youth with learning disabilities. In

D. Gerber & D. Brown (Eds.), Learning disabilities and employment (pp. 57–74). Austin, TX: ProEd. Cameto, R., Knokey, A., & Sanford, C. (2011, Spring/Summer). Participation in postsecondary education

of young adults with learning disabilities: Findings from NLTS2. Learning Disabilities: A Multidisci- plinary Journal, 45–54.

College Board. (2013). SAT trends 2011. Retrieved from http://research.collegeboard.org/programs/sat/ data/archived/cb-seniors-2011/tables

Council of Chief State School Officers, (2013). Common Core Standards Initiative. Retrieved from http:// www.ccsso.org/Resources/Programs/The_Common_Core_State_Standards_Initiative.html

Division for Learning Disabilities. (2007). Thinking about response to intervention and learning disabilities: A teacher’s guide. Arlington, VA: Council for Exceptional Children.

Fuchs, D., & Fuchs, L. S. (2006). Introduction to response to intervention: What, why, and how valid is it? Reading Research Quarterly, 41(1), 93–99.

Fuchs, D., Mock, D., Morgan, P., & Young, C. (2003). Responsiveness to intervention: Definitions, evidence, and implications for the learning disabilities construct. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 18, 157–171.

Gerber, P., & Brown, D. (1997). Learning disabilities and employment. Austin, TX: ProEd. Gersten, R., & J. A. Dimiro. (2006). Rethinking special education for students with reading difficulties.

Reading Research Quarterly, 4(1), 99–108. Hennesy, N., Rosenberg, D., & Tramaglini, S. (2003). A high school model for students with dyslexia:

Remediation to accommodation. Perspectives: The International Dyslexia Association, 29(2), 38–40. Hughes, C. A., & Dexter, D. D. (2011). Response to intervention: A research-based summary. Theory into

Practice, 50, 1–8. Herff Jones Achievement Series. (2011, September). The educational promise of social media [White pa-

per]. Retrieved from http://www.herffjones.com/network Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act (IDEA) of 2004. Public Law 108–446. Lee, J., Grigg, W., & Donahue. (2007). The nation’s report card. NCES-2770-496. Washington, DC: National

Center for Educational Statistics, Institute for Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. Lerner, J. W., & Johns, B. (2012). Learning disabilities and related mild disabilities: Characteristics, teaching strate-

gies, and new directions. Florence, KY: Cengage Learning. Levine, M. (2002). A mind at a time. New York: Simon and Schuster. Lyon, G. R. (2003). Reading disabilities. What can be done about it? Perspectives: The International Dyslexia

Association, 29(2), 17–19. Moats, L. (1999). Teaching reading is rocket science. What expert teachers of reading should know and be able to do.

Washington, DC: American Federation of Teachers. National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP). (2011). The nation’s report card. U.S. Department of

Education. National Endowment for the Arts. (2004). Reading at risk: A survey of literacy reading in America. Washington, DC:

Author. National Reading Association. (2006). New roles in response to intervention: Creating success for schools and children.

Newark, DE: Author.

16 C H A P T E R 1

National Reading Panel. (2000). Teaching children to read: An evidence based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and implications for reading instruction. Washington, DC: National Institute of Child Health and Human Development.

Office of Special Education Programs, Department of Education. (2011, January 21). Memo: A response to intervention (RTI) process cannot be used to delay or deny an evaluation for eligibility under the Individuals with Disabilities Act (IDEA). Retrieved from http://www.ldanatl.org/news/osep-012111- rtimemo.pdf

Slavin, R. (2008). What works? Issues in synthesizing educational program evaluations. Educational Researcher 57(1), 5–14.

Smith, S. (1991). Succeeding against the odds: Strategies and insights from the learning disabled child. Los Angeles: Jeremy P. Tarcher.

Stecker, P. M. (2007). Tertiary intervention. Teaching Exceptional Children, 39(95), 50–57. Tomlinson, C., Brimijoin, K., & Navaez, L. (2008). Differentiated schools: Making revolutionary changes in

teaching and learning. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Tomlinson, C. A., & Inbeau, M. B. (2010). Leading and managing a differentiated classroom. Alexandria, VA:

Association for Curriculum and Development. U.S. Department of Education. (2006, August 14). Regulations for the Individuals with Disabilities Educa-

tion Improvement Act. Federal Register. U.S. Department of Education. (2007). Twenty-Eighth annual report to Congress on the implementation of the

Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education. Wagner, M., Newman, L., Cameto, R., Levine, P., & Garza, N. (2006). An overview of findings from Wave 2 of

the National Longitudinal Transition Study-2 (NLTS2). Menlo Park, CA: SRI International. Zirkel, P., & Krohn, N. (2008). RTI after IDEA: A survey of state laws. Teaching Exceptional Children, 40(3),

71–73.

Go to topic 1: Reading Instruction and topic 12: Progress Monitoring in the MyEducationLab (www.myeducationlab.com) for Reading Prob- lems: Assessment and Teaching Strategies, where you can: ◆ Find learning outcomes for reading instruc-

tion and progress monitoring, along with the national standards that connect to these outcomes.

◆ Complete assignments and activities that can help you more deeply understand the chapter content.

◆ Apply and practice your understanding of the core teaching skills identified in the chapter with the Building Teaching Skills and Dispositions learning units.

◆ Examine challenging situations and cases presented in the Iris Center Resources.

◆ Access video clips of CCSSO National Teachers of the Year award winners respond- ing to the question, “Why Do I Teach?” in the Teacher Talk section.

◆ Practice targeting instruction and mak- ing content accessible for all students with A�RISE activities.

◆ Strengthen your understanding and usage of the English language in writing with the Grammar Tutorial.

◆ Gain experience in choosing appropriate literature and integrating the best titles into language arts instruction with the Children’s and Young Adult Literature Database.

◆ Track the month-by-month literacy growth of five second graders with the Literacy Portraits.

Overview of Reading and Reading Problems 17

◆ Create, update, and share quality lesson plans with the Lesson Plan Builder.

◆ Access state licensure test requirements, overviews of what the tests cover, and sample test items in the Certification and Licensure section.

◆ Check your comprehension of the content covered in the chapter with the Study Plan.

Here you will be able to take a chapter pre- test, receive feedback on your answers, and then access personalized Review, Practice, and Enrichment exercises to enhance your understanding of chapter content. After you complete the exercises, take a posttest to confirm your comprehension.

2Factors Associated With Reading Problems

Introduction

Neurological and Cognitive Factors Differentiated Instruction Working Memory Cognitive Strategy Instruction

Environmental Factors The Home Environment The School Environment The Social Environment The Cultural Environment

Emotional Factors

Intelligence and Intellectual Factors Definitions of Intelligence Cultural Bias in the Measurement of

Intelligence Using Intelligence Tests to Determine the

Existence of a Reading Disability

Concerns About Using Intelligence Tests to Determine a Reading Disability

Language Factors Oral and Written Language Receptive and Expressive Language Systems of Oral Language Speech Problems and Language Disorders English Language Learners (ELLs)

Physical Factors Hearing Impairment Visual Impairment Gender Differences Other Physical Problems

Summary

18

C H A P T E R

Factors Associated With Reading Problems 19

Introduction

In this chapter, we explore some of the factors that are associated with difficulty in reading. Reading problems can be rooted in neurological and cognitive fac- tors. Environmental factors include the student’s home, school, social, and cultural environments. Difficulty in reading can also be linked with emotional factors. Reading difficulty is often associated with intelligence and intellectual factors. Language factors also affect reading performance.

A summary of the factors that are associated with difficulty in reading is shown in Figure 2.1.

Neurological and Cognitive Factors

A student’s problem in reading can be linked to intrinsic neurological and cognitive fac- tors within the individual student. Every teacher has had experience with a student who struggles with reading difficulty, despite having a dedicated family, a nurturing school environment, average or above-average intelligence, and many economic advantages.

For more than 100 years, medical researchers have tried to detect those neuro- logical factors within the brain that are related to reading problems. As early as 1896, W. P. Morgan, a physician, described a condition he called “word blindness.” Hinshelwood (1917), an ophthalmologist, reported the case of an otherwise normal teenage boy who could not learn to read. Other medical researchers reported similar cases of students who had great difficulty learning to read (Critchley, 1970; Orton, 1937). However, it is only recently that researchers have begun to use new technolo- gies to actually study the brain as the individual reads. Using functional magnetic reso- nance imaging (fMRI) technology, brain research has led to clues about the role of

Neurological and Cognitive Factors

Factors Associated With Reading Disability

Environmental Factors

Intelligence and Intellectual Factors

Language Factors

Physical Factors

FIGURE 2.1 Factors Associated With Reading Disability

20 C H A P T E R 2

neurological factors that are associated with an individual’s reading problem. The brain research shows strong evidence of differences in brain function between poor readers and normal readers (Shaywitz, Morris, & Shaywitz, 2008).

The term dyslexia is sometimes used to describe individuals with severe reading disabilities, individuals who acquire reading abilities with extreme difficulty. Genetic differences in the brain make learning to read a struggle for children with dyslexia. Luckily, much of our brain development occurs after we are born, when we interact with our environment. This means that teaching techniques can actually retrain the brain, especially when the instruction happens early (Shaywitz et al., 2008).

Studies with fMRI scans compared English-speaking and Chinese-speaking chil- dren with dyslexia. Chinese children and American children with dyslexia are different. The research shows that dyslexia affects different parts of the brain depending upon whether the child uses an alphabet-based writing system (such as English) or a sym- bolic writing system (such as Chinese). Learning to read in English, an alphabet-based writing system, requires awareness of the sounds of language (phonemic awareness). In contrast, learning to read in Chinese, a symbol-based writing system, requires abilities with pictorial and visual symbols (Hotz, 2008; Siok, Niu, Jin, Perfetti, & Tan, 2008).

When we consider neurological or cognitive factors, we take into account the way in which an individual’s brain operates during the process of learning to read. The term cognitive processing refers to the mental activities that an individual uses in learning, such as visual processing, auditory processing, memory abilities, or language- related abilities. Cognitive processing deficits can interfere with the way that students understand information presented to them. For some students with a reading disabil- ity, cognitive processing deficits can play a major role.

Cognitive processing differences are also recognized in special education law, specifically in the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004 (IDEA-2004). Students with learning disabilities are identified as having “disorders in psychological processing.” Research shows that poor readers display more differences in cognitive processing than good readers (Lerner & Johns, 2012; Shaywitz et al., 2008).

Differentiated Instruction Differentiated instruction is an often-recommended approach to teaching students in general education. Differentiated instruction reflects a philosophy of teaching that enables the teacher to meet the specific needs of each student, capitalizing on the unique strengths and weaknesses of each student. That includes the student’s individual interests, talents, way of processing information, and other proclivities. The approach of differentiated instruction involves teaching by matching individual student charac- teristics to instruction. This includes the individual cognitive processing skills of the students (Bender, 2006; Díaz-Rico, 2012; Tomlison, 2001).

Working Memory Working memory (WM) is defined as a processing resource of limited capacity, in- volved in the preservation of information while processing the same or other informa- tion (Swanson & O’Conner, 2009). WM plays a major role in integrating information

Factors Associated With Reading Problems 21

during the task of comprehending text. Swanson and O’Conner found that WM plays a major role in moderating overall outcomes in text comprehension. Difficulty with WM was a major problem in children with specific learning disorders (Morris et al., 2012; Schucardt, Maehler, & Hasselhorn, 2008).

Cognitive Strategy Instruction Cognitive strategy instruction (CSI) focuses on how students learn rather than on what they learn. It is an explicit instructional approach that teaches students specific and general cognitive strategies to improve learning and performance. Many students with reading problems are inefficient and ineffective strategic learners. Cognitive rou- tines help students regulate and monitor their reading comprehension. The ability to identify and utilize effective strategies is a necessary skill for reading comprehen- sion. Students who use cognitive strategies ask themselves questions, they connect new information with what they already know, and they try to predict what will come next (Krawiec & Montague, 2012).

Environmental Factors

Environmental factors are associated with reading disability. Students live and grow in several different environments, and each environment has a strong influence on student desires and abilities to learn. Environments include the student’s home envi- ronment, school environment, social environment, and cultural environment. Each of these environments can affect a student’s reading. Figure 2.2 illustrates each of these environmental factors and their interaction.

The Home Environment The home is the child’s first environment. The child’s home environment can be the foundation for tremendous cognitive growth and development. The child’s experi- ences that occur during the critical first 5 or 6 years of life have powerful influences on a child’s development.

In the home environment, parents can provide emotional well-being as well as intellectual stimulation. For example, a child’s early development of self-concept is dependent on the support and encouragement of parents. Studies that compare good and poor readers show that students who experience success are much more likely to have a favorable home environment.

Parents can also stimulate their child’s love for reading. Parents who read to chil- dren, take them to libraries, and buy books as presents teach children to value reading. When children observe parents who are readers, the parents provide a role model for literacy. Further, the parental role continues to be crucial even after the child enters school.

Youngsters who experience difficulty learning to read need satisfying family rela- tionships. Parents can alleviate some of the psychological and emotional consequences

22 C H A P T E R 2

of reading failure by what they do in the home environment. Parents can provide love, acceptance, and other opportunities for success.

Today, many children come from increasingly risk-filled home environments. For example, poverty is a major factor that is related to a child’s risk levels in the areas of health, education, emotional welfare, and delinquency. According to the U.S. Census Bureau (2010), about 22% of all children in the United States are living in poverty.

Homes that are weighed down by poverty, family instability, and neighborhoods where violence is commonplace increase the likelihood that children will be at risk for school failure. On any given night, the number of homeless children is estimated to be at least 500,000 (U.S. Census Bureau, 2010).

Health and emotional problems tend to increase when children live in difficult environments. Poorer mothers are less likely than more affluent mothers to seek pre- natal care. Alcohol addiction in parents may affect a child in two ways: the child may be born with fetal alcohol syndrome, and the parent may not have the energy to nurture the child’s education.

Children who are hungry or homeless have little energy to focus on school. Their overburdened, often undereducated parents and guardians may lack the time and skills to nurture literacy by sharing books with them, encouraging them to do

Home Environment

School Environment

Social Environment

Cultural Environment

FIGURE 2.2 Environmental Factors

Factors Associated With Reading Problems 23

homework, or communicating with their teachers. Some families are able to rise above their problems and provide warm, nurturing places that support education, but the sad fact remains that children born into poor or unstable families are at risk for educa- tional failure. Thus, many family and home environmental causes combine to produce an increased risk for reading problems.

The School Environment A substantial portion of students’ waking hours is spent in school, and so the experiences and relationships in the school environment profoundly affect their lives. For the poor reader, school experiences are often unhappy ones. At times, even a well-meaning, stable family may not be able to prepare a child for the school situation. Even in affluent neighbor- hoods, teachers are noticing changes in the home environment, such as an increase in family breakups. School problems are multiplied in less-fortunate settings. As family instability increases, teachers in all schools are instructing at-risk children (Lerner & Johns, 2012).

Some school practices can actually contribute to a child’s reading problems. For example, in some cases, teachers might give up entirely on trying to teaching a child to read, and instead simply read everything to the child. During reading time, these children might be expected to sit quietly and do nothing. In such situations, the school system does little to help the child with significant reading problems.

In the school environment, students with reading problems do not read as much as students who are good readers. In an extensive line of research, Allington (1986) and Stanovich (1993–1994) compared the time spent and amount of reading in low- achieving and average students. Unskilled readers spent less time reading in school than did average students. Poor readers read only a third as many words as average students in school. Students who already have reading problems are not practicing enough to improve their reading skills (Lerner & Johns, 2012).

Students with reading problems often have unsatisfactory relationships with adults in the schools. Studies show that poor achievers tend to be perceived negatively by teachers, paraprofessionals, and principals. Teachers often identify poor readers as aggressive, lacking self-discipline, and unmotivated. Low achievers receive less praise or acknowledgment from teachers, and they are more likely to be criticized.

Instruction that does not meet a student’s needs can be an important factor in a reading problem. For example, when immature children are given formal reading in- struction before they can profit from it, they may become frustrated and develop read- ing problems. If children do not receive sufficient instruction in critical skills, they may fail in the initial stages of learning to read. For example, research demonstrates that an important link exists between phonemic awareness and early reading. If children do not develop the critical skill of phonemic awareness by first grade, their reading in all of the following grades is affected. Finally, low-achieving students often do not read enough to become better readers (Blachman, Tangel, & Ball, 2004).

Although students with reading problems are a challenge to teach, they still must be provided with the best instruction possible. Many of the suggestions provided in this book can help youngsters with reading problems break the cycle of reading failure and help them learn to love reading.

24 C H A P T E R 2

The Social Environment Successful interactions with friends provide students with many satisfactions and opportunities to gain confidence in themselves. Many students with reading problems, however, also have social difficulties. These students have difficulty making friends, have problems interacting with others, and do not understand the nuances of social situations. A sizable body of evidence shows that social unpopularity tends to accom- pany school failure. Poor achievers often are rejected or ignored by classmates and are uninvolved in extracurricular activities (Lavoie, 2007).

When children develop typically, they learn social skills in a casual and informal manner. Through many incidental experiences, they learn appropriate ways of acting with people—what to say, how to behave, and how to give and take in a social situation. Students with reading and social problems, however, may not be sensitive to social nuances, and they may be unaware of how others interpret their behavior. Further, in contrast to normal achievers, low-achieving students tend to overestimate their own popularity. They seem unable to recognize their own social shortcomings and have difficulty relating to peers in a social setting.

Often, students with reading and social problems may be unable to accommo- date themselves to another person’s point of view. Their chances for successful social interaction with peers are reduced because they fail to consider the needs of other people. See Table 2.1, which offers suggestions for teaching social skills.

The Cultural Environment The number of students in U.S. schools who come from diverse cultural and linguistic populations is rapidly increasing. Many students come from homes in which a language other than English is spoken; these students are English language learners (ELLs). They are not proficient in understanding and using oral English. ELL students are discussed in greater detail in this chapter under the section on language factors.

The population of North America is a composite of hundreds of different ethnic and cultural traditions. In today’s society, ever-changing patterns of immigration and

TABLE 2.1 Strategies for Teaching Social Skills

◆ Role-Playing. Involve the students in role-playing games, in which one person is made to adopt the viewpoint of another person, to improve social relationships.

◆ Social Autopsies. Have students analyze the social dilemmas in which they find themselves. To teach social behavior on the playground, teach it on a playground. To teach appropriate social behavior on the school bus, teaching it on the bus.

◆ Social Skills Instruction. Teach students how to make friends, give compliments, join group activities, and accept thanks.

◆ Social Stories. Social stories are stories about problematic social situations. Social stories offer a way for students to discuss the “how and what” of social situations. For example, a “comic strip” situation might allow students to discuss the “how and what” of a social situation. (See The Gray Center for Social Learning and Understanding at www.thegraycenter.org.)

Factors Associated With Reading Problems 25

movement occur as new groups of people add their cultural riches to the schools. A few decades ago, Americans assumed that everyone would be assimilated into the “melting pot” of the dominant culture. Now we try to value and maintain diverse cultural tradi- tions. One of the greatest challenges schools face is providing an excellent education to students of all cultures, whatever their geographical origin, socioeconomic status, or language.

Because significant numbers of U.S. families live below a specified poverty level, teachers need to be aware of the possible effects of poverty on students’ aca- demic performance. A recent study shows that poverty can take a toll on the brain development of children, leading to learning disabilities as well as behavior and emotional problems (Action for Children, 2008). Although individuals with incomes below the poverty level come from diverse backgrounds, they tend to have certain similarities. Parents are likely to have less energy to devote to their children’s devel- opment if they are necessarily concerned with basic survival needs. Often, children from these families must care for themselves at a young age and may come to school with relatively limited background experiences (Ortiz, 1997). Cultural differences, particularly those arising from a culture of poverty, may lead to intense suspicion and discomfort toward individuals perceived to be in the dominant culture (Lerner & Johns, 2012).

These generalizations do not, of course, hold true for all low-income students. In many poor families, education is cherished, the values of the school are upheld, and family members are encouraged to read and achieve. The opportunity to progress from poverty to economic security is a fundamental promise of democratic nations.

Emotional Factors

Failing readers, particularly if they have a long history of failure, often have accompa- nying emotional problems that impede reading. Emotional problems tend to increase as a youngster moves up through the elementary years and enters adolescence.

Sometimes it is hard to determine whether a reading problem is the result of an underlying emotional disorder or if emotional problems have developed because of a reading disability. Often, a constructive approach is to help the student experience success in reading, and this success in turn becomes a kind of therapy. A therapeutic approach to the teaching of reading can build confidence, establish self-esteem, and capture the pupil’s interest. However, students with severe emotional disorders may need psychotherapy or counseling (Silver, 2006).

Students react to having reading problems in different ways. Although some fail- ing readers seem to have little evidence of emotional reactions, many display a variety of emotional reactions.

One helpful informal assessment measure that can be used by teachers is the sentence completion activity. The sentence completion activity is a series of begin- ning sentence fragments that the student completes, such as “I like _____.” In finish- ing these sentences, students often provide insights into their thoughts and feelings. The activity can be administered orally or in writing. A sample sentence completion form is given in Figure 2.3. In interpreting results, however, bear in mind that it is

26 C H A P T E R 2

only an informal measure. Although it may suggest ideas about student attitudes, these hypotheses should be verified through interview, observation, and perhaps the admin- istration of formal measures.

Occasionally, teachers may need to refer a student to mental health specialists (such as psychiatrists, psychologists, or social workers) for further evaluation and pos- sible psychotherapy or counseling. Such referrals are needed when emotional prob- lems are so severe that they interfere with reading progress to the extent that the student achieves little growth over an extended period of instruction.

Intelligence and Intellectual Factors

A student’s intelligence may provide an estimate of his or her ability to learn. Teach- ers have long noted a variation in their students’ response to reading instruction: One student grasps the lesson quickly, another student learns the lesson in an unusual or

FIGURE 2.3 Sample Sentence Completion Form

1. I like ____________________________________________________________________. 2. Eating ___________________________________________________________________. 3. I am happiest when ________________________________________________________. 4. School is _________________________________________________________________. 5. My greatest fear is _________________________________________________________. 6. I wish I could _____________________________________________________________. 7. There are times ___________________________________________________________. 8. My mother _______________________________________________________________. 9. My father ________________________________________________________________.

10. Sometimes I wish _________________________________________________________. 11. I sleep ___________________________________________________________________. 12. When I dream ____________________________________________________________. 13. I want to _________________________________________________________________. 14. One thing that bothers me is ________________________________________________. 15. Sometimes I hope _________________________________________________________. 16. I think I will never _________________________________________________________. 17. Other people are __________________________________________________________. 18. One thing I don’t like is ____________________________________________________. 19. I feel sorry for people who __________________________________________________. 20. My mind _________________________________________________________________. 21. Most of the time ___________________________________________________________. 22. I try to ___________________________________________________________________.

Factors Associated With Reading Problems 27

unique way, and a third student has great difficulty catching on. This variation is often attributed to “intelligence” (Morris et al., 2012).

Definitions of Intelligence Views about intelligence and its measurement have undergone many changes over the years. As generally used, intelligence refers to an individual’s cognitive or thinking abili- ties or to the child’s potential for acquiring school skills. In fact, most intelligence tests have been validated by comparing them with school performance.

A person’s intelligence cannot be observed directly, so what is called intelligence is inferred through the student’s responses in a test situation. The intelligence quotient (IQ) is a score obtained on an intelligence test, and it is a measure of performance on the intelligent test questions in relation to peers of the same age.

Current theories about intelligence suggest that several components make up the factor called intelligence. A student may exhibit a high capacity in one component, such as verbal abilities, and low aptitude in another, such as spatial abilities. Different tests of intelligence are based on different components of intelligence. For example, the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children, 4th Edition (WISC-IV), provides scores on four major components: verbal comprehension, perceptual reasoning, working memory, and processing speed. The Kaufman Assessment Battery for Children, 2nd Edition (KABC-II), divides intelligence into sequential and simultaneous processing. Another theory of intelligence proposed by Gardner (1999) is that of multiple intel- ligences. Gardner proposes that people have many different intelligences. Gardner suggests eight types of intelligence: linguistic, musical, logical-mathematical, spatial, bodily kinesthetic, sense of self, sense of others, and naturalistic.

Cultural Bias in the Measurement of Intelligence Intelligence tests have been criticized because of cultural bias. Studies show that there are race and class differences in IQ scores: Students from middle-class homes tend to score higher than children from lower-class homes. Also, intelligence test items may not match the experiences that minority and lower-class children have in their cultural environment.

Using Intelligence Tests to Determine the Existence of a Reading Disability A reading disability is sometimes measured in terms of the difference between the stu- dent’s expected reading level (usually a student’s grade placement) and the student’s ac- tual reading level. Another method uses intelligence test scores to determine whether a student has a reading disability. Using this method, teachers can determine whether a significant discrepancy exists between the student’s potential for reading achievement (as measured by an intelligence test) and the student’s actual reading performance as measured by a standardized reading achievement test. A large gap, or discrepancy,

28 C H A P T E R 2

between reading potential and reading achievement indicates a reading disability, be- cause the student has the potential to read much better.

In calculating a discrepancy, an intelligence test, such as the WISC-IV scale, is used to measure potential and a standardized reading test is used to measure current reading achievement. (The WISC-IV and other tests of intelligence are discussed in Chapter 4.) In calculating a discrepancy, one must (1) determine a reading expectancy level and (2) compare the expected reading level to current reading achievement.

Harris and Sipay (1985) developed a method for calculating a student’s reading expectancy age (REA). This method uses a mental age (MA) to calculate whether a read- ing problem exists. The MA is obtained by multiplying the student’s IQ by his or her chronological age (CA) and dividing the product by 100, as in the following formula:

MA = IQ × CA

100

Express the MA and CA in tenths rather than years and months. Once you obtain the MA, you can calculate the reading expectancy age (REA):

REA = 2MA + CA

3

To convert the REA to a reading expectancy age (REG), subtract 5.2 from the REA. For example, Marion is 10.0 years old, and she has an IQ of 120. Her MA is

12.0 years. The REA formula indicates she has a reading expectancy age of 11.3 and a reading expectancy grade of 6.1 (11.3 – 5.2). If Marion’s current level of reading is 3.0, she would have a discrepancy of 3.1 years.

REA = 2(12.0) − 10.0 = 11.3 3

REG = 11.3 � 5.2 = 6.1

Reading Expectancy – Reading Achievement � Discrepancy

6.1 – 3.0 � 3.1

Table 2.2, based on the Harris and Sipay formula, helps avoid doing these cal- culations. If you know the IQ and CA of a student, the reading expectancy grade can then be found by noting the intersection of the CA with IQ. For students over 15 years of age, use 15.0 as the chronological age. If the CA and IQ fall between two values on a table, use the closest value. For convenience, the expectancy grade level, rather than age, is reported directly.

Concerns About Using Intelligence Tests to Determine a Reading Disability Educators have many concerns about using intelligence tests to measure the discrep- ancy between intellectual ability and achievement as a means of determining a reading

Factors Associated With Reading Problems 29

TABLE 2.2 Reading Expectancy Grade Levels

IQ Score

A g e

  70 75 80 85 90 95 100 105 110 115 120 125 130 135 140 145 6–0 — — — — — — — 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.6 6–3 — — — — — — 1.0 1.2 1.5 1.7 1.9 2.1 2.3 2.5 2.7 2.9 6–6 — — — — — 1.1 1.3 1.5 1.7 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3.0 3.2 6–9 — — — — 1.1 1.3 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.7 2.9 3.1 3.4 3.6 7–0 — — — 1.1 1.3 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.3 2.5 2.7 3.0 3.2 3.4 3.7 3.9 7–3 — — 1.1 1.3 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.3 2.5 2.8 3.0 3.2 3.5 3.7 4.0 4.2 7–6 — 1.0 1.3 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.3 2.6 2.8 3.0 3.3 3.6 3.8 4.0 4.3 4.6 7–9 1.1 1.3 1.5 1.8 2.0 2.3 2.6 2.8 3.1 3.3 3.6 3.8 4.1 4.4 4.6 4.9 8–0 1.2 1.5 1.7 2.0 2.3 2.5 2.8 3.1 3.3 3.6 3.9 4.1 4.4 4.7 4.9 5.2 8–3 1.4 1.7 2.0 2.2 2.5 2.8 3.0 3.3 3.6 3.9 4.2 4.4 4.7 5.1 5.3 5.5 8–6 1.6 1.9 2.2 2.4 2.7 3.0 3.3 3.6 3.9 4.2 4.4 4.7 5.0 5.3 5.6 5.8 8–9 1.8 2.1 2.4 2.7 3.0 3.3 3.6 3.8 4.1 4.4 4.7 5.0 5.3 5.6 5.9 6.2 9–0 2.0 2.3 2.6 2.9 3.2 3.5 3.8 4.1 4.4 4.7 5.0 5.3 5.6 5.9 6.2 6.5 9–3 2.2 2.5 2.8 3.1 3.4 3.7 4.0 4.4 4.7 5.0 5.3 5.6 5.9 6.2 6.5 6.8 9–6 2.4 2.7 3.0 3.4 3.7 4.0 4.3 4.6 4.9 5.2 5.6 5.9 6.2 6.5 6.8 7.2 9–9 2.6 2.9 3.2 3.6 3.9 4.2 4.6 4.9 5.2 5.5 5.8 6.2 6.5 6.8 7.2 7.5 10–0 2.8 3.1 3.5 3.8 4.1 4.5 4.8 5.1 5.5 5.8 6.1 6.5 6.8 7.1 7.5 7.8 10–3 3.0 3.3 3.7 4.0 4.4 4.7 5.0 5.4 5.7 6.1 6.4 6.8 7.1 7.4 7.8 8.1 10–6 3.2 3.6 3.9 4.2 4.6 5.0 5.3 5.6 6.0 6.4 6.7 7.0 7.4 7.8 8.1 8.4 10–9 3.4 3.8 4.1 4.5 4.8 5.2 5.6 5.9 6.3 6.6 7.0 7.3 7.7 8.1 8.4 8.8 11–0 3.6 4.0 4.3 4.7 5.1 5.4 5.8 6.2 6.5 6.9 7.3 7.6 8.0 8.4 8.7 9.1 11–3 3.8 4.2 4.6 4.9 5.3 5.7 6.0 6.4 6.8 7.2 7.6 7.9 8.3 8.7 9.0 9.4 11–6 4.0 4.4 4.8 5.2 5.5 5.9 6.3 6.7 7.1 7.4 7.8 8.2 8.6 9.0 9.4 9.8 11–9 4.2 4.6 5.0 5.4 5.8 6.2 6.6 7.0 7.3 7.7 8.1 8.5 8.9 9.3 9.7 10.1 12–0 4.4 4.8 5.2 5.6 6.0 6.4 6.8 7.2 7.6 8.0 8.4 8.8 9.2 9.6 10.0 10.4 12–3 4.6 5.0 5.4 5.8 6.2 6.6 7.0 7.4 7.9 8.3 8.7 9.1 9.5 9.9 10.3 10.7 12–6 4.8 5.2 5.6 6.0 6.5 6.9 7.3 7.7 8.1 8.6 9.0 9.4 9.8 10.2 10.6 11.0 12–9 5.0 5.4 5.8 6.3 6.7 7.1 7.6 8.0 8.4 8.8 9.2 9.7 10.1 10.5 11.0 11.4 13–0 5.2 5.6 6.1 6.5 6.9 7.4 7.8 8.2 8.7 9.1 9.5 10.0 10.4 10.8 11.3 11.7 13–3 5.4 5.8 6.3 6.7 7.2 7.6 8.0 8.5 8.9 9.4 9.8 10.2 10.7 11.1 11.5 12.0 13–6 5.6 6.0 6.5 7.0 7.4 7.8 8.3 8.8 9.2 9.6 10.1 10.6 11.0 11.4 11.9 12.4 13–9 5.8 6.3 6.7 7.2 7.6 8.1 8.6 9.0 9.5 9.9 10.4 10.8 11.3 11.8 12.2 12.7 14–0 6.0 6.5 6.9 7.4 7.9 8.3 8.8 9.3 9.7 10.2 10.7 11.1 11.6 12.1 12.5 13.0 14–3 6.2 6.7 7.2 7.6 8.1 8.6 9.0 9.5 10.0 10.5 11.0 11.4 11.9 12.4 12.8 13.3 14–6 6.4 6.9 7.4 7.8 8.3 8.8 9.3 9.8 10.3 10.8 11.2 11.7 12.2 12.7 13.2 13.6 14–9 6.6 7.1 7.6 8.1 8.6 9.1 9.6 10.0 10.5 11.0 11.5 12.0 12.8 13.0 13.5 14.0 15–0 6.8 7.3 7.8 8.3 8.8 9.3 9.8 10.3 10.8 11.3 11.8 12.3 12.8 13.3 13.8 14.3

30 C H A P T E R 2

disability (Fletcher, Coulter, Reschly, & Vaughn, 2004). The questions being asked include the following:

◆ How useful is the IQ score in measuring an individual’s intelligence? ◆ Do children who are poor readers have similar characteristics, whether they have

a high or a low IQ score? ◆ Are IQ scores good predictors of reading achievement?

Based on these concerns, the most recent special education law, IDEA-2004, permits schools to use another method to determine eligibility for learning disabilities services. Schools can use a response-to-intervention method to determine eligibility for learning disabilities rather than the IQ-discrepancy formula. (See Chapters 1, 6, and 8 for a discussion of response-to-intervention.) When determining whether a child has a learning disability, schools can provide intervention to an at-risk child to determine if the child responds to instruction using scientific, research-based instruc- tional materials.

Language Factors

Language is recognized as one of the greatest of human achievements, more important than all the physical tools invented in the last 10,000 years. Language permits human beings to speak of things unseen, recall the past, and verbalize hopes for the future. People communicate with each other through a communication process. One person sends a message; the other person receives the message (Figure 2.4).

Students’ ability to express and receive thoughts through oral language provides the foundation for reading; in other words, reading is based on language development. It is therefore not surprising that reading is an integral part of the language system of literate societies. Some students with reading problems have underlying problems with language. This section describes many different components of language.

Oral and Written Language Language is an integrated system linking the oral language forms of listening and talk- ing to the written language forms of reading and writing. As children mature, language plays an increasingly important part in the development of thinking and the ability to grasp meaning. Words become symbols for objects, classes of objects, and ideas.

As children gain competence using language in one form, they also build knowl- edge and experience with the underlying language system, and this learning carries over to learning language in another form. Oral language provides a knowledge base for reading and writing. Similarly, practice in writing improves both reading and oral language. Oral language problems can contribute to reading disability. About 8% of children fail to develop speech and language at the expected age (Tallal, Miller, Jenkins, & Merzenich, 1997). Children who have delayed speech and language devel- opment often experience problems in reading.

Factors Associated With Reading Problems 31

FIGURE 2.4 The Communication Process

Receptive and Expressive Language An important distinction needs to be made between receptive language (understand- ing through listening or reading) and expressive language (using language in speaking and writing). Usually, people’s receptive abilities exceed their expressive ones; that is, they understand more words than they use in speech and can read more words than they can write.

At times a student may appear to have poor language abilities because he or she engages in little conversation or gives one-word replies to questions. However, oral expressive language can be influenced by a student’s comfort level. Therefore, teachers must consider the student’s language abilities in both receptive and expressive language.

Systems of Oral Language Linguists identify four different systems involved in oral language: phonology (the sounds of language), morphology (meaningful elements within words), syntax (the grammatical aspects of language), and semantics (the vocabulary of language). Students with reading problems may exhibit difficulties in one or more of these linguistic systems.

32 C H A P T E R 2

Phonology. Phonology refers to the sound system of a language. Oral language consists of a stream of sounds, one after the other. Each individual sound is called a phoneme. Important differences exist in the ways speakers of different languages think about phonemes. For example, in English the b and v sounds are two differ- ent phonemes, or sounds. In Spanish, they are simply variations on one phoneme. These differences make the mastery of English difficult for students whose native language is not English, just as Spanish or French is difficult for native English speakers.

Young children may have difficulty producing certain speech sounds. Typically children do not complete full articulation development until about the age of 8. Con- sonant sounds that are acquired later include /r/, /l/, /ch/, /sh/, /j/, /th/ (as in the and thigh), /s/, /z/, /v/, and /zh/ (as in pleasure). Young children who have not mastered these sounds in speech may have difficulty distinguishing them in reading.

Phonological or phonemic awareness is developed as children learn to recog- nize that words are made up of phonemes, or sounds. This ability is closely related to success in beginning reading (see Chapter 7). Auditory discrimination, or the ability to hear distinctions between phonemes (for example, to recognize that big and pig are different), is another problem area for some struggling readers (Wiig & Semel, 1984).

As discussed in Chapter 8, the phonics system in English, which links spoken sounds and written letters, is not completely regular. For example, the letter c repre- sents two different sounds, as in the words city and cat. Although the English alphabet has only 26 letters, the average American English dialect contains 46 sounds.

Morphology. The morphological system refers to meaningful units, or morphemes, that form words or word parts. For example, the word walked contains two morphemes: walk and ed, a morpheme that signals the past tense. Other examples of morphemes are s (games) and re (rewind). Many students with reading problems have difficulties recognizing morphemes. The ability to recognize different morphemes when they ap- pear in print is called structural analysis (see Chapter 8).

Syntax. Syntax, also known as grammar, governs the formation of sentences in a language. For example, in English, a well-formed sentence has a subject and a verb (e.g., Jane walks). Further, sentences are combined by using conjunctions, such as Jane walks and runs.

Children do not acquire syntactic ability passively; rather, they construct syn- tactic rules for themselves. For example, a young child who says “he goed” for the past tense of go is using the rule that the past tense is formed by the addition of ed, even though the child is overgeneralizing this rule. Although most basic syntactic structures are acquired by the age of 6, some growth in syntax continues through the age of 10. Development of the ability to understand complex or difficult sentence patterns may continue even throughout the high school years. Because syntactic abilities continue to develop through the school years, teaching sentence compre- hension is important to reading instruction. Table 2.3 presents examples of difficult sentence types.

Factors Associated With Reading Problems 33

TABLE 2.3 Difficult Sentence Types

Category Example

Passive sentence Juan was surprise by the teacher. Out-of-order time sequence Move a yellow bead, but first move a red one.

Move a yellow bead, after you move a red one. Relative clause construction Juan, who is in the second grade, is learning to read.

The man, who is standing on the corner, is nice. Appositives Mr. Smythe, the postman, is very nice. Complement structure The fact that Steve is silly worries Meg.

Steve’s being silly worries Meg. Steve asked Meg what was worrying her.

Delayed reference in sentences Juan promised Meg to go. Juan asked Leia what to feed the doll.

Anophoric, or reference, sentences

Jake saw Melody and he said hello. Jake saw Melody and said hello.

Sentence connectives If you don’t do this, I will go. Unless you do this, I will go.

Semantics. The semantic system refers to the acquisition of vocabulary or word meanings. Compared with other languages, English has an extremely large vocabulary. The complexity and rich variety of English words makes the mastering of English vocabulary a lifelong task. Because vocabulary is highly related to reading achieve- ment, limited vocabulary development can seriously hamper reading.

Speech Problems and Language Disorders Reading is an integral part of the language system. Underlying problems with lan- guage can affect the ability to read. Two types of language problems are speech prob- lems and language disorders.

Speech Problems. Children display three kinds of speech problems: articulation problems (the inaccurate production of sounds), voice disorders (improper pitch or intonation), and stuttering (breath or rhythm problems). Although low-achieving readers have a somewhat higher incidence of speech problems, these problems do not necessarily lead to reading problems. Nevertheless, students who exhibit speech difficulties should be referred to a speech-language specialist for further evaluation and, if needed, therapy. If a speech problem is noted, hearing acuity should be tested, because sometimes a hearing impairment is the cause of a speech problem. Students with speech problems can be embarrassed when asked to read orally, and therefore oral reading should be avoided for them.

Language Disorders. Language disorders refer to the slow or atypical development of receptive and expressive oral language. The child with a language delay is slow

34 C H A P T E R 2

at talking and poor in vocabulary development and may have difficulty learning to formulate sentences. Language delay is often a forerunner of later difficulty in read- ing. If a reading teacher suspects an underlying language disorder, a speech-language specialist can provide further evaluation and treatment.

Rapid Automatized Naming (RAN). Some children with language delays have difficulty with rapid automatized naming (RAN); that is, they cannot quickly and automatically name objects and are slow with word finding. For example, when given the task of naming pictures as they are shown, these children cannot rapidly produce the names of the pictures. A slowness in word finding and naming is an accurate pre- dictor of later reading disabilities. Slowness in naming is probably due to memory retrieval problems that make accessing verbal and phonological information difficult (de Jong & Vrielink, 2004; German, 2001).

English Language Learners (ELLs) English language learners (ELLs) are students whose native language is not English and who are learning English as a second language. Today, one in five students speaks a lan- guage other than English in his or her home. ELL students often have difficulty with read- ing because they are not yet proficient with the English language (August & Shannahan, 2006; Genesee, Lindholm-Leary, Saunders, & Christian, 2006; Sullivan, 2011).

Chapter 14 covers in greater detail the growing number of students in the United States and Canada who are ELL students and are learning English as a second language. Teaching strategies for instructing ELL students also are explored.

Reading in English poses a serious hurdle for ELL students. They may acquire the ability to use spoken English, but becoming proficient in the written language, reading, and writing often takes many years. ELL students are often identified as hav- ing learning disabilities (Sullivan, 2011).

Physical Factors

This section describes a variety of physical factors that affect reading problems.

Hearing Impairment Because the ability to acquire reading skills may be severely affected by even moder- ate or temporary hearing loss, students should be screened for auditory acuity, or the ability to hear sounds. Auditory acuity is different from the ability to work with or distinguish words.

Hearing loss has several causes: childhood diseases, such as scarlet fever, meningitis, mumps, or measles; environmental conditions, such as repeated exposure to loud noises; congenital conditions, such as the malformation of or an injury to the hearing mecha- nism; temporary or fluctuating conditions, due to allergies, colds, or even a buildup of wax in the ears; maternal prenatal infections, including rubella; middle-ear infection or problems; and the use of certain medications, such as aminoglycosides and some diuretics.

Factors Associated With Reading Problems 35

Screening for Hearing Impairment. Auditory acuity is measured in two dimen- sions: frequency and intensity. Frequency refers to the ability to hear different pitches, or vibrations of a specific sound wave. The pitches are actually musical tones; the higher the tone, the higher the frequency. Because different sounds of the spoken lan- guage have different frequency levels, a person may be able to hear sounds clearly at one frequency but not at another.

Intensity refers to the loudness of a sound and is measured in decibels; the louder the sound, the higher the intensity, or decibel level. How loud does a sound (or decibel level) have to be before a person should be able to hear it? A person who can hear soft sounds at 0 to 10 decibels has excellent hearing. Students who cannot hear sounds at 30 decibels are likely to encounter some difficulty in learning.

If an auditory screening indicates a hearing problem, students should be referred to an audiologist (a nonmedical specialist in hearing) or to an otologist or an otolaryn- gologist (medical specialists in hearing). Although the audiometer is a good device for screening, only a specialist trained in measuring and treating hearing difficulties can make a final determination of the extent and nature of a possible hearing impairment.

Alleviating Hearing Problems. Medical specialists can also take measures to alle- viate a student’s hearing problem. Sometimes, medication or tubes in a child’s ear can alleviate clogged passages and improve hearing. Other children may need to be fitted with hearing aids.

Sometimes students pass the audiometric screening test yet still have hearing problems. One student, for example, had a sporadic hearing loss resulting from aller- gies, but because her visits to the pediatrician came after the allergy season, the hear- ing problem went undetected for years. Although the hearing problem was eventually cleared up, she missed some important early language growth, and her difficulties in reading continued into the later grades. Thus, if a teacher suspects a hearing loss, the student should be referred to a professional for continued monitoring.

Even moderate loss in the ability to hear may substantially affect the ability to read. A hearing loss impedes communication with teachers and peers, and so the stu- dent has difficulty functioning in class. Students may have difficulty learning phonics because they do not hear certain sounds. A low-frequency hearing loss (500–1500 Hz) may cause difficulty with vowel sounds; high-frequency losses (2000–4000 Hz) may cause difficulty with consonant sounds that continue, such as /s/, /z/, /j/, /v/, /th/, /sh/, and /ch/.

The most devastating effect of a hearing loss is that it prevents normal language development. When children cannot hear adequately, they are deprived of the com- munication necessary for normal language acquisition and growth. Their vocabulary, grammar, and verbal thinking processes often remain poorly developed, and their lan- guage skills may be inadequate to acquire higher-level reading skills.

Visual Impairment The ability to see clearly is critical to the reading process. However, the relationship between reading and vision is complicated. A particular visual impairment may impede

36 C H A P T E R 2

reading in one individual, but another person with a similar problem may be able to read effectively.

Types of Vision Problems. Several types of visual impairment are of concern to the reading teacher. These impairments include myopia, hyperopia, astigmatism, binocu- lar vision problems, and color perception.

Myopia, or nearsightedness, is the inability to see objects at a distance. Myopia is caused by an elongated eyeball that focuses visual images in an improper way. Although the problem of myopia is not highly related to reading difficulty, a student with myopia could have difficulty seeing objects such as writing on the blackboard (Lerner & Johns, 2012). A substantial portion of the population is myopic; the condi- tion often begins between the ages of 9 and 12. Myopia is usually correctable with eyeglasses.

Hyperopia, or farsightedness, is the inability to see objects clearly at nearpoint (that is, 13 inches or less). In children, it is often caused by an eyeball that is too short to permit focusing. Children are typically hyperopic until they reach the age of 7 or 8; thus, primary-grade textbooks generally contain large print. If hyperopia is a continu- ing problem, it can be corrected with lenses. Because reading is done at nearpoint, hyperopia can affect the ability to read.

An astigmatism is the blurring of vision because of irregularities in the surface of the cornea. This condition is generally correctable with lenses.

Binocular difficulties refer to the inability to focus both eyes on the same ob- ject, one of the most complicated of the visual functions. Both eyes focus together easily on an object that is far away, but as that object moves closer, the eyes must turn inward to maintain their focus. If the eyes cannot focus together, a double image may result. This condition is not tolerated well by the brain, and the image of one eye may be suppressed, possibly leading to a deterioration of that eye. In severe cases, the eyes appear to be crossed. Binocular vision problems may blur vision and also cause the reader to become easily fatigued; thus, they can interfere with reading.

Unfortunately, binocular vision is not as easily correctable as other visual prob- lems. Three strategies used to correct binocular problems are surgery (often used to correct a cross-eyed condition), corrective lenses in eyeglasses, and visual exercises to strengthen eye muscles. Opinions differ among eye specialists about the value of visual exercises as a treatment in overcoming binocular difficulties (American Academy of Pediatrics, 1992; Solan, 2004).

Screening for Visual Impairment. Students with reading problems should be screened for possible visual difficulties. An adequate visual screening should at least test nearsightedness, farsightedness, and binocular visual functioning. As with the hearing tests that are used by the reading teacher, visual tests given by schools or teachers are intended only for screening purposes. Students who do poorly on a visual screening test should be referred to an ophthalmologist (a physician who specializes in eye problems) or to an optometrist (a nonmedical eye specialist) for further test- ing. Vision tests that can easily be administered by a teacher include the Keystone Telebinocular Vision Tests and the Orthorater instruments.

Factors Associated With Reading Problems 37

Gender Differences More boys than girls are identified as having reading disabilities. In fact, about four times more boys are in special reading programs (Shaywitz, 2003), yet research sponsored by the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD) shows that as many girls as boys may have reading disabilities, but the girls are not being identified. Girls with a reading disability are considered an underserved population (National Reading Panel, 2000).

Several reasons have been suggested for more boys than girls being identified with reading disabilities:

◆ Boys mature physically later than girls. At the age of beginning reading instruc- tion, boys may not have developed certain skills that aid in reading, such as the ability to pay attention and the ability to manage pencils and books.

◆ The school environment may affect boys and girls differently. Most primary- grade classrooms in the United States are taught by female teachers, and boys may have more difficulty relating to them. In addition, rewards tend to be given for being neat and quiet in the primary grades, and these qualities are more char- acteristic of girls than boys.

The fact is that more boys are placed in special reading classes. Teachers must make these students feel welcome and happy in the reading environment.

Other Physical Problems Good physical health is also an important basic condition for learning. The pupil who is listless, tires easily, and cannot maintain attention may have an underlying medical problem. Prolonged illness, especially if accompanied by high fevers and long periods of absence from school, can also contribute to a reading problem.

General Health and Nutrition. Nutrient deficiency in infancy or early childhood has been shown to result in anatomical and biochemical changes in the brain. Early malnu- trition impairs growth, both of the body in general and of the central nervous system in particular. Other health concerns include nutrition problems, rheumatic fever, asthma, lack of sleep, biochemical imbalances, and endocrine problems. A general physical ex- amination is often recommended as part of a complete assessment for reading problems.

Injuries and Illnesses That Affect the Brain. Concussions, or swelling of the brain, can affect cognitive functioning. Concussions are often caused by injuries. If a brain inju- ry results in unconsciousness, a student has experienced a concussion. In addition, some illnesses, such as spinal meningitis and brain tumors, can destroy cognitive functioning.

Summary

Numerous factors are associated with reading disabilities. Experts recognize today that a student’s reading problem can be linked to intrinsic neurological and cognitive factors.

38 C H A P T E R 2

Neurological and cognitive factors within the student affect reading achieve- ment. Considerations include differentiated instruction, working memory, and cogni- tive strategy instruction.

Environmental factors include the home, school, cultural, and social environ- ments. The home is the child’s first environment, where the critical learning of the early years occurs. The school environment is another important system for the stu- dent, one that is often difficult for students with reading problems. Students with reading disabilities tend to have difficulty in their social environments. The cultural environment is another system that affects attitudes and interest in reading. Methods of assessing environmental systems include several systems of observation.

Emotional problems can influence reading achievement. Among the emotional problems exhibited by poor readers are emotional blocks, hostility, aggressiveness, learned helplessness, low self-esteem, depression, and anxiety. Emotional factors may be informally assessed using the sentence completion activity.

Intelligence refers to the potential for learning. Current views of intelligence divide intelligence into several components. Intelligence tests measure scholastic ap- titude. Although much of what is called intelligence is inherited, a child’s intelligence can be dramatically influenced by environmental conditions. In general, the child’s experiences and environment, including teaching, can make a significant difference.

Physical factors are also related to reading disability. Hearing impairment, in- cluding a mild or temporary hearing loss, can affect language learning and learning to read. The audiometer is used to screen for hearing loss. Visual impairment is also related to reading disability. Visual problems include myopia, hyperopia, astigmatism, poor binocular vision, and perhaps color sensitivity. Teachers can screen for visual im- pairment. Other physical factors, such as general health and nutrition or neurological conditions, are related to reading disabilities. Reading difficulties are identified more frequently in boys than girls; however, research shows that as many girls may have reading difficulties but are just not identified.

References Action for Children. (2008). Child poverty in North Carolina: A preventable epidemic. Raleigh, NC: Author.

Retrieved from http://www.ncchild.org Allington, R. L. (1986). Policy constraints and effective compensatory reading instruction: A review.

In J. Hoffman (Ed.), Effective teaching of reading. Research and practice (pp. 261–289). Newark, DE: International Reading Association

American Academy of Pediatrics. (1992). Learning disabilities, dyslexia, and vision. American Academy of Pediatrics, 90, 124–126.

Bender, W. (2006). Differentiating instruction for students with learning disabilities. Arlington, VA: Council for Exceptional Children.

Blachman, B., Tangel, D., & Ball, E. (2004). Combining phonological awareness and word recognition instruction. Perspectives: The International Dyslexia Association, 24(9), 12–14.

Critchley, M. (1970). The dyslexic child. Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas. de Jong, P., & Vrielink, L. (2004). Easy to measure: Hard to improve (quickly). Annals of Dyslexia, 54(1),

39–64. Díaz-Rico, L. (2012). A course for teaching English learners. Boston: Pearson Education.

Factors Associated With Reading Problems 39

Fletcher, J., Coulter, W., Reschly, D., & Vaughn, S. (2004). Alternative approaches to the definition and identifying of learning disabilities: Some questions and answers. Annals of Dyslexia, 54(2), 304–321

German, D. (2001). Its on the tip of my tongue. Chicago, IL: Word Finding Materials Inc. Word Finding Materials.

Harris, A., & Sipay, E. (1985). How to Increase Reading Ability: A Guide to Developmental Reading. New York: David McKay.

Hinshelwood, J. (1917). Congenital word-blindness. London: H. K. Lewis. Hotz, R. L. (2008, May 2). How alphabets shape the brain. Wall Street Journal, Science, p. A10. Krawiec, N., & Montague, M. (2012, Spring). A focus on cognitive stratgegy instruction. Current Practice

Alerts, TeachingLD.Org, 19, 1-4. Lavoie, R. (2007). The motivation breakthrough. New York: Touchstone (Simon & Schuster). Lerner, J. W., & Johns, B. (2012). Learning disabilities and related mild disabilities: Characteristics, teaching strate-

gies, and new directions. Florence, KY: Cengage Learning Morgan, W. P. (1896, November). A case of congenital word blindness. British Medical Journal, 2, 1378. Morris, R., Lovett, M., Wolf, M., Sevci, R., Steinbach, R., Frijters, J., & Shapiro, M. (2012, March/April).

Multiple-component remediation for developmental reading disabilities: IQ, socioeconomic status, and race as factors in remedial outcome. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 452, 99–127.

National Reading Panel. (2000). Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction: Report of the subgroups (National Institute of Health Pub. No. 00–4754). Washington, DC: National Institute of Child Health and Human Development.

Ortiz, A. (1997). Learning disabilities occurring concomitantly with linguistic differences. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 30, 221–232.

Orton, S. (1937). Reading, writing and speech problems in children. New York: Norton. Schuchardt, K., Maehler, C., & Hasselhorn, M. (2008). Working memory deficits in children with specific

learning disorders. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 41(6), 514–523. Shaywitz, S., Morris, R., & Shaywitz, B. (2008). The education of dyslexic children. From childhood to

young adulthood. The Annual Review of Pychology, 50, 451–475. Silver, A. (2006). The misunderstood child. New York: Three Rivers Press. Siok, W. T., Niu, Z., Jin, Z., Perfetti, C. A., & Tan, L. H. (2008). A structural–functional basis for dyslexia

in the cortex of Chinese readers. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA, 115(14), 5561–5565.

SLD evaluation: Linking cognitive assessment data to learning disabilities. LDA Newsbriefs, 33(3), 1, 8–9. Solan, H. (2004). Learning-related vision problems: How visual processing affects reading efficiency.

Learning Disabilities: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 13(1), 25–32. Stanovich, K. E. (1993–1994). Romance and reality. Distinguished educator series. The Reading Teacher, 47,

280–291. Sullivan, A. (2011). Disproportionality in special education identification and placement of English language

learners. Exceptional Children, 77(3), 317–334. Swanson, H. L., & O’Conner, R. (2009, November/December). The role of working memory and fluency

practice on the reading comprehension of students who are dysfluent readers. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 42(6), 529–548.

Tallal, P., Miller, S., Jenkins, W., & Merzenich, M. (1997). The role of temporal processing in developmental language-based learning disorders: Research and clinical implications. In B. Blachman (Ed.), Founda- tions of reading acquisition and dyslexia (pp. 49–60). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Tomlison, C. (2001). How to differentiate instruction in mixed ability classrooms. Alexandria, VA: Association for Curriculum and Development.

U.S. Census Bureau. (2010). Income, poverty, and health insurance coverage in the United States. Washington, DC: Author.

40 C H A P T E R 2

Go to topic 1: Reading Instruction and topic 11: Reading Difficulties & Intervention Strategies in the MyEducationLab (www.myeducationlab .com) for Reading Problems: Assessment and Teach- ing Strategies, where you can: ◆ Find learning outcomes for reading in-

struction and reading difficulties and inter- vention strategies, along with the national standards that connect to these outcomes.

◆ Complete Assignments and Activities that can help you more deeply understand the chapter content.

◆ Apply and practice your understanding of the core teaching skills identified in the chapter with the Building Teaching Skills and Dispositions learning units.

◆ Examine challenging situations and cases presented in the Iris Center Resources.

◆ Access video clips of CCSSO National Teachers of the Year award winners respond- ing to the question, “Why Do I Teach?” in the Teacher Talk section.

◆ Practice targeting instruction and mak- ing content accessible for all students with A�RISE activities.

◆ Strengthen your understanding and usage of the English language in writing with the Grammar Tutorial.

◆ Gain experience in choosing appropriate literature and integrating the best titles into language arts instruction with the Children’s and Young Adult Literature Database.

◆ Track the month-by-month literacy growth of five second graders with the Literacy Portraits.

◆ Create, update, and share quality lesson plans with the Lesson Plan Builder.

◆ Access state licensure test requirements, overviews of what the tests cover, and sample test items in the Certification and Licensure section.

◆ Check your comprehension of the content covered in the chapter with the Study Plan. Here you will be able to take a chapter pre- test, receive feedback on your answers, and then access personalized Review, Practice, and Enrichment exercises to enhance your understanding of chapter content. After you complete the exercises, take a posttest to confirm your comprehension.

3Gathering Data to Develop Students’ Literacy Profiles

Introduction

Information About the Environment Home Environment School Environment Social and Cultural Environments

Information About the Individual Emotional Information Information About Potential (Intelligence)

Physical Information Information About Language Development

Methods of Collecting Information Interview and Questionnaire Informal Talks School Records and Materials Observation During Reading Lessons

Summary

41

C H A P T E R

42 C H A P T E R 3

Introduction

Accurate assessment helps teachers plan the best possible instruction for students. Chapters 3 through 6 provide information on gathering and analyzing data about stu- dents and their reading. This chapter discusses background information, and Chapters 4 and 5 concentrate on the assessment of reading abilities. Both kinds of information are essential to good teaching.

This chapter examines ways to obtain a broad understanding of a student’s back- ground. As depicted in Figure 3.1, background information is divided into two parts: (1) the student’s environments, including home, school, social, and cultural, and (2) background factors within the individual, including emotional, potential (intelligence), physical, and language development. Specific methods of gathering information also are discussed.

Background factors can profoundly affect a student’s reading. Chapter 1 gave several examples. Some were of students whose environmental backgrounds did not foster reading development: Diane’s family could not provide a stable home life; Ilya missed a year of important preparation when he did not attend kindergarten. For other students, problems in reading seem to come from within the individual: Jason’s read- ing problems were related to his physical development.

Collecting Background Information

Information About the Environment

Home Environment

School Environment

Social and Cultural Environment

Information About the Individual

Emotional Information

Intellectual Potential

Physical Information

Information About Language Development

FIGURE 3.1 Collecting Background Information

Gathering Data to Develop Students’ Literacy Profiles 43

At times, identified problems can be corrected immediately. For example, a stu- dent with visual difficulties may be referred to an eye doctor, receive corrective lenses, and show immediate reading gains.

However, many students face problems that cannot be resolved easily. For example, a teacher has little ability to affect a difficult home situation—but even in that instance, a teacher can make a difference. During a time of family turmoil, a student may need a compassionate, understanding adult. Knowing background information enables teachers to deal sensitively with a fragile human being and to adjust instruction to special needs.

The discussion of background factors in this chapter is oriented to the imme- diate, practical needs of teachers. More theoretical, research-oriented information is presented in Chapters 2 and 15.

When dealing with background factors, teachers must remember that these factors have a complex relationship with reading problems. A factor may coexist with a reading problem but not actually cause that reading problem. For example, some students manage to achieve well in school despite difficult home lives. For other students, however, problems at home may impede learning. Thus, interpreting back- ground information judiciously is important.

Information About the Environment

Students live in several environments: the home, the school, and the social and cultural environments. Each of these environments influences how students think about read- ing, the desire to learn, and access to reading materials. In addition, these environments interact. For example, a difficult situation at home may contribute to difficulty making friends in the social realm and to trouble in cooperating with teachers at school.

Home Environment The home exerts a powerful influence on the development of reading and writing. Parents play an important role in modeling the value of literacy and bringing children to books, and the general home situation can influence a student’s academic achieve- ment. Events such as divorce or a move to a new neighborhood can affect a student’s ability to profit from school reading instruction.

Parents as Models for Literacy. Parents are children’s earliest and most important literacy role models. If parents read for both recreation and information and provide many reading materials at home, children learn to value literacy. Parents also stimulate a love of books by reading to their children, taking them to the library, and buying books as gifts. A home environment that is rich in books and in literacy activities fosters success in reading.

A reading teacher can determine whether the home supports and values literacy by interviewing the parents or by asking them to fill out a questionnaire. What infor- mation is helpful? Some of the questions to ask parents about their own reading habits are the following: Do they read regularly? Do they subscribe to newspapers and maga- zines? Do they buy books? Next, parents should be asked about literacy interactions

44 C H A P T E R 3

with their child. Do they regularly read to their child? Do they encourage their child to read? Do they take their child to the library or buy books for the child? Do they subscribe to any children’s magazines? Do they limit television viewing? Because lit- eracy extends beyond the traditional books and paper-and-pencil modes, we should also ask parents about digital literacy formats. Does the family have a computer? If so, what access does the child have to the computer? If the family does not have a computer at home, do parents take the child to the library to access computers? How does the child use the computer? How much time is the child allowed to spend on the computer? What kinds of restrictions are placed on the child’s access to the Internet? Responses to such questions indicate how parents and other family members, includ- ing grandparents and older siblings, foster literacy at home.

Information obtained directly from a student can also give insights into how literacy is modeled at home. As you gather information from interviewing and working with your students, you learn whether they have books or other modes of literacy at home and if they read regularly.

What can a reading teacher do if the home does not nurture literacy? Many parents are grateful for teacher suggestions about improving literacy in their homes. Often, the parents of students with reading problems are worried about their child’s future and have misgivings about their own parenting skills. A few suggestions often help foster a sense of family security and enhance literacy. For some families, these suggestions reinforce the good things they are doing already:

◆ Provide a good reading/studying environment. Advise parents to provide a quiet, stable, well-lit place in which their child will study. Supplies (paper and pencils) and reference materials (dictionaries, maps) should be located near this area. Make sure that the television is off during homework or reading time.

◆ If there is a computer in the home, it should be in a shared family space, and time should be spent engaging in literacy-related activities. The family can engage in interactive literacy activities on the computer and use the computer as a tool for homework and literacy extension activities.

◆ Share literacy with the child. When parents read to young children, they pro- mote an interest in reading, foster language development, and share close family experiences. If the child is older, parent and child can share reading time as they each read silently. Students of all ages enjoy reading material that they have mas- tered to a parent who listens enthusiastically. Encourage parents to take children to a local library and to look for a helpful children’s librarian who will aid them in locating suitable books.

◆ Accept the child as he or she is. Admitting that one’s own child has a problem is often difficult. Some parents deny that difficulties exist or hold unrealistic ex- pectations for their children. Children are sensitive to their parents’ disappoint- ments. To prevent a reading problem from becoming a family problem, children must know that parents accept and love them as they are.

◆ Help the child to feel secure and confident. Encourage activities that a child does successfully. Playing baseball or basketball, taking cooking lessons, or just being dad’s special helper may acquire a special meaning for a child with reading problems.

Gathering Data to Develop Students’ Literacy Profiles 45

When parents are unable to provide literacy experiences at home, teachers must nurture a love of literacy during instruction. Classrooms filled with different types of books and magazines, displayed invitingly, show students that literacy is important. Give students time to browse through and share these materials. Teachers can also read to students on a regular basis and ask them to share their own thoughts and feel- ings about the selections. Tools for digital literacy can be used in interactive ways to support classroom instruction.

General Home Situation. Children are profoundly affected by what happens to their families. They are often dramatically touched by a move to a new location, divorce or separation of parents, deaths of relatives, or older siblings leaving home. A child may not be able to pay attention to reading instruction when the father has just moved out or the mother has taken a new job and will no longer be at home after school.

A parent interview is often the means of collecting helpful information about a family. This information includes the names, ages, and occupations of the parents; the number and ages of siblings; the names of other family members living in the home; and the members of the nuclear family (parents, siblings) who are not living at home. During this interview, ask parents to share any other information that might help to explain their child’s difficulties. Often, parental insights give valuable ideas for coop- eration between a reading teacher and the family.

Occasionally, the parent interview reveals that a family situation is causing stress for the student and contributing to difficulty in school. Although teachers cannot in- tervene in a divorce or prevent an impending move to a new neighborhood, they can be sensitive to a student’s feelings and emotional needs. At such critical times, the reactions and guidance of an understanding teacher may be more important for the child than direct instruction in reading. Work with Shannon at the reading center il- lustrates this point. When Shannon’s parents separated, she reacted with fits of crying and withdrawal from other children. The teachers realized that certain topics might upset her, so they allowed her to select her own materials for instruction. Shannon avoided books about families. Instead she chose nonsense books such as Chicken Soup with Rice (Sendak) and books featuring brave young children, such as Hatupatu and the Birdwoman (Cowley) and Where the Wild Things Are (Sendak). These selections were key elements in improving her reading.

Teachers can help students cope with difficult home situations by:

◆ Being sensitive. Sensitivity in talking to students and allowing them to express their feelings is extremely important.

◆ Reducing demands. Teachers may need to adjust demands on students while they cope with especially difficult situations. For example, teachers may need to pro- vide extended time for assignments while a student adjusts to a stressful situa- tion or be more understanding if homework is left at a different house as a child adjusts to shared custody arrangements.

◆ Being aware of the student’s living situation. Teachers should be knowledge- able and understanding about the student’s living and legal custody arrange- ments. If parents do not live together, make sure the appropriate parent receives

46 C H A P T E R 3

communications. With permission from the custodial parent, both parents may be informed. As more families share custody, teachers need to be aware of these arrangements and may need to provide multiple copies of communications. Many teachers have established websites or blogs for their classrooms so that information and assignments are posted; in these cases, teachers must ensure that access to information is limited to appropriate adults.

School Environment Many factors in the school environment can influence reading achievement. Infor- mation about educational history, school attendance, and instructional methods helps teachers understand the student’s problem and forms a basis for cooperation among all the professionals who are helping a student.

Educational History. By gathering information about a student’s educational history, teachers learn what the youngster has already experienced and are able to select new options for instruction. Students differ widely in their educational histories. For some, first grade is the initial instructional experience; others enter first grade with a rich his- tory of preschool and kindergarten. Some students are barely 6 years old when they first encounter formal reading instruction; others are almost 7. Some students have repeated a grade or have received an extra year of kindergarten instruction. Some children have received private tutoring; some have been placed in special school programs.

Educational history may offer some hints about the seriousness of a student’s problem. For example, a student who has had many enriching experiences, such as preschool education and previous tutoring, and still has difficulty in reading probably has a serious problem. In contrast, a student who comes with no preschool education or history of reading during the preschool years may simply have lacked the opportu- nities needed for learning to read.

Educational history is gathered from many sources: interviews with parents or guardians and students, teacher interviews and questionnaires, cumulative school re- cords that follow the student from year to year, portfolios, and report cards. If you are not a staff member at the student’s school, you must obtain written permission from parents before contacting school personnel.

A complete history of schooling covers several areas:

◆ Ask about preschool experiences, including the length of nursery or preschool education and kindergarten attendance.

◆ Ask about the student’s early reading and writing instruction and the age and grade at which such instruction began. Children’s early literacy instruction must be considered in conjunction with their age and development (Interna- tional Reading Association, 2005; International Reading Association & National Association for the Education of Young Children, 1998; Teale & Yokota, 2000; Venn & Jahn, 2004).

◆ Ask if the student has ever repeated a grade; if so, try to determine the cause of retention.

Gathering Data to Develop Students’ Literacy Profiles 47

◆ Ask if the student is currently in, or has ever been in, a special school program. Placement in such programs as special education, special reading, or Title I can influence the type of instruction and attention a student receives. If the student is in a special program, is the placement full time or part time? Does the student receive supportive help in a resource room setting or in the regular classroom? Has the student been identified for Tier 2 or Tier 3 intervention? Is there a response-to-intervention plan or an individual educational plan for this child?

◆ If previous diagnostic work has been done for the student through the school or a private agency, ask the parents to bring in a copy of the findings. You must have written consent from parents or guardians to contact these professionals.

School Attendance. Absence from school and frequent transfers can impact a stu- dent’s progress. Some children are absent from school for weeks at a time, missing critical instruction. Other students change schools several times during the year, re- sulting in abrupt changes in instructional approaches and materials.

Information about school attendance can be obtained from parents, teachers, and cumulative school records. Try to determine how many times the student has been absent in the current school year and in earlier years. Instruction missed in first and second grade seems to have a particularly damaging effect on reading progress. Extended absences are also harmful. Try to determine how long the student has been in a particular school, and how many different schools the student has attended. Ask about the reasons for frequent absences or transfers.

School Instruction. Reading instruction dramatically affects students’ success in reading. Research has shown that a balanced, comprehensive approach to literacy in- struction is highly effective (Anderson, Hiebert, Scott, & Wilkinson, 1985; Samuels & Farstrup, 2011). Components of a balanced approach include reading, writing, speaking, and listening presented in a culturally sensitive, multifaceted program that is responsive to individual and developmental needs (Morrow & Gambrell, 2011). Thus, teachers need a strong repertoire of instructional strategies and approaches in word knowledge, comprehension, and writing. Further, although many students learn word recognition and comprehension strategies through extensive literacy experiences, struggling stu- dents may need guided instruction that supports them as they apply strategies (Duffy, 2002; Strickland, Ganske, & Monroe, 2002). Effective instruction for struggling read- ers must be carefully matched to individual student needs (Allington, 2011; Duffy, 2001; Short, Kane, & Peeling, 2000).

Struggling readers are often given books that are too hard for them. Because most classrooms use basal programs as the primary instructional material for teaching literacy, it is important to examine the characteristics of these materials (Hiebert & Martin, 2001; Hiebert & Mesmer, 2006; Maslin, 2007). These basal programs undergo cyclical revisions to comply with trends and mandates in literacy instruction. Read- ing teachers should examine the characteristics of the specific series as well as the way instruction is organized for the individual student. If the whole class is using one text, lower-achieving readers may not be able to read the material successfully. Even teachers who organize students into small groups may still have one or two students

48 C H A P T E R 3

who struggle with materials that are easy for their classmates. Basal reading programs published in recent years have attempted to provide a comprehensive approach to literacy instruction while providing materials teachers can use to differentiate instruc- tion. More recent reading programs integrate the instructional anthology with ac- companying sets of leveled books for guided reading instruction and digital literacy as well as suggestions for progress monitoring for response-to-intervention. Most also provide supplements for alignment with the Common Core State Standards (Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, 2012; Macmillan/McGraw-Hill, 2011; Rasinski & Padak, 2004; Scott Foresman, 2008).

Information about a student’s first experiences with reading instruction may provide insights into how a problem developed. Was the initial method suited to the student’s needs and level of development? Did the reading problem start in first grade, or were the student’s early experiences successful? Reading problems that begin in first and second grade often involve word recognition abilities; problems that develop in the intermediate grades (or later) tend to focus on comprehension and language abilities.

Information about school instruction can be obtained from school personnel, parents, and students. The school is a particularly valuable source. For most reading teachers, the school is the primary source of information. It is typically the classroom teacher who approaches the reading teacher with concerns about individual students. Teacher interviews and questionnaires, school records, and information about school- books and assignments all provide insight into instruction. In gathering information from the school, the reading teacher should try to get a full picture of instruction and progress. Is the student receiving specific reading instruction, or is reading and writing instruction addressed within the context of other subjects, such as social studies and science? If reading is taught as a subject, is a reading textbook series used? If so, which one, and at what level is the student placed? If novels and trade books are used, which ones has the student read? Is the class organized into reading groups, or is the whole class instructed together? Are word recognition and comprehension strategies taught explicitly? Are students taught strategies for reading in social studies, health, and sci- ence books? Is the class provided time for independent or recreational reading? If so, are books provided at the student’s level? Is writing encouraged? How is the student performing in areas such as math, science, social studies, art, and physical education? How is digital literacy integrated into instruction? Does the student respond differ- ently to reading digital text than when reading from a traditional book?

The student’s own perceptions about reading instruction can also offer valuable insights. Interviews and informal conversations provide information about whether a student likes reading class (or instruction) and whether the books and stories are easy and interesting to read. Ask the student what activities take place during read- ing instruction. Are stories and novels read orally or silently? We have found that students with reading problems often would like to change something about their instruction. For this reason, the students often are asked, “If you could change one thing about reading class, what would it be?” A student’s perceptions of reading can also be revealing. You might ask the student what reading is or what makes a good reader (Johnson, 2005).

Gathering Data to Develop Students’ Literacy Profiles 49

Parents’ perceptions of the school environment come from their child’s com- ments, homework examples, report cards, and teacher conferences. During an inter- view, ask the parents to describe the type and amount of homework their child is given. Ask parents if the student brings books home from school to read. Parents often have strong feelings about instructional factors that may have contributed to their child’s reading problems. Obtaining this information from parents is important in fostering a cooperative spirit between the school and home.

Sometimes the information suggests that school factors may have indeed con- tributed to the reading problem. What can you, as a reading teacher, do? You cannot change the past. Furthermore, assigning blame to a particular school or teacher is not helpful. A classroom teacher may have difficulty responding to the special needs of an individual when coping with a group of 25 to 35 students. A reading teacher can make helpful suggestions to the school and can foster cooperation among all of the profes- sionals who are trying to help the student. For example, one reading teacher suggested the titles of easy books for a low-achieving student to read during recreational reading time in his class. Another reading teacher worked with the classroom teacher to adjust difficult homework assignments for a special-needs student.

In some cases, information about past instruction is helpful in planning an effec- tive current reading program. Ten-year-old Gregg loudly stated that he hated school reading class and “all those hard worksheets.” Gregg defined reading as “saying the words right,” which explained his lack of interest and enthusiasm for it. To help him overcome negative past experiences, his reading teacher avoided any tasks that re- sembled rote instruction and emphasized comprehension rather than accurate word pronunciation. Gregg selected the stories that he and his teacher read together. They paused periodically to discuss and predict what might happen next. Because Gregg enjoyed art, the teacher encouraged him to illustrate parts of the story and vocabulary words. At the end of the semester, Gregg proclaimed that these lessons “weren’t real reading classes, but I learned to read better.”

Social and Cultural Environments Reading is a social process because during reading, an author communicates his or her ideas to the reader. Because of the social nature of reading, a student’s relationships with parents, teachers, and peers can affect reading achievement. Social interactions occur through specific personal relationships and through the student’s general cul- tural environment (Gillet, Temple, Temple, & Crawford, 2011).

Successful social interactions can provide the student with feelings of high self- esteem and confidence that encourage reading achievement. Unfortunately, many poor readers experience difficulties in social interactions. Students with reading prob- lems often are rejected by their classmates and viewed with disfavor by their teachers. They may be a source of concern to their parents. As a result, poor readers often have difficulty relating to others.

In today’s schools, reading instruction tends to be a social experience. Students often read orally in pairs or groups, sharing thoughts and feelings about a novel or working in cooperative groups. These activities can be burdensome to a student who

50 C H A P T E R 3

lacks ability in social interactions. Students who are poor readers may withdraw in shame when they have to share their reading. The student’s cultural environment may also affect reading progress. Some students are surrounded by peers who do not value literacy. In addition, the student’s cultural background may make asking a teacher for help a difficult and uncomfortable experience. Instruction may be made more relevant to students by having them read and write about topics of special interest to them, such as popular TV programs and movies, video games, and favorite musicians or comedians.

Reading teachers should gather background information about both the stu- dent’s social and cultural environments. Often the parents’ description of their child’s social interactions is informative. Ask the parents to describe their child’s relationships with them and with siblings. Does the student have many friends? Are the student’s friends from school or from other contexts? What is the student’s relationship with the teacher and classmates? Does the student willingly join in group activities or prefer to work alone? Is the student shy and withdrawn or outgoing?

Interviewing the student about friends and interests can also be useful. Does the student see reading as something that friends and family value? Does the student spend time with friends? What are the student’s interests? Such information provides hints about how to make reading a motivating experience.

At times, the investigation of a student’s social relationships indicates cause for concern. However, teachers often find that these relationships improve when academic problems are alleviated. When students read better, their feelings of success make them more confident in social interactions. Thus, by offering good instruction, read- ing teachers often can affect both students’ achievement and their social relationships.

At other times, a teacher’s use of students’ interests may draw them into social interactions. For example, Eamon, the poorest reader in his third-grade class, seldom interacted with his peers. During recess, he stood in the corner of the playground; at lunch, he usually sat and ate alone. To help him, the reading teacher made a point of talking to Eamon alone whenever possible. After discovering that Eamon was pas- sionately interested in snakes and had two pet reptiles at home, she gave him several books about snakes and asked him to bring his pets to school. The eager fascination of the other children motivated Eamon to talk about the care of his pets and how they should be handled. The teacher also read several books about snakes to the class and encouraged Eamon to critique them. Were the facts accurate? Had Eamon ever seen a snake do that? As Eamon became the class snake expert, he gradually increased his willingness to participate in class activities and to seek out the company of his peers.

Carefully planned reading with peers can promote social and reading compe- tence. Jennifer, a sixth-grade student in the reading center, was reading at the third- grade level and had a history of negative social interactions. To improve reading and social skills, Jennifer was paired with Samantha, a fifth-grade student. The two girls read Charlotte’s Web (White) at home and returned to the reading center to discuss difficult words, the characters in the book, and the plot. Sharing the reading experi- ence helped Jennifer overcome her shyness. Jennifer and Samantha became good friends as they enjoyed the positive social experience of reacting to good children’s literature.

Gathering Data to Develop Students’ Literacy Profiles 51

Information About the Individual

Many of the factors that contribute to reading problems are found within the indi- vidual student. This section discusses information about emotional status, potential or intelligence, physical health, and language development.

Emotional Information Poor readers often display emotional problems that impede learning. Not surprisingly, many students who have problems in their social environments, as discussed in the previous section, also display emotional problems.

For some students, problems with learning to read may result in emotional prob- lems. For example, some children withdraw and refuse even to attempt to read or write. Seven-year-old Carlos eagerly participated in classroom activities that did not involve reading or writing. However, when the teacher asked students to take out their books, Carlos would either put his head down on the desk or turn his chair away from the teacher. To avoid repeated failure, Carlos had decided not to read anymore.

If learning has been a painful experience, some students develop a block against all school activities. Others react by becoming hostile or aggressive. Still others de- velop self-images of poor readers; because these students believe that they are “dumb,” they give up trying to learn. Other students are overcome with anxiety and may start to shake or stutter when asked to read.

For other students, the reading problem may be related to an underlying emo- tional problem. For example, some students first develop problems with literacy just as their parents are separating or going through a divorce.

Teachers, parents, and students can all offer insights about emotional factors that may affect reading achievement. The teacher, who sees the child in class, can note re- actions to instructional activities. The parents can describe the child at home and with peers. Finally, the perceptions of the student are perhaps the most revealing.

What types of school information are useful in determining a student’s emo- tional state? Knowing whether the student works independently in class is helpful. Does the student cooperate well with others? Does the student pay attention and fol- low directions? Does the teacher see evidence of emotional outbursts, inappropriate behavior, or depression? Does the student willingly participate in reading activities? How does the student interact with others?

Through parent interviews, the reading teacher can also gain insight into a stu- dent’s interactions, behavior, and attitudes within the family and with friends. For ex- ample, can the child take enough responsibility to do chores and complete work? Does the youngster often withdraw from peer groups? Does the child seem unhappy?

Of course, simply observing and interacting with a student also gives much in- formation. Observation of a student’s behaviors and attitudes during reading class can make you aware of that student’s emotional state. Finally, as you interact with a stu- dent, you will be able to judge the appropriateness of responses.

At times, you may suspect that emotional factors may be affecting reading. How- ever, because a reading teacher is not a psychologist or psychiatrist, directly addressing

52 C H A P T E R 3

emotional problems is not appropriate. Rather, a reading teacher may best address these problems by planning sensitive instruction.

Donny, one student in a group of five, was quite hostile during reading instruc- tion. He accused the teacher of liking the other children better and of thinking that he was “dumb.” He deliberately dropped books and pencils, loudly complained of a stom- ach ache, and refused to answer questions or read orally. In fact, his behavior totally disrupted group activities. To help Donny, his reading teacher made a special effort to spend some time with him alone. She read orally with Donny, praising him when he was successful and gently helping him when he had difficulties. Donny enjoyed this private attention, away from the possibly negative reactions of others. Slowly, Donny’s trust in his teacher developed into an improved self-concept, and he became more cooperative during group reading activities.

Information About Potential (Intelligence) A student’s potential for learning affects his or her ability to read. Potential for learn- ing is often measured by tests of intelligence; however, an individual’s total potential cannot be fully captured in a test. This issue is discussed more fully in Chapter 2.

Physical Information Many physical factors, including hearing problems, vision problems, general health problems, and neurological dysfunction, affect a student’s ability to read. This section provides a brief overview of these factors.

Hearing Problems. A hearing loss, even if it is moderate or temporary, can greatly impede reading instruction. A student who cannot hear the teacher or who cannot differentiate the sounds needed for phonics instruction will often develop reading problems. However, the most serious effect of hearing loss is that it impedes normal language development, which is the basis of reading.

When students cannot hear adequately, all of their communication skills are im- paired. The result can be problems with vocabulary, grammar, and verbal thinking skills. Hearing loss is most devastating if it occurs during the language acquisition years (between the ages of 2 and 4).

Because of the importance of adequate hearing, students need to be screened for possible hearing impairment. Often schools do this testing, or preliminary screening may be done by a reading teacher (see Chapter 2).

Additional information can also help pinpoint a hearing problem. The reading teacher can ask the parents if they have observed any speech problems, such as slurred speech or difficulty in making sounds. Has the student suffered frequent ear infec- tions? Does the student turn her or his head to one side while listening? Does the student seem inattentive or ask for information to be repeated? Does the student fail to respond immediately when called? Of course, if you observe such behaviors during your own work with a student, you should immediately request a screening for hear- ing loss.

Gathering Data to Develop Students’ Literacy Profiles 53

What should be done if a teacher suspects a hearing problem? As mentioned, many schools and reading centers have devices for screening students. However, be- cause the testing of hearing is complex and the results may vary from time to time in children, a reading teacher cannot make a definitive diagnosis. Rather, if screening devices or symptoms suggest a hearing loss, the parents should be referred to a profes- sional in the field, such as an audiologist.

Teachers can also adjust their instruction to meet the needs of a student with a hearing loss or a suspected hearing loss. Remember to sit close to and face the stu- dent directly when speaking. If the student does not respond directly to questions or comments, repeat them in a cheerful fashion. Let the student watch you pronounce the words.

Vision Problems. The ability to see clearly is critical to the reading process. Vision problems may be quite complex, involving difficulties in seeing close up or far away or in focusing both eyes together. In addition, certain students may have difficulties with glare, fluorescent lights, and distinguishing colors. Because vision changes rapidly for children, it should be tested often.

As with possible hearing loss, a reading teacher should try to determine whether the student has a vision problem. School records or parents can provide the results of recent vision screenings. Reading teachers can also administer vision-screening tests (see Chapter 2).

Behaviors that may indicate vision problems include:

◆ Avoidance of reading and writing ◆ Holding a page very close or at an unusual angle ◆ Losing one’s place while reading ◆ Frowning, squinting, or scowling during reading ◆ Headaches, rubbing the eyes, or covering one eye

What can a teacher do to help a student with a suspected vision problem? If a screen- ing test or student behaviors indicate a vision problem, the youngster should be re- ferred to a vision professional (optometrist or ophthalmologist) for further testing.

If a reading teacher is dealing with an uncorrected vision problem, certain ac- commodations will make the student more comfortable. Use books with larger type if they are available. Some computer software allows the teacher to adjust the size of the print. In addition, the teacher may record some of the student’s books on audiotape.

General Health Problems. Because learning is an active process, it requires that a student be alert, energetic, and able to concentrate for long periods. Poor physical health can impair the ability to concentrate. Through parent interviews and question- naires, reading teachers can determine whether the child has any medical conditions that may affect learning or if the child suffers from conditions or takes medications that affect the ability to concentrate.

What can a teacher do when a student suffers from health problems? Sensitiv- ity to the needs of the student is crucial. For example, Meghan suffered from severe

54 C H A P T E R 3

allergies, and the strong medication that she took during certain times of the year tended to make her lethargic. Knowing this situation, her reading teacher praised Meghan for the work she completed and never suggested that Meghan was not trying her best.

Neurological Problems. All learning, including the ability to learn to read, is neuro- logically based. The reading process demands an intact and well-functioning nervous system; a neurological dysfunction can severely impede reading ability.

Children with atypical neurological systems are often readers with a serious dis- ability who have extreme difficulty learning to read (Vellutino et al., 1996) or are labeled dyslexic (see Chapter 15). Thus, if assessment of a student’s reading (as described in the next chapter) suggests a serious reading problem, a teacher might consider the possibil- ity of referring the student for a neurological examination.

To probe further, ask the parents if any other member of the family has experi- enced a serious reading problem. A history of a difficult pregnancy and delivery may also point to neurological dysfunction. Certain studies suggest that 50 to 70% of read- ing disabilities may be hereditary (Torgesen, 2004). Other signs of possible neurologi- cal dysfunction include slow physical development and accidents that have involved damage to the brain.

Evidence indicates that attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), a prob- lem that affects the ability to concentrate, is caused by neurological problems (Lerner & Johns, 2012). Students who have ADHD are often prescribed medications, such as Ritalin™, to help control their behavior. Finally, many practitioners believe that children with learning disabilities may also have subtle problems in their neurological function- ing. Students with learning disabilities are entitled to special services under the provision of the 2004 reauthorization of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act (IDEA).

Information on possible neurological problems can be gathered from the par- ents, school records, and specialists (such as physicians) who have been consulted by the child’s parents. If students with suspected neurological problems have been diag- nosed as having ADHD or a learning disability, the school will have already gathered much information about these students. For example, thorough testing is required for every special education student to comply with IDEA regulations (see Chapter 15). With parental consent, these records can be released to a reading teacher.

What can be done if a teacher suspects that a student may have a neurologi- cal dysfunction? If students need further testing, they should be referred to physi- cians specializing in pediatrics and neurology or to appropriate professionals in their schools.

However, teachers are still responsible for teaching these students to read. Can they help them? The answer is a resounding “yes.” At one time, educators believed that very specialized methods were required to teach students with neurological difficulties to read. More recent studies suggest that the same methods that are effective with all students who have reading problems will also work with those who have a neurological dysfunction (Cunningham & Allington, 2010). A reading teacher who concentrates on effective and motivating methods will often help these students make substantial gains.

Gathering Data to Develop Students’ Literacy Profiles 55

Be aware, however, that students with neurological problems (or suspected neurologi- cal problems) may improve at a slower rate and may need longer and more intense instruction than most students with reading disabilities.

Information About Language Development Because reading is language expressed in written form, a student’s language devel- opment forms the basis for all reading. The ability to express and receive thoughts through language is fundamental to being able to read. This relationship between oral and written language has received greater attention in the Common Core State Standards (National Governors Association, 2011). There is an emphasis throughout the grade levels in English language arts, the literacy as pects of history/social studies, science, and technical subjects on students’ abilities to engage in discussions about spe- cific topics using grade-appropriate vocabulary. A student who is confused about oral language sounds will have difficulty pronouncing written words. A student who does not know many word meanings will gain little information from reading, even if he or she can pronounce all of the words. In other instances, a student’s language patterns may be mature but may differ from the language used in school. Many students come to school speaking languages other than English. They need rich experiences in learn- ing English, plus experiences reading in their native languages, to develop high-level comprehension. Students who speak nonstandard dialects may lack both exposure to more standard English language patterns and a feeling of pride and proficiency in their own dialect.

A reading teacher can easily obtain background information about a student’s lan- guage. Simply listening to or conversing with a student gives many valuable insights. A student who speaks in long sentences, provides full answers to questions, and is able to use many words probably has an excellent language base for reading. Unfortunately, many students with reading problems speak haltingly in short sentences and use just a few words. Joey, for example, was in kindergarten, yet his language patterns resembled those of a 3- or 4-year-old. He often used his name instead of a pronoun or used pronouns incorrectly. “Joey needs crayons” or “Me need crayons” were typical utterances. Similarly, 8-year-old Paul had difficulty dictating even a single sentence to his reading teacher.

In addition to observation, interview questions can reveal much about a student’s language. Ask the parents whether their child’s language development was slower than that of other children or was within a normal range. Did their child experience any speech difficulties? Has the child had any language or speech therapy? To obtain in- formation about language differences, ask parents what languages are spoken in the home and whether the child knew English when entering school. A history of class placements, including bilingual services or EL, often gives much information about a student’s proficiency in English.

What can be done if a teacher suspects that language problems are affecting a student’s reading? At times, evaluation by a language professional (speech thera- pist or language specialist) may be needed to pinpoint the precise source of the diffi- culty. However, in many other instances, a reading teacher can foster the development of rich language by employing enjoyable instructional strategies, such as reading

56 C H A P T E R 3

language-rich storybooks to the student, encouraging conversation, and developing knowledge of abstract concepts (see Chapter 10).

Twelve-year-old José, a student in the reading center, could speak and understand basic English, but he lacked the English skills and specialized vocabulary to read complex grade-level material or content-area text. His teacher began by reading selections from the daily newspaper that focused on news about Mexico, his homeland. José enjoyed help- ing his teacher with the pronunciation of Spanish names. They then discussed what was happening in Mexico and read portions of the articles together several times. Finally, José attempted to read articles alone. At one point, he joyfully exclaimed, “That’s what NAFTA looks like!” José and his tutor continued this process, moving gradually into other familiar topics such as television and sports. As he did this, José began to locate cognates—words that are the same in Spanish and English—to help his teacher learn Spanish.

Methods of Collecting Information

As shown, a wealth of important background information may be collected about a student with reading difficulties. This information helps teachers understand the fac- tors that contribute to a reading problem. It also aids us in planning effective and motivating instruction.

Generally, background information is collected at the beginning of a teacher’s work with a student. The assessment tools most frequently used are (1) interviews and questionnaires; (2) informal talks with the student, parents, and professionals; (3) records of previous testing, school achievement, or report cards; and (4) obser- vation. In the school setting, the classroom teacher usually initiates the process by contacting the reading teacher for help with a student who is struggling in reading and writing. In many reading centers, parents or school literacy specialists may make the initial contact and provide the first source of information. In both situations, it is important for the reading teacher to collect information from the classroom teacher and the parents as well as the student.

Interview and Questionnaire Interviews and questionnaires with informed and concerned people yield information about the student that cannot be obtained in any other way. In these two formats, those concerned with a student’s reading problem are able to state important information frankly and fully.

Interview. In an interview, a reading teacher follows a prescribed set of questions, asking them orally of the person who is being interviewed. A reading teacher can interview parents, the student, or the classroom teacher. The personal and infor- mal atmosphere of an interview encourages the sharing of valuable information in a sympathetic setting. We interview the parents separately from the student and use different interview forms. A reading teacher who works outside the student’s school may get valuable information from interviewing the classroom teachers and other

Gathering Data to Develop Students’ Literacy Profiles 57

professionals in the school. However, written permission must be obtained from the parents before a student’s school may be contacted. Some important procedures en- sure a successful interview:

◆ Begin by telling the parents, student, or classroom teacher that this information will be kept confidential.

◆ Strive for an amiable, open atmosphere. Briefly discussing a neutral topic, such as the weather or sports, can reduce initial fears or discomfort about the interview process.

◆ Avoid indicating disapproval of responses. ◆ Follow a directed plan. You should know what questions to ask before the in-

terview begins. These questions should be in front of you so they will not be forgotten. Become familiar with the interview questions. This will allow you to conduct a more informal, conversational interview and usually yields more information than you would gather in a formal question-and-answer setting.

◆ We recommend recording the interview. This frees you from stopping to write responses and fosters a conversational atmosphere. If you cannot record the in- terview, you should take notes, because remembering everything that was said is difficult. Explain why you are taking notes. If the person being interviewed asks about what he or she said, cheerfully read the notes back aloud.

◆ Because of important legal and ethical considerations involved in the interview, it must be kept confidential. If you wish to tape the interview, you must obtain written consent from the parents, guardians, or professionals involved. The pres- ence of another individual during the interview also requires consent. Finally, information shared during an interview or any other part of the assessment pro- cedure cannot be released to another agency without parental permission.

Questionnaire. Like an interview, a questionnaire consists of a group of questions to which parents, a student, or another professional respond. However, the list of ques- tions is responded to in writing. A questionnaire may simply be mailed to the respon- dent, filled out, and mailed back. Alternatively, it may be filled out in the presence of the reading teacher.

Questionnaires are valuable when a face-to-face interview is not feasible. In the reading center, we often mail questionnaires to the classroom teachers of the students we serve because they have difficulties coming in for interviews. In addition, because questions are responded to independently, the use of a questionnaire enables parents, students, and classroom teachers to formulate thoughtful responses and take the time to gather valu- able information about developmental history, school attendance, and grades. However, questionnaires may be unproductive with parents and children who find writing difficult.

Parent Background Information Form. A sample form for gathering background information from parents is provided in Appendix A and on MyEducationLab in the Chapter Resources section of Chapter 3. Please feel free to download the document and adapt it for your own context. We suggest that, if possible, this form be used as an interview, rather than as a questionnaire.

58 C H A P T E R 3

Student Background Information Form. A student information form for younger students that can be used either in an interview or as a questionnaire is provided in Appendix A and on MyEducationLab in the Chapter Resources section of Chapter 3. A parallel form for older students is also provided. Questions about student interests help to establish rapport with a student and give the teacher information to motivate and personalize reading instruction. You can download the documents and modify questions to suit your locality (for example, adding skiing or surfing).

A final section gives information on how the student thinks about reading (Johnson, 2005). Often, low-achieving students think that reading is just saying words; not surprisingly, they do not focus on meaning. These questions also explore the stu- dent’s reading strategies. Many students with reading problems will simply “sound it out” as the only strategy they use to cope with an unknown word; they do not realize that meaning can also be used. Other low-achieving students have unrealistic pictures of good readers and believe that such readers know all the words and never make mistakes.

School Information Form. A form for collecting information from the student’s school is provided in Appendix A and on MyEducationLab in the Chapter Resources section of Chapter 3. Please download the form and add questions that may be pertinent to your setting. If you are working in a setting other than a school, remember that written permission from parents or guardians is needed whenever you contact a student’s school.

Informal Talks In addition to interviews and questionnaires, informal conversations throughout the year can keep providing valuable insights. Twelve-year-old Adam continued to share his frustrations with homework assignments through the school year, thus enabling us to help his classroom teacher modify them.

The parents of another child revealed, over an informal cup of coffee, that he had experienced extensive medical difficulties immediately after birth. This information, which was not given in an initial interview, was shared only as the parents became more comfortable with us. The reading teacher or the classroom teacher should be alert to opportunities to gather information through these continuing, informal means. Keep- ing in touch with parents as instruction continues is important. Equally important is the sharing of information between the classroom teacher and the reading teacher. Informal, but professional interactions between colleagues can often reveal important information and lead to increased effectiveness in providing instruction.

Continued contact with parents provides teachers with valuable information about how students are reacting to instruction, whether they are improving, and if their attitudes toward reading are becoming more positive. Finally, contact helps fami- lies to encourage children to read at home.

School Records and Materials School records, previous diagnostic reports, report cards, and student portfolios (organized collections of a student’s work kept in school) are all valuable sources of

Gathering Data to Develop Students’ Literacy Profiles 59

information. In addition, cumulative records, which detail a student’s progress over a number of years, provide information about the history of a reading problem. Reports, such as an individualized educational program (IEP) prepared for special education students under the provisions of the IDEA, are also valuable sources of information. Reading teachers in schools have access to this information. If you are a reading teacher working in a setting outside of the student’s school, ask parents to allow you access to school information because it enables you to gain a more thorough and balanced view of a child’s reading problem.

Observation During Reading Lessons In the discussion of background information, many types of information were presented that could be gathered through direct observation of your students. Direct observation provides insight into students’ social interactions and language development. As a reading teacher, you can make observations and enter anecdotal records as you work with a stu- dent. However, if possible, observe the student in many different settings. Student reac- tions and behaviors often vary according to the environment in which they are observed. A student who is quiet and cooperative in individual instruction may be noisy and defiant in a large class. In fact, sometimes a description of one student in these two settings is so different that teachers wonder if the same individual is being observed. To gain a realistic picture of students, observe them in natural settings (at parties, on the playground, in their general education classes) as well as in special reading classes. As a school-based reading teacher or literacy specialist, observations of the student in a variety of learning contexts are crucial to supporting teachers as they plan instruction for the student.

As you make observations, be sure to note them in writing for future reference. Understanding the instructional context is crucial in providing support for classroom teachers. Remember that even if the student receives supplemental support, the vast majority of instruction for most struggling readers and writers occurs within the gen- eral education classroom setting. Thus, an important role of the reading specialist is to provide instructional support to the classroom teacher (Strickland et al., 2002). Further information about observations is given in Chapter 2.

Summary

This chapter discusses collecting background information on students with reading problems, including information about the environment and the individual. Back- ground factors interact with reading problems in complex ways; a background factor can coexist with a reading problem and yet not cause that problem.

Environmental factors include the home, school, and social and cultural envi- ronments. The home influences a child as parents serve as role models for literacy and provide a general environment that nurtures the child. The child’s school history, attendance, and school instruction also affect a reading problem. Often, students who have reading problems are not receiving instruction that meets their needs. Students with reading problems also tend to have social difficulties. They may also come from a culture that does not support literacy.

60 C H A P T E R 3

Individual factors include emotional status, potential or intelligence, physical health, and language development. Students with reading problems may have emo- tional difficulties. Sometimes these emotional problems are alleviated as reading im- proves. Physical factors include hearing problems, visual problems, general health problems, and neurological problems. Students with ADHD and learning disabilities may have subtle neurological problems. Students with reading problems may also have difficulties with language development.

Information may be collected through interviews, written questionnaires, in- formal talks, school records and materials, and observation. Sample interviews and questionnaires are available for your use in Appendix A of this book as well as on MyEducationLab in the Chapter Resources section of Chapter 3.

References Allington, R. L. (2011). What really matters for struggling readers: Designing research-based programs (3rd ed.).

Boston: Allyn & Bacon. Anderson, R. C., Hiebert, E. H., Scott, J. A., & Wilkinson, I. A. G. (1985). Becoming a nation of readers. Washington,

DC: National Institute of Education. Cunningham, P. M., & Allington, R. L. (2010). Classrooms that work: They can all read and write (5th ed.). New

York: Allyn & Bacon. Duffy, A. M. (2001). Balance, literacy acceleration, and responsive teaching in a summer school literacy pro-

gram for elementary school struggling readers. Reading Research and Instruction, 40, 67–100. Duffy, G. (2002). Direct explanations of strategies. In C. Block & M. Pressley (Eds.), Instruction: Research-

based best practices (pp. 28–41). New York: The Guilford Press. Gillet, J. W., Temple, C. A., Temple, C. N., & Crawford, A. N. (2011). Understanding reading problems: Assess-

ment and instruction (8th ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon. Hiebert, E. H., & Martin, L. A. (2001). The texts of beginning reading instruction. In S. B. Neuman &

D. K. Dickenson (Eds.), Handbook of early literacy research (pp. 361–376). New York: Guilford Press. Hiebert, E. H., & Mesmer, H. A. E. (2006). Perspectives on the difficulty of beginning reading texts.

In S. B. Neuman & D. K. Dickenson (Eds.), Handbook of early literacy research (Vol. 2, pp. 395–409). New York: Guilford Press.

Houghton Mifflin Harcourt. (2012). Houghton Mifflin reading. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Publishing. Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act (IDEA). (2004). Public Law 108-446. International Reading Association. (2005). Literacy development in the preschool years: A position statement of the

International Reading Association. Newark, DE: Author. International Reading Association & National Association for the Education of Young Children. (1998). Learn-

ing to read and write: Developmentally appropriate practices for young children. Washington, DC: Author. Johnson, J. C. (2005). What makes a “good reader”? Asking students to define “good” readers. Reading

Teacher, 58, 766–773. Lerner, J. W., & Johns, B. (2012). Learning disabilities and related mild disabilities: What’s new in education.

Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Cengage Learning. Macmillan/McGraw-Hill. (2011). Treasures reading program. New York: McGraw-Hill Publishing. Maslin, P. (2007). Comparison of readability and decodability levels across five first grade basal programs.

Reading Improvement, 44(2), 59. Morrow, L. M., & Gambrell, L. B. (Eds.). (2011). Best practices in literacy instruction (4th ed.). New York:

Guilford Press. National Governors Association Center for Best Practices & Council of Chief State School Officers. (2011).

Common Core State Standards Initiative. Washington, DC: National Governors Association. Rasinski, T., & Padak, N. (2004). Beyond consensus—beyond balance: Toward a comprehensive literacy

curriculum. Reading and Writing Quarterly, 20, 91–102. Samuels, S. J., & Farstrup, A. E. (Eds.). What research has to say about reading instruction. 4th ed. Newark, DE:

International Reading Association.

Gathering Data to Develop Students’ Literacy Profiles 61

Scott Foresman. (2008). Scott Foresman Reading Street. Boston: Pearson Education. Short, R. A., Kane, M., & Peeling, T. (2000). Retooling the reading lesson: Matching the right tools to the

job. The Reading Teacher, 54, 284–295. Strickland, D. S., Ganske, K., & Monroe, J. K. (2002). Supporting struggling readers and writers: Strategies for

classroom intervention. Newark, DE: International Reading Association. Teale, W. H., & Yokota, J. (2000). Beginning reading and writing: Perspectives on instruction. In

D. S. Strickland & L. M. Morrow (Eds.), Beginning reading and writing: Language and literacy series (pp. 3–21). New York: Teachers College Press.

Torgesen, J. K. (2004). Learning disabilities: An historical and conceptual overview. In B. Y. L. Wong (Ed.), Learning about learning disabilities (3rd ed., pp. 3–34). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

Vellutino, F. R., Scanlon, D. M., Sipay, E. R., Small, S. G., Chen, R., & Pratt, A., et al. (1996). Cognitive profiles of difficult-to-remediate and readily remediated poor readers: Early intervention as a vehicle for distinguishing between cognitive and experiential deficits as basic causes of specific reading dis- ability. Journal of Educational Psychology, 88, 601–638.

Venn, E. C., & Jahn, M. D. (2004). Teaching and learning in preschool: Using individually appropriate practices in early childhood literacy instruction. Newark, DE: International Reading Association.

Go to topic 3: Reading Diagnosis in the MyEducationLab (www.myeducationlab.com) for Reading Problems: Assessment and Teaching Strategies, where you can: ◆ Find learning outcomes for reading diagno-

sis, along with the national standards that connect to these outcomes.

◆ Complete assignments and activities that can help you more deeply understand the chapter content.

◆ Apply and practice your understanding of the core teaching skills identified in the chapter with the Building Teaching Skills and Dispositions learning units.

◆ Access video clips of CCSSO National Teachers of the Year award winners re- sponding to the question, “Why Do I Teach?” in the Teacher Talk section.

◆ Practice targeting instruction and mak- ing content accessible for all students with A+RISE activities.

◆ Strengthen your understanding and usage of the English language in writing with the Grammar Tutorial.

◆ Gain experience in choosing appropriate literature and integrating the best titles into language arts instruction with the Children’s and Young Adult Literature Database.

◆ Track the month-by-month literacy growth of five second graders with the Literacy Portraits.

◆ Create, update, and share quality lesson plans with the Lesson Plan Builder.

◆ Access state licensure test requirements, overviews of what the tests cover, and sample test items in the Certification and Licensure section.

◆ Check your comprehension of the content covered in the chapter with the Study Plan. Here you will be able to take a chapter pre- test, receive feedback on your answers, and then access personalized Review, Practice, and Enrichment exercises to enhance your understanding of chapter content. After you complete the exercises, take a posttest to confirm your comprehension.

◆ Check the Chapter Resources to find sam- ple interviews and questionnaires.

4 C H A P T E R

Norm-Referenced and Criterion-Referenced Assessments

Introduction

Using Both Formal and Informal Assessment

Norm-Referenced Tests Criterion-Referenced Tests Bias in Testing Ethical Considerations Scores on Norm-Referenced Tests Standardization, Validity, and Reliability

Tests of General Reading Assessment Group Survey Tests Individual Survey Tests Normed Oral Reading Tests

Diagnostic Reading Tests Diagnostic Reading Batteries Diagnostic Tests of Specific Areas

Measuring Factors Related to Reading Measuring Vocabulary and Language

Development Measuring Intelligence

Using Intelligence Test Information in Reading Assessment

Intelligence Tests That Should Be Administered by Psychologists

Intelligence Tests That Can Be Administered by Teachers and Reading Specialists

Interpreting Intelligence Test Scores Summary

62

Norm-Referenced and Criterion-Referenced Assessments 63

Introduction

This chapter presents some of the more frequently used formal measures employed in a comprehensive diagnosis of reading ability. Chapter 5 presents an in-depth discus- sion of informal tests as well as the use of the informal reading inventory. Other tools for informal assessment are discussed in Chapters 7 through 13.

Using Both Formal and Informal Assessment

Teachers find that informal and authentic assessment methods provide immediate, usable, and practical information about students. Informal measures, such as infor- mal reading inventories, trial lessons, curriculum-based assessment, and structured observations, are described in Chapter 5. However, for a comprehensive evaluation of a student with reading problems, formal tests offer additional usable information. Formal tests serve several purposes:

1. They allow teachers to compare a student to others of the same age or grade level.

2. They provide scores that are more familiar to parents and other professionals, such as psychologists and physicians.

3. They help teachers make objective decisions about a student’s performance. 4. They fulfill the legal requirements for certain local, state, school, and federal

policies.

In fact, a student’s performance on a formal test administered schoolwide is often the impetus for a more in-depth diagnosis. Many schools have adopted a response- to-intervention process for determining whether a student has a specific learn- ing disability. In this model, a school develops an evaluation plan for a student that includes scientific, research-based intervention. Teachers must carefully document student growth; if students do not make adequate progress in response to this intervention, they may be referred for an evaluation for learning disabilities (Lerner & Johns, 2011). The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) was reauthorized in 2004, and specific regulations for identifying students with learning disabilities were enacted in 2006 (IDEA, 2004; U.S. Department of Education, 2006). Under these regulations, criteria used by state and local educa- tion agencies to determine whether a student has a learning disability must comply with the following:

1. The state and local agencies cannot require a severe discrepancy between the student’s potential as determined by an intelligence test and the student’s achievement level.

2. The state and local agencies must allow the use of a response-to-intervention process.

3. The state and local agencies may allow the use of alternative research-based procedures.

64 C H A P T E R 4

Although the evaluation process varies from state to state and district to district, a typical model includes screening, intervention, documentation, and diagnosis. Most models begin with school wide or system-wide screening with a general achievement test of all students. Based on the results of this screening instrument, the general edu- cation teacher provides scientific, research-based teaching and intervention as needed. Student progress is monitored on a continuous basis. Individual students who do not make adequate progress in the general education setting may be referred for further evaluation to determine whether they need more intensive intervention. Progress is continuously monitored and intervention can become progressively intensive as needed. This is usually a cyclical process to provide for systematic assessment to con- tinue to measure students’ progress (U.S. Department of Education, 2006).

Although the procedures presented in IDEA and the 2006 regulations focus on students’ qualifications for services in special education, reading specialists are often involved in the process. This is especially true of the response-to-intervention model. Reading specialists help teachers analyze the results of the reading achievement tests and provide support in planning appropriate instruction based on the results. They are especially helpful in planning and documenting intervention for students whose achievement levels indicate that they are struggling. The remainder of this chapter will focus on formal assessments that may be used in this process. A more detailed discus- sion of literacy instruction for students with special needs is provided in Chapter 15.

One of the criticisms of formal tests has been that they lack authenticity, because formal tests tend to assess the reader’s proficiency with short passages and isolated words rather than using the types of reading students do in school. However, some formal test publishers are now creating longer, more authentic passages for students to read. New assessment tools also provide ways to combine formal and informal assessment.

A second concern about standardized assessments is the lack of measurement of critical thinking. Morsy, Kieffer, and Snow (2010) completed an extensive study of assessments designed to measure reading comprehension for middle-level students. In their analysis of these tests, Morsy et al. (2010) found that none of the tests adequately measures critical thinking. Although the tests include inferential questions, they sel- dom include questions that require critical thinking skills. Further, even though some tests include passages about content areas, the results of abilities to read in content areas were presented as composite scores. None of the tests reported students’ abilities to comprehend in specific content areas. It is clear that as we implement the Common Core State Standards, much work is needed in the area of developing assessments to address this issue.

The information in this chapter is intended to serve as a guide to help you choose, administer, and interpret formal tests. Of greatest importance is to select tests that measure what you intend to measure. When we interpret results of tests, we are mak- ing inferences about what our students can do, and we then make crucial instructional decisions based on those inferences. For example, in measuring students’ comprehen- sion, there are wide variations in the the lengths and complexities of passages students are asked to read as well as the formats of the questions (Fletcher, 2006). You should ex- amine the items on the test to ensure that the test measures what you want to measure.

Norm-Referenced and Criterion-Referenced Assessments 65

A test that only asks students to read individual sentences and asks for multiple-choice responses to four questions about each sentence to provide a comprehension score is not measuring comprehension in the same way as one that provides a lengthy, complex text and asks students to respond to short-answer or cloze questions about the passage.

With the advent and convenience of computer-based and online assessments, there has been concern expressed about the equivalence of computer-based tests ver- sus paper-and-pencil tests. Although some of the earlier computer-based tests may have presented problems, recent advances in computer-based tests have eliminated most of the differences between the two presentations (Kingston, 2009). Even though there is still some difference between results in the area of mathematics, researchers found no siginificant differences between the two modes of presentation for language arts. Of course, the factor that does make a difference is student familiarity with com- puters (Wang, Jiao, Young, Brooks, & Olson, 2007, 2008).

For additional information, you can refer to The Eighteenth Mental Measurements Yearbook (Spies, Carlson, & Geisinger, 2010), a resource that contains extensive reviews of many different tests. You can also find many reviews of tests online at http://buros. unl.edu/buros/jsp/search.jsp

Formal tests include a broad class of instruments that are commercially produced, formally printed, and published. They also have specific procedures for administration and scoring. Two types of formal tests are norm-referenced and criterion-referenced tests.

Norm-Referenced Tests Most formal tests are norm referenced (also called standardized), which means that they have statistics (or norms) for comparing the performance of a student to that of other, similar students. Norm-referenced tests are developed carefully using a norm sample, which is a large number of students who are representative of the general population. The test is given to each student in the norm sample, and norms are estab- lished to determine, for example, how well the average fourth grader does on the test. These norms permit you, as a teacher, to compare the fourth grader you are testing with the fourth graders in the norm sample. To ensure that your student’s scores can be compared with those of the norm sample, you must strictly follow the procedures for test administration, scoring, and interpretation.

Criterion-Referenced Tests Some formal tests are criterion referenced. In this type of test, a student’s performance is compared to a specific standard or criterion (rather than to the norm sample). This kind of test determines whether a student has mastered certain competencies or skills. For example, can the student recognize word endings or find the main idea in a paragraph? Criterion-referenced tests are useful because they provide a means of accountability that can be related to the curriculum. For example, a teacher can determine whether a student has mastered the concept of the main idea after it has been taught.

66 C H A P T E R 4

To understand the difference between a norm-referenced and a criterion- referenced test, consider an analogy to another area of learning: swimming. In norm- referenced terms, a child can be tested in swimming and judged to swim as well as the average 9-year-old. In criterion-referenced terms, a child is judged on the basis of cer- tain accomplishments, such as putting his or her face in the water, floating on his or her back, and doing the crawl stroke. In other words, criterion-referenced tests measure mastery rather than grade level, and they describe rather than compare performance.

Bias in Testing Tests should be fair in representing student performance and should be free of racial or cultural bias. The content of the test should represent the experiences and values of all groups taking the test. For example, a reading test should not contain vocabu- lary, pictures, or stories that are unfamiliar to certain populations taking the test. As discussed in Chapter 2, formal intelligence tests, in particular, have been subjected to the criticism of cultural bias.

Ethical Considerations In using formal tests for assessment, professionals must comply with basic professional standards. If professionals from different disciplines are involved in assessment (i.e., educators, psychologists, counselors, social workers, medical specialists), each must abide by the standards of his or her own profession. All must maintain the confidenti- ality of the student, keep complete records, and follow standard testing criteria.

Scores on Norm-Referenced Tests The scores on norm-referenced tests indicate how an individual student has performed compared to students of the same grade or age level who are in the norm sample. After a teacher gives a test, the teacher determines a raw score, which is usually the number correct on the test. Raw scores are then converted to derived scores, which can be used for interpreting the student’s performance. Derived scores on norm-referenced reading tests can be reported as standard scores, reading grade equivalents, percentiles, normal curve equivalents (NCEs), and stanines.

Many scores on reading and other academic tests are based on a normal distribu- tion curve of scores. Most scores in a normal distribution fall in the middle, creating a “humped curve.” However, some high and low scores fall at the upper and lower ends of the curve. In other words, most scores are average, but some are very high or low. The more extreme (high or low) the score, the less frequently it occurs. The highest point on the curve is the mean (or average) point. The “area” within each vertical divi- sion represents the percent of scores in that division. The closer to the mean a division is, the greater the number of individuals who scored within it.

Standardized tests are statistically designed so that one-half of the students are below the mean (or average) and one-half are above. Of course, communities want all of their children to score above average. The humorist Garrison Keillor (2008)

Norm-Referenced and Criterion-Referenced Assessments 67

lampoons this notion in his tales of the mythical town of Lake Wobegon, where “all the children are above average.”

Standard Scores. Some formal tests report standard scores, which are scores in which the mean and the standard deviation (which is a measure of variation) have been assigned preset values. For example, in the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children, Fourth Edition (WISC-IV), the mean is set at 100, and the standard deviation at 15.

Grade Equivalent (GE). The reading GE indicates how well a student reads in terms of grade level. For example, a score of 4.5 (the 5th month of the fourth grade) indicates that the student correctly answered the same number of questions on this particular test as the average pupil in the 5th month of the fourth grade. Reading GEs do not indicate absolute performance; they indicate how the student performed in relation to the students in the norm sample population.

Percentiles (PR). Percentiles describe the student’s performance in relation to others in the same age group or grade. Percentiles can be understood as a rank within 100, expressed in numbers from 1 to 99. A percentile rank is the percentage of stu- dents scoring lower than the student being tested. For example, a percentile score of 57 indicates that this student scored higher than 57% of the comparison group and lower than 42%. The 50th percentile indicates the median (or middle) score. The highest percentile is 99 and the lowest is 1. Higher percentiles indicate better student performance.

Equal distances in percentiles, however, do not indicate equal differences in raw score points. Because many scores center near the mean, the difference between the 50th and 60th percentiles may be only a few raw score points, whereas the distance between the 18th and 19th percentiles often represents a great many raw score points on the test (Figure 4.1).

Normal Curve Equivalent (NCE) Scores. The NCE scores are similar to per- centiles in that they have a range from 1 to 99 and a mean of 50. They differ from percentile scores because they have been transformed into equal units of reading achievement. For example, the difference between the 50th and 60th NCE and the 18th and 19th NCE is the same in raw point scores. Figure 4.1 shows the distribution of NCE scores in comparison to percentiles.

Stanines. The stanine score ranks pupils from 1 to 9. The lowest stanine score is 1, the median stanine is 5, and the highest is 9. Stanine scores are assigned so that the results represent a normal distribution. Thus, in an average class, most students will receive stanine scores of 4, 5, or 6; a few will receive stanine scores of 1 or 9.

The name stanine is a contraction of “standard nine” and is based on the fact that the score runs from 1 to 9. Stanines are normalized standard scores with a mean of 5 and a standard deviation of 2. Figure 4.1 shows the percentage of students in each stanine and in each 10 NCE units and compares these with percentiles.

68 C H A P T E R 4

FIGURE 4.1 Relations Among Stanines, NCEs, and Percentiles

Source: Copyright © 2000 by The Riverside Publishing Company. “Norm graphic from p. 21 of GMRT4 Level 3 Manual for Scoring and Interpretation (940287)” reproduced from the Gates-MacGinitie Reading Tests ® (GMRT ®), Fourth Edition with permission of the publisher. All rights reserved.

Standardization, Validity, and Reliability Which norm-referenced tests are the best? In judging the value of a norm-referenced test, teachers should consider the test’s standardization, validity, and reliability.

Standardization. To standardize a test, it is given to a large representative group of students (the norm sample). Based on data derived from this norm sample, inferences are made about other students who take the test. When selecting a test, teachers should consider whether the norm sample was large enough to establish stable per- formance norms. In addition, the characteristics of the individuals who comprise the norm sample are important. Did the norm sample include representatives of the stu- dents who are being tested? If the norm sample group is not considered representative, some school districts develop their own local norms.

Validity. Validity refers to whether a test measures what it is supposed to measure. Two types of validity are content validity and criterion validity. Content validity in- volves inspecting the test to see whether the items are valid for testing purposes. For example, a valid reading comprehension test would probably contain passages with questions. In contrast, a comprehension test that required the student to match words would have questionable content validity.

Criterion validity refers to how the test compares with some other aspects of achievement. Most norm-referenced reading tests provide information about the

Norm-Referenced and Criterion-Referenced Assessments 69

comparison of performance on the reading test with some aspect of school achieve- ment (for example, grade-point average). The comparison is usually done in the form of a statistical correlation. This correlation may range from +1.0 (a high positive cor- relation) to –1.0 (a very negative correlation). For acceptable criterion validity, the correlation should be positive and high (generally at least 0.70).

Reliability. Reliability refers to the stability of test scores. If a test is reliable, the person will receive the same score on repeated testings. To be useful for making decisions about an individual, a test must have high reliability. Salvia, Ysseldyke, and Bolt (2006) believe that acceptable reliability for a test depends on the situation. If test scores are reported for groups of students for general administration purposes or screening, a reliability score of about 0.80 is acceptable. For individual decisions about students, such as placement in a Title I class or in special education, the reliability of the test should be 0.90.

Two forms of reliability are test-retest reliability and internal consistency reli- ability. In test-retest reliability, the test is given to a group of students two times. Then the scores are correlated to determine whether individual students perform about the same on the first and second administrations. In internal reliability, items within a test are compared with one another. In one form of internal reliability, split-half reliability, a group of students’ scores on one-half of the test items is correlated with performance on the items from the other half.

Tests of General Reading Assessment

Tests of general reading assessment are used to evaluate a student’s general level of achievement as well as to determine the general areas of reading strengths and weak- nesses. Types of tests that are used in the general reading assessment phase include group survey tests, individual survey tests, normed oral reading tests, and diagnostic tests of specific areas.

Group Survey Tests Survey tests are norm-referenced tests that are used to assess the student’s reading level. Both group survey tests and individual survey tests are used for this purpose.

Group survey tests are the most commonly used tests in schools. They are generally used once per year to assess student progress in reading and other academic subjects, to identify those who may have problems, or to evaluate the success of a program. Examples of group survey tests for reading are the Stanford Achievement Test; the Iowa Tests of Basic Skills (ITBS); the Gates–MacGinitie Reading Tests, Fourth Edition; and the Group Reading Assessment and Diagnostic Evaluation (GRADE). These tests are designed for use with a group of students in a class, but they are also useful for testing individual students. All standardized group reading tests permit teachers to compare a student’s scores to scores in large norm samples.

A group survey test is actually a series of tests at different levels. The different levels are suitable for students at different grade levels. In addition, each level usually

70 C H A P T E R 4

has multiple equivalent forms (for example, Form A and Form B). Because the equivalent forms are normed similarly, the scores on the two forms can be compared. If Form A is given during an initial assessment and Form B is given after a period of instruction is completed, the student’s progress can be evaluated easily.

Despite their excellent statistical properties, group survey tests have some limita- tions for use with students with reading problems:

◆ Out-of-level tests. Students with reading problems should be given test levels that are appropriate for their reading level but not for their age level. For example, an eighth grader reading at a second-grade level will find the eighth-grade test to be too hard but the second-grade test too “babyish.”

◆ Inability to measure school-related tasks. Over a period of years, many strides have been made in making these tests better reflect the actual types of reading students do in school. However, the tests continue to measure more discrete tasks, such as reading single words and relatively short passages. For this reason, the teacher must supplement information from standardized tests with informal measures that assess such abilities as reading whole stories and taking notes.

◆ Limits of a formal situation. Some students “freeze” on standardized tests. In addition, because they require a standard procedure, formal tests do not allow teachers to observe student performance closely and to probe a student’s re- sponses. Informal assessment, with its ability to adjust situations to a student’s needs, may give far more information.

The following descriptions of a few tests that are widely used for students with reading problems are examples of group survey tests that the reading teacher is likely to encounter.

Stanford Diagnostic Reading Test, Fourth Edition. The Stanford Diagnostic Reading Test, Fourth Edition (SDRT4) is intended for use with lower achievers and contains more easy items than most survey tests at the same levels. The four levels of the test are red, green, brown, and blue; at each level, the test contains two forms. Two new levels, pink and teal, have been added to assess emergent literacy skills for students in kindergarten and first grade. Phonics abilities are tested at all levels of the test. The red level, for grades 1–2, tests auditory discrimination, basic phonics skills, auditory vocabulary, word recognition, and comprehension. The green level, for grades 3–4, tests auditory discrimination, phonetic analysis, structural analysis, audito- ry vocabulary, comprehension, and reading rate. The brown level, for grades 5–6, tests phonetic analysis, structural analysis, auditory vocabulary, comprehension, and reading rate. Finally, the blue level, for grades 9–12 and community colleges, tests phonetic analysis, structural analysis, word meaning, word parts, comprehension, reading rate, and scanning and skimming. The test is well standardized and reports many different types of norms for students. In addition, the SDRT4 contains a criterion-referenced section called Progress Indicators. This feature is convenient for use in response-to- intervention plans. All of the test items measuring a certain skill are added together, and a criterion is given for mastery of that skill.

Norm-Referenced and Criterion-Referenced Assessments 71

The SDRT4 is available for either computer-based or paper-and-pencil administration. In comparison studies, there were no statistically significant differ- ences between students’ scores in the two modes (Pearson Education, Inc., 2009). For paper-and-pencil administration, scoring services can be purchased, which include fast, convenient scoring as well as analysis of results. The results are also aligned with lexile levels, which teachers find helpful in instructional planning.

Gates–MacGinitie Reading Tests. The Gates–MacGinitie Reading Tests, Fourth Edition (GMRT4), is another standardized reading test often used with low- achieving students. The test comes in five reading levels: prereading level, beginning reading level (grade 1), levels 1 and 2 (primary-level developmental reading skills), levels 3–12 (two tests: vocabulary and comprehension), and adult reading level (two tests: vocabulary and comprehension).

In the vocabulary test, which has a 20-minute time limit, students match isolated words to one of four pictures (at low levels) or one of four synonyms (at higher levels). In the comprehension tests, students read short passages and either match them to one of four pictures (at lower levels) or answer multiple-choice questions (at higher levels). This well-standardized test is used widely in Title I programs.

The GMRT4 is available for online administration. Scoring services are avail- able for paper-and-pencil administrations. Support materials are available that offer instructional suggestions as well as alignment with lexile levels. The alternate forms are easily used for progress monitoring.

Group Reading Assessment and Diagnostic Evaluation. The Group Reading As- sessment and Diagnostic Evaluation (GRADE; Williams, 2001) was designed to de- termine what reading skills students have and what skills they need to be taught. It may be used in a group or individually for students ages 5 through adult. GRADE consists of 11 levels. Level P, for use in preschool and kindergarten, includes picture matching, picture differences, verbal concepts, picture categories, matching sounds, rhyming, and listening comprehension. Level K, for use in kindergarten and first grade, includes matching sounds, rhyming, print awareness, letter recognition, word similarities and differences, sound–letter correspondence, word reading, and listening comprehension. Level 1, for use in kindergarten through second grade, and level 2, for use in second grade, includes subtests in reading words, word meaning, sentence com- prehension, passage comprehension, and listening comprehension. Level 3, for use in third grade, includes subtests in reading words, vocabulary, sentence comprehen- sion, passage comprehension, and listening comprehension. Levels 4 through 6, for use in the corresponding grade levels, include subtests in vocabulary, sentence com- prehension, passage comprehension, and listening comprehension. Level M, for use in grades 5 through 9, includes subtests in vocabulary, sentence comprehension, passage comprehension, and listening comprehension. Level H, for use in grades 9 through 12, includes subtests in vocabulary, sentence comprehension, passage comprehension, and listening comprehension. Level A, for use in grades 11 through postsecondary, includes subtests in vocabulary, sentence comprehension, passage comprehension, and listening comprehension.

72 C H A P T E R 4

The guidelines for administration include directions for out-of-level testing, as well as guidelines for developmentally appropriate test selection. Although reviewers expressed concerns about administering a group test to young children, they found that the content and construction of the GRADE provided important diagnostic in- formation seldom found in group tests. The standardization procedures and analysis were also found to be quite good (Fugate, 2003; Waterman, 2003).

GRADE includes software for scoring and interpretation of results, as well as suggestions for instructional planning. Online data sources can be purchased. GRADE is also aligned with GRADE instructional materials for specific skills development.

Individual Survey Tests Individual survey tests, which are used widely in assessing students with reading prob- lems, are designed to be administered to a single student. As survey tests, they give general information about reading scores rather than a detailed analysis of reading. In fact, many of these tests also include information about areas such as mathematics and spelling.

Individual survey tests usually consist of one level that is suitable for a wide range of reading abilities. Because an individual survey test might cover grades 1 through 9, it would be suitable for an older reader who is reading at a primary-grade level. In- dividual survey tests are usually standardized, so they permit valid comparison with a norm sample.

Through careful observation, the teacher can obtain diagnostic information dur- ing the process of giving a survey test. For example, the teacher can note whether the student hesitates or recognizes words instantly and whether the student uses decoding methods.

The actual reading tasks that students perform vary greatly from test to test. Many of the test authors use considerable ingenuity to make their tests brief or to use a multiple-choice format. Unfortunately, such methods may lead to tests that do not measure the authentic ability to read. Before using a test, the teacher should inspect the actual items to determine exactly what they require the student to do. The name of the test, or of its subtests, may not reflect the content.

The most frequently used individual general achievement tests include the Kaufman Test of Educational Achievement, Second Edition (KTEA-II; Kaufman & Kaufman, 2004c); the Peabody Individual Achievement Test–Revised/Normative Update (PIAT-R/NU; Markwardt, 1998); the Wechsler Individual Achievement Test, 3rd Edition (WIAT-III; Weschler, 2009); the Wide Range Achievement Test, Fourth Edition (WRAT IV; Wilkinson, 1993); and the achievement section of the Woodcock- Johnson Psychoeducational Battery III (WJ-RIII; Woodcock, McGrew, Mather, & Schrank, 2003).

Kaufman Test of Educational Achievement, Second Edition. The Kaufman Test of Educational Achievement, Second Edition (KTEA-II) includes two individual reading subtests in its battery of achievement tests: Reading Decoding and Read- ing Comprehension. In Reading Decoding, students are asked to identify letters and

Norm-Referenced and Criterion-Referenced Assessments 73

pronounce words that increase in difficulty; students are not asked to provide mean- ings of the words. In Reading Comprehension, students are asked to read passages and answer one or two comprehension questions about each passage. The 1998 review conducted by the Institute for Applied Psychometrics also found the KTEA to meet the standards established to measure reading achievement. Reviewers indicated that the standardization procedures were well done and that the test was highly reliable (McGrew, 1998). The KTEA-II is considered to be a well-developed, user-friendly instrument for measuring general achievement (Bonner, 2005). Carpenter (2005) describes the second edition as substantially different from the first edition, with considerable improvements. Because the KTEA-II is co-normed with the Kaufman Assessment Battery for Children, Second Edition (KABC-II), using both instruments to test the same individual allows for comparison of the student’s cognitive ability and achievement (Carpenter, 2005). The KTEA-II is well aligned with the requirements specified in IDEA. Thus, it is especially useful in response-to-intervention plans. For example, schools may administer the KTEA-II as part of a student’s placement pro- cedures, and then use the brief form for progress monitoring. A CD is provided with the test that provides instructional suggestions based on students’ results. These may prove especially helpful for students with individual educational plans (IEPs).

Wechsler Individual Achievement Test, Third Edition. The Wechsler Individual Achievement Test, Third Edition (WIAT-III; Wechsler, 2009) measures reading, writ- ing, mathematics, and language for ages 4 through 50 years and 11 months. Language and literacy are measured by the Listening Comprehension, Early Reading Skills, Reading Comprehension, Essay Composition, Pseudoword Decoding, Oral Experes- sion, Oral Reading Fleuency, and Spelling subtests. Oral Reading and Early Read- ing Skills are new subtests, and Listening Comprehension, Oral Expession, Written Expression, and Reading Comprehension have been revised to better comply with requirements of IDEA. In the Word Reading subtest, students are asked to name letters, rhyme words, identify beginning and ending sounds, blend sounds, match sounds with letters and blends, and read isolated words. In the Reading Comprehen- sion subtest, students are asked to match words and pictures as well as answer ques- tions after reading individual sentences and passages. In the Pseudoword Decoding subtest, students are asked to read nonsense words with regular phonics patterns. The WIAT-III is designed to provide information that supports educators’ decisions about placement, eligibility for services, diagnosis, and intervention procedures for students. The revised test has been piloted and standardized in compliance with stan- dards established by the American Education Research Association (Miller, 2010; Wilse, 2010). The WIAT-III subtests have been found to be helpful for Tier 2 and Tier 3 response-to-intervention plans.

Wide Range Achievement Test, Fourth Edition. The Wide Range Achievement Test, Fourth Edition (WRAT-4; Wilkinson & Robertson, 2006) is a battery of screen- ing tests in reading, spelling, and arithmetic first published in 1936. The current edi- tion is designed for use with ages 5 through 94. A Sentence Comprehenion test has been added to the fourth edition so that the test now includes four subtests: Sentence

74 C H A P T E R 4

Comprehenion, Word Reading, Spelling, and Math Computation. The Word Reading test consists of an isolated word list; the student is asked to identify each word with no meaningful context and is not asked to provide the meaning of the word. The fourth edition has also added grade-based norms. However, just as with previous editions, reviewers have found that the standardization process did not include adequate num- bers of representatives from special populations. In addition, the actual items are not designed to measure the components of reading (Hoff & Swerdlik, 2010; Sabers & Olson, 2010).

There is also a Progress Monitoring Version of the WRAT-4. This test is designed to provide an even briefer assessment of students’ progress in Word Read- ing, Sentence Comprehension, Spelling, and Math Computation (Roid & Ledbetter, 2009). However, reviewers found both the design and the standardization lacking and do not recommend using the test as the sole measure of student progress (Schafer, 2010; Venn, 2010).

Woodcock-Johnson III. The Woodcock-Johnson III (WJ-III; Woodcock et al., 2003) is designed to measure overall intellectual ability, specific cognitive abilities, aca- demic aptitude, oral language, and achievement for ages 2 through adult. The WJ-III consists of two parts: Tests of Achievement and Tests of Cognitive Abilities. The Tests of Achievement will be discussed here, and the Tests of Cognitive Abilities will be pre- sented later in this chapter. Norming procedures were updated in 2007.

The WJ-III is divided into two batteries: Standard and Extended. The Standard battery measures basic skills, fluency, and application. An expansion of the reading subtests provides information about early reading performance. A parallel version is available in Spanish. The WJ-III includes tests that are organized into six clusters:

1. Reading Clusters measure Broad Reading with tests in letter and word identi- fication, reading fluency, and passage comprehension. Basic Reading Skills are measured through the letter and word identification test as well as tests in word attack. Reading Comprehension includes passage comprehension and reading vocabulary.

2. Oral Language Clusters are part of the standard and extended batteries. Oral Language includes tests in story recall, understanding directions, picture vocab- ulary, and oral (listening) comprehension. Components include both listening comprehension and oral expression.

3. Math Clusters include Broad Math, which consists of calculations, math fluency, and applied problems; Math Calculation Skills; and Math Reasoning, which includes applied problems and quantitative concepts.

4. Written Language Clusters consist of tests in Broad Written Language, such as spelling, writing fluency, and writing samples. Basic Writing Skills include spelling and editing. Written Expression includes writing fluency and writing samples.

5. The Academic Knowledge Cluster measures academic knowledge in science, social studies, and general cultural knowledge.

Norm-Referenced and Criterion-Referenced Assessments 75

6. The Special Purpose Cluster includes Academic Skills as measured by letter- word identification, calculation, and spelling; Academic Fluency, measured by reading fluency, math fluency, and writing fluency; Academic Applications, mea- sured by passage comprehension, applied problems, and writing samples; and Phoneme/Grapheme Knowledge, measured by tests in word attack and spelling. Total Achievement is measured by letter-word identification, reading fluency, passage comprehension, calculation, math fluency, applied problems, spelling, writing fluency, and writing samples.

When used in conjunction with the Tests of Cognitive Abilities, the Tests of Achievement provide a means of comparing students’ achievement with their cogni- tive abilities. This is a valuable tool for members of assessment teams who need to make decisions about students’ placements and instructional programs. Although re- viewers have expressed concerns about how content validity was determined, they find the test as a whole quite useful for assessment, evaluation, and planning (Cizek, 2003; Sandoval, 2003). The WJ-III has been found useful in response-to-intervention plans.

Normed Oral Reading Tests Normed oral reading tests, like informal reading inventories (see Chapter 5), contain graded passages for oral reading. However, unlike informal reading inventories, these tests include statistical norms. Thus, you have another way to obtain a general reading assessment that compares a student’s performance to that of others in a normed sample.

Several normed tests of oral reading are available through commercial publish- ers. Examples include the Gray Oral Reading Test, Fifth Edition (Widerholt & Bryant, 2012) and the Standardized Reading Inventory, Second Edition (Newcomer, 1999).

Gray Oral Reading Test, Fifth Edition. The Gray Oral Reading Test, Fifth Edition (GORT5) was designed to measure oral reading rates, accuracy, fluency, and comprehension for students aged 7 to 18. The test includes two parallel forms, each consisting of 14 stories with five multiple-choice comprehension questions for each story. The authors recommend four specific uses for the previous fourth edi- tion (GORT4): to assist in identifying struggling readers, to identify students’ specific strengths and weaknesses, to document progress as a result of reading intervention, and to provide research data in measuring the reading abilities of school-aged students (Wiederholt & Bryant, 2001). Although some reviewers of GORT4 cautioned that the test is highly dependent on the expertise of the administrator, the standardization procedures and norming population meet established criteria for use as a measure of reading performance (Crumpton, 2003; Miller-Whitehead, 2003). The fifth edition has not been reviewed at the time of this writing.

Standardized Reading Inventory, Second Edition. The Standardized Reading Inventory, Second Edition (SRI-II) is designed to measure comprehension, word accuracy, and contextual meaning vocabulary for students ages 6 to 14. The SRI-II con- sists of five components: Words in Isolation, Passage Comprehension, Word Recogni- tion Accuracy, Vocabulary in Context, and Predictive Comprehension. There are two

76 C H A P T E R 4

forms, each consisting of 10 passages. The passages range from preprimer through eighth-grade reading levels. Although reviewers have found this instrument a valuable tool, they question whether it actually provides more useful information to teachers than informal reading inventories (Solomon, 2001; Stevens, 2001).

Chapter 5 discusses oral reading assessment and the rich diagnostic opportuni- ties oral reading tests provide. Listening to a student read passages orally provides insight into automatic sight word recognition, word analysis strategies employed suc- cessfully by the student, areas of instructional needs in the area of word analysis, and fluency. Oral reading tests include questions about comprehension as well. Students’ responses to these questions provide a profile of their literate and inferential compre- hension proficiency. See oral reading passages on MyEducationLab in the Chapter Resources section of Chapter 4.

Diagnostic Reading Tests

Diagnostic tests yield more specific information than general survey reading tests. These diagnostic tests provide a more detailed analysis of specific reading strengths and weaknesses. Three kinds of tests are described in this section: diagnostic reading batteries, diagnostic tests of specific areas of reading, and tests of related factors that are often used in a comprehensive diagnosis of a student’s literacy profile.

Diagnostic Reading Batteries A diagnostic reading battery consists of a group of subtests, each of which assesses a different component of reading. It offers useful information for obtaining a profile of the student’s reading in several areas, such as oral reading, phonics, sight vocabulary, and comprehension. As with all tests, teachers should examine the subtests to make sure that they actually test the skills they describe.

Typically, diagnostic batteries are more suitable for beginning readers. Although they sample several components of reading, they tend to emphasize emergent literacy and word recognition rather than comprehension or word meaning.

Because diagnostic batteries often do not contain extensive reading passages, they should be used in conjunction with other tests of actual reading and comprehen- sion. Sometimes teachers may administer only the sections of these batteries that are relevant to a particular student, rather than the entire battery. Widely given diagnostic batteries include the Woodcock Reading Mastery Tests, Third Edition, and the WJ-III Diagnostic Reading Battery (WJ-III DRB). Each of these tests is briefly described in the following sections.

Woodcock Reading Mastery Test, Third Edition. The Woodcock Reading Mastery Test, Third Edition (WRMT-III) is a widely used reading diagnostic test that measures in- dividuals from a beginning reading level through that of an advanced adult. It is available in two forms (Form A and Form B); each is accompanied by a comprehensive and well- organized test manual. The WRMT-III is comprised of four new and five revised subtests.

Norm-Referenced and Criterion-Referenced Assessments 77

New WRMT-III subtests include Phonological Awareness, with items that require students to match initial and final sounds, to produce rhymes, to blend pho- nemes into words, and to delete specific phonemes. Listening Comprehension is also a new subtest. In Rapid Automatic Naming, students identify objects and colors as well as letters and numbers. An Oral Reading Fluency subtest has also been added. Other subtests that have been revised in the third edition include Letter Identification, Word Identification, Word Attack, Word Comprehension, and Passage Comprehension.

The WRMT-III is a paper-and-pencil test. The test has been totally re-normed, with grade-based norms for K–12 as well as age-based norms for ages 4 years, 6 months through 79 years, 11 months. Scoring is typically done by hand, but online scoring is avail- able for purchase. The two equivalent forms provide tools for progress monitoring for Tiers 2 and 3 of response-to-intervention models. However, we recommend that, espe- cially in the areas of comprehension, this test be used in conjunction with other measures. Reviews of the WRMT-R are available in the Fourteenth Mental Measurements Yearbook (Plake & Impara, 2001). The WRMT-III has not been reviewed at the time of this writing.

WJ-III Diagnostic Reading Battery. The WJ-III Diagnostic Reading Battery (WJ-III DRB; Woodcock et al., 2003) is designed to measure specific aspects of read- ing achievement as well as cognitive abilities related to reading. Results are analyzed both as performance on individual tests and in clusters so that comparisons can be made to provide insight into students’ reading difficulties.

The WJ-III DRB is comprised of 10 tests from Form B of the WJ-III Tests of Achievement and Tests of Cognitive Abilities. It includes eight clusters that can be used for interpretation of results:

◆ Brief Reading is a screening instrument that measures prereading skills. It was developed to be used with children as young as 3 years, 6 months.

◆ Broad Reading includes tests of reading decoding and comprehension skills. ◆ Basic Reading Skills includes tests of reading vocabulary and phonic and struc-

tural analysis. ◆ Reading Comprehension includes reading vocabulary and comprehension in

passages. ◆ Phonics Knowledge tests sound–symbol correspondence. ◆ Phonemic Awareness tests abilities to analyze and synthesize phonemic

information. ◆ Oral Language Comprehension tests oral language comprehension for words

and passages. ◆ Total Reading provides an overall measure of reading achievement.

The authors of the WJ-III DRB indicate that this test meets the requirements of the Reading First initiative at both the cluster and test levels. Although the DRB can provide a good source of information about students’ achievement for some compo- nents of reading and related skills, some concern has been expressed about the need for further research in its uses as well as additional studies about its validity (Margolis, 2007). Margolis recommends that the DRB be used in conjunction with other tests

78 C H A P T E R 4

that more closely approximate the demands of classroom reading, such as an informal reading assessment. England (2007) suggests that further research is needed to sub- stantiate the authors’ assertion that the DRB provides extensive support for planning and developing instruction as well as a valuable instrument for measuring students’ response-to-intervention. Certainly, teachers and reading specialists would need to determine if the items measure instructionally based reading experiences.

Two tests that were specifically developed to measure skills developed in pri- mary grades are the Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills, 6th Edition (DIBELS) and the Texas Primary Reading Inventory (TPRI). Both of these norm- referenced tests are approved for use in programs funded through the Reading First initiative as part of the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) legislation.

Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills, Sixth Edition. The Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills, Sixth Edition (DIBELS; Kaminski & Good, 2003) measure student performance in seven areas: word-use fluency, initial-sound fluency, letter-naming fluency, phoneme-segmentation fluency, nonsense-word fluency, oral-reading fluency, and retelling fluency. Word-use fluency is measured in kindergarten through grade 3; initial-sound fluency is measured in kindergarten; letter-naming fluency is measured in kindergarten and early grade 1; phoneme- segmentation fluency is measured in kindergarten and grade 1; nonsense-word fluency is measured in kindergarten through early grade 2; oral-reading fluency is measured in grades 1 through 3; and retelling fluency is measured in grades 1 through 3.

DIBELS was reviewed by Brunsman (2005) and Shanahan (2005). Both review- ers questioned the standardization procedures and the validity of the instructional clas- sifications based on the test results. In addition, the scoring was found to be somewhat complicated. Shanahan (2005) also expressed concerns about the lack of vocabulary and comprehension measures. He recommends using DIBELS only in conjunction with other measures.

Texas Primary Reading Inventory. The Texas Primary Reading Inventory (TPRI) measures students’ progress in reading fluency in kindergarten through grade 3. The test consists of two sections: the screening section and the inventory section. The screening section consists of three areas: graphophonemic knowledge in kindergarten and grade 1, phonemic awareness in kindergarten and grade 1, and correct identification of isolated words in grades 1 and 2. The inventory section consists of seven areas: book and print awareness to measure students’ knowledge of the function and characteristics of print and print materials in kindergarten, phone- mic awareness in kindergarten and grade 1, listening comprehension in kindergar- ten and grade 1, graphophonemic knowledge as measured by letter recognition and sound–symbol relationships in kindergarten and grade 1, word-building activities in grade 1 and spelling in grade 2, reading fluency in grades 1 and 2, and reading comprehension in grades 1 and 2. A companion assessment instrument, Tejas Lee, is available for students whose primary reading instruction is in Spanish. The TPRI has not been evaluated for review in the Mental Measurements Yearbook at the time of this writing.

Norm-Referenced and Criterion-Referenced Assessments 79

Diagnostic Tests of Specific Areas Tests of specific areas concentrate on an in-depth evaluation of a specific area of read- ing. These tests are particularly useful in gathering detailed information about one area of reading, such as the student’s abilities in phonics.

Test of Reading Comprehension, Fourth Edition. The Test of Reading Compre- hension, Fourth Edition (TORC 4; Brown, Wiederholt, & Hammill, 2008) is used to analyze strengths and weaknesses in silent reading comprehension for students ages 7 through 17. TORC-4 consists of five subtests (reduced from the eight presented in TORC-3): Relational Vocabulary, Sentence Completion, Paragraph Construction, Text Comprehension, and Contextual Fluency. TORC was originally published in 1978; the second edition was published in 1986 as a diagnostic tool. TORC-3, pub- lished in 1995 (Brown, Hammill, & Wiederholt, 1995), was the first edition to include normative data. TORC-4 uses new norming data to determine students’ standard scores and percentiles. Scores are also provided to present a composite comprehension index. TORC-4 is used primarily to monitor individual student progress. Reviews of TORC-3 are available in the Thirteenth Mental Measurements Yearbook (1998). TORC-4 has not been reviewed at the time of this writing.

Diagnostic Assessment of Reading, Second Edition. The Diagnostic Assessment of Reading (DAR), Second Edition (Roswell, Charn, Curtis, & Kearns, 2005) mea- sures students’ strengths and weaknesses in nine components of reading and language: print awareness, phonological awareness, letters and sounds, word recognition, word analysis, oral reading accuracy and fluency, silent reading comprehension, spelling, and word meaning (Roswell et al., 2006). The diagnostic tool is administered individually and can be used from kindergarten through adulthood. The test is scored as it is ad- ministered. Based on the results, schools can purchase Trial Teaching Strategies online through the publisher’s website at www.riverpub.com/products/tts/index.html. This website provides teachers with access to reading strategies and supporting materials. Reviews for the second edition of the DAR are available in the Mental Measurements Yearbook, Eighteenth Edition (Spies et al., 2010).

Comprehensive Test of Phonological Processing. The Comprehensive Test of Phonological Processing (CTOPP; Wagner, Torgesen, & Rashotte, 1999) measures phonological awareness, phonological memory, and naming for students ages 5 to 24. The test consists of two versions. The first version, administered to students ages 5 and 6 includes: Elision, Blending Words, Sound Matching, Memory for Digits, Nonword Repetition, Rapid Color Naming, Rapid Object Naming, and a supplemental subtest for Blending Nonwords. The second version, administered to students ages 7 to 24, includes the previous subtests as well as Rapid Digit Naming, Rapid Letter Naming, and Segmenting Nonwords, with supplemental subtests for Phoneme Reversal and Segmenting Words. The CTOPP is intended to be used to identify students who are significantly behind their peers in phonological abilities and to determine their strengths and weaknesses as well as to document their progress in developing those

80 C H A P T E R 4

skills through intervention. In reviewing the CTOPP, Hurford (2003) and Wright (2003) found the test to be an effective measure of phonological abilities for instruc- tional purposes and program evaluation. However, they recommend the develop- ment of alternate forms and further replication studies before the CTOPP is used for research purposes.

Measuring Factors Related to Reading

As discussed in Chapter 2, there are factors that impact students’ reading development. Two of the most common are oral vocabulary or language development and intelligence. In this section, we discuss assessment instruments to measure these factors. Although reading specialists and reading teachers often administer tests to measure vocabulary and language development, they are more likely to administer only screening instruments to refer students for testing by psychologists for placement recommendations. However, reading specialists should be familiar with such instruments because they often are asked to provide interpretation of the results to help teachers in instructional planning.

Measuring Vocabulary and Language Development In our comprehensive diagnosis of a students’ literacy performance, we often find that vocabulary and language development impede progress in reading and writing. In Chapter 10, Vocabulary Development and Listening Comprehension, we discuss several informal measures of vocabulary development, including an untimed, oral pre- sentation of the Vocabulary Subtest of the Gates–MacGinitie Reading Test, Fourth Edition (a group survey test presented earlier in this chapter).

Perhaps, the most widely used measure of students’ vocabulary development is the Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test (PPVT). Now in its fourth edition, the PPVT-4 is a useful diagnostic tool to use with students who struggle with comprehension. This test and its companion test, the Expressive Vocabulary Test, Second Edition, are pre- sented in Chapter 10.

Measuring Intelligence

Perhaps no concept has provided more controversy in education than the measure of intelligence. Heated public debate periodically erupts on the nature of intelligence, its role in achievement, and the role of culture in intelligence. This important measure is used in making decisions about who is entitled to special education services and, in some instances, who should be classified as reading disabled (see Chapter 15). For this reason, a special section is devoted to the measurement of intelligence.

The full concept of intelligence is much richer than what is actually measured by intelligence tests. Intelligence includes mechanical ability, street knowledge, cre- ativity, and social skills. However, most intelligence tests simply predict whether an individual is likely to do well in schoolwork, especially in learning tasks with highly

Norm-Referenced and Criterion-Referenced Assessments 81

verbal content (Salvia et al., 2006). Therefore, intelligence tests can be best regarded as measures of scholastic aptitude.

An intelligence quotient (IQ) score, in part, reflects a student’s background. Intelligence scores are also affected by a student’s comfort with the testing situation. Thus, intelligence cannot be measured with absolute accuracy, nor can teachers learn how much a particular student might ultimately achieve. Intelligence tests measure only the current potential for learning; future potential is unknown. In summary, intel- ligence must be interpreted in a judicious manner.

Teachers should remember that the content of these tests and the validity of their scores have come under serious criticism. An IQ test cannot give a definitive or permanent rating of a student’s mental ability. Thus, teachers should be alert to the many other sources of information about students, including classroom behavior, independence in living, and interests and accomplishments outside the school setting.

Using Intelligence Test Information in Reading Assessment The purpose of obtaining information on a student’s cognitive abilities and aptitude for learning is to help the teacher better understand the reading problem. The intel- ligence test information can be used to assess a student’s current potential, analyze a student’s component cognitive abilities, and observe the student’s behavior during the testing situation. Each of these uses is discussed here.

Assessing a Student’s Potential. As described in Chapter 15, information from an intelligence test can help the teacher determine whether a student has the potential to read better than he or she does at present. For example, Ellen’s intelligence test score indicated a potential for reading that is much higher than her present reading achievement level. This discrepancy between potential and performance shows she has the cognitive ability to read much better than she does at present. In contrast, Mark’s evaluation indicated that although he is reading poorly, he is actually doing fairly well in relation to his potential for learning. Mark, however, will still benefit from reading instruction suited to his individual needs.

When evaluating a student with suspected learning disabilities, federal law, such as the Individuals with Disabilities in Education Improvement Act of 2004 (IDEA- 2004), previously required the evaluation team to consider whether the student has a severe discrepancy between the potential for learning and the current level of perfor- mance. Specific regulations for identifying students with learning disabilities enacted in 2006 altered this requirement to say that states could not require a severe discrep- ancy between potential and achievement for determining whether a student has a learning disability. Methods for determining discrepancy are described in more detail in Chapters 2 and 15.

Analyzing a Student’s Component Cognitive Abilities. Intelligence is more than a single general factor. The current theory of intelligence is that intelligence com- prises many separate abilities (Gardner, 1983; Moran & Gardner, 2006; Sternberg,

82 C H A P T E R 4

1985, 1999). In addition to providing an overall general score (IQ score), many tests of intelligence contain subtests and subscales that measure different (or component) cog- nitive functions. These tests help teachers analyze the student’s strengths and weak- nesses in learning aptitude. Several methods can be used to determine cognitive pat- terns in students (Lerner & Johns, 2011):

◆ Comparison of subscales. The subscales contained in some intelligence tests allow comparisons of cognitive abilities. The widely used Wechsler Intelligence Scales—including the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children, Fourth Edition (WISC-IV); the Wechsler Preschool and Primary Scale of Intelligence, Third Edition (WPPSI-III); and the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale, Fourth Edition (WAIS-IV)—classify subtests as either verbal tests or performance tests. The Kaufman Assessment Battery for Children, Second Edition (KABC-2) identifies sequential and simultaneous processing.

◆ Evidence of subtest scatter and variability. Some intelligence tests, such as the Woodcock-Johnson IV (WISC-IV) Test of Cognitive Abilities, and the Kaufman Assessment Battery for Children, Second Edition, contain subtests that tap differing abilities. A significant scatter among subtest scores, with a student doing well in some subtests and poorly in others, suggests variability in cognitive functioning.

◆ Clustering of subtest scores to ascertain unique cognitive patterns. Another approach is to regroup or cluster subtest scores to provide a better understand- ing of the student’s strengths or weaknesses in cognitive functioning. Kaufman (1981) used factor analysis to regroup subtests from the WISC-IV into clusters of verbal comprehension, perceptual organization, and freedom from distracti- bility. The scoring system of the WISC-IV enables the tester to group individual subtests to obtain general clusters of cognitive factors, including verbal ability, reasoning, perceptual speed, and memory (Lerner, 2003).

Observing a Student’s Behavior. According to Yogi Berra, “Sometimes you can observe a lot by just watching” (Berra & Kaplan, 2008). Testers have the opportunity to observe students as they take intelligence tests. The tester can observe which activi- ties the student enjoys, which activities are frustrating, and how the student goes about doing tasks. For this reason, examiners watch carefully as students use problem-solving strategies to perform the many different tasks on an intelligence test.

Intelligence Tests That Should Be Administered by Psychologists Intelligence tests and tests of cognitive abilities provide information about students’ aptitude for learning and their specific cognitive characteristics. Most intelligence tests are administered by psychologists. Frequently used intelligence tests administered by psychologists include the WISC-IV (Williams, Weiss, & Rolfhus, 2003); the Stanford- Binet Intelligence Scales, Fifth Edition (SB5; Roid, 2003); and the KABC-II (Kaufman & Kaufman, 2004a; Lerner & Johns, 2012).

Norm-Referenced and Criterion-Referenced Assessments 83

Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children, Fourth Edition. The WISC-IV has been redesigned to reflect recent research in intelligence and current neurocogni- tive models of information processing. The new test includes 10 core subtests and 5 supplemental subtests to provide four factor-based index scores: Verbal Comprehen- sion Index, Perceptual Reasoning Index, Working Memory Index, and Processing Speed Index. The indices and subtests are organized as follows:

◆ Verbal Comprehension Index: Subtests include Similarities, Vocabulary, and Comprehension. Supplemental subtests are Information and Word Reasoning.

◆ Perceptual Reasoning Index: Subtests include Block Design, Picture Concepts, and Matrix Reasoning. The supplemental subtest is Picture Completion.

◆ Working Memory Index: Subtests include Digit Span and Letter-Number Se- quencing. The supplemental subtest is Arithmetic.

◆ Processing Speed Index: Subtests include Coding and Symbol Search. The sup- plemental subtest is Cancellation to measure visual selective attention between structured and unstructured items.

Historically, the Wechsler scales have been widely acclaimed for their usefulness and the high quality of their standardization procedures (Braden, 1995; Sandoval, 1995). In his review of the fourth edition, Thompson (2005) finds that the fourth edition has incorporated more current theoretical perspectives and comprises more developmen- tally appropriate items. He also believes that the newer edition is more user-friendly and yields more useful results. Maller (2005) agrees but raises concerns about gender and ethnic bias among some items.

Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scales, Fifth Edition. The SB5 (Roid, 2003) is used to identify gifted individuals as well as those with learning disabilities, mental retarda- tion, attention deficit disorders, speech and language delays, Alzheimer’s disease and dementia, traumatic brain injury, and autism. The test is organized into five factors with both verbal and nonverbal subtests to measure each factor:

◆ Fluid Reasoning: The nonverbal subtest is Nonverbal Fluid Reasoning, which requires individuals to organize series of objects. The verbal subtest is Verbal Fluid Reasoning, which includes early reasoning activities for Levels 2 and 3, verbal absurdities for Level 4, and verbal analogies for Levels 5 and 6.

◆ Knowledge: Nonverbal subtests include Procedural Knowledge for Levels 2 and 3 and Picture Absurdities for Levels 4 through 6. The verbal subtest is a vocabu- lary measure.

◆ Quantitative Reasoning: Both the nonverbal and verbal subtests for quantitative reasoning are administered for Levels 2 through 6.

◆ Visual-Spatial Processing: This factor has been added in the fifth edition. The nonverbal subtests focus on forms for Levels 1 and 2 and form patterns for Lev- els 3 through 6. The verbal subtests require individuals to perform tasks involv- ing position and direction at Levels 2 through 6.

84 C H A P T E R 4

◆ Working Memory: Nonverbal subtests include Delayed Response at Level 1 and Block Span at Levels 2 through 6. Verbal subtests include Memory for Sentences at Levels 2 through 3 and Last Word at Levels 4 through 6.

The interpretive manual provides guidelines for clustering individuals’ cognitive char- acteristics, which will help users develop profiles useful in educational settings (Kush, 2005). However, limited information is provided about using results to plan and imple- ment intervention (Johnson & D’Amato, 2005). In keeping with its long history of quality, the SB5 is highly recommended for its reliability and validity as well as its effectiveness as an instrument for making sound educational decisions (Johnson & D’Amato, 2005; Kush, 2005).

Kaufman Assessment Battery for Children, Second Edition. The KABC-II (Kaufman & Kaufman, 2004b) is designed to help educators identify the cognitive strengths and weaknesses of students ages 3 through 18. It consists of 5 scales and 20 subtests:

◆ Simultaneous/Visual Processing measures students’ abilities to consider several pieces of information to solve a problem. Core subtests include Conceptual Thinking, Triangles, Face Recognition, Pattern Reasoning, Block Counting, Story Completion, and Rover (in which students determine the shortest path for a dog to move on a checkerboard grid toward a bone). The supplementary test is Gestalt Closure, a test using incomplete pictures for students to identify images.

◆ Sequential Processing/Short-Term Memory tests a student’s ability to solve problems by remembering and using ordered series of images or ideas. This task is closely related to spelling and math. The core subtest administered to children at age 3 is Word Order. Supplementary subtests administered at age 3 are Num- ber Recall and Hand Movements. Core subtests for ages 4 through 18 include Word Order and Number Recall. Hand Movements is used as a supplementary test for these ages.

◆ Planning/Fluid Reasoning is a new scale presented in the second edition. It mea- sures a student’s ability to verbalize a solution to a problem presented nonver- bally. Subtests include Pattern Reasoning, in which students select a picture or geometric design to complete a series of pictures that forms a pattern, and Story Completion for students ages 7 through 18. For ages 5 and 6, these subtests are part of the Simultaneous/Visual Processing Scale.

◆ Learning Ability/Long-Term Storage and Retrieval measures students’ abilities to complete both immediate-recall and delayed-recall learning tasks. Atlantis is a core subtest for all ages. In this test, students are taught nonsense names for colorful pictures of sea plants and animals. Then students are shown an- other picture with the same characters and are asked to point to the correct character as it is named by the examiner. In Atlantis Delayed, a supplementary subtest for ages 6 through 18, students are asked to point to named characters after a period of time has passed. Rebus is a core subtest for ages 4 through 18. In Rebus, students learn words associated with simple line drawings. Then the

Norm-Referenced and Criterion-Referenced Assessments 85

drawings are presented in a series that forms a meaningful phrase, and students are asked to “read” the phrase. Rebus Delayed is a supplementary subtest for ages 6 through 18.

◆ Knowledge/Crystallized Ability assesses knowledge of words and facts presented with both verbal and pictorial stimuli and requiring either verbal or pointing responses. The Riddles subtest is a core subtest for all ages. Early items present students with sets of pictures. The examiner reads a two- to three-clue riddle, and the student points to the picture that answers the riddle. In later items, the examiner reads the choices and the student selects the answer to the riddle from the choices read. The Expressive Vocabulary subtest is a core subtest for ages 3 through 6 and supplementary for ages 7 through 18. In the Expressive Vocabulary Test, students are shown a picture of an object and must name the object. The Verbal Knowledge subtest is a core subtest for ages 7 through 18 and supplementary for ages 3 through 6. In this subtest, the student is shown six images; the examiner says a vocabulary word or gives a general information prompt and the student points to the picture that represents the answer. No oral response is required.

One advantage to the KABC-II is that it is co-normed with the Kaufman Test of Education Achievement, Second Edition (KTEA-II). Thus, if a district or state requires a comparison between a student’s academic potential and achievement, the information would be readily available (Kaufman & Kaufman, 2004c). The authors also indicate that the KABC and KABC-II tests are less culturally biased than other intelligence tests. Reviewers acknowledge that there is slightly less difference in scores across ethnic groups but argue that the differences may not be significant (Braden & Ouzts, 2005). Other than the claims of less cultural bias, Braden and Ouzts found that the standardization procedures were acceptable for validity and reliability. Thorndike (2005) found that the test did not clearly distinguish between students with disabilities and the norm group. Braden and Ouzts (2005) question the test’s usefulness for guiding interventions due to the lack of interpretive support.

Intelligence Tests That Can Be Administered by Teachers and Reading Specialists With training, classroom teachers can administer some tests, such as the Tests of Cogni- tive Ability from the Woodcock-Johnson III Norming Update; the Kaufman Brief Intel- ligence Test, Second Edition; and the Slosson Intelligence Test–Revised (Lerner, 2006).

Kaufman Brief Intelligence Test, Second Edition. The Kaufman Brief Intelli- gence Test, Second Edition (KBIT-2; Kaufman & Kaufman, 2004b) is a brief screen- ing instrument of verbal and nonverbal ability. It can be used by teachers to obtain quick estimates of students’ intelligence levels, to compare a student’s verbal and non- verbal intelligence, to screen students to recommend them for special programs, or to reevaluate students who previously participated in a thorough cognitive assessment. The KBIT-2 is comprised of two scales: Crystallized/Verbal with subtests in Verbal

86 C H A P T E R 4

Knowledge, including both receptive and expressive vocabulary items, and riddles and a Fluid/Nonverbal scale with a Matrices subtest. The KBIT-2 is co-normed with the Kaufman Test of Educational Achievement, Second Edition, Brief Form. This co- norming allows teachers and other educators to make rough comparisons between students’ potential and achievement levels just as the links between the KABC-II and the KTEA-II provide more in-depth comparisons between ability and achievement (Kaufman & Kaufman, 2004c) Reviews of the KBIT-2 are generally positive. Shaw (2007) found that the changes and updates, although minor, were improvements over the first edition. Madle (2007) concurred that the test was well developed and easy to admin- ister. However, he cautions that the KBIT-2 does tend to yield slightly lower IQ scores than the Wechsler scales. He also expressed concerns about the use of the test with non- English speakers because this population was not represented in the norming sample.

Slosson Intelligence Test, Revised, Third Edition. The Slosson Intelligence Test, Revised, Third Edition (SIT-R3; Slosson, Nicholson, & Hibpshman, 2002), is a quick individual screening test of crystallized verbal intelligence for both children and adults. The authors indicate that the SIT-R3 can be readily adapted for use with students who are visually impaired (Slosson, Nicholson, & Hibpshman, 2002). Reviews of the SIT-R3 were not available at the time of this writing. It should be noted that reviewers of the 1991 edition expressed concerns about whether the norming population truly reflected U.S. Census data. Although the reviewers acknowledged that the results were highly correlated with previous forms of the WISC, they caution users about accuracy of the information for older students and adults, and they recommend the use of components of the WISC or the KBIT to better match the results of more comprehensive measures used for placement or instructional decisions (Kamphaus, 1995; Watson, 1995).

Woodcock-Johnson III Tests of Cognitive Abilities. The Woodcock-Johnson III Tests of Cognitive Abilities (WJ-III; Woodcock et al., 2003) is the second set of bat- teries of the Woodcock-Johnson III. The Tests of Cognitive Abilities are comprised of a Standard Battery and an Extended Battery, each consisting of 10 tests. The tests are arranged to tap abilities in seven cognitive areas:

◆ Comprehension-Knowledge includes Verbal Comprehension and General Ver- bal Knowledge, which is new to the edition. These tests yield important infor- mation for reading teachers and specialists because they are related to language development and verbal background information.

◆ Long-Term Retrieval includes Visual-Auditory Learning and Retrieval Fluency. There is also a delayed test of Visual-Auditory Learning that is not considered part of the factor or cognitive performance clusters.

◆ Visual-Spatial Thinking includes Spatial Relations and Picture Recognition. There is also a Planning test that is not considered part of the factor or clusters.

◆ Auditory Processing includes Sound Blending and Auditory Attention, as well as a word finding test of Incomplete Words that is not considered part of the factor or clusters. This factor is closely associated with phonemic awareness and sound discrimination.

Norm-Referenced and Criterion-Referenced Assessments 87

◆ Fluid Reasoning includes Concept Formation and Analysis-Synthesis. The previously mentioned Planning test is also associated with spatial scanning and sequential reasoning but is not considered part of this factor or the clusters.

◆ Processing Speed includes Visual Matching as well as two new tests, Decision Speed and Rapid Picture Naming. Another test new to the third edition but not considered part of the factor or cognitive performance clusters is the Pair Cancellation Test.

◆ Short-Term Memory includes Numbers Reversed and Memory for Words. New to the third edition but not considered part of the factor or clusters is a test of Auditory Working Memory.

When used in conjunction with the Tests of Achievement, the Tests of Cognitive Abilities provide a means of comparing students’ achievement with their cognitive abilities. This is a valuable tool for members of assessment teams who need to make decisions about students’ placements and instructional programs. When used alone, the Tests of Cognitive Abilities can provide insight into students’ processing abilities for verbal information (Woodcock, et al., 2003). Although reviewers have expressed concerns about how content validity was determined, they find the test as a whole quite useful for assessment, evaluation, and planning (Cizek, 2003; Sandoval, 2003).

Interpreting Intelligence Test Scores Modern intelligence scores are reported as deviation scores, as a student’s score is compared with the scores of a norm group. The IQ score is based on the concept of a normal curve, as shown in Figure 4.1. An IQ of 100 is designated as the mean for each age group. As shown in Figure 4.1, approximately 34% of the population will fall within one standard deviation below the mean, and 34% of the population will fall within one standard deviation above the mean.

To illustrate (Figure 4.1), one standard deviation on the WISC-IV is 15 points. Therefore, 34% of the population will score between 85 and 100, and 34% of the population will score between 100 and 115.

Although psychologists would be expected to report specific IQ scores and descriptors, as reading specialists, we typically describe students’ performance on IQ scores as measures of potential. Thus, we would simply refer to students being expected to perform at a level equal to, above, or below that of their peers. Thus, a student with an average IQ would be described as being expected to perform at a level similar to that of his or her peers.

Summary

Formal tests should be administered according to prescribed procedures. Some are norm referenced and compare students to a norm sample. Others are criterion refer- enced and determine whether a student has achieved mastery. Formal tests that com- pare students to others of the same grade and age are familiar to professionals, permit objective decision making, and are required by some laws.

88 C H A P T E R 4

Scores on norm-referenced tests derive standard scores from raw scores, gener- ally by using means and standard deviations. Scores include reading grade scores, per- centiles, normal curve equivalents (NCEs), and stanines. Normed tests should have an adequate standardization sample, good validity (testing what is supposed to be tested), and reliability (stability of scores).

Tests of general reading assessment include survey tests (both group and indi- vidual), normed oral reading tests, and literacy tests. Diagnostic reading tests include batteries of specific skills and tests of individual areas.

Intelligence tests can be used to estimate a student’s potential for school achieve- ment, although the results can change with appropriate conditions. Patterns of scores and behavior during testing also give insight into learning. Widely used intelligence tests include the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children, Fourth Edition; Wood- cock-Johnson III; Kaufman Assessment Battery for Children, Second Edition (and short form); and the Slosson Intelligence Test, Third Edition, Revised. Scores on an IQ test are distributed on a normal curve distribution.

Of special interest to assessment teams and reading specialists are tests that provide for systematic assessment to measure students’ progress. This information is crucial in making placement decisions, planning for appropriate instructional inter- vention, and measuring response to intervention.

References Berra, Y., & Kaplan, D. (2008). You can observe a lot by watching: What I’ve learned about teamwork from the

Yankees and life. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley and Sons. Bonner, M. (2005). Review of Kaufman Test of Educational Achievement (2nd ed.). In R. A. Spies &

B. S. Plake (Eds.), The sixteenth mental measurements yearbook. Lincoln, NE: Buros Institute of Mental Measurements.

Braden, J. P. (1995). Review of Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children (3rd ed.). In B. S. Plake & J. C. Impara (Eds.), The twelfth mental measurements yearbook. Lincoln, NE: Buros Institute of Mental Measurements.

Braden, J. P., & Ouzts, S. M. (2005). Review of Kaufman Assessment Battery for Children (2nd ed.). In R. A. Spies & B. S. Plake (Eds.), The sixteenth mental measurements yearbook. Lincoln, NE: Buros Institute of Mental Measurements.

Brown, V. L., Hammill, D. D., & Wiederholt, J. L. (1995). Test of Reading Comprehension (3rd ed.). Austin, TX: Pro-Ed Inc.

Brunsman, B. A. (2005). Review of Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy. In R. A. Spies & B. S. Plake (Eds.), The sixteenth mental measurements yearbook. Lincoln, NE: Buros Institute of Mental Measurements.

Carpenter, C. D. (2005). Review of Kaufman Test of Educational Achievement (2nd ed.). In R. A. Spies & B. S. Plake (Eds.), The sixteenth mental measurements yearbook. Lincoln, NE: Buros Institute of Mental Measurements.

Cizek, G. J. (2003). Review of Woodcock-Johnson III. In B. S. Plake & J. C. Impara (Eds.), The fourteenth mental measurements yearbook. Lincoln, NE: Buros Institute of Mental Measurements.

Crumpton, N. L. (2003). Review of Gray Oral Reading Test (4th ed.). In B. S. Plake & J. C. Impara (Eds.), The fourteenth mental measurements yearbook. Lincoln, NE: Buros Institute of Mental Measurements.

England, C. (2007). Review of Woodcock-Johnson III Diagnostic Reading Battery. In K. F. Geisinger, R. A. Spies, J. F. Carlson, & B. S. Plake (Eds.), The seventeenth mental measurements yearbook. Lincoln, NE: Buros Institute of Mental Measurements.

Norm-Referenced and Criterion-Referenced Assessments 89

Fletcher, J. M. (2006). Measuring reading comprehension. Scientific Studies of Reading, 10, 323–330. Fugate, M. H. (2003). Review of Group Reading Assessment and Diagnostic Evaluation. In B. S. Plake,

J. C. Impara, & R. A. Spies (Eds.), The fifteenth mental measurements yearbook. Lincoln, NE: Buros Institute of Mental Measurements.

Gardner, H. (1983). Frames of mind: The theory of multiple intelligences. NY: Harper and Row. Hoff, K. E., & Swerdlik, M. E. (2010). Review of Wide Range Achievement Test, Fourth Edition. In R. A.

Spies, J. F. Carlson, & K. F. Geisinger (Eds.), The eighteenth mental measurements yearbook. Lincoln, NE: Buros Institute of Mental Measurements.

Hurford, D. P. (2003). Review of Comprehensive Test of Phonological Processing. In B. S. Plake, J. C. Impara, & R. A. Spies (Eds.), The fifteenth mental measurements yearbook. Lincoln, NE: The Buros Institute of Mental Measurements.

Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). (2004). Public Law 108–446. Johnson, J. A., & D’Amato, R. C. (2005). Review of Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scales (5th ed.). In

R. A. Spies & B. S. Plake (Eds.), The sixteenth mental measurements yearbook. Lincoln, NE: Buros Institute of Mental Measurements.

Kaminski, R. A., & Good, R. H., III. (2003). Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills (6th ed.). Eugene, OR: Dynamic Measurement Group.

Kamphaus, R. W. (1995). Review of Slosson Intelligence Test-Revised (3rd ed.). In J. C. Conoley & J. C. Impara (Eds.), The twelfth mental measurements yearbook. Lincoln, NE: Buros Institute of Mental Measurements.

Kaufman, A. S. (1981). The WISC and learning disabilities assessment: State of the art. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 14, 520–526.

Kaufman, A. S., & Kaufman, N. L. (2004a). KABC-II: Kaufman Assessment Battery for Children (2nd ed.). Circle Pines, MN: American Guidance Service, Inc.

Kaufman, A. S., & Kaufman, N. L. (2004b). KBIT-2: Kaufman Brief Intelligence Test (2nd ed.). Circle Pines, MN: American Guidance Service, Inc.

Kaufman, A. S., & Kaufman, N. L. (2004c). KTEA-II: Kaufman Test of Educational Achievement (2nd ed.). Circle Pines, MN: American Guidance Service, Inc.

Keillor, G. (2008). News from Lake Wobegon. A Prairie Home Companion. National Public Radio. Kingston, N. M. (2009). Comparability of computer- and paper-administered multiple-choice tests for K-12

populations: A synthesis. Applied Measurement in Education, 22, 22–37. Kush, J. C. (2005). Review of Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scales (5th ed.). In R. A. Spies & B. S. Plake (Eds.),

The sixteenth mental measurements yearbook. Lincoln, NE: Buros Institute of Mental Measurements. Lerner, J. W. (2003). Learning disabilities: Theories, diagnosis, and teaching strategies. New York, NY: Houghton

Mifflin Lerner, J. W., & Johns, B. (2011). Learning disabilities and related mild disabilities: What’s new in education.

Boston: Wadsworth Publishing. Madle, R. A. (2007). Review of Kaufman Brief Intelligence Test (2nd ed.). In K. F. Geisinger, R. A. Spies,

J. F. Carlson, & B. S. Plake (Eds.), The seventeenth mental measurements yearbook. Lincoln, NE: Buros Institute of Mental Measurements.

Maller, S. J. (2005). Review of Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children (4th ed.). In R. A. Spies & B. S. Plake (Eds.), The sixteenth mental measurements yearbook. Lincoln, NE: Buros Institute of Mental Measurements.

Margolis, H. (2007). Review of Woodcock-Johnson III Diagnostic Reading Battery. In K. F. Geisinger, R. A. Spies, J. F. Carlson, & B. S. Plake (Eds.), The seventeenth mental measurements yearbook. Lincoln, NE: Buros Institute of Mental Measurements.

Markwardt, F. C., Jr. (1998). Peabody Individual Achievement Test–Revised/Normative update. San Antonio, TX: Pearson Education, Inc.

McGrew, K. S. (1998). The measurement of reading achievement by different individually administered standardized reading tests: Apples and apples, or apples and oranges? In C. E. Snow, S. M. Burns, & P. E. Griffin (Eds.), Preventing reading difficulties in young children. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

Miller, M. D. (2010). Review of Wechsler Individual Achievement Test (3rd ed.). In R. A. Spies, J. F. Carlson, & K. F. Geisinger (Eds.), The eighteenth mental measurements yearbook. Lincoln, NE: Buros Institute of Mental Measurements.

90 C H A P T E R 4

Miller-Whitehead, M. (2003). Review. In B. S. Plake & J. C. Impara (Eds.), The fourteenth mental measure- ments yearbook. Lincoln, NE: Buros Institute of Mental Measurements.

Moran, S., & Gardner, H. (2006). Extraordinary cognitive achievements: A developmental and systems anal- ysis. In W. Damon (Series Ed.) and D. Kuhn & R. S. Sidgler (Vol. Eds.), Handbook of child psychology: Vol. 2, Cognition, perception, and language (6th ed., pp. 905–949). New York: Wiley.

Morsy, L., Kieffer, M., & Snow, C. (2010). Measure for measure: a critical consumers’ guide to reading comprehen- sion assessments for adolescents. New York, NY: Carnegie Corporation of New York.

Newcomer, P. L. (1999). Standardized Reading Inventory (2nd ed.). Austin, TX: Pro-Ed, Inc. Pearson Education, Inc. (2009, November). Computer-based & paper-pencil test comparability studies.

Tests, Measurement, and Research Services Bulletin, 9. Plake, B. S., & Impara, J. C. (Eds.). (2001). The fourteenth mental measurements yearbook. Lincoln, NE: Buros

Institute of Mental Measurements. Roid, G. H. (2003). Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scales (5th ed.). Rolling Meadows, IL: Riverside Publishing. Roid, G. H., & Ledbetter, M. F. (2009). Wide Range Achievement Test, 4th ed., Progress monitoring version. Lutz,

FL: PAR, Inc. Roswell, F. G., Chall, J. S., Curtis, M. E., & Kearns, G. (2006). Diagnostic Assessments of Reading (2nd ed.).

Itasca, IL: Riverside Publishing. Sabers, D. L., & Olson, A. M. (2010). Review of Wide Range Achievement Test, Fourth Edition. In R. A.

Spies, J. F. Carlson, & K. F. Geisinger (Eds.), The eighteenth mental measurements yearbook. Lincoln, NE: Buros Institute of Mental Measurements.

Salvia, J., Ysseldyke, J. E., & Bolt, S. (2006). Assessment in special and inclusive education (10th ed.). Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

Sandoval, J. (1995). Review of Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children (3rd ed.). In J. C. Conoley & J. C. Impara (Eds.), The twelfth mental measurements yearbook. Lincoln, NE: Buros Institute of Mental Measurements.

Sandoval, J. (2003). Review of Woodcock-Johnson III. In B. S. Plake, J. C. Impara, & R. A. Spies (Eds.), The fifteenth mental measurements yearbook. Lincoln, NE: Buros Institute of Mental Measurements.

Schafer, W. D. (2010). Review of Wide Range Achievement Test, Fourth Edition, Progress Monitoring Version. In R. A. Spies, J. F. Carlson, & K. F. Geisinger (Eds.), The eighteenth mental measurements yearbook. Lincoln, NE: Buros Institute of Mental Measurements.

Shanahan, T. (2005). Review of Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy. In R. A. Spies & B. S. Plake (Eds.), The sixteenth mental measurements yearbook. Lincoln, NE: Buros Institute of Mental Measurements.

Shaw, S. R. (2007). Review of Kaufman Brief Intelligence Test (2nd ed.). In K. F. Geisinger, R. A. Spies, J. F. Carlson, & B. S. Plake (Eds.), The seventeenth mental measurements yearbook. Lincoln, NE: Buros Institute of Mental Measurements.

Slosson, R. L., Nicholson, C. L., & Hibpshman, T. H. (2002). Slosson Intelligence Test (3rd ed.). East Aurora, NY: Slosson Educational Publications, Inc.

Solomon, A. (2001). Review of Standardized Reading Inventory (2nd ed.). In B. S. Plake & J. C. Impara (Eds.), The fourteenth mental measurements yearbook. Lincoln, NE: Buros Institute of Mental Measurements

Spies, R. A., Carlson, J. F., & Geisinger, K. F. (Eds.). (2010). The eighteenth mental measurements yearbook. Lincoln, NE: Buros Institute of Mental Measurements.

Spies, R. A., Plake, B. S., Geisinger, K. F., & Carlson J. F. (Eds.). (2007). The seventeenth mental measurements yearbook. Lincoln, NE: Buros Institute of Mental Measurements.

Sternberg, R. J. (1985). Beyond IQ: A triarchic theory of human intelligence. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

Sternberg, R. J. (1999). Ability and expertise: It’s time to replace the current model of intelligence. American Educator, 23, 1–30, 50.

Stevens, B. A. (2001). Review of Standardized Reading Inventory (2nd ed.). In B. S. Plake & J. C. Impara (Eds.), The fourteenth mental measurements yearbook. Lincoln, NE: Buros Institute of Mental Measurements.

Thompson, B. (2005). Review of Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children (4th ed.). In R. A. Spies & B. S. Plake (Eds.), The sixteenth mental measurements yearbook. Lincoln, NE: Buros Institute of Mental Measurements.

Norm-Referenced and Criterion-Referenced Assessments 91

Thorndike, R. M. (2005). Review of Kaufman Assessment Battery for Children (2nd ed.). In R. A. Spies & B. S. Plake (Eds.), The sixteenth mental measurements yearbook. Lincoln, NE: Buros Institute of Mental Measurements.

U.S. Department of Education. (2006, August 14). 34 CFR Parts 300 & 301: Assistance to states for the education of children with disabilities and preschool grants for children with disabilities. Federal Register, Part II.

Venn, J. J. (2010). Review of Wide Range Achievement Test, Fourth Edition, Progress Monitoring Version. In R. A. Spies, J. F. Carlson, & K. F. Geisinger (Eds.), The eighteenth mental measurements yearbook. Lincoln, NE: Buros Institute of Mental Measurements.

Wagner, R. K., Torgesen, J. K., & Rashotte, C. A. (1999). Comprehensive Test of Phonological Processing. Austin, TX: ProEd, Inc.

Wang, S., Jiao, H., Young, M. J., Brooks, T. E., & Olson, J. (2007). A meta-analysis of testing mode effects in grade K-12 mathematics tests. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 67, 219–238.

Wang, S., Jiao, H., Young, M. J., Brooks, T. E., & Olson, J. (2008). Comparability of computer-based and paper-and-pencil testing in K-12 assessments: A meta-analysis of testing mode effects. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 68, 5–24.

Waterman, B. B. (2003). Review of Group Reading Assessment and Diagnostic Evaluation. In B. S. Plake, J. C. Impara & R. A. Spies (Eds.), The fourteenth mental measurements yearbook. Lincoln, NE: Buros Institute of Mental Measurements.

Watson, T. S. (1995). Review of Mental Measurements Yearbook. Lincoln, NE: Buros Institute of Mental Measurements.

Wechsler, D. (2009). Wechsler Individual Achievement Test (3rd ed.). Lutz, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources, Inc.

Wiederholt, J. L., & Bryant, B. R. (2012). Gray Oral Reading Tests (4th ed.). Austin, TX: ProEd Inc. Wilkinson, G. S. (1993). Wide Range Achievement Test (4th ed.). Lutz, FL: Psychological Assessment

Resources, Inc. Williams, K. T. (2001). Group Reading Assessment and Diagnostic Evaluation. San Antonio, TX: Pearson

Education, Inc. Williams, P. E., Weiss, L. G., & Rolfhus, E. L. (2003). Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children (4th ed.).

San Antonio, TX: The Psychological Corporation. Wilse, J. T. (2010). Review of Wechsler Individual Achievement Test (3rd ed.). In R. A. Spies, J. F. Carlson, &

K. F. Geisinger (Eds.), The eighteenth mental measurements yearbook. Lincoln, NE: Buros Institute of Mental Measurements.

Woodcock, R. W., McGrew, K. S., Mather, N., & Schrank, F. A. (2003). Woodcock-Johnson Psychoeducational Battery (3rd ed.). Itasca, IL: Riverside Publishing.

Wright, C. R. (2003). Review of Comprehensive Test of Phonological Processing. In B. S. Plake, J. C. Impara, & R. A. Spies (Eds.), The fourteenth mental measurements yearbook. Lincoln, NE: Buros Institute of Mental Measurements.

Go to the topic 2: Reading Assessment and topic 3: Reading Diagnosis in the MyEduca- tionLab (www.myeducationlab.com) for Read- ing Problems: Assessment and Teaching Strategies, where you can: ◆ Find learning outcomes for reading assess-

ment and reading diagnosis, along with the national standards that connect to these outcomes.

◆ Complete assignments and activities that can help you more deeply understand the chapter content.

◆ Apply and practice your understanding of the core teaching skills identified in the chapter with the Building Teaching Skills and Dispositions learning units.

92 C H A P T E R 4

◆ Examine challenging situations and cases presented in the Iris Center Resources.

◆ Access video clips of CCSSO National Teachers of the Year award winners respond- ing to the question, “Why Do I Teach?” in the Teacher Talk section.

◆ Practice targeting instruction and mak- ing content accessible for all students with A+RISE activities.

◆ Strengthen your understanding and usage of the English language in writing with the Grammar Tutorial.

◆ Gain experience in choosing appropriate literature and integrating the best titles into language arts instruction with the Children’s and Young Adult Literature Database.

◆ Track the month-by-month literacy growth of five second graders with the Literacy Portraits.

◆ Create, update, and share quality lesson plans with the Lesson Plan Builder.

◆ Access state licensure test requirements, overviews of what the tests cover, and sample test items in the Certification and Licensure section.

◆ Check your comprehension of the content covered in the chapter with the Study Plan. Here you will be able to take a chapter pre- test, receive feedback on your answers, and then access personalized Review, Practice, and Enrichment exercises to enhance your understanding of chapter content. After you complete the exercises, take a posttest to confirm your comprehension.

◆ Check the Chapter Resources to find oral reading passages.

5 Administering an Informal Reading Inventory

Introduction

Does the Student Have a Reading Problem and How Severe Is It?

What Is the General Area of the Reading Problem?

Problems With Emergent Literacy Problems With Word Recognition Accuracy Problems With Reading Fluency Problems With Comprehension Problems With Language and Meaning

Vocabulary Overview of Informal Assessment Measures

The Informal Reading Inventory Obtaining Answers to General Assessment

Questions Administering and Scoring the Informal

Reading Inventory Interpreting the Scores of the IRI Special Issues and Options in Using IRIs

IRIs and Response-to-Intervention

Combining IRI Assessment With Think-Alouds

Summary

C H A P T E R

93

94 C H A P T E R 5

Introduction

The informal reading inventory is a fundamental tool that gives many insights into a student’s reading. This chapter describes the process of administering and scoring an informal reading inventory. Assessing a student’s reading achievement involves answering three general questions: (1) Does the student have a reading problem? (2) How severe is it? (3) What is the general area of the reading problem? Often, an informal reading inventory can answer all three questions as well as provide much additional information about a student.

Does the Student Have a Reading Problem and How Severe Is It?

To determine the existence and severity of a reading problem, a teacher needs to deter- mine at what level a student is reading and compare this level with the level at which that student should be reading; that is, compare the student’s current reading level to the student’s appropriate reading level.

By appropriate level, we mean the texts that are used in the student’s grade-level classroom. These include texts used in reading classes as well as those used for content- area instruction in math, social studies, and science. Usually, appropriate materials mean those at a student’s chronological grade level—that is, an appropriate level for a fourth grader would be fourth-grade text. However, if the student’s class is reading at a higher level, then appropriate materials are at that higher level. However, the opposite is not true. Children who are experiencing problems in school are often placed in special classes where they read materials well below their grade level. For example, a fourth grader might be in a special class that is reading second-grade material. In this case, second-grade text is not an appropriate level; the appropriate level for this student would be the fourth-grade level, the actual grade placement.

A student who can read at an appropriate level with acceptable word recognition and comprehension does not have a reading problem. However, a student who cannot read appropriate materials has a reading problem, and the next step is to determine the severity of that problem. The difference between the student’s grade placement and the grade level of the texts he or she can read shows us the severity of the reading problem.

How does a teacher know whether a student’s problem can be classified as severe? Compare the student’s current grade placement to his or her reading level (Spache, 1981). For first through third graders, a difference of 1 year or more suggests a severe problem. For fourth through sixth graders, a difference of 2 years or more suggests this. For students in grades 7 and above, a gap of 3 or more years represents a serious issue. As you can see, the younger the student, the less difference is needed to define a reading problem as severe.

Using these criteria, a student who is in fourth grade but is reading at the second- grade level would have a reading problem that is severe. A fourth-grade student reading at the third-grade level would have a reading problem, but not a severe one. A fourth-grade student reading at the fourth-grade level would not have a reading problem.

Administering an Informal Reading Inventory 95

The severity of the student’s reading problem helps determine what type of spe- cial instruction is most effective. Students with severe reading problems may require long and intensive intervention in daily classes with individual instruction. In contrast, students with less severe problems may blossom in small-group settings that meet once or twice a week.

What Is the General Area of the Reading Problem?

As discussed in Chapter 1, reading consists of many different components. Problems with reading fall into several general areas:

◆ Emergent literacy ◆ Word recognition accuracy ◆ Reading fluency ◆ Comprehension ◆ Language and meaning vocabulary

Some students may have problems in only one of these general areas. Other students may have problems in a combination of areas. Deciding the general area of a student’s reading problem is important because this information helps you, as a reading teacher, deliver the most effective instruction.

Problems With Emergent Literacy Emergent literacy refers to the understandings and skills that underlie reading. These skills include the knowledge that print stands for meaning, the recognition of alphabet letters, and the ability to discriminate letter sounds. Although most students have acquired emergent literacy skills by the time they enter first grade, some students with reading problems continue to lack such skills long after formal reading instruction has begun.

Problems With Word Recognition Accuracy Many students with reading problems cannot recognize words accurately. They lack strategies for identifying unfamiliar words. For example, when trying to read a passage about farms, 9-year-old Carlos pronounced the word farm as from, form, and for. Without accurate word identification, a student cannot comprehend a passage. For example, Carlos’s summary of the farm passage was “They—the kids—were going someplace.”

Problems With Reading Fluency In addition to recognizing words accurately, readers need to identify them quickly. Words that we recognize instantly, without any need for analysis, are often called sight vocabulary. When we read fluently, we read text without stopping to analyze words. Fluency is important because human beings have limited memories. If we direct all

96 C H A P T E R 5

our attention to figuring out the words, we will have difficulties understanding what the author is saying because we will have no resources to devote to comprehension (LaBerge & Samuels, 1974; National Reading Panel, 2000). Only if we recognize words quickly can we devote attention to comprehension. One student, Sofia, did a flawless oral reading of a story about Johnny Appleseed. However, because she labored over many words, she read slowly and without expression. As a result, she could answer only 3 of 10 comprehension questions.

Problems With Comprehension Many students have problems comprehending what they read. At times, youngsters do not actively construct meaning but simply read to pronounce words or answer ques- tions; thus, they are not reading to comprehend. Comprehension occurs at different levels. Literal comprehension includes understanding content that is explicitly stated in the text. Higher-level comprehension includes organizing what is read, drawing inferences, and thinking critically.

However, at times, poor understanding of text may be rooted in causes other than comprehension. For example, a student who lacks adequate word recognition may not be able to comprehend material. Sofia, mentioned previously, could not com- prehend material because she lacked reading fluency. Similarly, apparent problems in reading comprehension may actually be caused by underlying problems in under- standing language structure and word meanings.

Problems With Language and Meaning Vocabulary Because reading is a language process, the ability to read cannot exceed the language we can understand and the word meanings we already know. Students who can pronounce words as they read but cannot understand them are not really reading. Aushabell, a second-grade student, recently arrived from Turkey. She could read orally with amaz- ing accuracy. However, she had little idea of what she was reading, because she lacked an understanding of such common English words as mother, school, run, and night. Many other students may speak English fluently but lack the knowledge of rich language pat- terns and meaning vocabulary needed to read more sophisticated stories, novels, and textbooks. In fact, problems with underlying language and word meaning have been recognized as an extremely important factor in reading disabilities for intermediate- and upper-grade students beyond third grade (National Reading Panel, 2000).

Overview of Informal Assessment Measures

Informal assessments are instruments that can be modified to suit the needs of stu- dents and the information teachers want to gather. The three key differences between formal and informal measures are as follows:

◆ Student scores on informal measures are not based upon comparison to the scores of a norm group; that is, the average score of the norm group is not used as a reference point for a student’s score.

Administering an Informal Reading Inventory 97

◆ Informal measures are flexible and teachers are free to make modifications in procedures, adapting them to serve specific needs. For example, the teacher can select different reading passages to present to students and decide whether or not to administer a word list or ask for a retelling after reading. On the other hand, formal measures are standardized and the administration process must remain the same across all students. Informal measures often represent a more authentic task.

◆ Informal assessments are often more authentic; that is, they are similar to actual reading tasks. In such measures, students read longer selections, summarize them, and answer questions just as they would in a typical classroom or when reading for their own information or enjoyment. In contrast to this, many for- mal tests only measure the student’s ability to read short passages and answer multiple-choice questions.

To summarize, informal measures allow teachers the flexibility to adapt assess- ment so that it gives maximum information about how students, materials, and class- room situations interact to affect a reading problem. In this way, teachers can best determine how students can meet the demands of school reading.

The Informal Reading Inventory

The informal reading inventory (IRI) is one informal instrument that is widely used in reading assessment. The IRI is an extremely effective tool for observing and analyzing reading performance and for gathering information about a student’s strengths and needs.

The IRI is administered to students individually. In an IRI, a student reads graded passages orally and/or silently and answers questions about them. As a student reads, the teacher records performance in word recognition, fluency, and comprehen- sion. Generally, IRIs contain passages at the preprimer, primer, first-grade, and all other grade levels through the eighth grade. Some IRIs contain high school passages. In addition, many inventories contain graded word lists, which are used to help select appropriate passage levels for students to read and to determine a student’s ability to pronounce words without the benefit of context.

Passages in all IRIs represent different grade levels. In some IRIs, however, they are also quite similar to passages in textbooks at that level or are actually taken from representative textbooks. This allows a teacher to see how a student functions with classroom-like materials. The information gained from a classroom-based IRI is often more useful and realistic than the results of a standardized test.

An IRI is also effective for assessing both short-term and long-term growth (Leslie & Caldwell, 2011). A teacher can use an IRI to assess student reading achieve- ment at different times during the school year. After a student has participated in an intervention program, an IRI can be used to measure the student’s reading growth.

There are many different types of IRIs. An IRI is included in Appendix B and on MyEducationLab in the Chapter Resources section of Chapter 5. Whichever IRI

98 C H A P T E R 5

you choose, remember that it is an informal measure you can adapt for different purposes and needs.

Obtaining Answers to General Assessment Questions The IRI helps teachers obtain information on the three general assessment ques- tions presented in the beginning of this chapter: (1) Does the student have a reading problem? (2) How severe is it? (3) What is the general area of the student’s reading problem?

To answer the first two questions, the reading teacher determines an instruc- tional reading level for the student. At this level, the student can read with instruc- tional support, such as that provided in a typical classroom. The reading teacher then compares the instructional level on the IRI to the level of reading appropriate for the student. This comparison shows the existence and the severity of the reading problem. For example, a student who has an instructional level of fifth grade on the IRI and is in fifth grade does not have a reading problem. On the other hand, a fifth-grade student who has an instructional level of first grade has a severe reading problem.

The IRI can also help reveal the general area of the reading problem. By listen- ing to a student read orally, the teacher can determine whether the student’s problem is word recognition or reading fluency. By asking questions and having students retell passages that have been read, the teacher can assess comprehension. By having the stu- dent listen to a passage and respond to questions, the teacher can determine whether language and meaning vocabulary are problems.

Finally, because the IRI is an individual test, a teacher has opportunities during its administration to make diagnostic observations that answer many other different questions. Does the student read better orally or silently? Become easily frustrated? Point to each word or regularly lose the place in reading? Does the student have par- ticular difficulty answering inferential questions or in retelling what was read? The IRI is a rich source of these and many other insights.

However, like all other assessment tools, IRIs have some limitations. It can be a relatively time-consuming process to administer and score. Examiners, especially un- trained ones, can miss some problems with oral reading. In addition, a student’s perfor- mance on a passage may be affected by the amount of personal interest in the subject and/or background knowledge (Leslie & Caldwell, 2011). Finally, the shortness of IRI selections (often a few hundred words) may not allow teachers to determine how well a student reads a multipage selection.

Administering and Scoring the Informal Reading Inventory Each published IRI comes with directions for administration that may vary in detail from other IRIs. All IRIs have some common features, however, and the directions given in this chapter are based on these similarities (see Table 5.1).

The IRI consists of a series of graded reading selections followed by questions. Some IRIs provide both narrative and expository passages; some only consist of narratives.

Administering an Informal Reading Inventory 99

TABLE 5.1 Procedure for Informal Reading Inventory Administration

Administer word lists. Determine percentage of words read correctly on each list. Stop when student scores below 60%.

Use word list performance to select a beginning point for passage administration. Begin at a level where the student scores 90% on word list.

Administer passages in oral or reading format.

Record reading errors and determine independent, instruc- tional, and/or frustration levels for word identification.

Record time needed to read each passage.

  Ask questions about the text and determine independent, instruc- tional, and/or frustration levels for comprehension.

  Stop when material becomes too difficult.

Administer passages in silent reading format.

Ask questions and determine independent, instructional, and/or frustration levels for comprehension.

Record time needed to read each passage.

  Stop when material becomes too difficult.

Most IRIs also contain graded word lists. The teacher can use these lists to decide which passage to administer first. The student reads passages (orally or silently) at different grade levels and stops when the material becomes too difficult. After the student reads each passage, the teacher asks comprehension questions. For passages read orally, the teacher records reading errors, or miscues, which are deviations from what is written. The teacher also records the time needed to read the passage and student responses to the questions. For passages read silently, the teacher records the time needed for reading and the responses to questions. In addition, the teacher may wish to ask students to retell a selection in their own words, and some IRIs provide guidelines for doing so.

The percentage of reading miscues determines word recognition accuracy. The time needed for reading, which determines reading fluency, may also be used to judge passages. The responses to questions determine the comprehension score. In turn, word recognition and comprehension scores determine three reading levels for the student:

◆ Independent: the level at which a student can read without teacher guidance. Use this level for recreational reading.

◆ Instructional: the level at which a student can read with teacher support. Use this level for reading instruction.

◆ Frustration: the level that is too hard for the student.

100 C H A P T E R 5

Each level is expressed as a grade level (from preprimer through eighth grade and/or high school). Teachers can use these three levels to determine the severity of a reading problem as well as to select reading materials for various purposes.

As indicated in Chapter 6, for many struggling readers, grade-level classroom text represents a frustration level. However, such text can be used effectively in an intervention setting if the teacher offers adequate support through read-alouds and various forms of shared reading.

Materials and General Preparation. To give an IRI, select a period of about an hour to work with an individual student. For younger students and students who are extremely nervous, you may want to divide the testing into two periods. Materials you will need usually include the following:

◆ Student copy of the IRI word lists and passages ◆ Protocol (or teacher copy) of word lists and passages ◆ Stopwatch or watch with a second hand ◆ Tape recorder ◆ Clipboard

To help prepare a student for the IRI, explain that he or she will read passages both orally and silently and answer questions after each passage. Finally, tell the student that the material may become progressively more difficult.

Seat the student across from you and hand him or her the student copy of the passage to read. The student copy contains only the passage, without the questions. Record oral reading miscues and responses to questions on a teacher copy, referred to as a protocol. The protocol also contains questions to ask the student. Place the protocol on a clipboard for ease in handling.

Even experienced examiners find that taping the entire session is helpful so that they can refer to it later. Explain to the student that you are taping because you can’t remember everything. Then place the tape recorder off to one side to reduce its intrusion into your testing situation.

To record the speed of your student’s reading, you will need a stopwatch. Again, explain what you are doing to the student and then place it off to one side.

Administering Word Lists. Many IRIs provide a set of graded word lists. A student’s performance on reading these word lists provides a quick way to determine which pas- sage in the IRI the student should read first. Word lists generally start at the preprimer level and continue through higher levels. Each level usually has 20 to 25 words.

Students usually begin by reading the easiest list. As your student reads from the student’s copy, record the responses on your teacher’s copy. If the student rec- ognizes a word instantly, mark a “+” in the timed column. If the student must take some time to analyze the word, mark a “+” in the untimed column. Administer the graded word lists until the student scores below 60% on any list (for example, misses 11 or more words out of 25 on the timed words or 8 or more out of 20). Begin the oral reading passages at the highest level on which the student scores at least 90%

Administering an Informal Reading Inventory 101

(no more than  two miscues). If students score low on the word lists, begin testing at the preprimer level or terminate the IRI and use emergent literacy assessments (see Chapter 7).

For example, fourth-grade Reyna’s scores on the IRI word lists follow:

Preprimer: 90% Grade 2: 80% Primer: 100% Grade 3: 55% Grade 1: 80%

The primer level is the highest level at which Reyna scored 90% or above. Therefore, the teacher should begin testing Reyna at the primer level.

In addition to determining which passage to administer first, a student’s perfor- mance on word lists can provide important diagnostic information about word recog- nition abilities. By looking at incorrect responses on a word list, you can gain insights about how a student analyzes words. You can see, for example, whether students are matching letters and sounds (phonics) or just engaging in wild guesses. You can also determine if they use structural analysis, such as examining prefixes and suffixes. Figure 5.1 shows Reyna’s responses to the second-grade word list. If you look at Reyna’s incorrect responses, you can see that she is able to use sounds (such as t, dr, wh) at the beginnings of words but does not always use correct vowels and ending sounds. This information provides the reading teacher with suggestions of phonics strategies that need to be taught.

Some children score much lower on word lists than they do when reading a selection. This situation suggests that the student is using the context of the passage as an aid to word recognition. Although this strategy is normal for beginning readers, older and skilled readers do not use context for word pronunciation, and poor readers often overuse it (Stanovich, 1993–1994).

Administering Reading Passages. If you have given a word list, you will know the passage level to administer first. If not, start at a level that you think will be easy for the student. Sometimes information from other testing or classroom performance can suggest a beginning passage level. Remember that beginning too low is better than be- ginning too high. Students who have difficulty on the first IRI passage they read often become nervous. If you find that the first passage you have chosen is too challenging, stop the reading and immediately move down to an easier level.

Most IRIs provide passages for both oral and silent reading. You can administer all of the oral passages first, obtain reading levels for this mode, and then administer the silent passages. Or you can alternate oral and silent passages at each grade level. Because the IRI is an informal instrument, you can choose the procedure that works best for you.

The following steps are appropriate for administering passages for many published IRIs:

1. Before reading, give the student a brief introduction to the topic: For example, say, “This story is about a girl who wanted to become a champion skater.”

102 C H A P T E R 5

FIGURE 5.1 Reyna’s Scored IRI Word List, Level 2

Student’s Attempt Knew in Context

(in oral passage) � or �Target Word

Timed Presentation

Untimed Presentation

Oral Passages

camp +

year +

spend +

whole what when

week will +

packed pick +

clothes clap +

dressed dr... drossed

brushed +

teeth test tooth

kitchen +

eggs +

toast test +

seemed s... +

forever +

hundreds +

shorts +

shirts shark shirk

tent +

knew k... know

Silent Passages

teacher +

world work +

playground +

classroom +

card +

Results # Correct Multiplied by 4 % Correct

Timed Presentation 14 × 4 56

Untimed Presentation 6 × 4 24

Total 20 × 4 80

Administering an Informal Reading Inventory 103

2. Ask a background question to determine how familiar the student is with the topic: “What do you know about championship skating?” Answers to such ques- tions allow you to determine whether problems with reading might be due to lack of background knowledge. (The IRI on MyEducationLab in the Chapter Resources section of Chapter 5 provides instructions and background questions.)

3. Hand the student copy to the student to read. State that you will ask questions after the reading is completed. Have the student read orally (for oral passages) or silently (for silent passages). If the passage is read orally, tell the student that you will not be able to help with words and that he or she can say “pass” if a word cannot be figured out. (See “Special Issues and Options in Using IRIs” later in this chapter for a discussion of teacher aid.) If the passage is read silently, ask your student to look up immediately when finished so that you can record the time correctly.

4. For oral reading, record any differences between the text and the student’s read- ing on your protocol. If you want to record reading speed, time the student with a stopwatch.

5. After the student finishes, take away the passage and ask the comprehension questions. If you want additional information, you may also ask the student to retell the passage in his or her own words.

6. Continue testing until you have determined the independent, instructional, and frustration levels for your student. For example, if a student scores at an inde- pendent level for third grade, have the student read the fourth-grade passage. Continue moving up until you reach the student’s frustration level. If a student scores at a frustration level on the first passage read, move down until you reach the independent level. The next section explains how to determine these levels.

Reading Levels Obtained From the IRI. Using an IRI, a reading teacher can de- termine the student’s independent, instructional, and frustration reading levels. The instructional level is particularly critical because the severity of a student’s reading problem is determined by comparing the instructional level with the level at which the student should be reading (usually the student’s grade placement). For example, if a student’s IRI instructional level is third grade but is in a sixth-grade class, this would indicate a severe reading problem.

How do we calculate reading levels? As stated earlier, reading levels on an IRI are determined by performance on the passages, not scores on the word lists.

The level of an orally read passage is based on (1) the word recognition accuracy score for the passage and (2) the comprehension score. The level of a silently read pas- sage is based on the comprehension score.

The word recognition score comes from the number of miscues, or errors, that the student makes while orally reading a passage. The comprehension score comes from the number of correct responses on the comprehension questions. Table 5.2 lists the criteria suggested for the different IRI levels.

Scoring Word Recognition Accuracy. A word recognition score is obtained from the student’s oral reading of passages. To obtain this score, you must code and score this oral reading.

104 C H A P T E R 5

TABLE 5.2 IRI Passage Criteria for Three Reading Levels

Reading Level Word Recognition Accuracy (%)   Comprehension (%)

Independent 98–100 and 90–100

Instructional 95–97 and 70–89

Frustrational Less than 95 or Less than 70

Your first step is to code the oral reading. As the student reads, you need to mark all miscues using a standard system so that you can later determine exactly what the student said. Commercial IRIs generally provide their own coding systems. Teachers who construct their own IRIs or use the one provided with this book should use the coding system presented in Figure 5.2.

FIGURE 5.2 Coding System for Scoring IRI Passage Miscues

1. Omissions: Circle. □ on the table

2. Insertions: Insert the added word above a caret.

□ on the table

3. Substitutions, mispronunciations: Underline the word in the text and write the word that the student said above the word in text.

□ on the table

4. Reversals: Same as substitutions.

5. Repetitions: Draw a line with an arrow below the words. □ on the table

6. Words pronounced correctly but with hesitations: Write an H over the word.

□ on the table

7. Lack of punctuation: Circle ignored punctuation. □ I saw Mary . She was happy.

8. Student corrections: Cross out any previous responses and mark with SC.

□ on the table

big

∧

tablet

H

SC tablet

Administering an Informal Reading Inventory 105

Omissions, additions, substitutions, and reversals usually count as word recogni- tion errors. You might, in addition, want to record repetitions, hesitations, and omis- sions of punctuation. However, because these three things do not usually alter the meaning of text, we do not recommend counting them as errors. However, they can provide additional information about a student’s word recognition strategies.

After coding the oral reading, you need to score it. The easiest and most reli- able way to score the oral reading is to assign one point to each omission, addition, substitution, and reversal. Extensive field testing (Leslie & Caldwell, 2011) indicates that this scoring system places students at appropriate instructional levels. However, an alternative option, that of only scoring miscues that change passage meaning, is discussed in the section “Special Issues and Options in Using IRIs.”

Certain scoring problems may arise during an IRI. Suggested solutions to some of these are based on field testing by Leslie and Caldwell (2011):

◆ If a student repeatedly mispronounces the same word, count it as incorrect each time. If a student read an assignment in school, each mispronunciation would affect comprehension.

◆ If a student omits an entire line or phrase, count it as one miscue. In this situa- tion, the student simply lost his or her place.

◆ Proper names are difficult for students because they often do not follow regular phonics patterns. Do not count a mispronunciation of a proper name as incor- rect unless it changes the sex of the character. For example, do not count the substitution of Mary for Maria. However, do count the substitution of Mark for Maria. Sometimes students use a nonword to pronounce a proper name such as Moree for Maria. If the student says this consistently throughout the passage, do not count it as an error. If, however, the student pronounces it differently on other occasions, count it as incorrect each time. Follow these guidelines for names of places as well.

◆ Miscues that reflect a student’s speech patterns should never count as errors. In other words, mispronunciations resulting from dialect differences, speaking English as a second language, immature speech patterns, or speech impediments do not count as errors. For example, a student who speaks a dialect other than standard English might pronounce the word tests as tes, both in speaking and in reading an IRI passage. In such miscues, readers are simply recoding the written word into their own pronunciation. Pupils should never be penalized for such recoding.

After you have counted all of the errors on an individual passage, total them. Then compute the percentage of words read correctly in the passage. In the coded and scored passage in Figure 5.3, the student had four errors, and 92 correct words in the total 96 words. The percentage correct is 96%, an instructional level.

92 Words Correct divided by 96 Total Words multiplied by 100 = 96% To make this process easier, use Table 5.3. Simply find the intersection between

the number of words in the passage and the error count. For example, if the passage contains 103 words and the error count is 9, then the percentage correct is 91, a frus- tration level.

106 C H A P T E R 5

FIGURE 5.3 Student’s Coded Oral Reading of a Primer-Level IRI Passage

Nick’s Trip to the Lake

Nick and his dad like animals. One day, Nick and his dad went to the lake. They went to

see the animals. They sat next to the lake. They were very still.

Then Nick saw a big duck. He saw the duck swim to a big rock in the lake. Something

made the duck fly away fast.

Nick asked his dad, “Why did the duck fly away?”

Nick’s dad said, “Look over there.” He showed Nick something in the lake. Nick

thought he would see something big.

What a surprise to see a little green frog!

Scoring System

Omissions: Repetitions:

Insertions: ∧ Hesitations: H

Substitutions: Write the word and underline Student corrections: SC

Words in passage 96 Errors 4 Oral Reading Accuracy Score 96%

Once

∧ ∧ out Then

H

SC

After you have determined the percentage of words read correctly, translate this percentage score into a level (independent, instructional, or frustration) by using Table 5.2.

Scoring Comprehension. After the student reads each passage, the teacher asks questions to check comprehension. If the student’s answer is incorrect, the teacher writes the student response. Sometimes this can suggest issues in comprehension. If the response is correct, simply mark a “+.” The teacher obtains a percentage score; for example, if the student answers three of four comprehension questions correctly, the comprehension score would be 75% on that selection. Table 5.4 provides the per- centage of correct scores for different numbers of comprehension questions. Translate the percentage score on comprehension into a level (independent, instructional, or frustration) from Table 5.2.

Administering an Informal Reading Inventory 107

TABLE 5.3 Percentages for Word Recognition Accuracy Scores (Each Number Indicates Percentage Correct)

Number of Errors

  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

N u

m b er

o f

W or

d s

in P

a ss

a g e

28–32 97 93 90 87 83 80 77 73 70 67 63 60 57 53 50 47 43 40 37 33 30 27 23 20 17 13

33–37 97 94 92 89 86 83 80 77 74 72 69 66 63 60 57 54 52 49 46 43 40 37 34 32 29 26

38–42 98 95 93 90 88 85 82 80 78 75 72 70 68 65 62 60 58 55 52 50 48 45 42 40 38 35

43–47 98 96 93 91 89 87 84 82 80 78 76 73 71 69 67 64 62 60 58 56 53 51 49 47 44 42

48–52 98 96 94 92 90 88 86 84 82 80 78 76 74 72 70 68 66 64 62 60 58 56 54 52 50 48

53–57 98 96 95 93 91 89 87 86 84 82 80 78 77 76 73 71 69 67 66 64 62 60 58 56 55 53

58–62 98 97 95 93 92 90 88 87 85 83 82 80 78 77 75 73 72 70 68 67 65 63 62 60 58 57

63–67 98 97 95 94 92 91 89 88 86 85 83 82 80 78 77 75 74 72 71 69 68 66 65 63 62 60

68–72 99 97 95 94 93 92 90 89 87 86 84 83 82 80 79 77 76 74 73 72 70 69 67 66 64 63

73–77 99 97 96 94 93 92 91 89 87 86 85 84 83 81 80 79 77 76 75 73 72 71 69 68 67 65

78–82 99 98 96 95 94 92 91 90 89 88 86 85 84 82 81 80 79 78 76 75 74 72 71 70 69 68

83–87 99 98 96 95 94 93 92 91 89 88 87 86 85 84 82 81 80 79 78 76 75 74 73 72 71 69

88–92 99 98 97 96 94 93 92 91 90 89 88 87 86 84 83 82 81 80 79 78 77 76 74 73 72 71

93–97 99 98 97 96 95 94 93 92 91 89 88 87 86 85 84 83 82 81 80 79 78 77 76 75 74 73

98–102 99 98 97 96 95 94 93 92 91 90 89 88 87 86 85 84 83 82 81 80 79 78 77 76 75 74

103–107 99 98 97 96 95 94 93 92 91 90 90 89 88 87 86 85 84 83 82 81 80 79 78 77 76 75

108–112 99 98 97 96 95 94 93 92 91 91 90 89 88 87 86 85 85 84 83 82 81 80 79 78 77 76

113–117 99 98 97 97 96 95 94 93 92 91 90 90 89 88 87 86 85 84 84 83 82 81 80 79 78 77

118–122 99 98 98 97 96 95 94 93 92 92 91 90 89 88 88 87 86 85 84 83 82 82 81 80 79 79

123–127 99 98 98 97 96 95 94 94 93 92 91 90 90 89 88 87 86 86 85 84 83 82 82 81 80 79

128–132 99 98 98 97 96 95 95 94 93 92 92 91 90 89 88 88 87 86 85 85 84 83 82 82 81 80

133–137 99 99 98 97 96 96 95 94 93 93 92 91 90 90 89 88 87 87 86 85 84 84 83 82 81 81

138–142 99 99 98 97 96 96 95 94 94 93 92 91 91 90 89 89 88 87 86 85 85 84 84 83 82 81

143–147 99 99 98 97 97 96 95 95 94 93 92 92 91 90 90 89 88 88 87 86 86 85 84 83 83 82

148–152 99 99 98 97 97 96 95 95 94 93 92 92 91 91 90 89 89 88 87 87 86 86 85 84 83 83

153–157 99 99 98 97 97 96 95 95 94 94 93 92 92 91 90 90 89 88 88 87 86 86 85 85 84 83

158–162 99 99 98 98 97 96 96 95 94 94 93 92 92 91 91 90 89 89 88 88 87 86 86 85 84 84

163–167 99 99 98 98 97 96 96 95 95 94 93 93 92 92 91 90 90 89 88 88 87 87 86 85 85 84

168–172 99 99 98 98 97 96 96 95 95 94 94 93 93 92 91 91 90 89 89 88 88 87 86 86 85 85

173–177 99 99 98 98 97 97 96 95 95 94 94 93 93 92 91 91 90 90 89 89 88 87 87 86 86 85

178–182 99 99 98 98 97 97 96 96 95 94 94 93 93 92 92 91 91 90 89 89 88 88 87 87 86 86

183–187 99 99 98 98 97 97 96 96 95 95 94 94 93 92 92 91 91 90 90 89 89 88 88 87 87 86

188–192 99 99 98 98 97 97 96 96 95 95 94 94 93 93 92 92 91 91 90 89 89 88 88 87 87 86

193–197 99 99 98 98 97 97 96 96 95 95 94 94 93 93 92 92 91 91 90 90 89 89 88 88 87 87

198–202 100 99 98 98 98 97 96 96 96 95 94 94 93 93 92 92 91 91 90 90 89 89 88 88 87 87

203–207 100 99 99 98 98 97 97 96 96 95 95 94 94 93 93 92 92 91 91 90 90 89 89 88 88 87

208–212 100 99 99 98 98 97 97 96 96 95 95 94 94 93 93 92 92 91 91 90 90 90 89 89 88 88

213–217 100 99 99 98 98 97 97 96 96 95 95 94 94 93 93 93 92 92 91 91 90 90 89 89 88 88

218–222 100 99 99 98 98 97 97 96 96 96 95 95 94 94 93 93 92 92 91 91 90 90 90 89 89 88

223–227 100 99 99 98 98 97 97 96 96 96 95 95 94 94 93 93 92 92 92 91 91 90 90 89 89 88

228–232 100 99 99 98 98 97 97 97 96 96 95 95 94 94 94 93 93 92 92 91 91 90 90 90 89 89

233–237 100 99 99 98 98 98 97 97 96 96 95 95 95 94 94 93 93 92 92 92 91 91 90 90 89 89

238–242 100 99 99 98 98 98 97 97 96 96 96 95 95 94 94 94 93 93 92 92 92 91 91 90 90 89

108 C H A P T E R 5

TABLE 5.4 Percentages for Comprehension Scores (Each Number Indicates a Percentage-Correct Score)

Number of Correct Responses                  

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

N u

m b er

o f

Q u

es ti

on s

1 100                      

2 50 100                    

3 33 67 100                  

4 25 50 75 100                

5 20 40 60 80 100              

6 17 33 50 67 83 100            

7 14 26 43 57 71 86 100          

8 12 25 38 50 62 75 88 100        

9 11 22 33 44 56 67 78 89 100      

10 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100    

11 9 18 27 36 45 55 64 73 82 91 100  

12 8 17 25 33 42 50 58 67 75 83 92 100

Determining Passage Levels. Once you have scored both word recognition accu- racy and comprehension, you are ready to determine a total level for that passage. For a silent passage, a student has only one score that determines passage level: the comprehension score. Leslie, for example, read a fourth-grade passage silently and achieved at an instructional level for comprehension. Therefore, her level for that passage was instructional.

However, if a student has read a passage orally, the teacher has both a word recognition accuracy score and a comprehension score to determine whether the passage is at a student’s independent, instructional, or frustration level. If a student achieves the same level for both word recognition accuracy and comprehension, determining the level is easy. For example, on a second-grade passage, Mark achieved at an independent level for both word recognition and comprehension. Therefore, the second-grade passage was at an independent level.

However, students sometimes have different levels for word recognition accu- racy and comprehension. In this case, use the lower level to determine passage level. For example, on a third-grade passage, Mark achieved at an instructional level for word recognition accuracy but an independent level for comprehension. Therefore, the third-grade passage was at an instructional level. Table 5.5 helps you to assign levels to oral passages.

At times, a student may achieve at the independent or instructional levels on two (or even more) passages. For example, a student reading oral passages might achieve an

Administering an Informal Reading Inventory 109

instructional score on the primer, first-grade, and second-grade passages. If this situa- tion happens, the highest level is the instructional level. In this case, the instructional level is second grade.

Combining Oral and Silent Levels Into One Overall Level. Determine the levels for oral reading and then determine the levels for silent reading. Students often per- form differently on oral and silent reading and may achieve different levels for each one. However, to make instructional decisions, you should combine your results for both modes of reading.

To combine oral and silent levels, first put the level of each oral and silent passage side by side according to grade level. Then, if the two levels are different, choose the lower level for the total reading level.

For example, Leslie, who is in the fifth grade, achieved these levels on orally read passages:

Grade 2—Independent Grade 3—Instructional Grade 4—Frustration

In this case, Leslie’s oral reading levels, which are quite easy to determine, are as follows:

Grade 2—Oral Independent Reading Level Grade 3—Oral Instructional Reading Level Grade 4—Oral Frustration Reading Level

TABLE 5.5 Criteria for Assigning Levels to Oral Reading Passages

Comprehension Word Recognition Passage Level

Independent Independent Independent

Independent Instructional Instructional

Independent Frustrational Frustrational

Instructional Instructional Instructional

Instructional Independent Instructional

Instructional Frustrational Frustrational

Frustrational Frustrational Frustrational

Frustrational Independent Frustrational

Frustrational Instructional Frustrational

110 C H A P T E R 5

On silently read passages, Leslie received these levels:

Grade 2—Independent Grade 3—Independent Grade 4—Instructional Grade 5—Frustration

Based on these passages, Leslie’s silent reading levels are as follows:

Grade 3—Silent Independent Level Grade 4—Silent Instructional Level Grade 5—Silent Frustration Level

To determine Leslie’s combined reading levels, place the results from each silent and oral passage side by side and then choose the lower level.

Oral Reading Passages Silent Reading Passages Combined Level

2 Independent 2 Independent 2 Independent 3 Instructional 3 Independent 3 Instructional 4 Frustration 4 Instructional 4 Frustration 5 (not given) 5 Frustration  

Based on this information, Leslie’s total reading levels are as follows:

◆ Grade 2—Combined Independent Reading Level ◆ Grade 3—Combined Instructional Reading Level ◆ Grade 4—Combined Frustration Reading Level

Assigning a combined reading level is helpful in evaluating the severity of a read- ing problem. Because Leslie’s combined reading level is instructional at the third- grade level, and because she is a fifth grader, her reading problem can be considered severe. With teacher guidance, she will probably be successful reading third-grade text. However, as a fifth grader, confining her to third-grade text will probably not raise her to grade level. As indicated in Chapter 6, she would also need guided expo- sure to grade-level material.

Interpreting the Scores of the IRI The IRI is a rich source of information about a student’s reading, and it can pro- vide detailed answers to the three diagnostic questions asked earlier in this chapter: (1) Does the student have a reading problem? (2) How severe is it? (3) What is the general area of the reading problem? Answering these questions requires adding some

Administering an Informal Reading Inventory 111

procedures to ones already given. These procedures provide options for enriching the information obtained from an IRI.

Does the Student Have a Reading Problem and How Severe Is It? To estimate the existence and severity of a reading problem, the teacher should examine the gap between a student’s highest instructional level on the IRI and the level of text that would be appropriate for that student.

Let’s consider the case of Subash, a sixth grader whose IRI summary is presented in Table 5.6. His teacher reported that Subash’s class is reading sixth-grade material. On the IRI, Subash’s combined independent level is 2. Because he scored at an instructional level on both Grades 3 and 4, his instructional level is the higher level (4). His frustra- tion level is 5. The gap between Subash’s appropriate reading level (6) and his highest instructional level on the IRI (4) indicates that he has a severe reading problem, accord- ing to the criteria by Spache (1981), mentioned earlier in the chapter.

We now move to the third diagnostic question: determining the general area(s) of the reading problem. To answer this question, we will consider the areas one by one.

Using Miscue Analysis to Determine the Nature of Word Recognition Accuracy. The student’s word recognition accuracy score is generally based on passages because reading a passage is a more authentic task than reading a word list. However, the teacher should be aware that certain things, such as context of the passage, the familiarity

TABLE 5.6 IRI Summary for Subash

  Oral Passages

Silent Passages

Combined Reading Listening

Level Word Recognition Accuracy Level

Comp Level

Passage Level

Comp & Passage Level

Passage Level

Passage Level

Preprimer — — — — — —

Primer — — — — — —

1 — — — — — —

2 Ind Ind Ind Ind Ind —

3 Ind Ins Ins Ins Ins —

4 Ind Ins Ins Ins Ins —

5 Ind Frus Frus Frus Frus Ind

6 — — — — — Ins

7 — — — — — Frus

8 — — — — — —

112 C H A P T E R 5

of the topic, and the presence of pictures, may inflate a student’s score (Leslie & Caldwell, 2011). Rhyme or repetition of phrases in the passage can also aid word rec- ognition. If time permits, the teacher should verify the word recognition level with another passage at the same level. A word recognition accuracy score below the third- grade level on IRI passages is one sign that the primary nature of the reading difficulty is word recognition.

Judging a student’s word recognition accuracy also involves determining the strategies the student uses to recognize words. Only by knowing the tools that students use to identify words can the teacher help them develop missing skills. Miscues, which are mismatches between the text and what the student says, provide opportunities to analyze these strategies.

Some miscues show that the student is using meaning or context clues. A student using context might substitute a word that makes sense in the context, for example, car for bus or animal for leopard.

Other miscues show that the student is using phonics clues to recognize words. A student who uses phonics clues makes miscues that contain many of the same sounds as the words that are in the passage. However, the miscues will often not make sense in context. In fact, sometimes they are not even real words.

An exact recording of oral reading can be analyzed to see which strategies a student tends to use. We call this miscue analysis (Goodman, 1969). Some forms of miscue analysis are complex; others are simple. However, they all share a common purpose: to determine the reader’s strategies for identifying words. Almost all try to determine whether the reader pays primary attention to letter–sound matching, to meaning, or to both as skilled readers do.

To help analyze a reader’s strategies, look at a form of miscue analysis adapted from Leslie and Caldwell (2011); Table 5.7 presents the miscue analysis worksheet.

In columns 1 and 2 on the miscue analysis worksheet, record the text word in column one and the student’s miscue in column 2. Then ask three sets of questions about each miscue:

1. Is the miscue similar in sound to the text word? Do the miscue and text word begin with the same letter (went for want) or consonant pattern (crock for cricket)? Do they share a common vowel pattern (then for when) or (look for book)? Does the miscue resemble the text word in the final letters (fits for fins) or have the same morphologi- cal ending (jumping for singing or watched for wanted)? If the answer is “yes” for one or more of these areas, the student is paying attention to phonics when reading. Indicate if the miscue is similar in sound to the text word in any way by placing a check mark in column 3.

Some miscue analysis formats differentiate between miscues in the beginning, medial, or ending positions; that is, analyze them separately. However, we believe it is sufficient to indicate similarity as signaled by either of these positions. First, data analyzed by Leslie and Caldwell (2011) determined that primer through third-grade readers made similar percentages of each type of miscue across grade levels. Miscues with similar be- ginnings were most common and the percentage of similar medial and ending miscues

Administering an Informal Reading Inventory 113

TABLE 5.7 Miscue Analysis Worksheet

Student Name Selections

1. Text Word

2. Miscue 3. Similar Letter– Sound Patterns

4. Changes Meaning

5. Corrected 6. Does Not Change Meaning

7. Corrected

Analysis Total Number of Miscues in Each Column

1. 2. Total All Miscues

3. Total Similar Letter– Sound Patterns

4. Total Meaning Change Miscues

5. Total Corrected Meaning Change Miscues

6. Total Non- Meaning Change Miscues

7. Total Corrected Non- Meaning Change Miscues

Analysis Total of All Miscue (Column 2)/Total Miscue Type (Columns 3–7) = %

1. 2. Total All Miscues

3. Total Similar Letter– Sound Patterns/ Total Miscues = %

4. Total Meaning Change Miscues/ Total Miscues = %

5. Total Corrected Meaning Change Miscues / Total Meaning Change Miscues = %

6. Total Non- Corrected Meaning Change Miscues/ Total Miscues = %

7. Total Corrected Non- Meaning Change Miscues/ Total Non- Meaning Change Miscues = %

114 C H A P T E R 5

were almost identical. Second, we believe that phonics instruction should pay attention to the entire word as opposed to focusing on word parts. For example, Beck (2006) suggests that beginning and ending sounds should be taught concurrently and that vowel sounds should be taught right from the beginning.

2. Does the miscue change the author’s meaning and is it corrected? Correction of a meaning change miscue suggests that the reader is paying attention to meaning as he or she reads. In columns 4 and 5, place a check mark to indicate whether the miscue changed meaning and whether it was corrected. In columns 6 and 7 record the correc- tion pattern for miscues that do not change meaning. What is the difference? Good readers correct miscues that do not make sense in the context of the passage. We are sure you have had the experience of misreading a word and, after continuing in the text, recognizing that what you are reading does make sense. So you do what good readers do. You go back and correct the misread word. Correcting words that change text meaning is the mark of a good reader.

But what about corrections of words that do not alter the meaning of the text? For example, the text says “the teacher divided the children into groups” and the reader reads it as “the teacher put the children into groups.” “Put” and “divided” do not alter text meaning. We can possibly hypothesize that such a reader is primarily focused on the meaning of the passage and saw no need for correction because the student’s read- ing of “put” made sense in the context of the passage

Pilot data (Leslie & Caldwell, 2011) indicated that through second grade, read- ers tend to self correct both non-meaning-change and meaning change miscues. This suggests that their primary focus was word identification. However, readers at a third- grade level primarily focused on self-correcting miscues that distorted meaning, which suggests attention to meaning as opposed to correct pronunciation.

Once you have recorded the miscues, first count the total number of miscues made by the student (column 2). Then count the total number of checks in columns 3 through 7. You can compare the number of miscues with similar letter–sound patterns (column 3) to the total number of miscues (column 2) by dividing the total of column 3 by the total of column 2. For example, if a student made a total of 18 miscues and 13 were similar in sound, 13/18 =72%. In a similar manner, determine the percent- age of miscues that changed meaning (column 4) and were corrected (column 5) and the percentage of those that did not change meaning (column 6) and were corrected (column 7).

In summary, miscue analysis offers an indication of the following good reader behaviors: attempting to match letters and sounds and paying attention to meaning by correcting meaning change miscues. Miscue analysis also indicates if the reader is paying more attention to pronunciation than to meaning by correcting miscues that do not change the meaning of the text. If this is the case, instruction should help the reader to focus on meaning as well as word identification.

Determining the Nature of Reading Fluency. To assess reading fluency, calculate the reading rate, or the number of words per minute, for oral and silent passages. To determine the reading rate, take the number of words in the passage, multiply by 60,

Administering an Informal Reading Inventory 115

and divide by the number of seconds required by the student to read the selection. This calculation yields a word-per-minute score.

Number of words × 60 Number of seconds to read

= Words per minute

For example, Tammie read a second-grade passage that contained 249 words in 2 minutes and 15 seconds (or 135 seconds); 249 multiplied by 60 equals 14,940. Divide this number by 135 seconds. Tammie’s reading rate for that passage is 110  words per minute (WPM).

Some have argued that a WPM score is primarily an indicator of reading speed, and they suggest that measuring rate as correct words per minute (CWPM) ad- dresses both speed and accuracy (Fuchs, Fuchs, Hosp, & Jenkins, 2001; Kame’enui & Simmons, 2001). To compute CWPM, take the number of words in the passage and subtract the number of miscues to arrive at the number of words read correctly. Multiply by 60 and divide by the number of seconds the student took to read the pas- sage. For example, Tammie made 12 miscues as she read the 249-word passage, so the number of words read correctly was 237; thus, 237 multiplied by 60 equals 14,220. Divide this by 135 seconds and Tammie’s rate is 105 corrected words per minute. See Chapter 9 for additional information on CWPM.

What is a normal reading rate for different levels of passages? It is difficult to say. Ranges for reading rate at each grade level are quite wide. For example, WPM rates for second graders can range from 43 to 89 WPM. The span is even wider for fifth grade, 61 to 133 WPM (Leslie & Caldwell, 2011). Hasbrouck and Tindal (2006) offer grade-level norms for oral reading fluency that can be used for comparison and some informal reading inventories provide suggested rates (Leslie & Caldwell, 2011) However, such guidelines are only advisory. Reading rate must always be interpreted in relation to comprehension. A student who reads below the lowest reading rate given for a passage or grade level probably needs work in reading fluency, especially if comprehension is poor. A slow reader who cannot comprehend adequately is prob- ably concentrating all of his or her attention on recognizing the words. This situation strongly suggests a need for fluency instruction. However, fluency instruction may be less important for a student who reads slowly but comprehends well. We must also realize that good readers are naturally less fluent when reading unfamiliar or difficult text. This will be discussed more fully in Chapter 9.

At times, the teacher may only need to listen to a student to determine that the need is reading fluency. Slow, hesitant, expressionless reading that is filled with pauses suggests that a student is working hard to identify words and lacks the fluency essential for making sense of the author’s message.

Determining the Nature of Comprehension. If both word recognition and com- prehension levels are at the frustration level on a passage, the comprehension problems are probably due to poor word recognition. Because of this relationship, the student needs to concentrate on improving word recognition accuracy or fluency.

However, if word recognition accuracy and fluency are good but comprehension is poor, the student probably has a comprehension problem and needs to focus on

116 C H A P T E R 5

comprehension strategies. If the problem is comprehension, careful analysis of an IRI can provide some important instructional hints.

Some students have problems in comprehension because they believe that reading is “getting all the words right.” These readers are often extremely accu- rate and tend to self-correct miscues that do not change meaning. As a result, they do not actively construct meaning as they read. For example, Susan was asked to read an IRI passage containing the following sentences: “Bill’s mom saw the dog. Bill asked, ‘May I keep it?’ ” She read, “Bill’s mother saw the dog. Bill asked, ‘Can I have it?’ ” Then she paused and went back, carefully correcting each miscue. Susan’s comprehension of the total passage was poor, probably the result of her concern with accuracy. For a reader like Susan, the teacher should emphasize that reading is meaning, not just saying words.

An analysis of IRI questions may also provide insight into comprehension pat- terns. Many IRIs divide questions into literal and inferential categories. Comparing the percentages correct on these two types of questions helps determine whether the reader is focused on factual information or able to draw inferences. You might also note whether a student appears to get the central focus of the passage or is more observant of details.

If you ask a student to retell a passage after reading it, you can see exactly how he or she constructs meaning. In judging a retelling, use these questions as guidelines for a narrative or story:

Does the retelling contain the central events of the passage? Does the student remember the most important facts? Is the student able to retell the events in sequence? Finally, when students read both oral and silent passages, you can determine

whether they comprehend better after oral or silent reading. Young or very disabled readers are usually able to comprehend better after they have read orally. These stu- dents need practice to increase their comfort in silent reading. More mature readers comprehend better after silent reading than after oral reading.

Most IRIs are based on narrative passages; that is, passages that tell stories. Although these passages allow you to assess comprehension, it is more appropriate to judge study strategies from informational passages. In the section that follows, we address the use of IRIs that contain informational passages.

Extending the IRI to Examine Performance in Informational Text. Students can often comprehend narrative text but have problems with informational text. This may be because narrative text is emphasized in the lower grades. Also, written narra- tives are similar in structure to those on television and in the movies, and many narra- tives lack the detailed complexity of much informational text. Typically, IRIs focus on narrative passages. However some, like the Qualitative Reading Inventory-5 (Leslie & Caldwell, 2011), offer both narrative and informational passages at all levels.

If the IRI you are using has both narrative and expository passages, we recom- mend finding a student’s instructional level for both. In most cases you may find that the instructional level for expository material is well below that for narrative text. This offers a clear direction for the type of material to emphasize in instruction. If the

Administering an Informal Reading Inventory 117

IRI you are using does not have both types of passages, use the narrative passages to determine an instructional level for your student. Then, have your student read ex- pository material at that instructional level to see how he or she handles such material.

What Is the Nature of Language and Meaning Vocabulary?: Determining the Listening Level. Because reading is a language process, people read only as well as they can understand language and word meanings. An IRI enables a teacher to deter- mine a student’s language level by finding a student’s listening level.

To do this, the teacher reads aloud IRI passages and asks the comprehension questions about the passage. The highest level at which the student gets 70% or more of the answers correct is the listening level.

The listening level provides an estimate of the student’s listening, or language, comprehension level. If a student’s listening level is lower than his or her chronologi- cal grade level, that student needs to develop better language skills. Instruction should then focus on developing rich language and learning more word meanings.

In contrast, the example of Subash, the sixth grader whose IRI summary sheet is presented in Table 5.6, shows a student who has a good language base. Subash’s high listening level (6) but lower instructional reading level (4) indicates a 2-year gap be- tween his current reading level and his language level. The fact that his listening level is equal to his grade level indicates that his language base is sufficient for reading at grade level. No language development is needed for him; instead, he needs to work on reading.

You can also use the IRI to directly assess knowledge of meaning vocabulary. After the student has read and answered the questions in a passage, ask the student to define (or use in a sentence) key vocabulary words in the passage. Remember that you may have to pronounce words that the student has not read correctly in the passage. A student who knows the meanings of difficult words in a grade-level passage has a strong vocabulary base. A student who cannot define these words or use them in a sentence needs more development of meaning vocabulary. If a student cannot define a word in isolation, you might ask him or her to reread the sentence in the passage to see if context helps the student with word meaning.

Special Issues and Options in Using IRIs The informal nature of an IRI allows many options for administration and adaptation to the special needs of students. At times, you may face some difficult decisions. This section discusses some of these issues and, in addition, presents some alternatives for administering and interpreting the IRI.

Pronouncing Words for Students. When reading IRI selections orally, a student may sometimes become “stuck” on a word. The teacher may be tempted to supply this word to make the student more comfortable and able to continue. However, pronouncing words for the student may inflate the student’s comprehension score, because understanding the passage depends on reading the words accurately. To obtain the most accurate assessment, teachers are strongly discouraged from supplying words.

118 C H A P T E R 5

Tell students to say “pass” for unknown words, and score these passes as omission errors. Also encourage students to try pronouncing a word before they give up. However, some guidelines for IRI administration permit teachers to aid students.

Unclear IRI Results. When administering an IRI, you may sometimes have dif- ficulty determining a stable level. What are some of the things that can happen? A student may score just slightly below the criteria for a specific level, for example, scoring 94% for word recognition accuracy on one passage, only slightly below the frustration cutoff of 95%. At other times, a student may not do well on a certain topic. Should the teacher count these passages as frustration and simply discontinue testing? If you are unsure of the correct decision, you should continue to gather information by testing at higher levels or administering another passage at the same level.

At times, however, you will not be able to come to a perfectly clear-cut decision and may have to make exceptions to some of the scoring criteria. Because the IRI is an informal instrument, you should feel free to modify criteria by using your own judgment. You should, however, note that you have made an exception to the scoring criteria and explain the reason for this exception.

Alternative Ways to Score Miscues. As stated earlier, scoring each miscue as one error is the best and most reliable way to reach an appropriate reading level for your student. This recommendation has been verified with extensive field testing. How- ever, miscues that do not change the author’s meaning suggest that the student is actu- ally comprehending the passage. For example, consider the following sentence: The teachers divided the children into four groups. A substitution of put for divided would not affect meaning. On the other hand, the substitution of from for four does distort meaning. Some reading teachers prefer not to count miscues that retain meaning (put for divided), and some IRIs such as the Qualitative Reading Inventory-5 (Leslie & Caldwell, 2011) provide directions and scoring guides for both options.

Which option should you use? Because the IRI is an informal instrument, you are free to choose the scoring system that makes you most comfortable. However, once you choose the scoring system that best fits your needs, you should use it consistently.

Allowing Students to Look for Answers. Another option in administering an IRI is to use look-backs. After scoring the questions and determining the comprehension level, you can ask the student to look back in the text to locate or correct answers. This procedure allows you to note the difference between comprehension during reading and memory after reading. A student may read a passage and understand it fully. However, when asked questions following reading, the student may forget cer- tain parts. Hasn’t this happened to you? If a student can locate or correct answers, you can assume that he or she understood the passage. If a student is unable to successfully use the look-back strategy, perhaps the problem is one of basic comprehension during reading.

Leslie and Caldwell (2011) found that students reading at the third-grade level and above could effectively use look-backs to raise their comprehension scores. This situation was most evident in upper-level middle school and high school passages.

Administering an Informal Reading Inventory 119

Students who scored at the frustration level for comprehension often raised their scores to an instructional or independent level following look-backs. In fact, Leslie and Caldwell (2011) recommend that comprehension levels for upper-level text (sixth grade and above) be determined following look-backs. Actually, the look-back strategy parallels what students are asked to do in school. Rarely are they expected to answer questions without the support of the text unless it is a testing situation.

If you wish to use look-backs, first ask and score the questions to arrive at a comprehension level without look-backs. Then ask the student to look back and score the results of his or her efforts. A comprehension score with look-backs represents the total of all questions answered correctly for both procedures.

Using an IRI to Measure a Student’s Growth. If you are measuring classroom growth or growth following an intervention program, decide when you wish to assess the student. Every 3 or 4 months is a realistic interval for the classroom. Intervention program intervals can be of short or long duration.

Choose an IRI passage to administer prior to instruction. Obtain a score for both word recognition and comprehension. If the student scores at an independent level, continue at higher levels until you reach the student’s frustration level. Then, when the classroom interval is over or the intervention is completed, administer the same passage as a posttest measure.

You have another option. You can administer a different IRI passage for the pre- test and the posttest. This option is preferable if the duration between pretest and posttest is short and you think that memory for the initial passage may inflate the results. Of course, the two passages should be as alike as possible. They should be at the same level and have the same structure: narrative or expository. They should both be relatively familiar to the student.

Levels of Questions on IRIs. Most IRIs have two types of questions: literal (or explicit) and inferential (or implicit). However, there are multiple levels of inferential questions (Caldwell, 2008; Ciardiello, 1998). Applegate, Quinn, and Applegate (2002) describe three basic types: low-level inference items, high-level inference items, and response items. The answers to low-level inference items are not stated in the text, but they are relatively obvious. Some may require the reader to identify information that is stated in different words from the question. Others may require identification of simple relationships such as a causal relationship that is not marked by the signal word because. High-level inference items ask the reader to identify an alternative solu- tion, offer a plausible explanation, or predict past or future actions. Response items ask the reader to defend an idea and react to the passage as a whole. Applegate et al., (2002) caution that IRIs may contain a variety of such disparate items loosely grouped under the heading of inferential, or implicit, questions. To put it simply, some infer- ence questions are more difficult than others.

What does this variety of inferential questions mean for IRI administration? You should be aware that all questions are not the same level of difficulty and take this into account when you assess a student’s comprehension. Dewitz and Dewitz (2003) carefully analyzed a student’s responses on an IRI and divided them into several categories: failing

120 C H A P T E R 5

to link ideas across a passage, difficulty with causal inferences, excessive elaboration or overreliance on prior knowledge, problems with vocabulary, and problems with syntax. Using these categories, they designed a program of instruction for each student based on areas of need.

We do not necessarily advise you to construct such elaborate classifications of inference difficulties. However, if you decide to further analyze a student’s answers, we suggest a simpler classification scheme than those just described. You can use the question–answer relationships (QARs) strategy as devised by Raphael (1982, 1986) and explained in Chapter 12. This strategy provides you with two pieces of information: a system for classifying students’ answers and a procedure for teaching students how to locate answers to four different kinds of questions: right-there questions, think-and- search questions, author-and-me questions, and on-my-own questions.

The emergence of the Common Core State Standards Initiative (2010) will have serious ramifications for IRIs. Few questions on existing IRIs meet the criteria for questioning set by the Common Core. For example, the Common Core standards ask students to cite text evidence in support of inferences; to analyze events, procedures, and interactions; to determine text structure; to compare and contrast points of view; and to interpret figurative language. Few questions in existing IRIs assess a student’s ability to deal successfully with such questions.

IRIs and Response-to-Intervention

What role does the IRI play in the response-to-intervention (RTI) initiative? Lipson (2011) described five purposes for RTI assessment: screening, diagnostics, formative progress monitoring, benchmark progress monitoring, and summative outcome as- sessment. Given the extensive information that can be provided by an IRI, it fits well into the area of diagnostics. As mentioned previously in this chapter, an IRI can an- swer three critical questions: Does the student have a reading problem? How severe is it? What is the general area of the reading problem? RTI screening may identify the existence and severity of a reading problem but a carefully administered IRI can identify if the problem is centered on word identification, fluency, and/or comprehen- sion. Performance on the IRI word lists can suggest a reader who has not developed a workable sight vocabulary. Miscue analysis of errors made while reading the passages can differentiate two general types of readers: those who primarily focus on saying the words and those who concentrate on deriving meaning from the text. Calculations of reading rate on IRI passages can suggest a need for fluency development. Finally, differentiating between a student’s ability to answer literal versus inferential questions can offer clear guidelines for comprehension instruction.

An IRI also fits within summative outcome assessment. When ongoing progress monitoring suggests progress on the part of a student, an IRI coupled with formal measures can verify that sufficient progress has been made to remove a student from RTI instruction. As mentioned in the previous chapter, intervention should prepare a

Administering an Informal Reading Inventory 121

student to function successfully in his or her grade-level classroom. An IRI that con- tains passages representative of classroom text can indicate if a student will be able to succeed in his or her classroom.

Combining IRI Assessment With Think-Alouds

Assessment does not need to involve special instruments such as word lists or IRI passages. You can learn much about students’ reading abilities by reading any text with them and asking pertinent questions. When students meet an unfamiliar word, you can ask how they will go about pronouncing it. If the students pro- nounce the word correctly but do not know its meaning, you can probe to discover what strategies they use. In talking about a selection, you can ask the students how they arrived at answers to questions. You can ask them to explain what is in their minds at that point. Basically, you are asking students to stop at various points during reading and think out loud. The think-aloud process has been examined by a variety of researchers who agree that it offers an interesting opportunity to ob- serve the thinking that occurs during reading (Caldwell & Leslie, 2010; Pressley & Afflerbach, 1995).

The think-aloud approach works only if you know exactly what you are look- ing for. For example, Harmon (2000) listed a variety of strategies that students might use to determine the meaning of an unfamiliar word: They could examine sentence context or the context of the entire selection; make connections to events in the text, to text and language structures, to the author’s style, or to ideas beyond the text; or use word-level strategies, such as sounding out or structural analysis, the dictionary, or other outside sources. By asking students to think aloud when they met an unfamiliar word, Harmon was able to determine the strategies they used or ignored as they at- tempted to determine the meaning of unfamiliar words.

The think-aloud process can also be used to examine students’ comprehension. Leslie & Caldwell (2011) identified several types of think-aloud comments that sug- gest understanding or lack of understanding on the part of the reader. They found that think-aloud comments indicating understanding were positively and strongly related to comprehension after reading.

Think-aloud statements that indicate understanding include the following:

◆ Paraphrasing or summarizing. The student retells the contents of the text in his or her own words.

◆ Making new meaning. The student draws an inference, reaches a conclusion, or engages in reasoning of some sort.

◆ Questioning that indicates understanding. The student asks a question, but the question clearly indicates that he or she understood the text. For example, the student may question a character’s motives or ask if the content would apply to another situation.

122 C H A P T E R 5

◆ Noting understanding. The student indicates that he or she understood what was read.

◆ Reporting prior knowledge. The student indicates that he or she knew this infor- mation before reading or thought something different beore reading.

◆ Identifying personally. The student relates the text to personal experiences in some way, such as stating agreement or disagreement, like or dislike, or interest or lack of interest.

Think-aloud statements that indicate lack of understanding include the following:

◆ Questions that indicate lack of understanding. The student’s questions indicate that the student does not understand the text. For example, the student asks about the meaning of an unfamiliar word, phrase, or sentence.

◆ Noting lack of understanding. The student states that he or she is confused or does not understand the text.

Students exhibit a variety of think-aloud patterns. Some use one comment exclusively. For example, when Jared read a selection on clouds, every comment involved a paraphrase of the text content. Some students make a variety of com- ments. While reading the same cloud passage, Ryan offered several paraphrases, commented on what he knew and did not know about different cloud types, and reacted quite personally to clouds that signal the possibility of severe weather, tying it to some recent tornadoes in his state. Such diverse comments certainly suggest an extremely interactive reader.

How often should you stop to ask a student to think aloud? No set guidelines ex- ist. The text should be long enough to present enough content to think about, but you shouldn’t have to stop so often that the process becomes laborious. Because there are no definitive guidelines, experiment with different text segments. Of course, segments will vary in length with the age of the reader and level of the text.

You can set up the process in different ways. One way is to mark the text with stop signals: either the word Stop or a colored dot. The students read orally or silently, and when they reach the signal, they stop and think aloud. You can also read orally with the students in an assisted format and stop at points of your choosing. Another way is to ask the students to read silently and stop after each paragraph or at the end of each page. You can also read to the students and use think-aloud statements to evaluate the nature of their listening comprehension processes. All methods work; choose the one that works best for you and your students.

What are you looking for? You are looking for some evidence of interaction with the text. Too many readers have difficulty thinking aloud, which suggests a lack of ac- tive comprehension processing.

Contrast the following two students who both read an article on ancient Egypt (Leslie & Caldwell, 2011). Using the list of think-aloud statements as a guide, you can see that John’s interaction with the text is limited and minimal com- pared to Brittany’s. John could well profit from some of the strategies outlined in Chapters 11 and 12.

Administering an Informal Reading Inventory 123

Text Segment 1

Brittany: They built pyramids to bury the pharaoh and they put them there with all their possessions because they would use them in the afterlife. Summary/ paraphrase. Do you think they put all the pharaohs in the same pyramid? What if a pharaoh died before they finished building it? Where would he go? Questions that signal understanding.

John: They built pyramids and used them like tombs; they used them and they buried the kings there. Summary/paraphrase.

Text Segment 2

Brittany: They mummified the kings to preserve their bodies. Summary/paraphrase. I know all about that! They wrap them up in bandages. I saw a movie where one came to life. Reporting prior knowledge.

John: They made the king a mummy. Summary/paraphrase. Why did they do that? It seems dumb. Question indicates lack of understanding because the text clearly indicates the rationale for mummification.

Text Segment 3

Brittany: Yuck, this is really gross. Identifying personally. They took out all the organs except the heart, rubbed the body with stuff, and wrapped it. Summary/ paraphrase. I wonder if they took out the brain? Question that indicates understanding. I would think the brains should have been left in so the pharaoh could think in his afterlife. But maybe they didn’t know what the brain did. Making new meaning.

John: It took 70 days and they rubbed oil on the body and wrapped it up like a mummy. Summary/paraphrase.

Text Segment 4

Brittany: Farmers helped to build the pyramids when they couldn’t work in their fields, and they weren’t slaves. Summary/paraphrase. If they didn’t use slaves to build the pyramids, I wonder how much they paid the farmers? Question that indicates understanding.

John: Farmers helped to build the pyramids. Summary/paraphrase. What is this word? I can’t pronounce it (points to archaeologists). Noting lack of understanding.

Text Segment 5

Brittany: They dragged all the stones with ropes and it was dangerous and a lot of them died. Summary/paraphrase. I bet sometimes the stones fell and crushed them. If they were going up hill and the rope broke, that could wipe out a bunch of workers. Mak- ing new meaning.

John: They cut stones and worked for 8 days. Summary/paraphrase that actually contains an error; the text states the workers worked for 10 days in a row.

Text Segment 6

Brittany: They were paid with food, and they had to work fast in case the pharaoh would die. Summary/paraphrase. Why weren’t they paid with money? Question that indicates

124 C H A P T E R 5

Summary

Assessing reading achievement involves answering two questions: How severe is the student’s reading problem? What is the general area of the reading problem?

Informal measures have not been normed on large populations as have standard- ized formal measures. Therefore, they may be used more flexibly and may be adapted to the needs of the student and the demands of the diagnostic situation.

The informal reading inventory (IRI) consists of a series of graded reading selections. The student reads increasingly difficult material until a frustration level is reached. IRIs measure both oral and silent reading. Three levels of reading are obtained: independent, instructional, and frustration. These levels are based on the student’s word recognition accuracy and ability to comprehend passages. Generally, separate passages are provided for oral and silent reading.

The IRI provides information about the existence and severity of a reading prob- lem and its general area(s). Careful analysis of the IRI can suggest whether a student is having problems with word recognition accuracy, reading fluency, comprehension, language base and meaning vocabulary, or studying. Miscue analysis, the analysis of a student’s oral reading deviations, allows the reading teacher to examine the strategies that a student uses to recognize words.

Special issues and options in using IRIs involve pronouncing words for students, alternating oral and silent passages, finding unclear results, using alternative miscue scoring procedures or norms, allowing students to look back for answers, levels of ques- tions, using an IRI to assess student growth, and employing the think-aloud procedure.

References Applegate, M. D., Quinn, K. B., & Applegate, A. J. (2002). Levels of thinking required by comprehension

questions in informal reading inventories. The Reading Teacher, 56, 174–180. Beck, I. L. (2006). Making sense of phonics: The hows and whys. New York: The Guilford Press. Caldwell, J., & Leslie, L. (2010). Thinking aloud in expository text processes and outcomes. Journal of

Literacy Research, 42, 308–340. doi: 10.1080/1086296X.2010.504419 Caldwell, J. S. (2008). Comprehension assessment: A classroom guide. New York: The Guilford Press. Ciardiello, A. V. (1998). Did you ask a good question today? Alternative cognitive and metacognitive

strategies. Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy, 42, 210–219. Common Core State Standards Initiative. (2010). Common Core State Standards for English language arts & lit-

eracy in history/social studies, science and technical subjects. Retrieved from http://www.corestandards.org

understanding. I would rather have money so I could buy the food I wanted. Identifying personally. Maybe there weren’t many stores back then. Making new meaning.

John: Nothing really, just about food and working fast. Summary/paraphrase. Why did they have to be courageous? They were just building something. Question that indicates lack of understanding; the text clearly outlines the dangers.

Administering an Informal Reading Inventory 125

Dewitz, P., & Dewitz, P. K. (2003). They can read the words, but they can’t understand: Refining compre- hension assessment. The Reading Teacher, 56, 422–435.

Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., Hosp, M. K., & Jenkins, J. R. (2001). Oral reading fluency as an indicator of reading competence: A theoretical, empirical, and historical analysis. Scientific Studies of Reading, 5, 239–257.

Goodman, K. S. (1969). Analysis of oral reading miscues. Reading Research Quarterly, 5, 9–30. Harmon, J. M. (2000). Assessing and supporting independent word learning strategies of middle school

students. Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy, 43, 518–527. Hasbrouck, J., & Tindal, G. A. (2006). Oral reading fluency norms: A valuable assessment tool for reading

teachers. The Reading Teacher, 59, 636–643. Kame’nui, E. J., & Simmons, D. (2001). Introduction to this special issue: The DNA of reading fluency.

Scientific Studies of Reading, 5, 203–210. LaBerge, D., & Samuels, S. M. (1974). Toward a theory of automatic information processing in reading.

Cognitive Psychology, 6, 293–223. Leslie, L., & Caldwell, J. (2011). The Qualitative Reading Inventory-5. New York: Longman. Lipson, M. Y. (2011). Diagnosis: The missing ingredient in RTI assessment. The Reading Teacher, 36, 205–208. National Reading Panel. (2000). Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research

literature on reading and the implications for reading instruction. Washington, DC: National Institute of Child Health and Human Development. Retrieved from http://www.nichd.nih.gov/publications/nrp/ smallbook.htm

Pressley, M., & Afflerbach, P. (1995). Verbal protocols of reading: The nature of constructively responsive reading. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Raphael, T. E. (1982). Question-answering strategies for children. The Reading Teacher, 36, 186–190. Raphael, T. E. (1986). Teaching question-answer relationships, revisited. The Reading Teacher, 39, 516–522. Spache, G. D. (1981). Diagnosing and correcting reading disabilities. Boston: Allyn & Bacon. Stanovich, K. E. (1993–1994). Romance and reality. Distinguished educator series. The Reading Teacher, 47,

280–291.

Go to the topic 2: Reading Assessment in the MyEducationLab (www.myeducationlab.com) for Reading Problems: Assessment and Teaching Strategies, where you can: ◆ Find learning outcomes for reading assess-

ment, along with the national standards that connect to these outcomes.

◆ Complete assignments and activities that can help you more deeply understand the chapter content.

◆ Apply and practice your understanding of the core teaching skills identified in the chapter with the Building Teaching Skills and Dispositions learning units.

◆ Examine challenging situations and cases presented in the Iris Center Resources.

◆ Access video clips of CCSSO National Teachers of the Year award winners respond- ing to the question, “Why Do I Teach?” in the Teacher Talk section.

◆ Practice targeting instruction and mak- ing content accessible for all students with A+RISE activities.

◆ Strengthen your understanding and usage of the English language in writing with the Grammar Tutorial.

◆ Gain experience in choosing appropriate literature and integrating the best titles into

126 C H A P T E R 5

language arts instruction with the Children’s and Young Adult Literature Database.

◆ Track the month-by-month literacy growth of five second graders with the Literacy Portraits.

◆ Create, update, and share quality lesson plans with the Lesson Plan Builder.

◆ Access state licensure test requirements, overviews of what the tests cover, and sam- ple test items in the Certification and Li- censure section.

◆ Check your comprehension of the content covered in the chapter with the Study Plan. Here you will be able to take a chapter pre- test, receive feedback on your answers, and then access personalized Review, Practice, and Enrichment exercises to enhance your understanding of chapter content. After you complete the exercises, take a posttest to confirm your comprehension.

◆ Check the Chapter Resources to find an Informal Reading Inventory.

6 Providing Instruction and Intervention Strategies

Introduction

A New Perspective on Intervention: Grade-Level Competence

Successful Intervention Programs Individual Intervention Programs K–5 Group Intervention Programs K–5 Intervention Structures 6–12 Classroom Interventions

Guidelines for Teaching Struggling Readers

Set High Expectations Coordinate Intervention Instruction

and Classroom Instruction Use Read-Alouds to Expose Students

to Higher-Level Text

Emphasize Reading for Meaning Teach Students the Strategies That Good

Readers Use Make Assessment an Ongoing Component

of Instruction Provide a Balanced Instructional Framework Provide a Consistent Instructional Structure

and Use Time Effectively Keep the Size of the Group as Small as

Possible Instructional Support for Struggling

Readers and RTI Summary

127

C H A P T E R

128 C H A P T E R 6

Introduction

In the last 10 to 20 years, various intervention programs have been shown to be effective in helping children learn to read (Biggam, Teitelbaum, & Willey, 2007; Cunningham, Hall, & Defee, 1998; Hall, Prevatte, & Cunningham, 2007; Hiebert, 1994; Hiebert, Colt, Catto, & Gury, 1992; Knight & Stallings, 2007; Santa & Hoien, 1999; Taylor, Short, Shearer, & Frye, 2007; Taylor, Strait, & Medo, 1994; Walp & Walmsley, 2007; Winfield, 2007). These programs are very different. Some focus on individuals and others on groups. Some are pullout programs and others occur in the classroom. Some move far beyond an intervention program for struggling readers and include reform of the school wide literacy curriculum and the redesign of classroom literacy activities. The most common intervention structure is still a pullout model and, as schools and districts move to implementation of the response-to-intervention (RTI) three-tiered format, the pullout model will probably continue to dominate. Despite differences in structure, all programs share a common purpose: to improve the reading performance of struggling readers. In addition, common instructional elements exist across all pro- grams. Understanding these commonalities will allow you to design and implement your own instruction for students who find learning to read difficult.

The purpose of this chapter is three-fold: to present a new perspective on inter- vention, to describe successful intervention programs, and to identify those compo- nents that seem most important to student success.

A New Perspective on Intervention: Grade-Level Competence

An examination of successful intervention programs suggests that improvement in reading level is a defining characteristic of success. That is, students are measured before and after instruction, and if they show significant growth, the intervention is regarded as effective. In some cases the growth of students in a specific intervention is compared to that of students who did not receive the targeted instruction. If the post-intervention performance of the intervention students is significantly higher, the intervention is marked as successful (Ehri, Dreyer, Flugman, & Gross, 2007; Santa & Hoien, 1999). We believe, however, that the ultimate purpose of any inter- vention should be to move struggling readers to a level that is appropriate for their age and grade (Caldwell & Leslie, 2013; Klenk & Kirby, 2000). Unfortunately, in this regard, intervention programs have met with limited success. Results of the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) indicate that approximately two-thirds of eighth graders do not score at a proficient level (Brozo, 2010). Similarly, few stu- dents identified as learning disabled ever return to their regular classroom able to effectively participate in literacy-based activities (Johnston, 2010b). However, several instructional formats that we will describe in this chapter have resulted in grade-level attainment, so we know that it is a possibility (Lyons & Beaver, 2007; Hall et al., 2007; Kuhn et al., 2006; Lyons & Beaver, 2007; McCormack, Paratore, & Dahlene, 2004).

Providing Instruction and Intervention Strategies 129

Aiming for grade-level competence is in close accord with the Common Core State Standards Initiative (2010). The standards are grade-specific rather than skill- specific targets, and students at each grade level are expected to meet the standards for their respective grade level. In the past we expected students to meet skills at their instructional level. However, the standards are quite explicit; students should master skills at their chronological grade level by reading grade-appropriate text. The stan- dards use single grade levels from kindergarten through grade 8 “to provide useful specificity,” but use 2-year bands for grades 9 and 10 and 11 and 12 to allow for more flexibility in high school curriculum design (2010, p. 4). The standards do have some similarities across grade levels. For example, with regard to informational text, Stan- dard 2 focuses on determining the main idea. However, at higher grade levels, students are expected to do much more: determine the main idea of two or more paragraphs as well as an entire text, explain its relationship to supporting details, analyze its develop- ment; and show how it is shaped by specific details.

An intervention may not move a student to his or her classroom reading level for a variety of reasons. These can include the length and duration of the intervention, its structure, the materials used, and the quality of the instruction itself. In addition, the purpose of the intervention may simply have been improvement as opposed to grade-level performance. Moving a child from one instructional level to the next, for example, from a third-grade to a fourth-grade level, is often regarded as adequate progress over the span of a year. However, another reason may be the teacher’s incom- plete understanding of the concept of transfer, “the ability to use what was learned in new situations” (Mayer & Wittrock, 2006, p. 289).

A basic principle of transfer is that “transfer between tasks is a function of the degree to which the tasks share cognitive elements” (Bransford, Brown, & Cocking, 2000, p. 65). For example, at a basic and somewhat obvious level, learning the pronun- ciation of the vowel pattern –at will probably transfer to pronunciation of sat, cat, and flat. Similarly, knowing the meaning of drum will probably transfer to understanding of the phrase rain drumming on the roof. However, comprehending text involves much more complexity. Reading and understanding narratives will not transfer to compre- hension of a science chapter; the two text structures and the underlying concepts are too different. Reading a fifth-grade text on the cell will not necessarily transfer to middle or high school text on the same subject. At the high school level, sentences are more difficult, vocabulary is more varied, paragraphs are longer, and concepts are more complex. The fifth-grade selection may describe cell parts such as the cell mem- brane and nucleus. The high school text will provide extensive detail on the functions of the nucleus and the membrane. Concepts such as eukaryotic cells, organelles, and lipid bilayers are not present in the fifth-grade selection. In addition, the high school chapter is much longer; an amazing amount of information fills each page.

A second principle of transfer states that “knowledge that is taught in a variety of contexts is more likely to support flexible transfer than knowledge that is taught in a single context” (Bransford et al., 2000, p. 236). What does this mean for interven- tion? Intervention sessions should provide multiple and different contexts for decod- ing, word study, and comprehension strategies, contexts that include narrative and

130 C H A P T E R 6

informational text and text at varying reading levels. In order to prepare struggling readers to read texts at their actual grade level, intervention instruction should build knowledge of literature, science, history, and math concepts; develop vocabulary con- gruent with higher grade levels; and address the issue of different text structures. This suggests that use of a single intervention text will not be effective; “intervention spe- cialists should familiarize themselves with the content of their students’ classroom instruction and make a concerted effort to coordinate intervention and classroom con- tent whenever possible” (Caldwell & Leslie, 2012, p. 3).

Of course, this raises the thorny issue of reading level. For years, we have fo- cused on identifying a student’s independent and instructional levels. We have rec- ommended that independent reading, as the term suggests, be at a level that the reader can manage without help. When guided and supported by the teacher, instructional- level text is appropriate. We have avoided frustration-level text, assuming that it represents a frustrating and negative experience for the reader. Unfortunately, for many struggling readers, grade-level text represents a frustration level, and this poses a problem. An emphasis on independent and instructional-level text may deny struggling readers access to grade-level concepts, vocabulary, and syntax and “may prevent children from acquiring information that contributes to their development of language, comprehension and writing” (McCormack et al., 2004, p. 119). Simi- larly, Gelzheiser, Scanlon, and Hallgren-Flynn (2010) suggest that lack of exposure to grade-level text may cause “limitations in reading, vocabulary and language [to] grow even larger” (p. 224).

Glasswell and Ford (2010) suggest that, instead of avoiding frustration-level text, the teacher should offer instructional support to the students to help them negotiate challenging materials. This aligns with Kintsch (2004), who states that “learners acquiring a new skill must have the opportunity to face difficulties and learn to repair mistakes” (p. 1314). An effective teacher and practices such as a read-alouds and think-alouds can help struggling readers negotiate grade-level text. McCormack et al. (2004) designed a successful third-grade intervention using the students’ classroom texts. Instruction consisted of the teacher reading aloud and modeling comprehension strategies. Instruction focused on student self-generation of questions and reactions and oral rereading using a variety of shared-reading techniques.

In summary, we believe that intervention sessions should define success not just as improvement in reading level but as leading the struggling reader to function suc- cessfully in his or her grade-level classroom. Intervention instruction should teach for transfer to the grade-level environment and provide experiences with independent-, instructional-, and frustration-level text. Goetz, Laster, and Ehren (2010) suggest a workable direction for the intervention specialist: “Work with leveled text may focus on word recognition and mastery of basic comprehension strategies, whereas work with grade-level text would focus on manipulating complex language involved in higher level thinking skills within a content area and expansion of such cognitive skills as inferential reasoning” (p. 179). This is in accord with the Common Core Standards Initiative, which places literacy development “squarely within the content areas” (Brozo, 2010, p. 147).

Providing Instruction and Intervention Strategies 131

Successful Intervention Programs

In the past, we assumed that students who were categorized as “learning disabled” required qualitatively different instruction than other struggling readers. Large-scale studies have not been able to differentiate between children categorized as learning disabled and struggling readers who are not so labeled, and we have become aware that there are no special or unique techniques for teaching reading to different categories of readers (Mathes et al., 2005; Walmsley & Allington, 2007). In the last 15 to 20, vari- ous intervention programs have been designed, tested, and found to be successful. An old adage states that “imitation is the sincerest form of flattery,” and if this is true, then it makes good sense to use these successful programs as models. The following section describes a variety of successful intervention programs as well as programs specifically designed for classroom implementation.

Individual Intervention Programs K–5 Some successful intervention programs have been designed for a single student who interacts with one teacher. It is easy to see how such a design could result in positive gains. The teacher can place his or her attention solely on one child as opposed to a group. The teacher can easily adapt and change the lesson on an ongoing basis to meet the understanding or lack of understanding of the student. However, such a format is extremely expensive in terms of staff and time. More students can be served in a group format and less staff is needed to do so. If your school or district is not able to employ individual intervention lessons, you can still adapt many of the techniques of the following interventions to a group format.

Reading Recovery. Reading Recovery (Clay, 1993; Lyons & Beaver, 2007; Pinnell, Lyons, Deford, Bryk, & Seltzer, 1994) provides daily half-hour individual tutoring for first graders. Reading Recovery lessons have a very structured format. Each day, the teacher and student engage in the same basic activities. The student reads and rereads familiar and unfamiliar books. The student dictates a sentence or short story. The teacher guides the child to accurately write it, copies the message onto a sentence strip, cuts it into individual words, and asks the child to reassemble it. Throughout the lesson, the teacher fosters the development of strategies for identifying words and comprehending text. Typically, students stay in the program for 12 to 16 weeks. At the end of this time, most can read as well as the average student in their class. Reading Recovery is presently being incorporated into Tier 2 and/or Tier 3 RTI instruction (Forbes, Swenson, Person, & Reed, 2010). Phillips and Smith (2010) de- scribe a successful program for the “hardest-to-teach” based upon the principles of Reading Recovery.

Early Steps. Although Early Steps is quite similar to Reading Recovery, it contains more explicit attention to letter–sound matching (Santa & Hoien, 1999). The lessons are 30 minutes in length. The child spends at least half of the instructional time read- ing books at his or her instructional level, moving gradually to more difficult text.

132 C H A P T E R 6

The word study component involves word or letter sorts to foster awareness that words share common sounds and common spelling patterns. A comparison of the achievement of children who participated in Early Steps versus a control group indi- cated superior growth for the Early Steps children in spelling, word recognition, and passage reading.

Reading Rescue. Reading Rescue (Ehri et al., 2007) is an intervention program for low-socioeconomic status (SES) language-minority first graders. Students begin each lesson by rereading familiar books to increase fluency and to practice word analysis and comprehension strategies. Each lesson provides systematic phonics instruction and attention to phonemic awareness. The teacher assists the students in writing one or more sentences about the books read in class. Introduction of a new book involves an opportunity to develop oral language. Students talk about the book, learn the meanings of new words, and practice strategies for comprehension. The tutoring sequence gradually presents more difficult concepts and materials as students develop their skills. Children who participated in Reading Rescue made significantly greater gains in reading words and comprehending text than the con- trol group. In addition, the majority reached average reading levels at the conclusion of the tutoring sessions.

Howard Street Tutoring Model. This is a model for volunteer tutors working with second and third graders under the supervision of a reading specialist (Brown, Morris, & Fields, 2005; Morris, 2005). The lessons are 45 minutes in length and occur twice a week. The tutor begins by supporting the child in reading and understanding instructional-level stories using echo reading, partner reading, or independent read- ing. This takes approximately 18 minutes. For the next 10 minutes, the tutor develops understanding of basic spelling patterns using games and word categorization activi- ties. Then the child reads easy or previously read books for 10 minutes in order to build sight vocabulary, fluency, and confidence. At the end of the session, the tutor reads to the child for approximately 7 minutes using quality literature that appeals to the child’s interests. Tutored children performed significantly better than the control group on both standardized and informal reading measures, and tutors proved to be almost as effective as certified teachers in providing instruction.

Book Buddies. This intervention also focuses on tutors (Invernizzi, Juel, & Rosemary, 1996–1997; Invernizzi, Rosemary, Juel, & Richards, 1997). Community volunteers work with individual at-risk first graders twice a week for 45 minutes, supported by a reading coordinator. The tutor follows a sequence of activities that involve rereading a familiar book, engaging in word study, writing, and reading a new book employing choral and echo reading to support the child’s first attempts. The word study component involves word cards used to form a word bank of known words and word sorting. Writing gen- erally takes the form of dictation by the tutor, with the tutor elongating the sounds in words to help children match letters to the sounds they hear. Yearly pretest to posttest data on this program suggest that it is both effective and practical (Invernizzi et al., 1996–1997).

Providing Instruction and Intervention Strategies 133

Summer School Tutoring. This intervention involves individual tutoring for a third-grade struggling reader 4 days a week for 5 weeks (Mokhtari, Hutchison,  & Edwards, 2010). The 60-minute session begins with reading easy or previously read text. This is followed by introduction of a new text, dealing with pronunciation of unfamiliar words, and focusing on key vocabulary. Writing is a key component, as is a daily mini-lesson that introduces new skills and strategies. The session ends with the student reading challenging text in a partner- or shared-reading format.

Group Intervention Programs K–5 Various group interventions have proven to be successful. Such interventions were no doubt motivated by the need to address larger numbers of children than could be successfully handled within an individualized format. Also, school and district efforts to implement the RTI initiative beyond the primary grades may have also played a part. As you read the descriptions that follow, you will see similarities to activities and practices present in individualized interventions.

Kindergarten Interventions. Scanlon and Sweeney (2010) describe an interven- tion program designed to prevent first-grade reading problems. Groups of three meet twice a week for 30 minutes. Each lesson includes the following: listening to a book, reading emergent-level text, engaging in phoneme analysis, working with letters, focusing on recognition of high-frequency words, and writing both words and dictated sentences.

Craig (2010) designed a three-part lesson framework. The first part involves shared or guided reading. The teacher models fluent reading, fosters interactions with text content, and engages the children in repeated and shared reading. The second phase involves interactive writing, and the final segment emphasizes word study.

The KELT Program (MacDonald & Figueredo, 2010) involves a half-day ses- sion throughout the year. Daily components include writing, rereading, and discussing a daily message. Listening skills are fostered through song, music, and dance activities. The children explore learning centers and engage in a variety of literacy activities: writing, word play, story time read-alouds, and book browsing.

The Boulder Project. The Boulder Project focuses on first graders in groups of three (Hiebert, 1994; Hiebert et al., 1992). In a structured daily plan, the lesson begins with oral rereading of familiar books, both individually and as a group. The teacher reviews words from the previous day’s lesson and introduces a new book. The teacher and students engage in word study based on the new selection. They participate in phonemic awareness activities such as rhyming. They locate words in the text and use them in new sentences. They write the words and transform them by changing letters and letter patterns, for example, changing stop to mop. As children write on chosen topics, the teacher guides them in letter–sound matching. The Boulder Project also provides children with take-home book bags and emphasizes at-home reading.

Early Intervention in Reading. Early Intervention in Reading (EIR) is taught almost entirely by the classroom teacher (Taylor et al., 2007; Taylor et al., 1994).

134 C H A P T E R 6

Each day, the classroom teacher works with five to seven of the poorest readers for an additional 20 minutes of instruction. Lesson structure revolves around a 3-day cycle. The students read short retellings of text after the teacher reads the actual book to the students. The children repeatedly read this retelling across the 3 days, both as a group and individually. The teacher supports accurate word identification by suggesting and modeling contextual clues and strategies for matching letters and sounds. On the first day, the lesson focuses on phonetically regular words from the text. The children lis- ten for sounds and choose letters to represent sounds. On the second and third days, the children, supported by the teacher, write sentences based on the story. Gradually, students shift to longer retellings, actual books, and initial reading done independently by students.

Interactive Strategies Approach. The Interactive Strategies Approach (ISA) focus- es on preventing reading difficulties in the early primary grades (Scanlon & Anderson, 2010). The ISA can use a one-to-one or small-group format. The ISA is focused on five instructional goals. The first is to increase motivation for reading and writing. The second goal centers on developing understanding of the alphabetic principle and skill in decoding. A focus on sight vocabulary forms the third goal. The fourth goal ad- dresses the development of oral language and word meaning. The fifth goal is compre- hension development. These five goals are developed within an instructional context that includes read-alouds; teacher modeling; shared, buddy, and independent reading; and writing.

Third-Grade Intervention. The design of this intervention (McCormack et al., 2004) questions the commonly held assumption that struggling readers should be taught us- ing independent- or instructional-level text, an issue we discussed earlier in this chapter. Such text may allow students to read words with relative ease, but it “may bar access to concepts and ideas otherwise acquired by reading grade-appropriate text” (McCormack et al., 2004, p. 119). In other words, reliance on instructional-level text may not foster acquisition of the concepts, vocabulary, and syntactical structures needed for success in later grades. In this intervention, students read their regular classroom texts and, when they return to the classroom, they are “reintegrated into ongoing literacy instruction” as full participants (p. 123).

The hour-long instruction involves the review and retelling of previously read material. The teacher introduces essential vocabulary and the students engage in word study by practicing sight words and reviewing strategies for successful decoding. The teacher and students then preview the new selection and the teacher reads it aloud using think-alouds to model comprehension strategies. The teacher and students dis- cuss the new text and reread it several times using a variety of oral reading strategies. The intervention also includes self-selected reading on the part of the students. After approximately a year of instruction, a majority of the students performed at grade level on several assessment measures. The substitution of teacher read-alouds and student rereading for reliance on instructional-level text proved to be a powerful and effective tool.

Providing Instruction and Intervention Strategies 135

Intervention Structures 6–12 Over the past 10 to 20 years, most of the effort in designing intervention programs has focused on the lower primary levels, with less attention being paid to strug- gling readers in grades 4 through 12. Edmonds and colleagues (2009) synthesized research on the effectiveness of literacy interventions for older students. They re- viewed 29 studies that met their criteria for well-designed research and offered the optimistic conclusion that struggling readers and those with identified disabilities “can improve reading comprehension when taught reading comprehension prac- tices” (p. 292). However, studies that focused on word identification strategies showed small to moderate effects on comprehension, and studies that focused on fluency showed little to none. The authors concluded that background knowledge, vocabulary knowledge, and knowledge of comprehension strategies were key com- ponents in student improvement. The synthesis also suggested that strategies taught in an intervention setting do not transfer easily to new or novel texts. This suggests, as we discussed earlier in the chapter, that intervention specialists specifically plan lessons that foster transfer to grade-level text.

Interactive Strategies Approach–Extended (ISA-X). This intervention focuses on struggling middle school readers (Gelzheiser et al., 2010). Daily individualized 40-minute sessions follow a consistent routine: a 5- to 7-minute mini-lesson, 25 to 30 minutes focused on reading and discussion, and 5 minutes of writing or reflection. Texts were “aligned with the students’ classroom social studies instruction” (p. 231) and utilized thematic units that exposed the participants “to grade-appropriate vo- cabulary” and prepared them for “increasing content-knowledge expectations (p. 224).

Cross-Age Tutoring. Paterson and Elliott (2006) designed a cross-age tutoring program for 9th- and 10th-grade struggling readers. Their primary purpose was to improve “the attitudinal barriers of the older student by placing them in a leader- ship role as tutors for younger children thus implying high academic status and competence” (p. 379). The tutees were struggling second- and third-grade readers. Prior to the tutoring session, students practiced expressive reading of the books they would share. They learned some basic strategies for tutoring reading and re- ceived a lesson plan to follow involving phonics, context clues, sight words, paired and echo reading, and comprehension strategies such as prediction, questioning, and summarizing.

Literacy Tutoring for Adolescents. Chandler-Olcott and Hinchman (2005) suggest a framework for adolescent tutoring sessions. They believe that tutoring sessions “are most effective when sessions have a consistent structure and when tutors model the use and enjoyment of reading and writing strategies at each session” (p. 59). They rec- ommend four different approaches to include within a single 40-minute session. This differentiation allows tutors to help their students in different ways. The first approach involves the tutor reading aloud and thinking aloud with a focus on one or two strate- gies. The second approach is guided practice in the strategy previously modeled by the

136 C H A P T E R 6

teacher. The third approach is student engagement in independent reading or writing. The session closes with a 5-minute oral or written reflection by the student, describing what was learned and what is still not understood.

Classroom Interventions Several successful interventions have their origin in the regular classroom; that is, they were designed to deal with a large group of children of varying degrees of reading skill delivered by a single teacher and on a daily basis. As with previously described interventions, classroom interventions offer suggestions that can be incorporated into individualized or group instruction for struggling readers.

Four Blocks Literacy Model. The Four Blocks Literacy Model (Cunningham, Hall, & Defee, 1991, 1998; Hall et al., 2007) was not originally designed as an intervention program, but its success in preventing reading failure warrants its inclusion in this chapter. The focus of the project is first- and second-grade stu- dents, but its success has prompted implementation in third grade and above. Classroom instruction is organized into four 30-minute blocks. In the guided reading block, the teacher introduces heterogeneously grouped children to a wide array of literature selections and emphasizes comprehension instruction. The teacher models prereading strategies, guides class discussion, and supports the children in completing story maps or webs. In the self-selected reading block, students choose their own reading materials. In this block, the teacher may also read to them. The writing block consists of short mini-lessons in which the teach- er explicitly models the writing process by thinking aloud and writing in full view of the students. The children then write independently. The working-with-words block is divided into two activities: a word wall and making words. The word wall is a display of high-frequency words arranged in alphabetical columns. The teacher reviews words written on the word wall each day and adds new words. The teacher then directs the children through the activity of making words by moving letter tiles.

Data across approximately 6 years of instruction using the Four Blocks Model has demonstrated its success. The authors report that 58 to 64% of first-grade Win- ston-Salem children read above grade level at the end of the year, 22 to 28% read on level, and only 10 to 17% read below level (Cunningham et al., 1998). At the end of second grade, results improved even further.

Fluency-Oriented Reading Program. The Fluency-Oriented Reading Program (FORI) was originally designed to improve second-grade reading achievement in het- erogeneous classrooms by modifying instruction to foster the development of reading fluency (Kuhn et al., 2006; Stahl & Heubach, 2005; Stahl, Heubach, & Cramond, 1997). In the lesson structure, the teacher reads the story to the class and guides dis- cussion. Because the story is read to students, below-level readers are able to partici- pate in discussion. Students then reread the story up to five times before the teacher moves to another selection. These repeated readings include echo reading, reading

Providing Instruction and Intervention Strategies 137

with partners, and practicing favorite parts of the story to perform. Some selections are dramatized, with individual students or small groups taking different parts. Children also take books home and share them with parents. Every day, students also read books of their choice and keep a reading log.

At the end of the year, the average gain of students in this program was 1.88 grade levels. Students at all levels of reading made substantial advances. These results meant that students beginning on grade level were now reading almost 2 years above level, and students in preprimer and primer text were now close to grade-level reading. The program showed similar success during a second year with other students. Additional research continues to demonstrate the success of FORI (Kuhn et al., 2006; Stahl & Heubach, 2005).

Reader’s Workshop. Reader’s workshop was originally designed as an instruc- tional structure for an entire classroom (Atwell, 1998). Williams (2001) adapted the model for groups of seven to eight adolescent struggling readers who meet daily. For 2 days a week, Williams uses a traditional reading workshop format. The teacher reads aloud to the students for 10 to 15 minutes, often employing a think- aloud strategy. An 8- to 10-minute mini-lesson focuses on strategy instruction and involves the following components: a statement of what the strategy is and why it is important, teacher modeling, group or partner practice, and reminders to use the strategy during silent reading time. Students then read silently in self-selected texts for approximately 15 minutes. Afterward, they share what they read or what they learned. For the other 3 days, Williams structures the lessons around peer-assisted learning strategies. Student partners read and help each other with word identifica- tion and retelling. They construct short statements about the main idea and summa- rize each paragraph. The students predict what will come next in the text and read to check the accuracy of their predictions.

Taylor and Nesheim (2000–2001) used children’s literature in an innovative ap- plication of the reader’s workshop model with adolescents. Their goals were to present children’s literature as enjoyable for readers of all ages and to provide motivation for reading children’s literature. They modeled techniques for sharing reading and pro- moted reading as a valued activity. Mini-lessons focused on a variety of topics: print conventions, procedures for small-group sharing, comprehension strategies, strategies for reading aloud, and techniques for fostering reader response.

The Memphis Comprehension Framework. The purpose of this model is to improve the comprehension of expository text for middle school students (Flynt & Cooter, 2005). After assessing students’ needs, the teacher chooses a comprehension skill objective to focus on for a minimum of 3 weeks. The teacher reads aloud daily for at least 10 to 15 minutes for the purpose of expanding the students’ listening and speaking vocabularies. The teacher initiates active discussion of the text. Throughout the discussion, the teacher models the chosen comprehension strategy, uses graphic organizers, asks key questions, and calls attention to new vocabulary. The final step in the lesson develops students’ abilities in three forms of retelling: guided oral retelling, graphic organizer retelling, and written retelling. In guided oral retelling, students

138 C H A P T E R 6

simply retell the text. In graphic organizer retelling, the students construct a graphic organizer. In written retelling, they use the graphic organizer as a tool for completing a written summary.

Guidelines for Teaching Struggling Readers

Because students with reading problems are already behind their peers, instructional time is precious. What form should this instruction take? The intervention programs described in this chapter differ from each other, yet they exhibit certain similarities that allow us to formulate some key guidelines for teaching students who struggle with literacy (Caldwell & Leslie, 2013).

Set High Expectations Students tend to meet the expectations of their teachers. If you do not expect that they will progress, they probably will not. If you are satisfied with a small amount of growth, that is generally what you will get. “Conversely, the expectation that a stu- dent will succeed academically increases the likelihood that he or she will” (Scanlon & Anderson, 2010, p. 36). Do not be content with just progress. Progress is good and it is critically important, but aim higher, much higher. Work to bring a student up to grade level. Your ultimate aim should be that as a result of intervention, the stu- dent becomes able to function successfully in his or her grade-level classroom. As mentioned previously, interventions such as Third-Grade Intervention, Reading Recovery, Reading Rescue, the Four Blocks Model, and Fluency-Oriented Reading Instruction met this objective.

Coordinate Intervention Instruction and Classroom Instruction Much intervention instruction, both in special education and reading, occurs in re- source rooms by pulling students from their regular classrooms. A major problem with this is the lack of coordination between classroom instruction and intervention instruction (Walmsley & Allington, 2007). If the most important goal of intervention instruction is to help students function better in their grade-level classes, intervention should be closely coordinated with the content of classroom textbooks and the nature of classroom activities. In an ideal world, the classroom teacher and intervention spe- cialist would jointly decide how best to help the student, through collaborative plan- ning and teaching. As Walmsley and Allington (2007) state: “All staff are responsible for the education of all students. . . . All children are entitled to the same literacy experiences, materials and expectations” (pp. 26–29). Coordination with the classroom will require two sets of materials: materials that the students can read somewhat com- fortably, that is, materials at an independent and instructional level, and classroom materials that may well represent a frustration level. The Third-Grade Intervention used classroom texts as the primary basis for instruction.

Providing Instruction and Intervention Strategies 139

Use of grade-level materials in intervention instruction is, as discussed earlier in this chapter, a relatively new concept. Perhaps an analogy will help. In all sports, there are various levels of difficulty and different strategies to master. Football at a grade school level is different from the same sport at a high school or college level, and some players never succeed in the NFL. However, success at each level involves the opportunity to play at that level, be exposed to new strategies, recognize the increas- ing difficulty of the game, and receive adequate guidance. Similarly, a student who is never exposed to grade-level text, who does not understand the problems that can be encountered, and who does not receive effective coaching will never move to that level. Many readers cannot do this on their own, and many content specialists do not see it as their role. We suggest it is the role of the intervention specialist.

Use Read-Alouds to Expose Students to Higher-Level Text Coordination of intervention and classroom instruction clearly leads to this guide- line. Read-alouds provide a powerful device for exposing students to the type of text they are expected to handle in their grade-level classes (Lane & Wright, 2007). For many struggling readers, this will represent a frustration level, something we have long avoided in intervention settings. However, if students are carefully supported in their encounters with frustration text, such text will allow them to “interact with complex vocabulary and language structures and become familiar with the discourse of the domain (Goetze et al., 2010, p. 179). Combining read-alouds with various forms of repeated, assisted, and performance reading as described in Chapter 9 allows struggling readers to experience success with grade-level text. The use of discussion cards, text coding, and content-free questions as described in Chapter 12 will help to make difficult text accessible to the students. The Four Blocks Literacy Model, the Fluency-Oriented Reading Program, and the Third- Grade Intervention all employed reading aloud in texts appropriate for the grade level of the students, with amazing success.

Emphasize Reading for Meaning A crucial component of successful literacy intervention is that students read, read, and read some more. All of the previously described interventions involve an emphasis on reading as opposed to filling out worksheets and engaging in “skill-and-drill” activi- ties. Why is reading important? Readers learn by doing, and students must actually read if they are to learn to read well. Compare learning to read with learning to drive, skateboard, or swim. Some of you have taken swimming lessons that required you to sit at the side of a pool doing exercises for breathing, kicking, and arm strokes—yet learning these isolated skills did not make you swimmers. You became swimmers only after you learned to apply these skills as you were swimming. In the same way, students can learn to read only by applying what they learn about reading as they are actually reading text. Teachers should read to their students and with their students and they should schedule time for students to read independently.

140 C H A P T E R 6

Reading to students is a powerful strategy for developing new concepts and grappling with unfamiliar syntactic structures. As noted, teachers can use reading aloud to demonstrate effective comprehension strategies, and students can practice these strategies during listening as well as reading. Reading with students involves us- ing a shared-reading format. The teacher and student can read together chorally. The teacher can read to students, and they can then reread the same text, either orally or silently. The teacher and a single student can read orally while other students listen and wait their turns. Such approaches are much more effective than the traditional round-robin reading, where students were expected to orally read alone and in front of their peers. Reading with students allows the teacher to model fluent and expres- sive reading. The teacher can also model the process of thinking during reading by stopping at certain parts, talking about the text, and inviting students to offer their thoughts and comments.

Reading intervention should include both silent and oral reading on the part of the students. At different times, both of these modes are appropriate. Teachers need to monitor individual oral reading wisely. Students should not read orally in the presence of their peers unless they have first practiced the selection. A stumbling and hesitant performance filled with miscues does not help either the reader or the listener. The reader is all too conscious of his or her limitations, and the listeners are often bored or confused. If students are orally reading a selection for the first time, employ a form of shared reading or limit such reading to individual sessions with you. Oral reading done in the presence of peers should always be practiced or rehearsed.

Perhaps the most important job of the teacher is fostering the desire to read so that students will, ultimately, make learning to read a self-sustaining process. We seldom choose to do something that is difficult, something that leads to failure more often than not. Success is the strongest component of motivation. Students will choose to read when they feel confident in doing so.

Teach Students the Strategies That Good Readers Use Teach struggling readers to understand and practice the strategies of successful read- ers. All of the intervention programs described previously emphasize the reading pro- cess, in one way or another, by teaching students strategies used by successful readers. For example, Reading Recovery focuses on showing students how the semantic, syn- tactic, and phonological clue systems interact to aid word pronunciation. Early Steps and the Boulder Project direct the student’s attention to word patterns. In the Four Blocks Literacy Model, the teacher writes in front of the students and thinks aloud as he or she models the composition process.

The basic activity in strategy instruction is thinking aloud, “a technique in which students verbalize their thoughts as they read and thus bring into the open the strate- gies they are using to understand the text” (Oster, 2001, p. 64). The teacher models the process and initiates students into the practice of talking about what they read and how they read it. Thinking aloud can involve both describing a strategy and commenting about the content of the text.

Providing Instruction and Intervention Strategies 141

The term strategy refers to what the successful reader does as he or she reads. The Common Core standards clearly focus on strategies for comprehending text: refer- ring to text examples when drawing an inference; determining main ideas; analyzing and explaining ideas and events; determining word meaning from context; identifying text structure; determining point of view or purpose; interpreting visual information; and integrating materials from multiple sources. Good readers employ such strategies; struggling readers need to learn them. Various books and journal articles have docu- mented the effectiveness of strategy instruction and an awareness of its importance for all students (Almasi, 2003; Barton & Sawyer, 2003; Block & Pressley, 2002; Harvey & Goudvis, 2000; Worthy, Broaddus, & Ivey, 2001). Taylor, Peterson, Pearson, and Rodriguez (2002) examined effective reading instruction and concluded that “a shift in certain teaching practices, such as higher-level questioning, style of interacting, and encouraging active pupil involvement, may be warranted” (p. 275). Sadly, such instruction is not prevalent in classrooms. Pressley (2002) suggests that although “a good case can be made for teaching comprehension strategies” (p. 23), it does not seem to be a common practice in schools. Dougherty Stahl (2004) also noted limited use by primary teachers. If this is indeed true, then that is all the more reason why intervention specialists should make strategy instruction a key component of their instruction.

Make Assessment an Ongoing Component of Instruction Many of the previously described programs move students through increasingly dif- ficult levels of text and gradually expose students to more complex instructional ac- tivities. Ongoing assessment of student understanding that occurs concurrently with instruction allows a teacher to know when to move to a more difficult concept or when to engage in additional practice.

An additional and more formal type of monitoring assesses progress at frequent and regular intervals. For example, monitoring in RTI is often weekly or biweekly. Such an assessment should be technically adequate (Mellard, 2005). A technically adequate assessment is one that matches instruction; it measures what was taught. If the teacher focused on recognizing text structure, the assessment should focus on text structure. If the lesson centered on understanding prefixes and/or suffixes, the assessment should center on these. Ongoing monitoring should not involve an exter- nal instrument that has little connection with intervention activities. For example, if vocabulary development has been stressed, a technically adequate assessment would focus on the words that were taught, not a word list from some external source that may or may not match the instruction that occurred. Similarly, if the focus of the in- struction has been retelling or summarization, the assessment should not ask student to answer literal questions that center on minute details. A technically adequate assess- ment also maintains a uniform format; that is, it is either an open-ended constructed response or a multiple-choice selected response. It is either oral or written. Changes in format can mask progress because a wrong answer can often be the result of student unfamiliarity with the new format.

142 C H A P T E R 6

Provide a Balanced Instructional Framework A successful intervention is based upon a balance between decoding, vocabulary, and comprehension, or what Perfetti (2010) calls “the golden triangle of reading skill” (p. 291). It is impossible to separate these components; limitation in one will negatively affect the others. Comprehension depends on the ability to accurately and fluently pronounce words and assign meanings to the pronunciations. Limitations in vocabu- lary knowledge will negatively affect decoding, as we tend to identify known words more quickly and accurately. Because these three components are so intimately con- nected, all should be addressed during an intervention session. However, one or two may receive greater emphasis based upon the needs of the student. Writing should be used to reinforce all three components. Students who write regularly come to feel a sense of control over both reading and writing. The interventions described previously in this chapter all provide a carefully balanced set of activities.

Provide a Consistent Instructional Structure and Use Time Effectively Each intervention described earlier in the chapter has a clearly defined lesson struc- ture and a series of activities that occur each day, usually in the same sequence. The familiarity of the structure allows the teacher to concentrate on the student as opposed to focusing attention on what to do next. The success of using volunteers in the Book Buddies and the Howard Street Tutoring programs was probably intertwined with the provision of preplanned and uniform lessons. Volunteers in other programs often drop out, despite initial enthusiasm, because they do not know what to do or do not feel confident enough in doing it. The uniform structure may be a factor in the high retention of volunteers in the Book Buddies program (Invernizzi et al., 1996–1997).

Successful interventions use a basic lesson template, and the teachers adhere to it. Each day, the students participate in the same activities for approximately the same amount of time and usually in the same sequence. For example, the 30-minute Read- ing Recovery lesson involves the following activities: rereading familiar books; taking a running record; letter identification or word analysis; writing a story; cut-up sen- tences; introduction of the new book; and student reading of the new book. That is a lot of activity for one 30-minute lesson! Such a consistent and clearly defined structure allows the teacher to be very efficient, to focus on what is important, and to discourage moving off track. Structure also helps the students to know what is coming next and reduces the off-task behavior often associated with moving to a new task. A consistent lesson structure minimizes off-task behavior. Students know what is expected, and they move quite competently from task to task.

But doesn’t a set lesson structure stand in the way of individualizing for students’ needs? A set structure actually helps you to individualize and assess, and it makes les- son planning much easier (Caldwell & Leslie, 2013). Individualization occurs within the structure with the books you choose, the words you emphasize, and the strategies you model. It occurs within your ongoing assessment as you modify the text or the task to the needs of the students. Because you do not have to construct a lesson structure

Providing Instruction and Intervention Strategies 143

each time you prepare, you can spend more time selecting appropriate materials and refining strategies. An added bonus is that because you do not have to worry about the next step in your plan, you can focus your attention on what your students are doing!

Keep the Size of the Group as Small as Possible Students with reading problems may be instructed individually or in groups. With the exception of the classroom programs, all intervention programs provide either one-to-one or small-group instruction. Even the classroom programs make provision for small groups and individual attention. For example, during the self-selected read- ing and writing blocks in the Four Block Model, the teacher confers individually with students.

One-to-one tutoring is usually reserved for Tier 3 instruction in the RTI structure. It is an extremely effective form of instruction. For students with severe difficulties in reading, individual instruction is often preferable because it allows the teacher to carefully individualize instruction. In addition, highly distractible students often need an environ- ment that protects them from irrelevant stimuli. Finally, in individual instruction, students can avoid the embarrassment of peer pressure. Small-group instruction, however, also has benefits for students. It enables students to learn from each other. As students listen to others, their own comprehension deepens. Group instruction also helps students to become more active in asking each other questions, sharing comments about the text, and working with one another. See Table 6.1 for a summary of these guidelines.

TABLE 6.1 Guidelines for Teaching Struggling Readers

Set high expectations. Work to bring the student up to chronological grade level.

Coordinate intervention instruction and classroom instruction. Closely connect intervention instruction with the content of classroom textbooks and the nature of classroom activities.

Use read-alouds to expose students to higher-level text. Support students by combining read-alouds with repeated, assisted, and performance reading (Chapter 9) and with discus- sion cards, text coding, content-free questions, think-alouds, and idea mapping (Chapter 12).

Emphasize reading for meaning. Include both oral and silent reading but avoid unpracticed oral reading.

Teach students the strategies that good readers use. Model such strategies and initiate students into the practice of talking about what they read and how they read it.

Make assessment an ongoing component of instruction. Assessment should be technically adequate; that is, it should measure what was taught.

Provide a balanced instructional framework. Each lesson should provide a focus on decoding vocabulary and comprehension.

Provide a consistent framework and use time wisely. Have students participate in the same activities for approximately the same amount of time and often in the same sequence

Keep the size of the group as small as possible. Although individualized instruction has many benefits, small-group instruction enables students to learn from one another.

144 C H A P T E R 6

Instructional Support for Struggling Readers and RTI The RTI initiative has resulted in a strong focus on the identification and instruc- tion of struggling readers. As school and districts meet the challenge of RTI, various new intervention structures have emerged (Johnston, 2010a; Lipson & Wixson, 2010). Some of the programs described in the early part of this chapter were developed in response to RTI (Craig, 2010; Gelzheiser et al., 2010; Scanlon & Sweeney, 2010). How RTI plays out in a specific school or district is dependent upon a variety of fac- tors, such as staff, time, and resources. However, we suggest that a viable approach is to model RTI instruction on what has proven successful in the past by following the guidelines set forth in this chapter.

Summary

In this chapter we suggested a new perspective for intervention programs: moving beyond satisfaction with progress to an emphasis on moving a struggling reader to grade-level proficiency. This is in accord with the Common Core State Standards Initiative (2010). This will involve paying more attention to the concept of transfer and recognizing that an emphasis upon instructional-level text may deny readers ac- cess to the complexity of language and concepts found in grade-level material.

We described a variety of successful intervention programs to provide guidelines for structuring similar programs. These programs are not identical. Some are designed for individual instruction; others focus on groups. Some are appropriate for younger readers and others provide instruction more suited for older students. However, they all have features in common that form the basis for successful literacy instruction.

We described principles drawn from these successful programs that can be used to develop other programs:

◆ Set high expectations for students and work to bring them up to grade level. ◆ Coordinate intervention instruction with classroom texts and activities. ◆ Emphasize reading. Structure lessons around reading as opposed to worksheets

and “skill-and-drill” activities. Read to, and with, students. Employ both oral and silent reading formats.

◆ Teach students the strategies that good readers use, such as those that com- prise the Common Core standards: referring to text examples when drawing an inference; determining main ideas; analyzing and explaining ideas and events; determining word meaning from context; identifying text structure; determin- ing point of view or purpose; interpreting visual information; and integrating materials from multiple sources.

◆ Provide a balanced lesson framework that addresses word identification, word meaning, and comprehension.

◆ Make assessment an ongoing and integral component of instruction. Carefully observe what your students say and do, and use these observations to individual- ize and shape instruction. Provide technically adequate assessments that measure what was taught and maintain a uniform format.

Providing Instruction and Intervention Strategies 145

◆ Provide a consistent lesson structure and use time wisely. A carefully planned and consistent lesson structure minimizes off-task behavior. It also allows the teacher to better individualize instruction by paying more attention to the students and less to what comes next in the lesson.

◆ Keep the size of the group as small as possible. Individual instruction is most appropriate for students with severe reading difficulties. Grouping can provide benefits in that students can learn from each other and experience opportunities for sharing literacy experiences.

◆ In developing RTI programs, we suggest that the preceding principles be adhered to as closely as possible.

References Almasi, J. F. (2003). Teaching strategic processes in reading. New York: The Guilford Press. Atwell, N. (1998). In the middle: New understandings of writing, reading, and learning. Portsmouth, NH:

Boynton. Barton, J. & Sawyer, D. (2003). Our students are ready for this: Comprehension instruction in the elemen-

tary school. The Reading Teacher, 57(4), pp. 334–347. Biggam, S. C., Teitelbaum, N., & Willey, J. (2007). Improving early literacy: Vermont stories of educational

change from the bottom up and the top down. In R. Allington & S. Walmsley (Eds.), No quick fix: Rethinking literacy programs in America’s elementary schools. The RTI edition (pp. 197–213). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.

Block, C. C., & Pressley, M. (Eds.). Comprehension instruction: Research-based practices. New York: Guilford Press Bransford, J. D., Brown, A L., & Cocking, R. R. (Eds.). (2000). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and

school. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. Brown, K. J., Morris, D., & Fields, M. (2005). Intervention after grade 1: Serving increased numbers of

struggling readers effectively. Journal of Literacy Research, 37, 61–94. Brozo, W. G. (2010). The role of content literacy in an effective RTI program. The Reading Teacher, 64, 147–150. Caldwell, J. S., & Leslie, L. (2013). Intervention strategies to accompany informal reading inventory assessment: So

what do I do now? Boston: Allyn and Bacon. Chandler-Olcott, K., & Hinchman, K. A. (2005). Tutoring adolescent literacy learners: A guide for volunteers.

New York: The Guilford Press. Clay, M. M. (1993). Reading recovery: A guidebook for teachers in training. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann

Educational Books. Common Core State Standards Initiative. (2010). Common Core State Standards for English language arts & lit-

eracy in history/social studies, science and technical subjects. Retrieved from http://www.corestandards.org Cook., J., & Sawyer, D. M. (2003). Our students are ready for this: Comprehension instruction in the

elementary school. The Reading Teacher, 57, 334–347. Craig, S. H. (2010). An adapted writing intervention for the kindergarten classroom: Creating a frame-

work for responsive teaching. In P. H. Johnston (Ed.), RTI in literacy- responsive and comprehensive (pp. 197–219). Newark DE: International Reading Association.

Cunningham, P. M., Hall, D. P., & Defee, M. (1991). Nonability-grouped, multilevel instruction: A year in a first grade classroom. The Reading Teacher, 44, 566–571.

Cunningham, P. M., Hall, D. P., & Defee, M. (1998). Nonability-grouped, multilevel instruction: Eight years later. The Reading Teacher, 51, 652–654.

Dougherty Stahl, K. A. (2004). Proof, practice, and promise: Comprehension strategy instruction in the primary grades. The Reading Teacher, 57, 598–611.

Edmonds, M. S., Vaughn, S., Wexler, J., Reutebuch, C., Cable, A., Tackett, K. K., & Schnakenberg, J. W. (2009). A synthesis of reading interventions and effects on reading comprehension outcomes for older struggling readers. Review of Educational Research, 70, 262–300.

146 C H A P T E R 6

Ehri, L. C., Dreyer, L. G., Flugman, B., & Gross, A. (2007). Reading Rescue: An effective tutoring inter- vention model for language-minority students who are struggling readers in first grade. American Educational Research Journal, 44, 414–448.

Flynt, E. S., & Cooter, R. B. (2005). Improving middle-grades reading in urban schools: The Memphis Comprehension Framework. The Reading Teacher, 58, 774–780.

Forbes, S., Swenson, B., Person, T., & Reed, J. (2010). Reading Recovery: A major component of many RTI models. In P. H. Johnston (Ed.), RTI in literacy- responsive and comprehensive (pp. 171–177). Newark DE: International Reading Association.

Gelzheiser, L. M., Scanlon, D. M., & Hallgren-Flynn, L. (2010). Spotlight on RTI for adolescents: An example of intensive middle school intervention using the interactive strategies approach—extended. In M. Y. Lipson & K. K. Wixson (Eds.), Successful approaches to RTI: Collaborative practices for improving K-12 literacy (pp. 211–230). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.

Glasswell, K., & Ford, M. P. (2010). Teaching flexibly with leveled texts: More power for your reading block. The Reading Teacher, 64, 57–60. doi:10.1598/RT.64.1.7

Goetze, S. K., Laster, B., & Ehren, B. J. (2010). RTI for secondary school literacy. In M. Y. Lipson & K. K. Wixson (Eds.), Successful approaches to RTI: Collaborative practices for improving K-12 literacy (pp. 173–210). Newark. NJ: International Reading Association.

Hall, D. P., Prevatte, C., & Cunningham, P. M. (2007). Eliminating ability grouping and reducing failure in the primary grades. In R. Allington & S. Walmsley (Eds.), No quick fix: Rethinking literacy programs in America’s elementary schools. The RTI edition (pp. 137–159). New York: Teachers College Press, and Newark, DE: International Reading Association.

Harvey, S., & Goudvis, A. (2000). Strategies that work: Teaching comprehension to enhance understanding. York, ME: Stenhouse Publishers.

Hiebert, E. H. (1994). A small-group literacy intervention with Chapter I students. In E. H. Hiebert & B. Taylor (Eds.), Getting reading right from the start: Effective early literacy interventions (pp. 85–106). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

Hiebert, E. H., Colt, J. M., Catto, S. L., & Gury, E. C. (1992). Reading and writing of first-grade students in a restructured Chapter I program. American Educational Research Journal, 29, 545–572.

Invernizzi, M., Juel, C., & Rosemary, C. A. (1996–1997). A community volunteer tutorial that works. The Reading Teacher, 50, 304–311.

Invernizzi, M., Rosemary, C. A., Juel, C., & Richards H. C. (1997). At-risk readers and community volunteers: A three year perspective. Journal of the Scientific Studies of Reading, 3, 277–300.

Johnston P. H. (2010a). (Ed.). RTI in literacy—responsive and comprehensive. Newark, NJ: International Read- ing Association.

Johnston, P. H. (2010b). A framework for response to intervention in literacy. In P. H. Johnston (Ed.), RTI in literacy—responsive and comprehensive (pp. 1–12). Newark, NJ: International Reading Association.

Kintsch, W. (2004). The construction-integration model of text comprehension and its implications for instruction. In R. B. Ruddell & N. J. Unrau (Eds.), Theoretical models and processes of comprehension (5th ed., pp. 1270–1328). Newark DE: International reading Association

Klenk, L., & Kirby, M. W. (2000). Re-mediating reading difficulties: Appraising the past, reconciling the present, constructing the future. In M. L. Kamil, P. B. Mosenthal, P. D. Pearson, & R. Barr (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (Vol. II, pp. 667–690). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Knight, S. L., & Stallings, J. A. (2007). The implementation of the accelerated school model in an urban elementary school. In R. Allington & S. Walmsley (Eds.), No quick fix: Rethinking literacy programs in America’s elementary schools. The RTI edition (pp. 236–254). New York: Teachers College Press, and Newark, DE: International Reading Association.

Kuhn, M. R., Schwanenflugel, P. J., Morris, R. D., Morrow, L. M., Woo, D. G., Meisinger, E. B., et al. (2006). Teaching children to become fluent and automatic readers. Journal of Literacy Research, 38, 357–388.

Lane, H. B., & Wright, T. L. (2007). Maximizing the effectiveness of reading aloud. The Reading Teacher, 60, 668–674. Lipson, M. Y., & Wixson. K. K. (Eds.). (2010). Successful approaches to RTI: Collaborative practice for improving

K-12 literacy. Newark, DE: International Reading Association. Lyons, C. A., & Beaver, J. (2007). Reducing retention and learning disability placement through Reading

Recovery: An educational sound cost-effective choice. In R. L. Allington & S. A. Walmsley (Eds.), No quick fix: Rethinking literacy in America’s elementary schools. The RTI edition (pp. 116–136). New York: Teachers College Press, and Newark, DE: International Reading Association.

Providing Instruction and Intervention Strategies 147

MacDonald, C., & Figueredo, L. (2010). Closing the gap early: Implementing a literacy intervention for at-risk kindergartners in urban schools. The Reading Teacher, 63, 404–419. doi:10.1598/RT.63.5.6

Mathes, P. G., Denton, C. A., Fletcher, J. M., Anthony, J. L., Francis, D. J., & Schatschneider, C. (2005). The effects of theoretically different instruction and student characteristics on the skills of struggling readers. Reading Research Quarterly, 40, 148–182.

Mayer, R. E., & Wittrock, M. C. (2006). Problem solving. In P. A. Alexander & P. H. Winne (Eds.), Handbook of educational psychology (pp. 287–303). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

McCormack, R. L., Paratore, J. R., & Dahlene, K. F. (2004). Establishing instructional congruence across learning settings: One path to success for struggling third grade readers. In R. L. McCormack & J. R. Paratore (Eds.), After early intervention, then what? Teaching struggling readers in grades 3 and beyond (pp. 117–136). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.

Mellard, D. (2005). Responsiveness to intervention: Implementation in schools. Retrieved from http://www .schwablearning.org/articles.aspx?r=1057

Mokhtari, K., Hutchison, A. C., & Edwards, P. A. (2010). Organizing instruction for struggling readers in tutorial settings. The Reading Teacher, 64, 287–290. doi: 10.1598/RT.64.4.10

Morris, D. (2005). The Howard Street Tutoring manual: Teaching at-risk readers in the primary grades. New York: The Guilford Press.

Oster, L. (2001). Using the think-aloud for reading instruction. The Reading Teacher, 55, 64–69. Paterson, P. O., & Elliott, L. N. (2006). Struggling reader to struggling reader: High school students’

responses to a cross-age tutoring program. Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy, 49, 378–389. Perfetti, C. (2010). Decoding, vocabulary and comprehension: The golden triangle of reading skill.

In M. G. McKeown & L. Kucan (Eds.), Bringing reading research to life (pp. 291–303). New York: The Guilford Press.

Phillips, G., & Smith, P. (2010). Closing the gaps: Literacy for the hardest-to-teach. In P. H. Johnston (Ed.), RTI in literacy—responsive and comprehensive (pp. 219–249). Newark DE: International Reading Association.

Pinnell, G. S., Lyons, C. A., Deford, D. E., Bryk, A. S., & Seltzer, M. (1994). Comparing instructional models for the literacy education of high-risk first graders. Reading Research Quarterly, 29, 9–30.

Pressley, M. (2002). Comprehension strategies instruction: A turn-of-the-century status report. In C. C. Block & M. Pressley (Eds.), Comprehension instruction: Research-based best practices (pp. 11–27). New York: The Guilford Press.

Santa, C. M., & Hoien, T. (1999). An assessment of Early Steps: A program for early intervention. Reading Research Quarterly, 34, 54–79.

Scanlon, D. M., & Anderson, K. L. (2010). Using the interactive strategies approach to prevent reading difficulties in an RTI context. In M. Y. Lipson & K. K. Wixson (Eds.), Successful approaches to RTI: Collaborative practices for improving K-12 literacy (pp. 20–65). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.

Scanlon, D. M., & Sweeney, J. M. (2010). Kindergarten intervention: Teaching to prevent reading difficul- ties. In P. H. Johnston (Ed.), RTI in literacy—responsive and comprehensive (pp. 178–196). Newark DE: International Reading Association.

Stahl, S., Heubach, K., & Cramond, B. (1997). Fluency-oriented reading instruction. Reading research report No. 79. Athens, GA, and College Park, MD: National Reading Research Center of the University of Georgia and the University of Maryland.

Stahl, S. A., & Heubach, K. M. (2005) Fluency-oriented reading instruction. Journal of Literacy Research, 37, 25–60.

Taylor, B. M., Peterson, D. S., Pearson, P. D., & Rodriguez, M. C. (2002). Looking inside classrooms: Re- flecting on the “how” as well as the “what” in effective reading instruction. The Reading Teacher, 56, 270–279.

Taylor, B. M., Short, R., Shearer, B., & Frye, B. J. (2007). First grade teachers provide early reading interven- tion in the classroom. In R. Allington & S. Walmsley (Eds.), No quick fix: Rethinking literacy programs in America’s elementary schools. The RTI edition (pp. 159–176). New York: Teachers College Press, and Newark, DE: International Reading Association.

Taylor, B. M., Strait, J., & Medo, M. A. (1994). Early intervention in reading: Supplemental instruction for groups of low-achieving students provided by first grade teachers. In E. H. Hiebert & B. M. Taylor (Eds.), Getting reading right from the start: Effective early literacy interventions. New York: Allyn & Bacon.

148 C H A P T E R 6

Taylor, S. V., & Nesheim, D. W. (2000–2001). Making literacy real for “high-risk” adolescent emerging readers: An innovative application of reader’s workshop. Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy, 44, 308–318.

Walmsley, S., & Allington, R. (2007). Redefining and reforming instructional support programs for at-risk readers. In R. Allington & S. Walmsley (Eds.), No quick fix: Rethinking literacy programs in America’s elementary schools. The RTI edition (pp. 19–44). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.

Walp, T. P., & Walmsley, S. A. (2007). Scoring well on tests or becoming genuinely literate: Rethinking remediation in a small rural school. In R. Allington & S. Walmsley (Eds.), No quick fix: Rethinking literacy programs in America’s elementary schools. The RTI edition (pp. 177–196). New York: Teachers College Press, and Newark, DE: International Reading Association.

Williams, M. (2001). Making connections: A workshop for adolescents who struggle with reading. Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy, 44, 588–602

Winfield, L. F. (2007). Change in urban schools with high concentrations of low-income children: Chapter I schoolwide projects. In R. Allington & S. Walmsley (Eds.), No quick fix: Rethinking literacy programs in America’s elementary schools. The RTI edition (pp. 214–235). New York: Teachers College Press, and Newark, DE: International Reading Association.

Worthy, J., Broaddus, K., & Ivey, G. (2001). Pathways to independence: Reading, writing and learning in grades 3–8. New York: The Guilford Press.

Go to the topic 11: Reading Difficulties & Intervention Strategies in the MyEducationLab (www.myeducationlab.com) for Reading Prob- lems: Assessment and Teaching Strategies, where you can: ◆ Find learning outcomes for reading dif-

ficulties and intervention strategies, along with the national standards that connect to these outcomes.

◆ Complete assignments and activities that can help you more deeply understand the chapter content.

◆ Apply and practice your understanding of the core teaching skills identified in the chapter with the Building Teaching Skills and Dispositions learning units.

◆ Examine challenging situations and cases presented in the Iris Center Resources.

◆ Access video clips of CCSSO National Teachers of the Year award winners re- sponding to the question, “Why Do I Teach?” in the Teacher Talk section.

◆ Practice targeting instruction and mak- ing content accessible for all students with A+RISE activities.

◆ Strengthen your understanding and usage of the English language in writing with the Grammar Tutorial.

◆ Gain experience in choosing appropriate literature and integrating the best titles into language arts instruction with the Children’s and Young Adult Literature Database.

◆ Track the month-by-month literacy growth of five second graders with the Literacy Portraits.

◆ Create, update, and share quality lesson plans with the Lesson Plan Builder.

◆ Access state licensure test requirements, overviews of what the tests cover, and sam- ple test items in the Certification and Li- censure section.

◆ Check your comprehension of the content covered in the chapter with the Study Plan. Here you will be able to take a chapter pre- test, receive feedback on your answers, and then access personalized Review, Practice, and Enrichment exercises to enhance your understanding of chapter content. After you complete the exercises, take a posttest to confirm your comprehension.

7 Introduction

Early Literacy Concepts Oral Language Development Listening Comprehension Print Knowledge Environmental Print Alphabet Knowledge Phonemic Awareness Short-Term Phonological Memory Rapid Naming Visual Memory Visual Perceptual Skills

Strategies to Develop Early Literacy Concepts

Oral Language Development Print Knowledge Alphabetic Knowledge and Phonemic

Awareness Beginning Reading Vocabulary

Summary

C H A P T E R

Early Literacy

149

150 C H A P T E R 7

Introduction

This chapter discusses the underlying concepts that students must develop to read and write. Early literacy comprises children’s earliest awareness and use of letters through the development of fluent reading and the ability to decode basic phonics patterns. In this chapter, we will focus on the phases students go through as they develop an understanding of written language. We will include suggestions for assessment as well as instructional strategies that can be used to support students’ progress through these developmental phases. We will also provide ideas for the use of digital media to sup- port students’ early literacy skills.

At one time, the field of reading focused on reading readiness as a set of skills stu- dents needed before they could begin reading instruction. However, research has shown that children best develop the foundation for reading as they engage in activities with print. Rather than children being “ready for reading” at one point in their lives, the basis for reading is laid gradually and involves speaking, listening, reading, and writing (Strickland, Galda, & Cullinan, 2007). In a joint position statement, the International Reading Association and the National Association for the Education of Young Children (1998) identified five stages of literacy development: awareness and exploration, experimentation, early reading and writing, transitional reading and writing, and conventional reading and writing. Ehri (2005) has proposed a phase theory to describe the processes through which early readers progress. Gentry (2007) rejects the concept of “emerging” readers and writ- ers. He supports Ehri’s phase theory and describes five phases through which students “metamorphose” into readers and writers. These phases are presented in Table 7.1.

Unfortunately, many students with reading problems have not mastered one or more of these crucial concepts. If you have students who cannot comfortably read beginning- level books, you must determine whether they have developed the foundation needed for reading. Many such students, even those in intermediate grades, lack basic concepts about print. When these concepts are developed using books, stories, letters, and words, students improve dramatically. The tasks used to assess early literacy in the literacy center are based on the Early Reading Screening Instrument (ERSI), developed by Darrell Morris (1998).

This chapter focuses on the first four phases of development and the concepts that children should develop as they progress through these phases. We discuss how to assess those concepts and suggest some instructional strategies to teach them. Al- though most students struggling in early literacy development will progress using these techniques, some students with multiple or severe disabilities need more inten- sive measures, as presented in Chapter 15.

Early Literacy Concepts

The National Early Literacy Panel (Shanahan et al., 2008) has identified these areas that have strong research bases and are correlated with success in literacy:

◆ Oral language development and vocabulary ◆ Listening comprehension ◆ Print knowledge

Early Literacy 151

◆ Environmental print ◆ Alphabet knowledge ◆ Phonemic awareness ◆ Phonological short-term memory ◆ Rapid naming ◆ Visual memory ◆ Visual perceptual skills

This section discusses each of these concepts and suggests methods for assessing them. It is critical for reading specialists to work closely with teachers in the primary grades to identify students who may struggle with these early concepts. Early interven- tion can prevent more serious issues later in literacy development.

Oral Language Development As described in Chapter 6, reading, writing, listening, and speaking are all aspects of language. Students whose oral language is not well developed have difficulty with literacy.

With the adoption of the Common Core State Standards Initiative (Council of Chief State School Officers [CCSSO] & National Governors Association, 2010), oral language development assumes an even more important role as the foundation for

TABLE 7.1 Phases of Becoming a Proficient Reader and Writer as Described by Gentry

Phase Descriptor Characteristics

0 Reads and Writes Without Letter Knowledge

Student cannot write his or her name but scribbles, sometimes using letter-like symbols

1 Reads and Writes With Letter But Without Sounds

Uses letters, but without regard to their sounds May emulate reading using picture or context cues

2 Reads and Writes With Some Phonemic Awareness

Begins to match letters and sounds in writing Begins to read words using initial letters as the cues for words

    Begins to write words in abbreviated fashion: one or two letters may represent entire words

3 Reads and Writes With Phonemic Awareness

Matches letters and their constituent sounds in writing

    Matches letters and sounds in reading Spells words with one letter representing each sound

4 Reads and Writes Using Spelling Patterns

Uses phonics patterns (rimes) to write words Can apply phonics patterns, or chunking, to reading text

152 C H A P T E R 7

standards in speaking and listening throughout the grades. Although oral language development has historically been viewed as crucial to the development of compre- hension, it is now recognized as being central to the continued language development of students.

Aspects of Oral Language Important for Literacy. To read effectively, students need to be able to express and understand ideas fully. They also need to develop lan- guage skills specifically related to stories. For example, they must understand and be able to express the structure of stories. This understanding includes realizing that stories have characters and events that occur in sequence. The Common Core State Standards require that students as early as kindergarten should be able to confirm their understanding of text read orally or information conveyed orally by asking and answering questions (CCSSO & National Governors Association, 2010).

It is clear that questioning is also a language skill. To participate fully in lessons, students must be able to respond to teachers’ questions as well as ask questions to clarify their own understandings or seek information. Many students with language development problems have difficulty constructing or responding to questions.

During the “get-acquainted” activity in our literacy center, it became apparent that Sean, a third grader, had language problems. When Sean’s teacher asked him for a word to describe himself, he could not answer. After many probes, he finally said “boy” and “brother.” When he retold Little Red Riding Hood in his own words, he referred to the Grandmother as “Mom” and to Little Red Riding Hood as “she.” Finally, despite the many problems Sean encountered, he never asked for help in reading or writing.

Assessing Oral Language Development and Vocabulary Development. Oral lan- guage development is assessed through informal teacher observations and through narrative comprehension. As you engage students in conversations and observe their conversations with others, you should notice whether students talk about their inter- ests and activities. When you ask students about important events in their lives, are the responses full accounts or one-word answers? Can students convey events in sequen- tial order? When students misunderstand directions or encounter problems, can they ask for help?

If students exhibit problems in oral language development, teachers may decide to assess their language development and vocabulary more formally. The Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test, Fourth Edition (PPVT-IV), and the Expressive Vocabu- lary Test, Second Edition (EVT-II), yield excellent information about students’ oral language development. The PPVT-IV measures students’ receptive, or listening, vocabulary. The EVT-II measures students’ abilities to provide synonyms for prompts with supporting pictures. For example, the teacher may show the student a picture of a jet and ask the student, “Can you tell me another word for jet?” The student would be expected to reply, “plane.” These are norm-referenced tests that yield results as percentile ranks, age-equivalents, and stanines so that teachers can compare their students’ language development to that of their peers. Also, comparing individual students’ receptive language with their expressive language can provide important in- formation for teachers in planning instruction.

Early Literacy 153

Listening Comprehension Before students become skilled readers, teachers can assess their narrative compre- hension skills through story construction. Narrative comprehension is an important predictor of later reading success (Dooley & Matthews, 2009; Paris & Paris, 2003). One way to assess narrative comprehension is to read a story to students and ask them to retell it (Morrow, 2011). You can also use passages from an informal reading inven- tory, as described in Chapter 5, to determine the language levels of your students. Paris and Paris (2003) developed an assessment tool that uses wordless picture books and asks students to construct stories based on these sequential pictures. Checklists that help teachers score students’ retellings and story constructions are especially useful in maintaining class records and monitoring students’ progress (Gredler & Johnson, 2004; Strickland & Strickland, 2000; Walker, 2011).

If you need to use formal assessments to document students’ progress as part of your school’s response-to-intervention (RTI) model, there are several instruments that you might find useful. First, you should carefully select assessments to suit your purposes; look at the actual items to see that they test the skills you want to measure. If your school has used the Kaufman Assessment Battery for Children, Second Edition (KABC-2) or the Kaufman Brief Intelligence Test (KBIT-2), Second Edition, to deter- mine students’ potential and the Kaufman Test of Educational Achievement, Second Edition (KTEA-II) to determine students’ achievement levels, you can use subtests from them or the KTEA-II Brief Form to monitor students’ progress. These provide an especially good formal assessment plan because of the co-norming across these tests.

Print Knowledge An understanding of how print works is critical to early literacy. Students must realize that print on the page is read in a certain order and that it contains individual words.

Print Concepts Crucial to Reading. As specified in the Common Core State Standards (CCSSO & National Governors Association, 2010), students in kindergar- ten should develop the following print concepts:

1. Print, rather than pictures, carries meaning. 2. Reading is tracked, or followed, from top to bottom and left to right, and from

page to page. 3. In print, words are separated by spaces.

Although these concepts are typically developed in the kindergarten years, some students with reading problems have not fully mastered them in the primary grades. Kelly, a first grader in the literacy center, traced lines backward, from right to left, as her teacher read them. Derrick, a second-grade child, thought that every spoken syllable he heard was a printed word. These children still needed to develop fundamental concepts about print.

Assessing Concepts About Print. In her An Observation Survey of Early Literacy Achievement, Marie Clay (1993) included a Concepts About Print test using two books,

154 C H A P T E R 7

Sand and Stone, that were specifically designed to measure students’ understanding of how print works. These books provide teachers with the opportunity to determine students’ awareness of print as meaning, ability to track words and lines in text, and knowledge of words. The test also measures awareness of inverted pages, transposed words, reversed letters, mismatches between pictures and text, and sentences printed out of sequence.

Many concepts about print can be measured without formal tests just by sharing a simple book with a student. Choose an 8- to 12-page book with one or two lines of text per page. The book should contain multisyllabic words and at least one return sweep. To determine awareness of print as meaning, open the book and ask the stu- dent to point to “what we read.” The student should identify print, not pictures. Next, to determine tracking, point to the print and ask the student to show you “where we begin to read,” and “where we go next.” Notice whether the student starts at the left for each line. Finally, for word awareness, ask the student to point to and repeat words after you have read each page. From this repetition, you can see whether the student can correctly identify a multisyllabic word as one word.

Environmental Print The first print that students recognize is environmental print. On the way to child care one morning, Andrea’s 3-year-old son, Mark, starts begging for chicken tenders. Having just cleaned the breakfast table, Andrea is baffled until they turn the corner and Mark shouts, “McDonald’s!” Next, she hears Mark’s twin sister, Anna, saying, “Slow down, Mommy, it says ‘Stop.’” Although Andrea would like to think her children are precocious and early readers, as a kindergarten teacher, she knows that they are in an early phase of literacy development, recognizing environmental print. This print is recognized logographically rather than orthographically; if Andrea wrote the word McDonald’s on a piece of paper, Mark might recognize that it starts with the letter M just as his name does, but he wouldn’t immediately recognize the word. Similarly, if Andrea arranged the magnetic letters S-T-O-P on the refrigerator Anna would not shout, “Stop!” when she went to the kitchen for a cup of juice. The twins are in Phase I, as described by Gentry (2007). They can recognize environmental print and are mov- ing through the natural progression of literacy development. As books, paper, and markers become a part of their world, they will make the transition from recognizing logos and signs to recognizing their names or words such as mom and dad.

A child’s first sight words play a critical role in literacy development, because early readers gain confidence by using their beginning sight words in reading and writing. These words also form the foundation for word analysis strategies and enable students to use known words as a basis for learning about new ones.

One way to assess early reading vocabulary is to ask students to write any words they know. This activity provides students with the opportunity to show you what they know instead of what they do not know.

Clay (1993, 2002) recommends that teachers assess beginning reading vocabu- lary by developing a word list using 15 high-frequency words drawn from the students’ early reading materials and asking students to read these words. This method allows the

Early Literacy 155

teacher to discover which early reading words students know and what their strategies are for coping with unknown words. Allow 10 minutes for students to repeat this activity.

Parents and teachers can support this important phase by engaging children in “reading” as they take walks, travel, and participate in family outings to the grocery store or zoo. Reading signs and logos is an important component of early literacy development. Simple trips through the aisles of the grocery store, where children rec- ognize characters on their favorite cereal boxes, provide rich learning experiences for developing readers and writers. Drawing signs as they play with their blocks and cars helps to build the foundation for literacy development.

Alphabet Knowledge Research shows that the ability to name letters is an excellent predictor of early reading achievement (Bishop & League, 2006; Hammill, 2004; Trieman, Tincoff, & Richmond-Welty, 1996; Walsh, Price, & Gillingham, 1988).

Knowledge Needed for Reading. Alphabet knowledge consists of two parts: recog- nizing letters and writing letters. Students must identify letters automatically and must be able to name them when they are presented in random order. In addition, students must know both uppercase and lowercase letters. The Common Core State Standards (CCSSO & National Governors Association, 2010) identify the skill of recognizing all upper- and lowercase letters of the alphabet as a foundational skill that should be achieved in kindergarten. Some struggling readers and writers, even in the third grade, still have problems with letter recognition. Allen, for example, a third grader in the literacy center, frequently asked the teacher how to make a u or a j.

Assessing Alphabet Knowledge. A sample of an alphabet test is given in Figure 7.1. To administer the task, ask your student to say each letter, reading across the lines. Next, ask the student to write these same letters as you say them.

Again, if you need to use formal assessment to monitor students’ progress, many of the achievement tests include an alphabet knowledge subtest.

Phonemic Awareness Phonemic, or phonological, awareness is the knowledge that speech is built from sounds. For example, the word bed consists of three speech sounds, or phonemes: /b/, short e, and /d/. The word sleep consists of four phonemes—/s/, /l/, long e, and /p/— even though it has five letters; the ee combination makes only one sound. Consonants can also combine to make one sound; the word sheep, which has five letters, consists of three phonemes: /sh/, long e, and /p/.

Knowledge Needed for Reading. Phonemic awareness refers to students’ knowledge of individual sounds in words and their ability to manipulate those seg- ments (Bishop & League, 2006; Hammill, 2004; National Reading Panel, 2000;

156 C H A P T E R 7

Stahl & Murray, 1994; Strickland & Schickedanz, 2009). Research shows that students’ abilities to identify and manipulate these sound elements are highly related to reading achievement and spelling (Ball & Blachman, 1991; Bishop & League, 2006; Byrne & Fielding-Barnsley, 1991; Hammill, 2004; Stanovich, 1988).

Phonemic awareness includes a variety of abilities. Students must be able to identify and separate beginning sounds of words, identify and separate ending sounds, and substitute sounds within a basic pattern. They should also be able to identify and produce rhyming words. Finally, students need to be able to manipulate sounds by putting them together (or blending them), taking them apart (or segmenting them), and deleting and substituting them. All of these abilities help students to master pho- nics in reading. The Common Core State Standards address the components as areas that should be mastered in kindergarten (CCSSO & National Governors Association, 2010).

Assessing Phonemic Awareness. Phonemic awareness is assessed by asking stu- dents to blend and segment sounds, as shown in Figure 7.2. Other tasks include asking students to identify the first sound in a spoken word (e.g., “What is the first sound in table?”) or to say a word without a sound (e.g., “Say table without the /t/.”) (Paris, 2003; Stahl & Murray, 1994).

A S D F G H J

K L P O I U Y

T R E W Q Z X

C V B N M

a s d f g h j

k l p o i u y

t r e w q z x

c v b n m

j g a t q i

FIGURE 7.1 Alphabet Recognition

Early Literacy 157

Most formal assessments for early literacy include subtests that measure phone- mic awareness. If your school needs to use formal assessment to document students’ progress for its RTI plan, you can select a comprehensive form of an achievement test, such as the KTEA-II, and use the brief form of the test in a systematic assessment plan to document progress.

Letter–Sound Correspondence. To read successfully, students must be able to identify and manipulate sounds and associate these sounds with their corresponding letters (Ball & Blachman, 1991; International Reading Association, 1998; Morrow, 2011; Trieman et al., 1996). The Common Core State Standards (CCSSO & National Governors Association, 2010) identify three skills that students should master in kindergarten:

1. One-to-one letter–sound correspondence 2. Association of the common spellings for short and long sounds for the five major

vowels 3. Identification of the differences among similarly spelled words

FIGURE 7.2 Assessing Phonemic Awareness: Blending and Segmenting

Directions: I am going to say some words in a special code, and I want you to figure out the real word. If I say /s/-/a/-/t/, you say sat. If I say /p/-/i/-/g/, you say pig.

Teacher says: Expected Response Student’s Response

/d/-/i/-/g/ dig  

/p/-/u/-/l/ pull  

/b/-/e/-/d/ bed  

/f/-/a/-/s/-/t/ fast  

/s/-/o/-/f/-/t/ soft  

Directions: Now we will change jobs. If I say bat, you say /b/-/a/-/t/. If I say feet, you say /f/-/ee/-/t/.

Teacher says: Expected Response Student’s Response

can /c/-/a/-/n/  

tell /t/-/e/-/l/  

dust /d/-/u/-/s/-/t/  

sit /s/-/i/-/t/  

fog /f/-/o/-/g/  

NOTE: The use of slashes (//) indicates that you should say the letter sound.

158 C H A P T E R 7

Relationship to Reading. Students’ knowledge of letter–sound correspondence is highly related to later reading achievement (Morrow, 2011; Nasland & Schneider, 1996). Especially important to early literacy is knowledge about beginning consonants.

Assessing Knowledge of Letter–Sound Correspondence. To assess students’ knowl- edge of beginning consonants, the teacher gives them a word and asks them to identify the beginning sound of the word and the letter that corresponds to this sound. The words in the sample task in Figure 7.3 are frequently found in beginning reading ma- terials and all begin with single-letter initial consonant sounds. The task also includes some two-syllable words. Students’ spelling of unfamiliar words also reveals important information about letter–sound correspondences (Gentry, 2004, 2008; Paris, 2003).

Short-Term Phonological Memory A large body of research in early literacy has focused on the importance of short-term phonological memory in language tasks, such as reading and writing (Baddeley, 2003; Montgomery & Windsor, 2007). To understand language and respond to it, students must be able to hold a sequence of words in short-term memory while they process their meaning. Even at the sentence level, students may be required to hold 10 to 15 words in short-term memory while they are processing what the individual words mean, then what those words mean in relation to each other.

Research indicates that limited phonological short-term memory may be related to other language problems. For example, Gray (2004) and Ellis Weismer (1996) found that students with limited phonological short-term memory exhibited problems learn- ing new words. Further research has indicated that this limitation hinders students’ sentence comprehension (Ellis Weismer & Thordardottir, 2002).

Relationship to Reading. Consider how much our early learning experiences rely on understanding the spoken word and series of spoken words—directions and

FIGURE 7.3 Assessing Letter–Sound Correspondence: Beginning Letter Sounds

Practice: What is the beginning sound of mat? (Student should say /m/.) What letter makes that sound? (Student should say M. If not, model and practice another word.)

Word Beginning Sound Beginning Letter

fish    

little    

ride    

want    

happy    

Early Literacy 159

instructions, story reading, even simple conversations! How can you respond to your classmate or your teacher if you can’t remember a whole sentence? How can you ap- preciate the humor in a Berenstain Bears book if you can’t remember a series of words that comprise a sentence? You can’t even enjoy a nursery rhyme or a patterned book without an adequate memory for words.

These simple stories and rhymes provide the foundation of our reading experi- ences. It is through these shared reading experiences with parents and teachers in pre- school and kindergarten that students develop their understanding of story structure or word families. These early language experiences provide the foundation for both word recognition and comprehension.

Assessing Phonological Short-Term Memory. Phonological short-term memory is assessed in most studies by asking students to repeat a series of nonwords. In sev- eral formal tests of ability, students are asked to repeat a series of numbers, words, or nonwords. In other tests, they are asked to repeat sentences of varying lengths. Teachers can assess phonological short-term memory informally by asking students to repeat lines of poems or sentences. If students have problems completing this task successfully, a more structured, but still informal assessment can be conducted. Teach- ers can ask students to repeat short series of words or numbers. Then, if the teacher suspects limitations in a student’s phonological short-term memory, screening instru- ments such as the Comprehensive Test of Phonological Processing; the Kaufman Brief Intelligence Test, Second Edition; or the Slosson Intelligence Test, Revised, Third Edition. If these screening tests indicate serious problems, the teacher can request more extensive evaluation. Then the tests just mentioned can comprise the systematic assessment plan as part of the RTI plan.

Rapid Naming There has been extensive research in the relationships between rapid naming and early literacy development. In most studies, rapid naming tasks consist of children identi- fying a series of numbers, letters, colors, or common objects. Others include words and pseudowords. Results have indicated that there is a relationship between students’ abilities to recognize these items rapidly and accurately and early reading and spelling development (Allor, 2002; Bishop & League, 2006; Hammill, 2004; Hammill, Mather, Allen, & Roberts, 2002).

Relationship to Reading. Although most studies in rapid naming have found a moderate to high correlation between rapid naming of letters and early litera- cy development, there is little evidence to support a lasting effect for more mature readers. There is stronger evidence that this skill is related to spelling and to fluency (Bishop & League, 2006; Savage et al., 2005). However, because of the strong rela- tionship between reading and writing, especially in the early phases, this research has some important implications for reading teachers working with early literacy learners (Gentry, 2007).

160 C H A P T E R 7

Assessing Rapid Naming. Many of the formal assessments of ability include rap- id naming subtests: the Weschler Intelligence Scales for Children, Fourth Edition (WISC-IV); the KABC-2; and the Woodcock-Johnson III (WJ-III). Some informal assessments include timed recognition of letters or words. Teachers can also con- struct informal assessments using flash cards or timed presentations on computer monitors.

Visual Memory Early in the process of learning to read, students begin to store characteristics of letters in memory. As they progress, students store aspects of words, or their spell- ing patterns (Ehri, 2005). As they become mature readers and writers, these aspects become more detailed and precise (Ehri, 2005). This visual memory for letters and words forms the foundation for automatic recognition, an important compo- nent for automaticity and fluency in reading as well as spelling (Holmes, Malone, & Redenbach, 2008).

Relationship to Reading and Writing. Certainly visual memory for characteris- tics of individual letters is crucial to alphabet recognition, a skill highly correlated to early reading and writing. As students progress through the phases of early literacy, they begin to develop a sight vocabulary for high-frequency words (Gentry, 2007). As early as kindergarten, students should be able to read common high-frequency words such as me, you, is, are, to, you, and the (CCSSO, 2010). As we mature as read- ers, we amass large numbers of words that become automatically recognizable. The sight vocabulary and memory for how words look support our reading and spelling throughout literacy development.

Assessing Visual Memory. Most early literacy assessments include spelling tests. Asking students to spell unfamiliar words reveals much about their strategies for rec- ognizing those words. Spelling tests measure graphophonemic knowledge; the infor- mation they yield is invaluable in planning instruction. However, if a student exhibits strong phonemic awareness but continues to struggle in spelling or reading, you may need to assess his or her visual memory. Tasks that measure visual memory are includ- ed in the WISC-IV, the KABC-2, and the WJ-III. They are also included in the brief forms of these tests so that teachers can monitor students’ progress.

Visual Perceptual Skills An important component to storing characteristics associated with specific letters and words is the ability to distinguish individual characteristics. Students in the early phases of literacy learning are often still developing these skills. For example, a student recognizes that some letters have stems that extend upward; however, he or she may not yet distinguish between b and d, or l and t. Similarly, letters with stems that extend below the baseline may not be distinguishable, so that students may identify the letter g as p, q, or j.

Early Literacy 161

Relationship to Reading. The development of visual perceptual skills is a crucial component of students’ ability to store letters and to associate specific letters with their constituent sounds. Reading requires the orchestration of both visual and pho- nological cues.

Assessing Visual Perceptual Skills. The formal assessments that include subtests for visual memory also include visual perception subtests. Often schools use the comprehensive form of one of these tests as part of the diagnostic battery of tests and use the brief forms for monitoring students’ progress as part of their RTI plans. In addition, teachers can construct informal measures of students’ perceptual skills by engaging them in drawing specific shapes or reconstructing patterns.

Strategies to Develop Early Literacy Concepts

This section suggests activities for developing early literacy concepts. Although in assessment we often try to separate components of literacy development, these ar- eas are usually learned through an integrated literate environment (Morrow, 2011). The National Early Literacy Panel (Shanahan et al., 2008; Strickland & Shanahan, 2004) has identified three broad areas for planning engaging, integrated, and develop- mentally appropriate learning experiences for students in the early phases of literacy development:

◆ Oral language ◆ Alphabetic knowledge ◆ Print knowledge

Suggestions in this book will focus on these three areas. Because they are presented as integrated learning experiences, one activity may foster several areas of early lit- eracy. As previously emphasized, early literacy understandings are best taught within the context of real reading and writing in literacy-rich environments. Because literacy learning is a gradual process, the instructional activities used to support development overlap with those used for beginning reading and writing.

Oral Language Development As stated earlier in this chapter, oral language development forms the basis for read- ing and writing. Thus, it is critical that parents and teachers of young children foster oral vocabulary development. Vocabulary and concept development lay the foundation for the background knowledge needed in reading comprehension. In their analysis of early literacy curricula, Neuman and Dwyer (2009) found a lack of suggestions for early literacy teachers to provide explicit instruction in vocabulary and concept de- velopment. Vocabulary development must be incorporated into early literacy instruc- tion beginning with oral language development and continuing throughout literacy development.

162 C H A P T E R 7

Three aspects of oral language development crucial to literacy are understand- ing and using oral language, understanding the structure of stories, and responding to and constructing questions. The Common Core State Standards (CCSSO & National Governors Association, 2010) indicate that students in kindergarten should be able to, with some support and prompting:

Ask and answer questions about text Retell familiar stories, including key details Identify characters, setting, and major events in a story Recognize the differences between texts on the same topic

Reading Aloud to Students. Reading books aloud to children is valuable for helping them develop language skills. Many students with reading problems have not had wide experience in sharing print with an adult. Reading to students enables them to experi- ence the rich language of books as an adult models the process of reading. Children learn to follow a story structure and to engage in conversation about books. It is impor- tant to engage students in the reading experience. In the sections that follow, additional strategies are given that may be used as the teacher reads books aloud to children.

Directed Listening-Thinking Activity. Often referred to by its initials, DL-TA, this activity is a modification of the Directed Reading-Thinking Activity (DR-TA) de- veloped by Stauffer (1975) and discussed in Chapter 11. In DL-TA, the teacher reads the text aloud, stopping at crucial points to allow students to predict what will happen next and to confirm or revise previous predictions. These predictions and confirma- tions (or revisions) guide the students’ understanding of the story.

After students are familiar with this strategy, the teacher can alter it by stopping before the last section of text and asking students what they think will happen in the end. Ask students to draw pictures showing what they think will happen; they may then write or dictate a sentence or two about their pictures. Next, read the author’s actual ending to the story and compare it with the students’ endings.

Story Grammar. The structure of stories (also presented in Chapter 11) can be used to guide the discussion of books a teacher reads to children. Focusing on story elements helps students learn that (1) stories are organized in a predictable fashion, and (2) special terms, such as characters, events, and setting, are used for stories. These understandings will help children both to read and to write stories (Dymock, 2007; Gillet, Temple, Temple, & Crawford, 2011; Strickland et al., 2007).

After you read a story to your students, ask them, “Who is this story about?” or “Who are the main characters in this story?” Then ask the students, “Where does this story take place?” and “When does this story take place?” Next, ask students, “What is the main characters’ problem?” and finally ask, “How do they solve the problem?”

In the literacy center, questions are often placed on a chart. Students can answer the questions with pictures from the story or refer to the chart as they retell stories or construct their own. Learning about the language of stories provides an excellent

Early Literacy 163

foundation for the more complex story grammars and maps used in later comprehen- sion instruction. The importance of using a common academic language about text is emphasized throughout the Common Core State Standards (CCSSO & National Governors Association, 2010).

Shanahan and Shanahan (1997) have developed a related strategy called character perspective charting. In this strategy, children track the main characters in stories and identify their perspectives in relation to story events. This strategy has proved quite effective in helping students understand stories.

Shared Book Experience. In this strategy (Holdaway, 1979; Morrow, 2011), teachers imitate the “bedtime story” experience of young children. You can use the shared book experience with whole classes, in small groups, or with individuals. Students are drawn into the shared book experience by the quality of the stories shared, by the teacher’s en- thusiasm, and by the “sharing” format. A shared book experience may be extended over several days, as children reread and engage in several different activities. Generally the teacher uses predictable, or patterned, books, which contain repeated words or phrases and plots simple enough for students to predict outcomes. Some favorite predictable books include Have You Seen My Duckling? (Tafuri), Bears in the Night (Berenstain & Berenstain), Where’s Spot? (Hill), Have You Seen Crocodile? (West), The Carrot Seed (Krauss), Titch (Hutchins), Ape in a Cape (Eichenberg), Is Your Mama a Llama? (Guarino), Green Eggs and Ham (Dr. Seuss), Too Much Noise (McGovern), and The Very Hungry Cat- erpillar (Carle). Predictable books support students as they attempt to read on their own.

The steps in a shared book experience are:

1. Introduce the book. Ask students to predict what it will be about as you clarify any concepts that may be unknown. Show the pictures in the book.

2. Read the book aloud to students. Point to each word as you read. Read slowly but with expression, rather than word by word. Position the book so that the students can see it. Then reread the book, inviting children to join you. If students do not join you in the rereading, encourage them by leaving off significant words. Cu- mulative, repetitive rhymes and lyrics are highly effective for these shared book experiences. If you read the cumulative portion of the text and pause, children can’t resist chiming in with the refrain!

3. Follow the reading with language activities. The language-related activities developed from shared book experiences can focus on letter–sound correspon- dences, dramatization, learning new vocabulary, or any other aspect of literacy that the teacher chooses to develop.

For example, if you choose to focus on letter sounds, select significant words from the story and draw pictures of them on index cards. Have students group the pic- tures by their beginning sounds. Next, introduce the letters that correspond to those sounds. Then, you might present a picture card and ask students to write the beginning letter.

Language Experience Approach. The shared book experience is an excellent springboard for the language experience approach (LEA) (Allen, 1976; Morrow, 2011;

164 C H A P T E R 7

Strickland & Schickedanz, 2009). In an LEA, teachers and students compose an origi- nal story or retell a story in their own words. Generally students dictate to a teacher, who writes down their words on a board or large piece of paper.

To try this strategy, follow these procedures:

1. Brainstorm ideas for a story. Topics may include shared experiences, such as field trips, science experiments, special events, or stories read aloud. Choose one topic for your story.

2. Take dictation from students. Ask students to tell you the words you should write. At early stages, stories should be limited to four or five sentences. Write the words in large print.

3. Read each word as you write it. 4. Reread each sentence, pointing to each word as you say it. Have students reread

each sentence with you. 5. Reread the entire story with students. 6. Follow up with language activities. For example, students might select three

words that they can recognize or draw pictures to go with the story. If they draw pictures, they might choose to write captions for them.

Often, teachers combine the language experience activity with the shared book experience to create a cohesive lesson. One second-grade Title I teacher used this format with poetry to provide her students with rich language experiences, as seen in Strategy Snapshot 7.1.

Strategy Snapshot 7.1 A Shared Book Experience with an LEA

Ms. Burgess, a teacher in a second-grade Title I class, began with a favorite poem, “Honey, I Love” (by Greenfield), printed on chart paper. She pointed to the words and the students read along in a sing-song fashion.

Next, Ms. Burgess reread a favorite story, Being Here With You (Nicola-Lisa), as part of a unit on friendship. Ms. Burgess introduced the LEA by saying, “Today we’re going to write a story like Mr. Nicola-Lisa’s, except ours is going to be about our class and how nice it is that we are all so different, but alike.”

The students brainstormed ways they were alike and different. As the students talked about what they liked to do together, they recalled a picnic at which they met their seventh- grade pen pals. The students created their own story, “Pen Pals in the Park.”

Next, the class divided into teams. One team played a sorting game with the letters p and b. Another group used magnetic letters to write words selected from their story. The third group sorted picture cards under the headings “Alike” and “Different.” The fourth group met with Ms. Burgess to read sentences they wrote about a previous story.

After several minutes, the students reassembled for Ms. Burgess to introduce a new book, Three Friends (Kraus). As she read, Ms. Burgess pointed to the words in the text and stopped occasionally to ask the students how they thought the characters could solve their problems. When she came to a word that started with b or p, she asked the sorting group for help.

Early Literacy 165

Using Wordless Books. Wordless books, which tell stories through pictures only and contain no text, can help students develop the skill of telling a narrative in se- quence. In using a wordless book, you may wish to have students dictate a sentence for each picture. An alternative approach is to discuss the book with students, record their dictation, writing each sentence on a separate page, and have students illustrate the book. You can then bind the pages to create your own big book. Children can be encouraged to identify words that they know and to read their creation to others. Popular wordless books include A Boy, a Dog, and a Frog (Mayer), What? (Lionni), and Apt. 3 (Keats). Each of these authors has written additional wordless books.

Print Knowledge The activities described in the previous sections of this chapter help to develop crucial concepts about print. This section presents some additional activities to develop these understandings.

Echo Reading or Pointing. The echo reading procedure presented earlier to evalu- ate concepts about print may also be used to teach these concepts. Good assessment should have much in common with instruction (Cunningham, Cunningham, Moore, & Moore, 2004).

In echo reading, teachers help students match the spoken word with the printed word. To implement this strategy, select a predictable book with limited print. First, read the entire book to the students. Next, read one sentence, pointing to each word. To echo read, students reread what you have read as they also point to words. As students become more familiar with the process, the length students repeat may be increased. Monitor students’ pointing carefully; make certain that they point to each word rather than to each syllable that is read.

Uhry (2002) emphasizes that this strategy is much more complex than it appears to be. Research has shown that matching speech to print is an underlying skill for specific word learning (Morris, 1993). However, both Morris (1993) and Ehri (1992) found that students who could segment phonemes were also more successful at finger- point reading. Many children involved in finger-point reading studies have reported that they used a system of “counting words” across a line of print to help them identify specific words (Uhry, 2002). The use of electronic tablets in classrooms has greatly ex- panded opportunities to use echo reading. With text-to-speech software, students can listen to text sentence by sentence and echo the reading. If they encounter unknown words, with some software, they can highlight the words and receive pronunciations, or, in some cases, definitions of the words.

A major implication for teachers in early grades or for teachers working with older students who are in early literacy phases of development is that these skills are interrelated. Students need to develop one-to-one correspondence so that they can match individual words in speech and print. They need to develop the alphabetic prin- ciple in order to develop letter–sound correspondence, and they need to develop pho- nemic awareness to segment phonemes. The instructional strategies that follow can help you foster the development of these skills.

166 C H A P T E R 7

Counting Words. In this activity (Cunningham, 2008; Cunningham et al., 2004), students recognize words in speech, a skill that prepares them to recognize them later in print. To do the activity, give students objects (blocks, Popsicle sticks) to use as counters. The student listens as you say a sentence at a normal rate. Then say the sentence again, pausing after each word. Students should move a counter for each word you say. Next, have students make up their own sentences and count the words in them.

Jumbled Sentences. In this strategy, students count words as they reorder them. Many students who develop early reading problems need this physical separation of words to develop a strong concept of word. To try this strategy, follow these proce- dures:

1. Begin with a story you have read or written with your students. Ask students to write a sentence about the story. Most students write summary sentences. For example, in a story about a hungry dog, Ramon wrote, “Duffy gobbled up all our food.” Students often draw a picture about the story and write or dictate a sentence in a practice book.

2. Write the sentence on a large sentence strip. Have students read their sentences to you. Next, read the sentence together as you point to each word.

3. Have students rewrite their sentences on small sentence strips, using the large sentence strip as a model. Students then reread the sentence and point to each word as they read it.

4. Cut the large sentence strip into individual words and mix them up. 5. Have the students reassemble the sentence, using the small sentence strip as a

model. Then students reread the sentence.

Being the Words. In this activity (Cunningham, 2008), students actually “become” one word. To start, the teacher should write the sentences from a predictable book onto sentence strips. You may, of course, need to duplicate words that are used twice in a sentence, or write some words using both lower- and uppercase first letters. How- ever, you need not make copies of words that reappear in different sentences. Cut the words from two sentence strips into individual words and distribute each word to a student. Make a separate card for each punctuation mark.

Now tell the students they are going to be the words they are holding. Display the first two sentences of the book, and read them together. Point to the words as you read them and ask students to look at their words to see if they have any matches. Students who have the words from those sentences come forward and arrange them- selves in left-to-right order. Have the other students in the class read the sentences as you point to each “student word.” Continue this activity until you have made all the sentences from the book.

For older students, write the sentences on smaller cards and deal a few (like a deck of playing cards) to each student. When you display the sentence, the students must cooperate to construct it.

Early Literacy 167

Alphabetic Knowledge and Phonemic Awareness In teaching alphabetic knowledge, the teacher combines letter names with letter sounds to help students progress more efficiently. Thus, alphabetic knowledge and phonemic awareness are integrated through instruction.

Memory Game. Sets of cards, which can be easily made or purchased, are used in this game. A set of cards is placed face down on the table. Half contain pictures (no words) of objects, and half contain the letters representing the initial consonant sounds of those objects. Students turn pairs of cards over and try to match the beginning sound of a picture card with its letter. When a match is found, students must name the object and identify the corresponding letter name.

Using Alphabet Books. A variety of beautiful alphabet books can help expand chil- dren’s word knowledge and appreciation of literature as they learn letters. Some favor- ites include Alligators All Around (Sendak), ABC (Burningham), and I Love My Anteater with An A (Dahlov). Research by Stahl (2003) indicates that children’s alphabet books that provide words starting with a letter sound (such as dog for d) also help in develop- ing phonemic awareness. Letters in an alphabet book should be shown in both upper- and lowercase (e.g., D and d).

Using Nursery Rhymes and Rhyming Books. Chanting nursery rhymes develops phonemic awareness and the ability to rhyme. Traditional poetry and songs are excel- lent resources to use with younger children.

Teachers can also use the many excellent books that focus on rhyming to help develop this ability. Begin by reading a rhyming book to students. Next, reread it, but this time, leave out the word that “completes the rhyme,” and ask the students to pro- vide it. For example, in the sentences “It is a nice day; I would like to play,” you would omit the word play and ask the students to supply it. Students can also create their own rhymes.

Excellent books to model rhyming include Sheep in a Jeep and its sequels (Shaw), The Hungry Thing and its sequels (Slepian & Seidler), and books by Dr. Seuss, such as One Fish, Two Fish or Green Eggs and Ham. For older students, use collections of poetry, such as The New Kid on the Block (Prelutsky) or A Light in the Attic (Silverstein).

As you read, children will naturally participate in the humorous rhyming words of Dr. Seuss’s There’s a Wocket in my Pocket or The Hungry Thing’s “schmancakes.” Follow the readings with activities in which students create their own rhymes using common objects in the room. For example, you can have a “tock on the clock.” You can wear a FEED ME sign and use plastic foods in a lunch bag to practice phoneme substitution and rhyming words (Cunningham, 2008; Yopp & Yopp, 2000).

Identifying Beginning Sounds. We begin teaching beginning sounds with regu- lar consonants and contrasting two sounds, such as /b/ and /d/ or /p/ and /t/. You might begin with a picture sort in which students categorize pictures by the beginning sounds of their names, and then add the letter cards of those beginning-letter sounds.

168 C H A P T E R 7

As children gain some understanding of beginning sounds, tongue twisters with alliterations are fun to help students understand the concept of words that “start the same.” Reading books with alliterations is lots of fun. Some suggested titles are pre- sented in Figure 7.4. You can create your own alliterations using students’ names and silly characteristics that will help support their reading. These can become posters with pictures of the children around the classroom or you can create a class book of alliterations (Cunningham, 2008).

Rhymes and Riddles. In the rhymes and riddles activity (Cunningham, 2008), teach- ers select two groups of words, one to rhyme with head and the other to rhyme with feet. Next, ask students a riddle so that the answer rhymes with either head or feet. The children point to the part of their bodies that rhymes with the answer to the riddle. For example, if you ask, “When you are hungry, do you want to . . . ?” students should point to their feet, because eat rhymes with feet. You can repeat this game with other parts of the body. For example, you can ask students to answer riddles with words that rhyme with hand and knee or arm and leg.

Counting Sounds. In this activity, students break apart words and count their sounds. To do the activity, select 10 words that contain two to four phonemes each. The words should be regular; that is, if the word has two sounds, it should have two letters. In fact, use only words with short vowels, consonants, and consonant blends (in which each consonant says a sound), such as it, man, bent, and stop.

Students listen to you pronounce a spoken word, say it themselves, and then move one object for each sound they hear. You can use craft sticks, cubes, or counters. Try to use objects that are all the same, such as blocks of one color or similarly sized paperclips.

Begin by modeling the activity. Pronounce a word. Then pronounce each sound element of the word and move a counter for each sound that you say. Finally, move the counters back together and repeat the word as a whole.

Next, repeat the procedure with the same word, but this time ask students to try the game with you. Repeat this procedure with another word. Model the segmenta- tion task. Then ask students to join you. Stop after the second phoneme and see if your students can complete the task. If practiced over a period of several weeks, this activity can produce substantial gains for students.

Deleting Phonemes. In this relatively advanced activity, students take a word apart, remove one sound, and pronounce the word without that sound. You might introduce

FIGURE 7.4 Good Tongue Twisters/Alliterations

Walter Was Worried by Laura Vaccaro Seeger

Six Sick Sheep: 101 Tongue Twisters by Joanna Cole, Stephanie Calmenson, and Alan Tiegreen

Tongue Twisters to Tangle Your Tongue by Rebecca Cobb

Early Literacy 169

this activity by removing parts of compound words. For example, pronounce a word, such as playground, and ask students to say it without play. Students should say ground. Next, tell students to say applesauce without the sauce.

Next, ask students to say words, omitting single sounds. Ask students to say ball without the /b/. (They should say all.) Try several of these, asking students to omit the beginning sounds; then ask students to omit ending sounds. When students suc- cessfully can omit beginning and ending sounds from words, ask them to say a word, omitting a medial sound. For example, you might say “Say stack, without the /t/.” The student should say sack.

Segmenting and Blending. Students must be able to segment, or separate, the sounds in words, and blend, or put sounds together to make words. The ability to segment sounds usually develops earlier than the ability to blend, and segmenting the onset from the rime usually develops earlier than the ability to segment individual pho- nemes in words. Games, songs, and chants that teachers and parents often sing and play with young children are easily adapted to help children learn to blend and segment.

You can begin with a simple riddle game: “I’m thinking of an animal that lives on a farm and is a /p/ - /ig/.” Children are asked to blend the onset and rime into the correct word. As children become more skilled, you can segment the individual pho- nemes. You can also let the child who guesses the correct animal give the next riddle.

As students develop stronger concepts about print and the ability to identify indi- vidual sounds in spoken words, they need to connect these spoken words with printed letters and words. Start with initial consonant sounds because they are the easiest sounds for students to hear and segment, and they are therefore the easiest to associate to letters.

Acting Beginning Sounds. Many students have difficulty breaking words down into their individual sounds and identifying these sounds. To develop this skill, Cunningham (2008) suggests that teachers start by working with individual sounds in words. Begin by showing a specific letter, such as b, and having all the students engage in an activity that begins with that sound as they repeat the sound. For /b/ students bounce; for /c/ they catch. Other actions might include dance, fall, gallop, hop, jump, kick, laugh, march, nod, paint, run, sit, talk, vacuum, walk, yawn, and zip.

Manipulating Letters and Sounds. To use familiar words to figure out unfamil- iar words, students need to be able to find familiar patterns and substitute individual phonemes. The foundation for this skill is laid in phoneme deletion (described earlier). Now we are ready to move to the next step of phoneme substitution. Cunningham (2008) has developed an activity called “Changing a Hen to a Fox” that provides prac- tice in letter–sound manipulation. By changing one letter at a time, you can guide stu- dents to change from one word to another. For example, in Cunningham’s “Changing a Hen to a Fox,” you begin with the word hen, ask children to change hen to pen, then ask them to change pen to pet, pet to pit, pit to sit, sit to six, six to fix, and, finally, fix to fox. Magnetic letters or magnetic letter tiles are especially useful for this activity. After students practice with the magnetic letters, you can ask them to write the words. This activity is an important transition from phonemic awareness to the more advanced word analysis strategies presented in Chapter 8.

170 C H A P T E R 7

Spelling. Allowing students to spell words they have worked with provides practice in manipulating letters and sounds in print. As students gain in their understanding of letter–sound relationships, their writing will become more conventional. Encourage students to write freely and explore their own spellings. Try not to correct them, but rather let them explore their own understandings, whether or not they are completely accurate.

Beginning Reading Vocabulary Many activities can encourage students to develop the first sight words on which read- ing is built. You may make a collection of logos and children’s favorite words. Some teachers prepare flash cards with words that are common in the environment. They cut out pictures from newspaper and magazine advertisements and label them. Chil- dren often enjoy bringing in and identifying food labels and wrappers. In “print walks,” children and adults walk through a building and identify all the times they see a certain type of print, such as the word exit, words about weather, or 10-letter words.

Many of the activities presented earlier, such as shared book experiences and lan- guage experience stories, help children develop a fund of sight words. However, stu- dents also need to directly learn a number of important words by sight. These words, at first, might include their names, their addresses, and words that they frequently see in reading or use in writing. Students might keep personal cards for each word and form them into sentences using the jumbled-sentences activity presented earlier.

Summary

In early literacy, students surrounded by reading and writing gradually develop the foundation for these activities. Students with reading problems may lack some early literacy understandings. Areas of knowledge needed for early literacy include listening comprehension, print knowledge, environmental print, alphabet knowledge, phone- mic awareness, phonological short-term memory, rapid naming, visual memory, and visual perceptual skills. These should be taught in an integrated approach through oral language, knowledge about print, and alphabetic knowledge.

In oral language development, students need to express and understand ideas fully, understand how stories are organized, and develop the ability to answer and formulate questions. Instruction in oral language development includes retelling sto- ries, composing original stories, developing questions, reading to students, Directed Listening-Thinking Activity (DL-TA), discussing story structure, shared book activi- ties, language experience approach (LEA), and using wordless books.

Three concepts about print are crucial to reading: understanding that print car- ries meaning, knowing how print is organized, and understanding words. Instruction includes echo reading, counting words, jumbled sentences, and “being” the word.

Alphabet knowledge is strongly related to reading. Sounds can be taught with letter names. Instruction includes the memory game and the use of alphabet books.

Phonemic awareness refers to abilities in manipulating sounds, including seg- menting, blending, rhyming, sound deletion, sound addition, and sound substitution.

Early Literacy 171

Activities include using nursery rhymes and rhyming books, identifying beginning sounds, guessing rhymes and riddles, identifying and counting sounds, deleting pho- nemes, and blending.

Letter–sound correspondences, identifying a letter and its sound, can be taught by acting out beginning sounds, manipulating letters and sounds, and practicing spell- ing, as well as several strategies mentioned earlier.

Students’ early reading vocabulary words come from their environments. As they are exposed to more print, students start to connect environmental print with specific words. Teachers and parents help the process by reading extensively to students, label- ing objects in their environments, and collecting interesting words.

References Allen, R. V. (1976). Language experiences in communication. Boston: Houghton Mifflin. Allor, J. H. (2002). The relationships of phonemic awareness and rapid naming to reading development.

Learning Disability Quarterly, 25, 47–57. Baddely, A. (2003). Working memory and language: An overview. Journal of Communication Disorders, 36,

189–208. Ball, E. W., & Blachman, B. A. (1991). Does phoneme awareness training in kindergarten make a difference

in early word recognition and spelling? Reading Research Quarterly, 26, 49–66. Bishop, A. G., & League, M. B. (2006). Identifying a multivariate screening model to predict reading dif-

ficulties at the onset of kindergarten: A longitudinal study. Learning Disability Quarterly, 29, 235–252. Byrne, B., & Fielding-Barnsley, R. (1991). Evaluation of a program to teach phonemic awareness to young

children. Journal of Educational Psychology, 83, 451–455. Clay, M. M. (1993). An observation survey of early literacy achievement. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann Educa-

tional Books. Clay, M. M. (2002). An observation survey of early literacy achievement (2nd ed.). Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann

Educational Books. Council of Chief State School Officers & National Governors Association. (2010). Common Core State

Standards for English language arts and literacy in history/social studies, science and technical subjects. Retrieved from http://www.corestandards.org

Cunningham, P. M. (2008). Phonics they use: Words for reading and writing (5th ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon. Cunningham, P. M., Cunningham, J. W., Moore, S. A., & Moore, D. W. (2004). Reading and writing in elemen-

tary classrooms: Research based K-4 instruction (5th ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon. Dooley, C. M., & Matthews, M. W. (2009). Emergent comprehension: Understanding comprehension

development among young literacy learners. Journal of Early Childhood Literacy, 9, 269–294. Dymock, S. (2007). Comprehension strategy instruction; Teaching narrative text structure awareness. Read-

ing Teacher, 6, 161–167. Ehri, L. (2005). Learning to read words: Theory, findings, and issues. Scientific Studies of Reading, 9, 167–188. Ehri, L. C. (1992). Reconceptualizing the development of sight word reading and its relationship to recod-

ing. In P. B. Gough, L. C. Ehri, & R. Treiman (Eds.), Reading acquisition (pp. 107–143). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.

Ellis Weismer, S. (1996). Capacity limitations in working memory: The impact on lexical and morphological learning by children with language impairment. Topics in Language Disorders, 17, 33–44.

Ellis Weismer, S., & Thordardottir, E. (2002). Cognition and language. In P. Accardo, B. Rogers, & A. Capute (Eds.), Disorders of language development. Timonium, MD: York Press.

Gentry, J. R. (2004). The science of spelling: The explicit specifics that make great readers and writers (and spellers!). Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Gentry, J. R. (2007). Breakthrough in beginning reading and writing: The evidence-based approach to pinpointing students’ needs and delivering targeted instruction. New York: Scholastic.

172 C H A P T E R 7

Gentry, J. R. (2008). Step-by-step assessment guide to code breaking: Pinpoint young students’ reading development and provide just-right instruction. New York: Scholastic.

Gillet, J. W., Temple, C. A., Temple, C. N., & Crawford, A. N. (2011). Understanding reading problems: Assessment and instruction (8th ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.

Gray, S. (2004). Word learning by preschoolers with specific language impairment: Predictors and poor learners. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 47, 1117–1132.

Gredler, M. E., & Johnson, R. L. (2004). Assessment in the literacy classroom. Boston: Allyn & Bacon. Hammill, D. D. (2004). What we know about correlates of reading. Exceptional Children, 4, 453–468. Hammill, D. D., Mather, N., Allen, E. A., & Roberts, R. (2002). Using semantics, grammar, phonology, and

rapid naming tasks to predict word identification. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 35, 121–136. Holdaway, D. (1979). The foundations of literacy. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. Holmes, V. M., Malone, A. M., & Redenbach, H. (2008). Orthographic processing and visual sequential

memory in unexpectedly poor spellers. Journal of Research in Reading, 31, 136–156. International Reading Association & National Association for the Education of Young Children. (1998).

Learning to read and write: Developmentally appropriate practices for young children. Newark, DE: International Reading Association.

Montgomery, J. W., & Windsor, J. (2007). Examining the language performances of children with and with- out specific language impairment: Contributions of phonological short-term memory and speed of processing. Journal of Speech, Language and Hearing Research, 50, 778–796.

Morris, D. (1993). The relationship between children’s concept of word in text and phoneme awareness in learning to read: A longitudinal study. Research in the Teaching of English, 27, 133–153.

Morris, D. (1998). Assessing printed word knowledge in beginning readers: The Early Reading Screening Instrument (ERSI). Illinois Reading Council Journal, 26, 30–41.

Morrow, L. M. (2011). Literacy development in the early years: Helping children read and write (7th ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

Nasland, J. C., & Schneider, W. (1996). Kindergarten letter knowledge, phonological skills, and memory processes: Relative effects on early literacy. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 62, 30–59.

National Reading Panel. (2000). Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction: Reports of the subgroups (National Insti- tute of Health Pub. No. 00-4754). Washington, DC: National Institute of Child Health and Human Development.

Neuman, S. B., & Dwyer, J. (2009). Missing in action: Vocabulary instruction in pre-K. The Reading Teacher, 6, 384–392.

Paris, A. H., & Paris, S. G. (2003). Assessing narrative comprehension in young children. Reading Research Quarterly, 38, 36–76.

Paris, S. G. (2003). What K–3 teachers need to know about assessing children’s reading. Naperville, IL: Learning Point Associates.

Savage, R. S., Frederickson, N., Goodwin, R., Patni, U., Smith, N., & Tuersley, L. (2005). Relationships among rapid digit naming, phonological processing, motor automaticity, and speech perception in poor, average, and good readers and spellers. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 38, 12–28.

Shanahan, T., Cunningham, A., Escamilla, K., Fishel, J., Landry, S. H., Schatschneider, C., & Strickland, D. (2008). Developing early literacy: Report of the National Early Literacy Panel. Jessup, MD: National Institute for Literacy

Shanahan, T., & Shanahan, S. (1997). Character perspective charting: Helping children to develop a more complete conception of story. The Reading Teacher, 50, 668–677.

Stahl, S. A. (2003). Teaching phonics and phonological awareness. In S. B. Neuman & D. K. Dickinson (Eds.), Handbook of early literacy research (pp. 333–347). New York: Guilford Press.

Stahl, S. A., & Murray, B. A. (1994). Defining phonological awareness and its relationship to early reading. Journal of Educational Psychology, 86, 221–234.

Stanovich, K. E. (1988). Children’s reading and the development of phonological awareness. Detroit, MI: Wayne State University Press.

Stauffer, R. G. (1975). Directing the reading-thinking process. New York: Harper and Row. Strickland, D. S., Galda, L., & Cullinan, B. E. (2007). Language arts: Learning and teaching. Belmont, CA:

Thomson/Wadsworth.

Early Literacy 173

Strickland, D. S., & Schickedanz, J.A. (2009). Learning about print in preschool: Working with letters, words, and beginning links with phonemic awareness (2nd ed., Wilmington, DE: International Reading Association.

Strickland, D. S., & Shanahan, T. (2004). Laying the groundwork for literacy. Educational Leadership, 61, 74–77.

Strickland, K., & Strickland, J. (2000). Making assessment elementary. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. Trieman, R., Tincoff, R., & Richmond-Welty, E. D. (1996). Letter names help children to connect print and

speech. Developmental Psychology, 32, 505–514. Uhry, J. K. (2002). Finger-point reading in kindergarten: The role of phonemic awareness, one-to-one cor-

respondence, and rapid serial naming. Scientific Studies of Reading, 6, 319–342. Walker, B. J. (2011). Diagnostic teaching of reading: Techniques for reading assessment and instruction (7th ed. Up-

per Saddle River, NJ: Merrill/Prentice Hall. Walsh, D. J., Price, G. G., & Gillingham, M. G. (1988). The critical but transitory importance of letter nam-

ing. Reading Research Quarterly, 23, 108–122. Yopp, H. K., & Yopp, R. H. (2000). Supporting phonemic awareness development in the classroom. The

Reading Teacher, 54, 130–143.

Go to the topic 4: Oral Language in the MyEducationLab (www.myeducationlab.com) for Reading Problems: Assessment and Teaching Strategies, where you can: ◆ Find learning outcomes for oral language,

along with the national standards that con- nect to these outcomes.

◆ Complete assignments and activities that can help you more deeply understand the chapter content.

◆ Apply and practice your understanding of the core teaching skills identified in the chapter with the Building Teaching Skills and Dispositions learning units.

◆ Access video clips of CCSSO National Teachers of the Year award winners re- sponding to the question, “Why Do I Teach?” in the Teacher Talk section.

◆ Practice targeting instruction and mak- ing content accessible for all students with A+RISE activities.

◆ Strengthen your understanding and usage of the English language in writing with the Grammar Tutorial.

◆ Gain experience in choosing appropriate literature and integrating the best titles into language arts instruction with the Children’s and Young Adult Literature Database.

◆ Track the month-by-month literacy growth of five second graders with the Literacy Portraits.

◆ Create, update, and share quality lesson plans with the Lesson Plan Builder.

◆ Access state licensure test requirements, overviews of what the tests cover, and sam- ple test items in the Certification and Li- censure section.

◆ Check your comprehension of the content covered in the chapter with the Study Plan. Here you will be able to take a chapter pre- test, receive feedback on your answers, and then access personalized Review, Practice, and Enrichment exercises to enhance your understanding of chapter content. After you complete the exercises, take a posttest to confirm your comprehension.

8 C H A P T E R

Improving Word Knowledge: Word Recognition

Introduction

Stages of Word Recognition Development

Strategies for Identifying Words

Word Recognition and the Common Core Standards

Assessing Phonics Strategies The Informal Reading Inventory Tests of Phonics Patterns

Teaching Phonics Strategies Letter–Sound Relationships Organizing Phonics Instruction Decoding Through Analogy Combining Phonics and Meaning Making Students Aware of Their

Strategies Dealing With Exceptions Ideas for Practicing Phonics Teaching Multisyllabic Words

Assessing Structural Analysis Strategies

Teaching Structural Analysis Strategies

Word Recognition and Response- to-Intervention (RTI)

Summary

Case Study

174

Improving Word Knowledge: Word Recognition 175

Introduction

Reading is not a natural process (Wolf, 2007). In contrast to other developmental achievements such as learning to talk, learning to read requires careful instruction. Learning to read is also a relatively lengthy process. It takes years, and the learner must persevere over an extended period of time. Moreover, the process of recogniz- ing words is complex; readers must use a variety of strategies to accomplish this task. Struggling readers have much difficulty with word recognition. Often they must exert so much energy struggling to recognize words that they are left with little energy for concentrating on comprehending the author’s message.

Word recognition strategies can be divided into those that foster reading fluency (sight words) and those that foster reading accuracy (phonics, structural analysis, and context). Sight words are words that are recognized immediately, with- out further analysis. For good readers, most words are sight words. Right now, the words that you are reading in this paragraph are sight words. Students must be helped to build an adequate sight vocabulary, and methods for doing are presented in Chapter 9.

This chapter is aimed at helping students develop accurate word recognition through use of phonics and structural analysis. First, it presents an overview of the stages of word recognition development. Then it discusses the assessment of and teaching strategies for the following components:

◆ Phonics: matching letters with their sound equivalents ◆ Structural analysis: ferreting out the parts of unknown words

The chapter closes with a case study of a second grader who was recommended for Tier 2 response-to-intervention (RTI) instruction that focused on the develop- ment of an adequate sight word vocabulary and effective use of phonics strategies.

Stages of Word Recognition Development

Children progress through different stages of reading development as they move from emergent reading to fluent and accurate word recognition. Normally readers pass through these stages with relatively little effort, but students with reading problems may become “stuck” at a stage and not develop further. Understanding the stage that comes next in the reading process helps teachers to move a student with reading prob- lems toward more mature reading development.

The first stage is called the logographic (Ehri, 1991, 1994), or the visual-cue- reading, stage (Spear-Swerling & Sternberg, 1996). In this stage, children identify words using only visual cues. They may use an actual logo, such as golden arches to identify McDonald’s, or they may use a few letter clues. A youngster once confided that he could recognize dog because the “barking” dog had its mouth open in the middle (the letter o). Of course, he confidently, but inaccurately, pronounced got and from as dog also.

176 C H A P T E R 8

Children then move into the partial alphabetic (Ehri, 1991, 1994), or phonetic- cue-recoding, stage (Spear-Swerling & Sternberg, 1996) as they begin to match letters and sounds. In this stage, they focus on the beginnings and ends of words, pronounc- ing, for example, need as not and from as farm. Because decoding in this stage is slow, children depend heavily on context and picture clues.

Gradually children move into full, or consolidated, alphabetic reading (Ehri, 1991, 1994; Gaskins, Ehri, Cress, O’Hara, & Donnelly, 1996), also known as controlled word reading (Spear-Swerling & Sternberg, 1996). They now pay attention to vowels and the patterns that contain them. For example, they might recognize grape as composed of gr and ape. Decoding becomes more accurate but is still slow.

The next stage is sight word reading (Ehri, 1991), or automatic word recog- nition (Spear-Swerling & Sternberg, 1996). Children begin to recognize many words automatically, without “sounding out,” and develop a large store of sight words. Because word recognition takes less attention, children begin to focus on comprehension.

Strategies for Identifying Words

What do we do when we meet an unfamiliar word in print? Ehri (1997) suggests basi- cally four ways to identify or pronounce it. The most common strategy is to identify the word from memory. Most of the words that we meet are familiar to us (words such as the, girl, house, because, etc.), and thus we immediately pronounce them without the need to analyze letters and sounds. We refer to these words as sight words, and we address developing sight word vocabulary in Chapter 9.

A second strategy for identifying words is to match sounds to letter patterns and blend these to arrive at a pronunciation. Ehri (1997) calls this decoding, or word attack. However, this strategy works best with short words and often fails with long and mul- tisyllabic words.

A third strategy is to predict a word’s pronunciation from the context of the passage. Beginning readers and those experiencing difficulties tend to be overly dependent on context. However, as they become more skilled, readers no longer use context to recognize words for three reasons (Stanovich, 1991). First, context strate- gies are not dependable for identifying a word; words can be predicted from context only 10 to 20% of the time. Second, word recognition through sight words is so rapid and automatic that context usage does not play a meaningful part. Finally, when good readers do not recognize a word automatically, they can use well-developed pho- nics skills. In fact, the ability to identify words accurately and quickly out of context is a characteristic of good readers (Perfetti, 1985, 1988; Stanovich, 1980, 1991). In contrast, poor readers tend to overuse context precisely because they do not have a large sight vocabulary and cannot decode words quickly (Perfetti, 1985; Stanovich, 1986). However, context is not an effective clue for readers with difficulty. To use context to recognize some words, the reader needs to identify most of the other words accurately. Students with reading problems cannot recognize enough words to do this (Adams, 1990).

Improving Word Knowledge: Word Recognition 177

A final strategy, and one probably most used by good readers, is to break a word into familiar chunks and match the pronunciation of each chunk to words already known as sight words. For example, if publisher were an unfamiliar word, the reader might pronounce it using knowledge of club, dish, and her. This strategy is often re- ferred to as decoding by analogy, or using known words as analogues to pronounce new words. However, decoding by analogy is not foolproof; it depends on choosing the right analogue (Ehri, 1997). For example, how would you pronounce fongue? Would you use tongue or fondue? How about disland? Would you use island as your analogue or is and land? Decoding by analogy requires a large sight vocabulary of known analogues and a large listening vocabulary. Your listening vocabulary is made up of all the words you have heard. Use of analogies generally results in an approximate pronunciation: You match that approximation to your listening vocabulary, and if you have heard a similar word, you arrive at the correct pronunciation (Caldwell, 2008).

Is it important to teach sound and letter matching to struggling readers? Will instruction in sight words and use of context suffice? Probably not. Readers use all four strategies, depending on the word and the situation. However, to pronounce an unfa- miliar word, and thus place it into our memory systems, we must match letter patterns and sounds. In other words, we must know and use phonics (Beck, 2006).

Phonics refers to the relationship between printed letters and sounds in lan- guage. Children must learn to decode the printed language, to translate print into sounds, and to learn about the alphabetic principle of symbol–sound relationships. Much research shows that students who learn the sound–symbol system of English read better than those who have not yet mastered these critical skills (National Reading Panel, 2000).

Word Recognition and the Common Core Standards

The Common Core State Standards Initiative (2010) does not explicitly address word recognition or mention phonics principles. However, the importance of word rec- ognition is implicit in all standards. The Language Standards K–5 expect students to “demonstrate command of the conventions of standard English . . . when writing, speaking, reading or listening” (p. 29). Thus, the standards focus on what students can do only after they have decoded print into actual words. To put it another way, in order to meet the language standards, students must know how to identify words in order to demonstrate high levels of comprehension regarding word and sentence meaning and the conventions of standard English. For example, students are expected to define the meaning of unknown and multiple-meaning words, use affixes as clues to word mean- ing, sort words into categories, demonstrate understanding of relationships between words, and grasp nuances of word meaning. Although the standards do not specifically mention phonics principles, their emphasis on the results of decoding makes it all the more important that students are able to recognize words. In short, a student who can- not decode or does so with extreme effort and marginal results will not demonstrate mastery of the Common Core standards at any grade level or in any form of text.

178 C H A P T E R 8

Assessing Phonics Strategies

Various phonics assessments are on the market. It is not the purpose of this chapter to offer in-depth evaluations of their merits and shortcomings. Instead, we discuss two assessment formats that can offer meaningful information on a reader’s ability to use phonics effectively. These are the informal reading inventory and tests of important phonics principles.

The Informal Reading Inventory As discussed in Chapter 5, results on an informal reading inventory (IRI) can offer valuable guidance in determining if a student has a decoding problem. If the in- structional level for word identification is below the student’s chronological grade level, there is probably cause for concern. An IRI can also suggest how severe the decoding problem might be. A frustration level for word identification that is sev- eral levels below a student’s actual grade level would suggest a more serious problem than a level just below grade placement. For example, a second grader who has a primer frustration level for word identification would present a more serious issue than one with a first-grade frustration level. Another form of analysis involves the number of miscues made at the frustration level. In Chapter 5, we explained that a score below 95% indicates a frustration level for word identification accuracy. Some IRIs use a 90% cutoff, and some offer different percentages when counting miscues that change meaning versus those that do not (Leslie & Caldwell, 2011). Use the cutoff recommended by your IRI and examine the student’s frustration-level score in terms of how close it is to the cutoff. That is, if your cutoff for a frustration level is any number below 95%, obviously a score of 78% signals a more serious problem than a score of 88%. Both, however, represent a frustration level, but a score of 78% indicates that more miscues were made, which could indicate a severe problem at that level.

Miscue analysis, as described in Chapter 5, can provide additional insight. If a student’s miscue contains the same sounds as the correct word, that student is using some phonics clues to read. We do not recommend using miscue analysis to determine the specific sounds to teach. Readers often make an error on one word and successfully pronounce another word containing the same sound(s). Analysis and comparison of words with identical sound(s) that were mispronounced and/or successfully decoded would be a time-consuming task. Also, a passage may not represent a full complement of sounds, and the reader may know or not know some that are not present in the passage.

As indicated in Chapter 5, it is helpful to use miscue analysis to examine self- correction strategies for words that may or may not change meaning. This can suggest whether the reader is paying too much attention to pronouncing words as opposed to gaining meaning from the text. Phonics is important, but phonics skill in the absence of comprehension is useless. Assessment and instruction of phonics use must always be connected to acquisition of meaning from the text.

Improving Word Knowledge: Word Recognition 179

Tests of Phonics Patterns One way to assess knowledge of phonics principles is to employ a list of nonsense words (or pseudowords) that contain important sound–symbol relationships. Because these “words” cannot be known by sight, the student must use phonics to decode them. Some formal instruments such as the popular Woodcock Reading Mastery Tests (WRMT-III; Woodcock, 2011) contain a section using pseudowords as a measure of word identification skill. An informal phonics test using pseudowords is given in Table 8.1. Although this assessment provides a precise assessment of phonics knowl- edge not influenced by context or sight word knowledge, you must remember that nonsense words are not an authentic assessment of phonics; such words do not appear in real-life reading. In addition, some young children may be reluctant to pronounce nonsense words and may simply make real words out of them.

A short and easily administered test of phonics patterns is the Names Test (Cunningham, 1990; Duffelmeyer, Kruse, Merkeley, & Fyfe, 1999). This instrument avoids the use of nonsense words by providing a list of first and last names such as Dee Skidmore and Bernard Pendergraph. The names sound like their spellings, and they

TABLE 8.1 Words for Testing Phonics Patterns

These nonsense words can be used to test phonics mastery. They should be typed in a large typeface or printed neatly and presented in a list format or on individual cards. Students should be warned that they are not real words.

1. Single Consonants 5. R-Controlled Vowels

bam fep dif dar tor   dup jit hak set  snir     sut rez jer

6. Vowel Combinations 2. Consonant Digraphs

shap chep   toat vay zew

doil roub  

geet rood  thip quen  

nack    

3. Consonant Blends 7. Hard and Soft c and g

sput streb pind cit cyle

cam ges

gast  

crob plut gart flug dreb

grat  

rupt  

8. Silent Letters  

knas gnip

wret ghes

4. Single Vowels: Long and Short

mab sote vo mabe lib vom sot libe  

180 C H A P T E R 8

represent common phonics elements: initial consonants and consonant blends (sp–, cr–, fl–, dr–, st–, gr–, pl–), consonant digraphs (sh, ch, th, ph, wh), short vowel sounds, long vowel sounds (–ate, –ake, –y, –ale, –o, –ene, –ace, –oke, –ine, –ade, –ale, –ane), vowel digraphs (au, oo, ay, ea, ee, oy, ay, oa, ey, ai), r-controlled vowels (er, ar, eu, or, ur, aw), and the schwa sound. As the student reads the names, the teacher records his or her per- formance and then analyzes that performance in terms of which elements were known or unknown.

Another way to identify phonics patterns that are known and unknown is to use real words containing frequent and infrequent vowel patterns (called phonograms). For example –ay is a very frequent vowel pattern or phonogram present in such com- mon words as day, say, play, and way. Fry (1998) identified 38 common phonograms that can make over 600 different single-syllable words. Some of these words are quite common and some with the same vowel pattern are less frequent. For example, see is a very-high-frequency word, but bee is less frequent. Jump is a high-frequency word, but bump is less so. When students successfully pronounce a word, it is difficult to know whether that word is a sight word memorized as a unit without attention to letter– sound patterns or if the reader actually decoded it. Asking students to pronounce a list of words containing high-frequency phonograms will show you which ones they know or do not know, but it will not make the distinction between decoded words and sight words. However, if you take a successfully pronounced word containing a fre- quent phonogram (same) and then ask the student to pronounce a less frequent word containing the same phonogram (fame), you can make the distinction. If the reader cannot pronounce the less frequent word, you know that the successful pronunciation of the more frequent phonogram was by sight rather than decoding. Why? Because if the reader had used letters and sounds to pronounce same, he or she would have been able to pronounce the same phonogram in a word he or she probably had not seen before, fame. The Qualitative Reading Inventory–5 (Leslie & Caldwell, 2011) provides a short assessment based upon frequent and infrequent words containing very com- mon phonograms.

Teaching Phonics Strategies

Phonics can be taught in many ways; however, the one you choose should be delivered systematically. A review of the findings of the National Reading Panel (Ehri, Nunes, Stahl, & Willows, 2001) concluded that systematic phonics instruction made a more significant contribution to student growth in reading than unsystematic or no phonics instruction. Systematic phonics instruction made the biggest impact when it began in kindergarten or first grade. It was equally effective when delivered through tutor- ing, small-group instruction, or whole-class instruction. Finally, systematic phonics was significantly more effective in helping struggling readers than unsystematic or no phonics instruction.

Initial implementation of RTI has focused on the lower grades, which ensures that word identification strategies play a central role in Tier 2 and Tier 3 instruction. Various phonics programs are on the market, and teachers may be quite confused as to

Improving Word Knowledge: Word Recognition 181

which ones would be appropriate. Perhaps the first strategy is to select the same pro- gram that is used in the student’s regular classroom and provide the struggling reader with additional time and guidance. Many struggling readers just need more time and more individualized attention in order to achieve success. If that is not a possibility, consider the guidelines offered in this chapter when deciding how to help a struggling reader achieve grade-level word recognition accuracy.

What makes for exemplary phonics instruction? Stahl (1992) suggested several guidelines. Exemplary phonics instruction

1. Builds on concepts about how print functions. Students need to recognize that print is the primary source of information as opposed to pictures.

2. Builds on a foundation of phonemic awareness. This subject is addressed in Chapter 7.

3. Is clear and direct and involves teacher explanation and modeling. 4. Is integrated into a total reading program that emphasizes the use of quality

children’s literature. 5. Focuses on reading words, not learning rules. 6. May include word families and use of decoding by analogy. 7. May include invented spelling practice. 8. Focuses on the internal structure of words to develop independent word recog-

nition strategies. 9. Develops automatic word recognition skills.

Letter–Sound Relationships Phonics refers to the relationship between speech and print, that is, the relationship between letter and letter groupings and speech sounds. Knowing such relationships allows readers to pronounce unfamiliar words and match these pronunciations to word meanings. In order to understand how to teach letter–sound relationships, we need to clarify certain terminology. Most people understand the difference between con- sonants and vowels and can readily identify a letter as one or the other. Consonant blends or clusters are two or three adjacent consonants, such as br in break and spl in split. Each consonant retains its own sound; that is, you say the distinct sounds of b and r when you say break. Consonant digraphs are also two or more adjacent consonants but they do not retain their individual sounds. If you say the sound of sh in ship, you make a new sound.

Vowels fall into several groups. Short vowels are those represented by the sounds of a as in fat, e as in ten, i as in win, o as in hot, and u as in cut. This pattern is often described as the consonant/vowel/consonant (CVC) pattern. Long vowels “say their own name”; that, is the sound of the vowel in a word is the same as the way the alphabet let- ter is pronounced. There are two main groups of long vowel sounds. The consonant/ vowel/consonant final e pattern (CVCe) is represented by words where the final e is silent and the vowel makes the long sound. Examples are cake, rice, note, and cube. Vowel digraphs form a second pattern. They make a long vowel sound but are represented by two adjacent vowels, as in meat, clay, seed, and gain. In these words, the digraphs

182 C H A P T E R 8

are ea, ay, ee, and ai. Vowel diphthongs and r-controlled vowels represent other com- mon patterns. A diphthong begins with one vowel sound and moves to another, as in how, dew, and toil. In the English language, the letter r often follows a vowel and influ- ences how it is pronounced. You can differentiate r-controlled vowels if you read the following word pairs out loud: fat and far; hem and her; and can and car. Note how the presence of the letter r changes the sound of the vowel.

In order for children to read words, what do they need to know? According to Beck (2006), they need to know the speech sounds that are associated with letters. They need to know how to put these sounds together to form a word, and they need to do this rapidly. What they do not need to know is terminology such as digraph, diph- thong, and r-controlled. Children must learn to match sounds and letter patterns, not identify their names.

Organizing Phonics Instruction Letter–sound patterns, the sounds represented by consonants and those represented by vowels, form the basis of phonics instruction. Consonants generally stand for depend- able sounds; that is, the sound represented by the letter b does not change depending upon its position in a word. The sound of b in back is the same as its sound in cab. As just described, vowel patterns are much more variable. Vowel patterns are often presented as phonograms. A phonogram is a vowel and a following consonant (or consonants), such as in and op. Phonograms form the basis for syllable units in multisyllable words. Consider the word intermittent, which contains the following phonograms: in, er, it, and ent. Knowledge of phonograms can translate into a powerful strategy for analyzing multisyllabic words.

Which patterns or phonograms should you teach, and in what order? Johnson (1999, 2001) offers some general recommendations for teaching vowel patterns and matching instruction to the needs of your students. Fry (2004) describes consonant and vowel patterns in terms of their frequency in the language. Allen (1998) provides an extensive list of frequently used patterns and examples of common one-syllable words that can be used as a basis for instruction. Beck (2006) arranges letter–sound patterns in the form of instructional units that move from simple to more complex pat- terns. These resources can be valuable tools in choosing the letters, sounds, and words to teach. Published programs (there are many of them, and more appear each day) also can offer guidelines in this respect.

Phonograms can be grouped into word families. A word family is made up of words that contain the same phonograms, such as win, tin, fin, and bin and crop, stop, cop, hop, and mop. Such words are often referred to as onset/rimes. The onset is the initial consonant pattern (bl as in black) and the rime is the vowel pattern (ack as in black). Children seem to learn word families easily and naturally (Adams, 1990; Caldwell & Leslie, 2013; Stahl, 1992).

Table 8.2 lists common phonogram units. Underlined phonograms represent those that occur most frequently in the English language. They either make up large word families or they are present in frequent words.

Improving Word Knowledge: Word Recognition 183

TABLE 8.2 Common Phonograms

ad, ag, am, an, ap, ar, at, aw, ay, ax, ack, age, ail, ain, air, ake, ale, all, alk, ame, and, ane, ang, ank, are, ash (wash and smash), ast, ate, ave, aught

e (me), ed, ee, en, et, er, ew, ear (bear and dear), eal, eat, een, eep, eet, eck, ell, end, ent, ess, est, each

id, ig, in, im, ip, it, ice, ick, ide, ife, ike, ile, ill, ine, ing, ink, ire, irt, ish, ite, ight

o (go and do), og, op, or, ot, ow (how and blow), oy, oat, ock, oil, oin, oke, old, ole, one, ong, oil, ook, ool, oom, ore, out, oast, ould, ound

ug, ue, un, up, uck, ull, ump, unk, ure, use

Whether you are designing your own sequence or basing it on published ma- terial, Beck (2006) stresses the importance of several principles. First, the popular practice of teaching consonants first and then vowels needs to be reexamined. Simple vowel patterns can and should be taught in tandem with consonants. Why? It is im- possible to actually pronounce a consonant by itself; it needs an accompanying vowel to make a pronounceable entity. Teaching consonants alone often leads to artificial pronunciation and later confusion on the part of students. The student pronounces the letter b, for example, as buh; however, the sound represented by uh is the short vowel sound. Try saying the sound of b without uh; all you get is a puff of air! For this reason, it makes sense to couple instruction in consonants with simple vowel patterns such as, at, an, en, it, op, and un.

Do not just focus on consonants in the beginning position such as t in tub. Expose children to the consonant in ending positions as well, as in cut, wet, and nut. Poor read- ers are often able to decode the initial letter but falter when faced with the same letter at the end of a word. Teaching consonant letter–sound relationships in both positions can help to avoid this.

Use manipulative activities to illustrate letter–sound relationships. Having stu- dents move and exchange letters to make words can illustrate how the sound of the letter t, for example, remains the same in tip and pot. Having students sort words into word families or phonograms can be a very motivating activity. Letter cards should include single consonants and vowels as well as consonant blends and digraphs, vowel digraphs, vowel diphthongs, and r-controlled patterns.

Good phonics instruction involves a dual focus on words and on application in reading. You can begin with a lesson using phonograms or word families, but you need to follow it with practice in a real reading situation—or you can begin with reading a book and designing your lesson around words in the book. These can include words the students knew as well as words they were not able to pronounce. For example, if the students knew the word hill, they can manipulate letters to make pill, gill, silly, miller, and million, thus extending phonics past the beginning stages and into more ad- vanced words. If they did not know a word such as steep, you can use this to extend into other words with the same pattern: stop, stem, stick and/or keep, peep, and weep. It is not

184 C H A P T E R 8

enough to focus on pronunciation. The lesson should also include attention to word meaning. What is a gill? What does it mean to weep? Where would we find a stem? In this way, the student recognizes that reading is not just saying words but saying words in order to make meaning. Work with letter–sound patterns must be repetitive; that is, the students must have many opportunities to interact with a specific pattern. A key role of the teacher is to point out the similarities between words relative to letter–sound patterns—you need to continually demonstrate that at, for example, says the same sound in hat, cat, batted, matter, fattest, and satisfy.

Decoding Through Analogy Research indicates that most people (including students with reading problems) learn phonics not by memorizing rules, but by recognizing patterns used in similar and known words (Goswami & Bryant, 1990; Goswami & Mead, 1992). In other words, people pronounce new words by using known words. This process is called decoding by analogy. A child learns to read close and class and thus learns how to pronounce the onset cl. The child learns day and say and how to pronounce ay. These learnings lead to the pronunciation of a new word, clay. Suppose you come across a word you have never seen before, such as tergiversation. How do you manage to pronounce it correctly? You use word elements that you know: ter as in term, the word giver, and sation as in conversation.

You can teach students with reading problems how to use this strategy. When they meet an unknown word, ask them to think of an analogous one. For example, if the student is unable to decode the word bay, you might ask, “Can you think of a word that ends like this word?” If the child can’t supply an analogy, you might say, “Think of the word day.” The use of word families helps students to recognize and use these analogies.

Allen (1998) suggests an integrated strategies approach based on the use of spell- ing patterns to pronounce unfamiliar words. Essential components of the program include understanding rhyme, learning to use key words and their spelling patterns to decode words by analogy, learning to cross-check to see if the word makes sense, and learning to read and spell a core of high-frequency words. Teachers choose words with frequently used spelling patterns from the literature they are using in the classroom. The teacher explicitly and frequently models strategy use and offers students many opportunities to learn and apply what they have learned by using a word wall, building words, reading new text, playing games, and writing frequently.

One instructional program for teaching word analysis through analogy is of outstanding quality. The Benchmark Word Identification/Vocabulary Development Program (Gaskins & Downer, 1986; Gaskins et al., 1986) was constructed for use at the Benchmark School, a facility for students with learning difficulties. The program stresses the use of context clues and decoding by analogy. It employs both mono- and multisyllabic words almost from the first lessons. The program, which can be pur- chased, is extremely detailed and provides scripts for daily lessons.

The Benchmark program teaches decoding by analogy through key spelling patterns. The teacher introduces key words for each common vowel pattern, and the students practice these words until they know them as sight words. Examples of key

Improving Word Knowledge: Word Recognition 185

words for o patterns are go, boat, job, clock, and long. The students dictate language expe- rience stories containing the key words and repeatedly read them. Students also write the key words and chant each word letter by letter. The words are displayed promi- nently in the classroom.

Next, the teacher shows how to use key words to identify unknown words by re- peatedly modeling the process of comparing and contrasting an unknown word to a key word. For example, the teacher presents a new word in a sentence such as Jim opened the present with joy. Pretending not to know joy, the teacher thinks aloud, noting that joy looks like the key word boy. Boy is written below joy. The teacher then uses boy to pronounce joy by saying, “If b-o-y is boy, then j-o-y is joy. Does joy make sense in the sentence?” The teacher models by checking to see if the “unknown” word fits the context. As new key words are introduced, these same basic components are used. Other lesson activities include rhyme recognition, fitting words into cloze sentences, and sorting words into spelling patterns.

A revision of this program, entitled Word Detectives: Benchmark Word Identi- fication Program for Beginning Readers (Gaskins, Cress, O’Hara, & Donnelly, 1996), has made several research-based improvements. In the newer program, students are asked to spell and write each key word several times so that they learn each letter. In addition, the program includes more connected reading, and the pace of word intro- duction is slower. The program has continued to evolve and is available for purchase at the following levels: Beginning (Nonreader), Transitional (1–2), Intermediate A (2–3), Intermediate B (3–6), and Grade 5 and above. Various websites offer extensive information.

Decoding by analogy is a strategy demonstrated in the case study at the end of this chapter.

Combining Phonics and Meaning Perhaps because they have had so much difficulty recognizing words, struggling read- ers often confuse phonics with reading. They think that reading is simply sounding out words, and they need to learn that pronouncing words is only a step toward gaining the author’s meaning. As they read, students need to constantly ask themselves, “Does this make sense?” They must remember to check whether their pronunciation efforts result in sensible meaning.

Cross-Checking. This variation on a cloze procedure is recommended by Cunningham (2005). The teacher writes a sentence that contains one covered word. To supply this word, students cross-check phonics clues with context clues in the sen- tence. Teacher and students first read the sentence, saying “blank” for the covered word. Next, the students offer suggestions as to what the missing word might be. All reasonable suggestions are written down where the students can see them. (If a student offers a suggestion that does not fit, the teacher reads the sentence, inserts this word, and demonstrates how the sentence does not sound right.) The teacher then uncovers the letters, one by one. All words that do not begin with these letters are crossed out. Finally, the teacher uncovers the entire word and points out that although many words might fit in the blank, the pronunciation must match the letters chosen by the author. See the example in Strategy Snapshot 8.1.

186 C H A P T E R 8

Word Sorts. In Chapter 6, we described several intervention programs that used word sorts to help students become aware of the different letter–sound combinations in words. Word sorts are also useful for tying word pronunciation to word meaning (Caldwell & Leslie, 2013). Asking students to sort words into different categories emphasizes that every word carries a meaning or, in many cases, multiple meanings. Students can group words according to things they can touch, see, hear, taste, buy, sell, own, make, and so on. They can sort according to where the item can be found: in a house, in a park, in a school, and so on. Words can be sorted according to what a person, an animal, a machine, and so on might do. The possibilities are endless, and students truly enjoy the activity. Not only does it provide practice in word identification as the students read the words but, as mentioned previously, it reinforces the concept that words carry meanings and, as students offer different reasons for sorting words, it ex- tends their vocabulary knowledge. All you need to do is make word cards, which can easily be done by hand or on a computer; procure a container to keep them; and add to the container as you work with decoding new words. Then, shuffle the contents of the container, hand out cards to the students, and let them decode and sort. In the be- ginning, you may wish to identify the categories for them; later you will find that they enjoy identifying their own categories for sorting words. The case study at the end of this chapter demonstrates the use of word sorts.

Encouraging Students to Monitor for Meaning. Struggling readers do not always demand meaning from reading. Often they continue reading long after the material has ceased to make sense to them. In fact, most of us have, from time to time, become aware that our eyes have been moving over the words, but we have no idea what they mean. What do we do? As good readers, we know that the purpose of reading is to gain meaning, so we stop and reread. Students with reading problems may finish an entire selection, proud for having “got the words right,” but with no understanding of what they have read. Thus, teachers must continually reinforce the idea that reading should

Strategy Snapshot 8.1 Using Cross-Checking

Ms. Tate uses cross-checking with a small group of poor readers to stress that pronunciation should make sense. She presents them with the sentence “Jane wanted to buy some _____” and asks what words would fit in the blank space. The children’s suggestions, including candy, clothes, cookies, books, raisins, flowers, toys, pets, shoes, and dolls, are written on the board. When one child suggests money and another offers friend, Ms. Tate reads the sentence with those words inserted and asks if it makes sense. The children agree that it doesn’t. Then Ms. Tate uncovers the first letter, which is a c. The choices narrow to candy, clothes, and cookies. The children agree that all three make sense; and when their teacher uncovers the entire word, they eagerly call out candy! Ms. Tate then gives them additional words that also start with c (city, children, country, caps, cards) and asks them if they make sense in the sentence. She reminds children that when a word is pronounced, they have to check for meaning.

Improving Word Knowledge: Word Recognition 187

make sense. To encourage monitoring for meaning, have students stop periodically as they read and ask themselves four questions:

Did what I just read make sense to me? Can I retell it in my own words? Are there any words that I do not understand? Are any sentences confusing to me? Students can remind themselves to consider these questions by making book-

marks that display these questions. The teacher can also place brightly colored, removable dots in the margin at regular intervals throughout a reading as reminders for students to stop and ask themselves these questions.

Making Students Aware of Their Strategies Several strategies to help your students figure out unknown words in print have been presented. However, to really master a strategy, your students need to become aware of what they are doing. How can you help them?

Remember that students need to see strategies modeled many times before they can use them. You must show them, over and over again, how you use these strategies to figure out unknown words.

You can also display the strategies. Put the strategies on a poster or have each student make a bookmark containing the steps in a strategy. One teacher created a bul- letin board entitled “How to Read Words” and put the children’s observations on the board. Another teacher placed a large tree branch in a bucket of sand and called it the “thinking tree.” As students learned strategies for identifying words, they wrote them on cards and hung them on the thinking tree.

Finally, teachers can ask students to talk about how they use strategies. Helping students periodically review steps stresses the how of phonics instruction. Students can write down their own strategies on cards that you can call “think cards.” When students create their own versions of strategies, they personalize what you have taught them.

Dealing With Exceptions Sooner or later, students will come across words that are exceptions to the patterns that you are teaching. Rather than treating such exceptions as a problem, you can use them as an opportunity to make students aware that phonics does not always work. For example, when you ask for words that have a silent e, students may suggest have and love, two words that are exceptions to the rule that the first vowel in the word takes a long sound when the second is a silent e. Write down such exceptions and tell the students that these words “don’t play fair.” Struggling readers often enjoy making lists of such exceptions that can be placed on bulletin boards in learning centers.

Ideas for Practicing Phonics To effectively learn phonics, students need to consistently practice letter–sound pat- terns. Only through extended use can struggling readers learn to apply phonics quickly and accurately. This section offers ideas for ways to practice phonics.

188 C H A P T E R 8

Making Words. Making words (Cunningham & Allington, 2002; Cunningham & Cunningham, 1992; Cunningham & Hall, 1994a, 1994b) involves students in actively thinking about letter–sound patterns as they use letters to make different words. This activity focuses on many different phonics patterns as children spell different words from a bigger word. By spelling, they practice creating phonics patterns. At the end of the activity, they can note similarities and differences among the words they have made.

For the making words activity, choose a word such as thunder and identify all words that can be made from it. Make seven cards, each containing one letter in thunder. Make larger squares with the same letters for your use at a ledge or pocket chart. Now ask the students to make the words that you say. Begin with the shortest words, move gradually to longer words, and finally to the seven-letter word thunder. The sequence might look like this: red, Ted, Ned, den, end, her, hut, herd, turn, hunt, hurt, under, hunted, turned, and thunder.

Making words can be used with an individual or with a group. If you are working in a group, have individual children or pairs form each word. Then, when they have finished, have one student come to the front of the room and arrange your large letter cards into words from memory.

As each word is made, write it on a card. When all the words have been made, you will have a list of words that you can use to sort according to phonics patterns. For example, you might have students sort all of the words (made from thunder) that contain ur, er, or ed. You might have students sort into piles the words that contain short vowels and long vowels. Remind students that when they meet a new word or when they need to spell an unknown word, they can use these patterns to help them. Words made during this activity can also be used for sorts involving word meaning, as described previously in this chapter. The making words strategy was employed in the case study presented at the end of this chapter.

Reading Books With Regular Phonics Patterns. Activities for practicing phonics in isolated words are enjoyable, but they will not allow students with reading problems to master phonics principles. To master phonics, your students must read, read, read. Only by getting practice figuring out unknown words while they are reading will stu- dents be able to use phonics.

Students with problems can profit from using reading materials that are not only meaningful, but also present many phonetically regular words. Many books using phonetically regular words are enjoyable for children.

Caldwell and Leslie (2013) present a list of trade books that repeat different pho- nograms. Because poems contain many regular words, they can serve as a rich source for phonics practice. Strategy Snapshot 8.2 shows how one poem acts as a basis for a complete phonics teaching sequence.

Teaching Multisyllabic Words As children move beyond beginning reading levels, they face the challenge of rec- ognizing increasing numbers of multisyllabic words (words of more than one sylla- ble). Some are relatively easy to pronounce, such as a single-syllable word joined to

Improving Word Knowledge: Word Recognition 189

a common ending (jumping, teacher) or a compound word (cowboy, airplane). However, other multisyllabic words (lilac, assisted, autograph) are more complex. Recognizing such words is important because they often carry much of the meaning of a text.

Students with reading problems seem to have particular difficulty with multisyl- labic words for several reasons:

1. Many students are simply scared by lengthy words and refuse even to try them. Some students “freeze” in front of words that contain eight or nine letters.

2. Students forget to combine phonics and context clues when they meet a long word. Unfortunately, many poor readers who have learned to use context for recogniz- ing single-syllable words revert to only matching letters and sounds when faced with long words. Using a combination of clues is important when decoding multisyllabic words because they tend to contain irregular sound patterns; thus, students need to check what they have sounded out with the sense of the sentence.

3. Because students with reading problems often have limited meaning vocabular- ies, they may never have heard a particular long word before. If you have heard a word and know its meaning, being able to pronounce even a few parts may be enough to identify the entire word. However, if a word is not in your meaning vocabulary, you cannot check pronunciation against meaning. Several instructional strategies can help poor readers cope with long words.

Strategy Snapshot 8.2 Using Poetry to Teach Phonics

Mr. Lutz based a phonics lesson on the poem “Recipe for a Hippopotamus Sandwich” (by Silverstein). After he and his students read and discussed its silly story, he asked children for words that sounded alike. As they suggested make, take, cake and ring, string, he wrote each on the chalkboard under the headings –ake and –ing. When asked for more examples of these patterns, the children came up with and listed (in the proper place) wake, sing, and rake.

Mr. Lutz asked the children how knowing –ake and –ing would help them. He got them to verbalize the fact that they could use these sound patterns to figure out new words. To demonstrate, Mr. Lutz wrote “I will bring popcorn to the party.” He asked them to pretend that they did not know “bring.” How could they use the –ing in the word?

To apply this principle to other phonograms, Mr. Lutz picked out the words slice and bread from the poem and asked the children for other words that contain the sounds of –ice and –ead. They created two more lists of word families. When children offered –led as a rhyme for bread, Mr. Lutz pointed out that words that sound alike can be spelled differently or are exceptions.

Finally, Mr. Lutz copied the words from the board onto cards and handed some out to each child. As each child held up and read a word card (e.g., nice), another child supplied a word with the same phonogram (e.g., twice).

190 C H A P T E R 8

Collecting Long Words. In this strategy, students are asked to collect long words that they can read. In doing this, they become aware that they can pronounce many long words and can use these long words to figure out words that they do not know (Cunningham, 2005). Having a collection of big words that students know also reduces the threat that such words often pose for struggling readers. As they become more comfortable with long words, they become eager to learn more.

To implement this strategy, ask students to note long words that they find inter- esting or important as they read. Don’t ask them to select unknown words, because they may feel threatened. Often, however, students with reading problems will choose words that they have found difficult. To remember the targeted word, students can check them lightly with a pencil, use page markers or Post-it notes, or write the words on a separate sheet of paper.

Next, display the words and have students discuss them. Observe which other words they bring to mind, where to divide the syllables, and the sentence in the book that contained the word. This activity enables the students to combine context and phonics. If the students cannot figure out the word, help them work through clues, even if you must pronounce the word for them. In doing this activity, do not over- whelm students or keep them from enjoying reading. Limit students to two to three very important or interesting words per story.

After discussion, have students put each word on an index card. As the pile of cards gets larger, it becomes a visible reminder that they know many long words.

As this activity proceeds, you may want to make it more complex. For exam- ple, students can search for big words that fit into categories, such as describing words (or adjectives) like astonished and overbearing. Students can also look for syn- onyms. One class collected staggered, evacuated, and advanced for moved and requested, communicated, and asserted for said. Students can collect words with certain prefixes or suffixes. They can collect big words that all contain the same spelling pattern (checkered, checkerboard, rechecked, checkbook, checkroom). Within a short time, your stu- dents will have more than a hundred big words. As they list them, they will acquire comfort with multisyllabic words as well as a store of known words to use in figuring out unknown words.

Modeling Use of Analogies to Pronounce Long Words. Good readers often use analogies to decode multisyllabic words, just as they use them to decode one-syllable words. When they meet a multisyllabic word, they match patterns in the new word to similar patterns in a known word. A student might pronounce publisher by using the known words tub, dish, and her. However, the reader must know how to break the word into parts by looking for chunks already known.

To model the use of analogies, take a long word and explain to students the strate- gies you would use to pronounce it. You might write “The dark clouds portended bad weather” on the board. Then read the sentence, and when you come to portended, say something like, “I’m not sure I have ever seen that word before. I will read on and see if the sentence gives me a clue.” After finishing the sentence, say “Well, I still don’t know the word but I can figure it out. I recognize parts of it. I know or so por is easy. I know the word tend and I can add on the ed ending. So this word is portended. Now what does

Improving Word Knowledge: Word Recognition 191

Strategy Snapshot 8.3 Using Analogies to Decode Multisyllabic Words

When she came to a multisyllabic word, Deneese valiantly, but vainly, attempted to match let- ters and sounds, and Melanie would simply stop and say “I don’t know.” To help both students, Ms. Katz first identified a list of one-syllable words that each girl knew. Deneese and Melanie grouped these words according to the first vowel, putting grab, black, and snail on the a list; he, scream, and treat on the e list; knife, pig, and will on the i list; and so on for o and u. These words were used as models for long, unknown words.

First the teacher wrote a multisyllabic word, such as republic, on the board. The teacher then separated the syllables, forming re/pub/lic. Deneese and Melanie searched their word lists for model words that had matching vowel patterns and wrote the key words under- neath republic. The match for re was he; the match for pub was club; and the match for ic was tic. The girls first pronounced the known words (he, pub, and tic) and then transferred these sounds to the new word (re, pub, lic). Finally, Ms. Katz presented republic in a sentence and the girls used context to determine its meaning. Later in the semester, Ms. Katz began to ask the girls to try to divide words into syllables for themselves by using their model words as a guide.

it mean?” Read the entire sentence again. “I can use context here. I know about dark clouds and rain, so I bet that portended means the same as signaled or indicated.”

You will need to model the use of analogies many, many times before students become comfortable using the strategy independently. Remember to give students opportunities to pronounce big words by making analogies to words they already know. Strategy Snapshot 8.3 focuses on modeling analogies with two third graders. To use known word parts to pronounce unknown words, students must be able to break long words into syllables. Using analogies with a multisyllabic word will not work if you do not know how to divide that word. However, teaching complex syllabication rules is often ineffective for poor readers. In our experience, work with phonograms and key words is much more profitable.

Assessing Structural Analysis Strategies

When readers use structural analysis clues, they break a word into meaningful parts and use these parts to help them both pronounce the word and understand its mean- ing. In contrast, low-achieving readers are unaware of how structural elements affect meaning. Thus, the teaching of structural analysis is an important element of teaching reading.

This section discusses basic structural analysis strategies, including compound words, contractions, and common word endings (inflectional suffixes) such as –s (plural), –ed (past tense), –er and –est (comparative), –’s (possessive), and –ing (gerunds

192 C H A P T E R 8

and progressive tense). More advanced structural analysis strategies using prefixes, other suffixes, and roots are discussed in Chapter 10.

Students with reading problems tend not to use structural analysis strategies effectively. They are often unaware of how endings on words such as talks, talking, and talked signal time and number, and they often simply omit them during reading. Informal discussion can provide much insight into the use of structural analysis clues.

For compound words, choose a few (cowboy, steamboat, railroad) and ask the stu- dents if there is anything unusual about them. Request that they tell you how each little word helps in knowing the meaning of the whole word. When asked about cowboy, Andy quickly stated that cowboys were boys who rode horses and shot guns in the movies, but he had no idea where cows fit into the picture.

To assess understanding of the meaning of contractions, write the base word on the board or chart paper and then add the contraction. For example, write can, and then under it, write can’t. Ask the student if the two words are different in meaning. If the student seems unsure, place the contractions in two sentences: I can write my name. I can’t write my name. If the student cannot verbalize the difference in meaning between the two sentences, target the contraction for instructional focus.

For inflectional endings, write both bird and birds on the board or chart paper and ask your student to explain the difference in meaning. If the student is unsure, place the words in two sentences: I have a bird. I have two birds. Ask your student to explain the difference in meaning.

Teaching Structural Analysis Strategies

Many of the guidelines that are suggested for teaching phonics can also be used to teach basic structural analysis. To help students draw a connection between structural analysis elements and reading, ask students to collect words that contain certain word endings. Focus on meaning by telling students how adding endings changes the sense of a word, but do not concentrate on spelling rules for adding endings or forming contractions.

One activity used successfully is called making words grow (Caldwell & Leslie, 2013). Students take a one-syllable word and try to make it longer by adding inflec- tional endings, prefixes, or suffixes and by forming compound words. The student first writes the base word and then, directly under this word, writes a longer word. The third word is written under the second word. The base words must be written exactly under one another, for aligning them in this way allows students to see how additional struc- tural elements change the words. Table 8.3 presents an example of making words grow.

Students enjoy trying to make lists as long as possible. They often willingly go to the dictionary to find additional words. Having students highlight the additions in color also helps to illustrate the structural analysis patterns.

One word of caution with regard to inflectional endings: They may pose a prob- lem for speakers of nonstandard dialects and for bilingual students. Because these students may not use inflections consistently in their speech, they may have trouble reading them. When working with such students, the teacher should point out the

Improving Word Knowledge: Word Recognition 193

TABLE 8.3 Making Words Grow

jump camp work jumps camps works jumped camped worked jumping camping working jumper camper worker jumpy campsite workbook   campout workbench     workman     workshop     workable

meaning signified by the inflections but not be overly concerned about the pronuncia- tion. If the student pronounces Mary’s as Mary when reading orally, no corrections should be made. Rather, make sure that the student understands the meaning of the ending.

Word Recognition Strategies and Response- to-Intervention (RTI)

We first consider assessment of word recognition within the content of RTI efforts. Lipson (2011) identified five purposes for assessment in RTI: screening, diagnostics, formative progress monitoring, benchmark progress monitoring, and summative out- come assessment. Assessing word recognition strategies can fit into all five categories, albeit in somewhat different ways.

Initial development of the RTI initiative has focused on the primary grades, and classroom screening measures often include a word recognition component. However, screening measures tend to be readily available instruments such as results of annual standardized tests or measures that are easy to administer to a class. These may not provide enough specificity of information to design appropriate instruction for those identified as needing Tier 2 intervention (Wixson & Valencia, 2011).

There are many instruments available to provide diagnostic information regard- ing a student’s word identification. There are formal measures such as the Woodcock Reading Mastery Test, Third Edition (WRMT-III; Woodcock, 2011), which assesses both sight vocabulary and knowledge of phonics principles. The assessments described in this chapter (the informal reading inventory and measures of phonics principles) can also provide important diagnostic information as to what to teach.

The tests of phonics principles described in this chapter also fit well as formative measures to gather instruction during instruction. They can also be used for benchmark monitoring, information gathered “at predetermined times of the year to ascertain if students are making adequate progress” (Wixson & Valencia, 2011, p. 468). However,

194 C H A P T E R 8

perhaps the best formative and benchmark measures are those that are closely aligned with instruction. For example, if Tier 2 or Tier 3 intervention focuses on decoding by analogy as a strategy for word identification, then formative and benchmark assess- ment should ascertain a student’s proficiency in that regard and perhaps even use the spelling patterns that were emphasized during instruction.

Summative assessment should focus on a student’s proficiency in identifying words in real reading situations (such as IRI passages). It should also include formal standardized measures that compare a student’s score to those of his or her peers. Both forms of assessment can provide information on a student’s ability to function success- fully in his or her regular classroom.

With regard to instruction of word recognition, the guidelines in this chapter effectively apply to RTI instruction for all three tiers. We strongly encourage RTI teachers to adhere to Stahl’s guidelines (1992) for exceptional phonics instruction as described earlier. We also recommend that you teach consonants and vowel patterns in tandem, include work with manipulatives, and always connect phonics instruction to comprehension.

Summary

The stages of reading development include the logographic, partial alphabetic, full alphabetic, and sight word reading.

Strategies for identifying words include identifying words from memory (sight words), matching letters and sounds, identifying words from context (typical of begin- ning readers), and breaking the word into chunks and matching the pronunciation of each chunk to known words.

The Common Core standards do not explicitly address word recognition, although in order to meet the standards students have to be able to identify words. Assessment of phonics can involve administration of an informal reading inventory and tests of phonics principles, which may include the use of nonsense words or pseudowords.

Exemplary phonics instruction builds on concepts about how print functions and on a foundation of phonemic awareness, is clear and direct and involves teacher modeling, is integrated into the total reading program, focuses on words rather than rules, may include word families and decoding by analogy, and develops automatic word recognition skills.

Struggling readers need explicit emphasis on phonics. Teachers may organize their teaching by using phonograms (or rimes) and analogies. Decoding by analogy, or recognizing unfamiliar words by using known words, is an excellent way to approach phonics instruction.

Activities for providing practice in phonics include making words to illustrate common patterns; reading books with regular phonics patterns; and, most important, extensive reading. Phonics instruction should also focus on helping students deal with long words. To learn multisyllabic words, students can collect long words, use analo- gies, or practice breaking words into syllables using transformations.

Improving Word Knowledge: Word Recognition 195

Assessment of structural analysis strategies involves informal evaluation. Teaching methods include making words grow and collecting lists of words with cer- tain endings.

Assessment of word recognition should be part of all forms of RTI instruction: screening, diagnostics, formative and benchmark monitoring, and summative outcome assessment.

Case Study

Introduction Krista’s parents moved to another part of the city at the completion of her first-grade year and she entered second grade in a new school. As a result of Tier 1 RTI assess- ment, she was identified as performing well below the level of her peers. As a result, Krista was referred to the reading specialist for further testing.

Assessment On an informal reading inventory, Krista achieved at a preprimer instructional level for both word recognition and comprehension. Her performance on the word list indicated that she attempted to match beginning sounds, and most errors involved medial and ending sounds. When she pronounced words on the list correctly, she did so very slowly, suggesting that few preprimer words were sight words. Miscue analy- sis of errors made during passage reading verified that although Krista attempted to match letters and sounds, her miscues seldom made sense and were never corrected. Passage reading was extremely slow and labored and marked by many hesitations and repetitions. When IRI passages at higher grade levels were read to Krista to as- sess her listening comprehension, she demonstrated adequate understanding of text appropriate for her chronological grade level. Krista’s parents indicated that they read to her almost every evening and that Krista enjoyed listening to audio versions of books.

The reading specialist administered several formal measures of reading ability. Krista demonstrated grade-level performance for listening comprehension and for phonological awareness activities such as sound matching, rhyme production, blend- ing, and sound deletion. Krista’s word identification skills were assessed in two ways. Her sight vocabulary was evaluated by having her pronounce a list of words within a time limit for each word and without the support of context clues. She was also asked to pronounce a list of nonsense words (pseudowords) to assess her knowledge of phonics relationships. Standard scores for both of these fell well below the level of her peers.

In summary, Krista’s exhibited strengths in listening comprehension and phono- logical awareness. However, she had not developed an adequate sight vocabulary and her use of phonics strategies was limited to a slow and rather painful application of beginning consonant sounds.

196 C H A P T E R 8

Instruction Krista was recommended for Tier 2 RTI instruction and joined a small group of students who exhibited similar difficulties with sight vocabulary and phonics.

The students met 4 days a week for 30-minute sessions. The structure of the lesson was the same across all sessions and was patterned after successful interventions described in Chapter 6.

In the first session of each week, the students orally reread a short selection or a portion of a selection from previous lessons. Rereading took different formats, such as shared reading, echo reading, or partner reading. If appropriate, they often dra- matized dialogue. The students discussed the contents and described what they liked or disliked about the selection. Vocabulary contained in the selection was reviewed. Then the teacher presented a new selection. The teacher read it aloud to the students, focused their attention on key concepts, modeled good-reader strategies, and engaged them in discussion of the contents. The students reread all or parts of the selection in a shared-reading format (see Chapter 9). The teacher presented three or four vocabu- lary words from the selection. The teacher and students examined these with regard to decoding components and meaning. For the last 5 minutes, the teacher read grade- level text to the students. Often these were selections from the second-grade literacy textbook.

The second session focused on developing sight vocabulary and effective usage of phonics principles. The teacher emphasized decoding by analogy; that is, taking a high- frequency word such as cat and using it to decode less familiar words such as flat, brat, and slat (Gaskins & Downer, 1986; Gaskins et al., 1986). High-frequency words were placed on a word wall where they could be easily accessed by the children. The teacher introduced a new analog often drawn from vocabulary in the selections that were read and modeled the process of using the analog to decode a new word: “If cat is cat, then brat must be brat because they both have the same vowel sound.” The students then engaged in a variety of activities involving the analog and new words. They participated in word sorts (Bear, Invernezzi, Templeton, & Johnson, 2012; Santa & Hoien, 1999). In some cases, the teacher asked them to engage in a closed sort; that is, the teacher pre- sented the categories for the sort, such as “sort according to words that have the same beginning sound.” At other times, the students engaged in an open sort; that is, they determined how to sort the words. The students made words out of letter cards as done in the Four Blocks Model (Hall, Prevette, & Cunningham, 2007), and made words grow by adding inflectional endings and suffixes (Caldwell & Leslie, 2013). Students acted out words when appropriate and used them in sentence writing. The teacher always made time at the end of the session to read to the students from grade-level material.

The next two sessions paralleled the first two. Session 3 focused on rereading and reviewing previously read text and introducing a new selection. The fourth session was a duplicate of session 2 and emphasized decoding-by-analogy activities.

At the end of the first half of the school year, Krista had made decided improve- ment. An informal reading inventory assessment placed her at a first-grade instructional level for both word recognition and comprehension. Fluency had improved, and Krista

Improving Word Knowledge: Word Recognition 197

actually corrected many of the miscues made during passage reading. By the end of the school year, Krista had progressed to a second-grade instructional level. At this point, previous formal measures were readministered and Krista’s standard scores were within the average range. Krista was then released from Tier 2 instruction.

References Adams, M. J. (1990). Beginning to read: Thinking and learning about print. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Allen, L. (1998). An integrated strategies approach: Making word identification instruction work for begin-

ning readers. The Reading Teacher, 52, 254–270. Bear, D., Invernizzi, M., Templeton, D., & Johnston, F. (2012). Words their way: Word study for phonics, vocabu-

lary and spelling instruction (5th ed.) Columbus, OH: Merrill. Beck, I. L. (2006). Making sense of phonics: The hows and whys. New York: The Guilford Press. Caldwell, J. S. (2008). Reading assessment: A primer for teachers and coaches. New York: The Guilford Press. Caldwell, J. S., & Leslie, L. (2013). Intervention strategies to follow informal reading inventory assessment: So what

do I do now? New York: Allyn & Bacon. Common Core State Standards Initiative. (2010). Common Core State Standards for English language arts & lit-

eracy in history/social studies, science and technical subjects. Retrieved from http://www.corestandards.org Cunningham, P. M. (1990). The names test: A quick assessment of decoding ability. The Reading Teacher, 44,

124–129. Cunningham, P. M. (2005). Phonics they use: Words for reading and writing (4th ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon. Cunningham, P. M., & Allington, R. L. (2002). Classrooms that work: They can all read and write (3rd ed.).

New York: Allyn & Bacon. Cunningham, P. M., & Cunningham, J. W. (1992). Making words: Enhancing the invented spelling-decoding

connection. The Reading Teacher, 46, 106–115. Cunningham, P. M., & Hall, D. P. (1994a). Making big words. Carthage, IL: Good Apple. Cunningham, P. M., & Hall, D. P. (1994b). Making words. Carthage, IL: Good Apple. Duffelmeyer, F. A., Kruse, A. E., Merkeley, D. J., & Fyfe, S. A. (1999). Further validation and enhancement

of the names test. In S. J. Barrentine (Ed.), Reading assessment: Principles and practices for elementary teachers (pp. 177–188). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.

Ehri, L. C. (1991). Development of the ability to read words. In R. Barr, M. L. Kamil, P. Mosenthal, & P. D. Pearson (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (2nd ed.). New York: Longman.

Ehri, L. C. (1994). Development of the ability to read words: Update. In R. Ruddell & H. Singer (Eds.), Theoretical models and processes of reading (4th ed.). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.

Ehri, L. C. (1997). The development of children’s ability to read words. Paper presented at the convention of the International Reading Association, Atlanta, GA.

Ehri, L. C., Nunes, S. R., Stahl, S. A., & Willows, D. M. (2001). Systematic phonics instruction helps stu- dents learn to read: Evidence from the national reading panel’s meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 71, 393–447.

Fry, E. (1998). The most common phonograms. The Reading Teacher, 51, 620–622. Fry, E. (2004). Phonics: A large phoneme-grapheme frequency count revised. Journal of Literacy Research,

36, 85–98. Gaskins, I. W., Cress, C., O’Hara, C., & Donnelly, K. (1996). Overview of Word Detectives. Benchmark Extended

Word Identification Program for Beginning Readers. Media, PA: Benchmark School. Gaskins, I. W., & Downer, M. (1986). Benchmark Word Identification/Vocabulary Development Program: Begin-

ning Level. Media, PA: Benchmark Press. Gaskins, I. W., Ehri, L. C., Cress, C., O’Hara, C., & Donnelly, K. (1996). Procedures for word learning:

Making discoveries about words. The Reading Teacher, 50, 312–327. Gaskins, I. W., Soja, S., Indrisano, A., Lawrence, H., Elliot, T., Rauch, S., et al. (1986). Benchmark School Word

Identification/Vocabulary Development Program. Media, PA: Benchmark School.

198 C H A P T E R 8

Goswami, U., & Bryant, P. (1990). Phonological skills in learning to read. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Goswami, U., & Mead, F. (1992). Onset and rime awareness and analogies in reading. Reading Research

Quarterly, 27, 150–162. Johnson, F. P. (1999). The timing and teaching of word families. The Reading Teacher, 53, 64–75. Johnson, F. P. (2001). The utility of phonics generalizations: Let’s take another look at Clymer’s conclusions.

The Reading Teacher, 55, 131–153. Leslie, L., & Caldwell, J. S. (2011). Qualitative Reading Inventory–5. Boston: Pearson. Lipson, M. Y. (2011). Diagnosis: The missing ingredient in RTI assessment. The Reading Teacher, 65, 204–208. National Reading Panel (2000). Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research

literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction: Reports of the subgroups (National Insti- tute of Health Pub. No. 00-4754). Washington, DC: National Institute of Child Health and Human Development.

Perfetti, C. A. (1983). Discourse context, word identification, and reading ability. In J. F. Le Ny & W. Kintsch (Eds.), Language and comprehension. New York: North-Holland Publishing Company.

Perfetti, C. A. (1985). Reading ability. New York: Oxford University Press. Perfetti, C. A. (1988). Verbal efficiency in reading ability. In M. Daneman, G. E. MacKinnon, & T. G. Waller

(Eds.), Reading research: Advances in theory and practice (Vol. 6, pp. 109–143). New York: Academic Press.

Spear-Swerling, L., & Sternberg, R. J. (1996). Off track: When poor readers become “learning disabled.” Boulder, CO: Westview Press.

Stahl, S. A. (1992). Saying the “p” word: Nine guidelines for exemplary phonics instruction. The Reading Teacher, 45, 618–625.

Stanovich, K. E. (1980). Toward an interactive-compensatory model of individual differences in the develop- ment of reading fluency. Reading Research Quarterly, 16, 32–71.

Stanovich, K. E. (1986). Matthew effects in reading. Some consequences of individual differences in the acquisition of literacy. Reading Research Quarterly, 21, 360–406.

Stanovich, K. E. (1991). Word recognition: Changing perspectives. In R. Barr, M. L. Kamil, P. Mosenthal, & P. D. Pearson (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (Vol. II, pp. 418–452). New York: Longman.

Wixson, K. K. & Valencia, S. W. (2011). Assessment in RTI: What teachers and specialists need to know. The Reading Teacher, 64, 466–469.

Wolf, M. (2007). Proust and the squid. New York: Harper Collins. Woodcock. R. W. (2011). Woodcock Reading Mastery Tests (WRMT-III). San Antonio, TX: Pearson.

Go to topic 5: Phonemic Awareness and Pho- nics and topic 8: Word Recognition in the MyEducationLab (www.myeducationlab.com) for Reading Problems: Assessment and Teaching Strategies, where you can: ◆ Find learning outcomes for phonemic

awareness and phonics, and word recogni- tion, along with the national standards that connect to these outcomes.

◆ Complete assignments and activities that can help you more deeply understand the chapter content.

◆ Apply and practice your understanding of the core teaching skills identified in the chapter with the Building Teaching Skills and Dispositions learning units.

◆ Examine challenging situations and cases presented in the Iris Center Resources.

◆ Access video clips of CCSSO National Teachers of the Year award winners respond- ing to the question, “Why Do I Teach?” in the Teacher Talk section.

Improving Word Knowledge: Word Recognition 199

◆ Practice targeting instruction and mak- ing content accessible for all students with A+RISE activities.

◆ Strengthen your understanding and usage of the English language in writing with the Grammar Tutorial.

◆ Gain experience in choosing appropriate literature and integrating the best titles into language arts instruction with the Children’s and Young Adult Literature Database.

◆ Track the month-by-month literacy growth of five second graders with the Literacy Portraits.

◆ Create, update, and share quality lesson plans with the Lesson Plan Builder.

◆ Access state licensure test requirements, overviews of what the tests cover, and sample test items in the Certification and Licensure section.

◆ Check your comprehension of the con- tent covered in the chapter with the Study Plan. Here you will be able to take a chapter pretest, receive feedback on your answers, and then access personalized Review, Practice, and Enrichment exer- cises to enhance your understanding of chapter content. After you complete the exercises, take a posttest to confirm your comprehension.

9Improving Word Knowledge: Fluency

Introduction

The Role of Fluency in the Reading Process

Fluency and the Common Core Standards

Assessing Fluency Listening to Students Read Orally Determining Reading Rate Timed Administration

of Word Lists General Guidelines for Fluency Development

Provide Models of Fluent Reading Link Fluency Instruction

to Meaning Encourage Wide Reading Avoid Unpracticed Oral Reading

Strategies for Developing Fluency in Context

Promoting Wide Reading of Easy Text Using Patterned Books Assisted Oral Reading Structured Repeated Readings Performance Reading Making Oral and Silent Reading Effective

Strategies for Developing Sight Words in Isolation

Choosing Words for Instructional Focus Guidelines for Teaching Sight Words Strategies for Focusing on Words

Word Recognition Fluency and Response-to-Intervention (RTI)

Summary

Case Study

200

C H A P T E R

Improving Word Knowledge: Fluency 201

Introduction

Contrast two different oral readers. One reads a selection at an appropriate rate of speed. Tom reads smoothly, confidently, and with expression, clearly conveying the author’s thoughts to an appreciative audience. Listening to this kind of reader is enjoy- able, and we are sorry when he reaches the end of the text. After finishing, he talks about what he read and shows clearly that he comprehended the text. Sarah approaches the text hesitantly. She reads tentatively, skipping, repeating, and stumbling over words. This reader is uncomfortable and pauses often as if uncertain how to continue. Her voice has little expression, and when she finishes, the listener is as relieved as the per- former. This reader demonstrates little understanding of what was read. These two readers are very different. One reader is fluent; the other is not, and what a difference it makes.

This chapter first defines fluency and explains its importance to the reading pro- cess. Next, it suggests methods of assessment. Most of the chapter focuses on instruc- tional strategies for developing fluency. The chapter ends with a case study of a third grader performing below his classmates regarding fluency.

The Role of Fluency in the Reading Process

Fluency involves three components: word identification accuracy, reading rate, and expression or prosody (Stahl, 2004). In the past, fluency was often equated solely with rate or speed of reading. The National Reading Panel (2000) clearly defines fluency as reading with accuracy, speed, and expression and doing so without conscious or overt attention on the part of the reader. Let us examine each of these elements.

The first component of fluency is accuracy. Fluent readers identify both famil- iar and unfamiliar words accurately. Familiar words are words they have seen before. They initially decoded them by matching letter and sound patterns, as described in Chapter 8, but they have seen the words so often that they can now identify them from memory. We call these familiar words sight words. Unfamiliar words are words they have never before seen in print. Fluent readers match letter and sound patterns and pronounce these new words almost effortlessly.

The second component of fluency is speed. Fluent readers identify both unfa- miliar and familiar (sight) words instantaneously. They engage in the word identifi- cation process without conscious thought or overt attention. Because fluent readers identify almost all words automatically and quickly, they can devote their ener- gies to the meaning of what they are reading (Cunningham, 2005; Cunningham & Allington, 2007).

The third component of fluency is prosody. Because fluent readers understand the text, they can read with suitable expression, using punctuation signals and varying voice tone to convey meaning. They read expressively by identifying cues in the struc- ture of the text and the language that suggest the proper pitch, stress, and juncture to use (Richards, 2000). Unless readers understand what they are reading, they are not able to take advantage of such cues.

202 C H A P T E R 9

To be fluent, readers must have three things (Caldwell & Leslie, 2013). First, they must have effective strategies for decoding or analyzing unfamiliar words. Sec- ond, they must have a large number of sight words that are recognized immediately without any analysis. Finally, readers must understand that the purpose of reading is comprehension.

Fluency and comprehension have a complex relationship. Fluency contributes to comprehension because a fluent reader can pay more attention to the meaning of the text than to word recognition (LaBerge & Samuels, 1985). On the other hand, comprehension contributes to fluency. When we understand what we are reading and when we are familiar with the topic and structure of the text, we tend to be more flu- ent. Contrast your fluency when reading a textbook chapter versus a novel by your favorite author. Similarly, lack of fluency and difficulty in recognizing words can seri- ously impede comprehension, and difficulties with comprehension can limit fluency (Kuhn, Schwanenflugel, & Meisinger, 2010). How fluent are you when reading the directions for filling out your income tax form?

Fluency is strongly associated with measures of reading achievement. Applegate, Applegate, and Modla (2009) assessed over 150 1st- through 10th-grade students and found that over one-third displayed fluency difficulties. Fluency and comprehension are more highly correlated at the lower grade levels. This relationship is not as strong in grades 4 and above, which suggests that vocabulary meaning and concept develop- ment may play stronger roles (Rasinski, Reutzel, Chard, & Linan-Thompson, 2011; Stahl & Hiebert, 2005).

Many struggling readers lack fluency because of limited sight vocabulary and poor decoding strategies. They do not enjoy reading; they find it a frustrating experi- ence and avoid it as much as possible (Rasinski, 2000). Because they do not read exten- sively, they do not develop a good sight vocabulary. In turn, lack of sight vocabulary makes reading more difficult, and a vicious cycle develops (Stanovich, 1986).

At this point, we feel it necessary to issue some important caveats. Good read- ers are not always fluent. Consider your level of fluency when reading a chapter in a statistics textbook, a mortgage agreement, or the terms of an insurance policy. Even though you can effectively decode new words and have an extensive sight vocabulary, the difficult concepts and unfamiliar text structure seriously limit your fluency. When faced with concept-dense text on unfamiliar topics, we all lack fluency. However, as we read and reread the text, develop our understanding of key concepts, and become familiar with the structure and content, we begin to demonstrate greater fluency and a higher level of comprehension. Unfortunately, all too many students do not see the value of rereading.

We will probably never be as fluent when reading a textbook chapter as we are when reading the review of a new movie or the account of a football game. It is im- portant to realize that there are many levels of fluency and that, in a sense, fluency represents a reader’s comfort with the vocabulary, structure, and concepts of the text. You may find that your struggling readers improve their fluency when reading stories but are still relatively nonfluent when reading a classroom textbook.

This leads to another caveat. As educators began to realize the importance of fluency, they incorporated it in their classrooms. In many cases, this took the form

Improving Word Knowledge: Fluency 203

of 1-minute fluency drills and practice sessions that were seldom connected to com- prehension. The focus was on reading accurately and quickly in order to attain a reading rate appropriate for the student’s grade level using published oral reading fluency norms such as those compiled by Hasbrouck and Tindal (2006). Unfortu- nately, although very well intended, this may have led to an unplanned consequence. Students learned that good reading is fast reading, not necessarily reading that leads to comprehension (Johns, 2007). Although reading rates have increased from 2005 to 2009, overall reading performance has not (Rasinski & Hamman, 2010). Marcell (2007) suggests that the instructional focus on speed and accuracy “has usurped pros- ody and comprehension” (p. 243). Fluency practice has its place, but never to the exclusion of comprehension. If students practice rereading text in order to develop fluency, the lesson is not complete unless the students talk about the text and demon- strate that in addition to achieving improved fluency, they have also comprehended what was read.

Fluency and the Common Core Standards

Fluency is, in some ways, a proxy for sight vocabulary and decoding; that is, a fluent reader at any grade level is demonstrating that he or she has a large store of words that are recognized immediately without sounding out. Fluency also suggests that unknown words are decoded swiftly without laborious letter-by-letter analysis. To a lesser degree, fluency is also a proxy for comprehension. A reader who is expressive and who pays attention to punctuation signals is demonstrating text comprehension. If you do not understand what you are reading, phrase boundaries, for example, will mean little.

What does this have to do with mastery of the Common Core State Initiative Standards (2011)? Like word recognition, fluency is implicit in the Common Core standards. Although fluency is not explicitly mentioned in the standards, one can assume that a reader would need to be relatively fluent in order to demonstrate profi- ciency, as described by the standards. Such fluency will probably be the result of one or more rereadings in order to determine text structure, analyze text, identify central ideas, and determine different points of view. It is difficult to believe that a slow, inac- curate, unexpressive reader will have much success in meeting any one of the standards at his or her grade level. So, in paying attention to a student’s fluency development, one is also addressing the Common Core standards.

Assessing Fluency

Ways to assess fluency include listening to students read orally, determining reading rate, and presenting timed administration of word lists. All three can be part of the administration of an informal reading inventory (IRI). However, the teacher can use these assessment procedures with any text or word list.

204 C H A P T E R 9

Listening to Students Read Orally A teacher can determine whether students are fluent readers simply by listening to their oral reading. Three common problems with fluency are as follows:

◆ Students stumble over individual words, trying out different possible pronuncia- tions. They repeat words. They pause. Their performance is choppy and marked by uncertainty and hesitation.

◆ Students read the text as if it were a list of disconnected words. There is little expression or variation in the rise and fall of their voices. They do not change their voices to indicate a period, an exclamation mark, or a question. They do not insert expression into segments of dialogue.

◆ Students race through the text as if the entire purpose of reading is to complete it. They ignore sentence breaks, and their focus on speed causes them to make errors even on familiar words.

Many students with reading problems have a combination of these problems, because fluent reading demands that accuracy, automaticity, and expression work together.

To judge a student’s fluency, simply listen to him or her read a text at an in- structional or independent level. Using your own common sense and your knowledge and appreciation of what fluent reading sounds like, you can determine whether the reading is fluent. You may want to compare audiotapes of a student’s reading made at different times to assess improvement.

Determining Reading Rate Reading rate can be measured in two ways. The most common method is to determine the number of words read per minute (WPM). A second way is to determine the num- ber of correct words read per minute (CWPM).

Words per Minute (WPM). Have the student read a selection at his or her instruc- tional or independent level. Using the instructional or independent reading level is important because we are all less fluent in frustration-level text, in text on an unfamil- iar topic, or in text written in an unfamiliar structure. As the student reads orally or silently, time the reading and then calculate WPM. Multiply the number of words in the passage by 60 and then divide by the number of seconds it took to read the passage (see Chapter 5).

Correct Words per Minute (CWPM). Determining the number of CWPM is simi- lar to determining words per minute, but in this case, you count only the number of words that were read correctly. Count as errors all mispronunciations, substitutions, additions, and omissions. What about errors that do not change meaning? You may choose not to count these (see Chapter 5); it is your decision. What about errors that are self-corrected? Again, you decide whether to count these. Just be consistent.

Improving Word Knowledge: Fluency 205

Take the number of words in the passage and subtract the number of errors. Then multiply this by 60. Finally, divide by the number of seconds it took the child to read the selection.

To contrast WPM and CWPM, let’s take an example of a child who read a 346- word passage with 24 errors. The child took 3 minutes and 45 seconds to read the passage.

WPM: 346 words * 60 = 20,760 235 seconds = 92 WPM

CWPM: 346 words - 24 errors * 60 + 19320 225 seconds = 86 CWPM

Which method should you use? Both have their place. Proponents of CWPM feel that it allows you to “index both accuracy and speed” (Kame’enui & Simmons, 2001, p. 205). However, if you determine WPM in instructional- or independent-level text, you are also allowing for the interaction of accuracy and speed.

A student’s reading rate must be interpreted with some caution. Normal readers show a wide range of acceptable reading rates, even at the same grade level. Reading rate also varies across different selections. Most people, for example, read movie re- views faster than they read editorials. Because of this variability, do not compare the rates of individual students with one another. Table 5.2 on page 105 offers some general guidelines or ranges for students reading passages at different levels. Published norms can also be used for comparison (Hasbrouck & Tindal, 2006). However, remember that these levels and/or norms are not absolute levels that every student should attain. Carver (1990) suggests that although reading rate is affected by a variety of factors such as reader purpose, text difficulty, and concept familiarity, it may also be deter- mined by individual processing speeds. That is, some individuals may have limits as to how quickly they can process text.

However, consider a word of caution regarding fluency assessment: It is often used as a proxy for comprehension or overall reading proficiency (Caldwell, 2008). A proxy is a form of substitute or stand-in for the real thing. Because fluency scores are highly correlated with comprehension scores on formal standardized measures and because it is much easier and faster to measure fluency than comprehension, educators often accept a fluency measure as indicative of adequate or inadequate comprehen- sion. Almost all early literacy assessments include fluency as an important component (Meisels & Piker, 2001; Southwest Educational Development Laboratory, 2006). Fluency as a comprehension proxy is also part of a process called curriculum-based mea- surement, where students orally read grade-level texts and their fluency rates are used to indicate reading proficiency (Davidson & Myhre, 2000; Fuchs, Fuchs, Hosp, & Jenkins, 2001; Good, Simmons, & Kame’enui, 2001; Hasbrouk & Tindal, 2006).

Experts acknowledge the importance of fluency, but fluency assessment should never completely substitute for assessment of a student’s comprehension—nor should teachers focus on fluency instruction and naively assume that if fluency increases, com- prehension will do so as well. It may or it may not. If teachers emphasize fluency

206 C H A P T E R 9

development to the detriment of comprehension instruction, teachers “may deny stu- dents what they most need, instruction in strategies for comprehension” (Caldwell, 2008, p. 152).

Timed Administration of Word Lists Although the previous two strategies enable teachers to judge contextual fluency, the timed administration of word lists is used to judge automatic sight word recognition. Compare (1) automatic (or timed) recognition of isolated words with (2) total (or timed plus untimed) recognition of isolated words (both automatic words and those recognized after analysis).

To judge automaticity, give the student a list of words to recognize (such as in an IRI). Using an IRI word list allows you to evaluate fluency at different levels, preprimer through middle school or high school. As  the  student reads, record per- formance on a teacher’s copy. For each word in the list, three responses are possible: (1) recognized automatically, (2) recognized after hesitation, and (3) not recognized. A word pronounced correctly within 1 second is marked as an automatic word. (To judge 1 second, say to yourself “one thousand and one.” If the student pronounces the word before you are finished, count the word as automatic.) A word recognized correctly, but not automatically, is an analysis word. A word recognized incorrectly tells you little about fluency.

To compare a student’s instantaneous word recognition, compare automatic words and total words known (automatic words plus analysis words). If a student’s total number of words is much larger than the automatic words, the student needs to practice instant recognition of sight words.

Timed administration of word lists can be helpful for assessing sight words; how- ever, remember that reading words in lists is not real reading. In real life, we do not curl up with a good list of words! For this reason, your assessment of a student’s per- formance should combine word-list performance with the reading of selections.

General Guidelines for Fluency Development

A variety of guidelines for developing fluency can apply to the regular classroom as well as to intervention settings. By paying attention to these guidelines, the teacher or intervention specialist can provide a comfortable setting that fosters fluency. Many of the following guidelines were clearly present in the case study instruction described at the end of this chapter.

Provide Models of Fluent Reading We all know how effective good models can be in helping us to perform a new skill or improve an old one. Modeling is just as important to fluency development. Unfortu- nately, many classrooms deny struggling readers the opportunity to listen to models of fluent reading by grouping students according to their reading levels. Although the

Improving Word Knowledge: Fluency 207

intention of this practice is to provide instruction that matches the levels of the stu- dents, it often leads to an unfortunate outcome. Struggling readers are grouped with other struggling readers, and during oral reading, they listen to their nonfluent peers. It is important that the intervention setting provides many opportunities for students to hear and produce fluent reading. Activities that are explained in this chapter offer varied ways to include modeling as part of the intervention setting.

Link Fluency Instruction to Meaning The purpose of reading is to comprehend what we read. This means that fluency instruction should always be linked to meaning. Isolated drills to develop fluency can actually be harmful. As we discussed earlier, they may reinforce the belief of many struggling readers that good reading is saying words accurately and quickly. If students are reading text using some of the strategies that are explained in this chapter, there should still be a focus on meaning. Students should talk about what they are reading and connect the text to their own lives. If they are practicing reading single words, they should still talk about the meaning of the words and connect meaning to their own experiences.

Encourage Wide Reading Fluency develops through practice, and the best practice is wide reading of text that the student finds both manageable and enjoyable. Unfortunately, the short time frame of many intervention sessions does not allow for much independent reading on the part of the students. You can encourage your struggling readers to read on their own and provide a wide assortment of books for them to read during independent reading time or take home to enjoy. However, there is no assurance that they will do so. Strug- gling readers do not enjoy reading, and who can blame them? To what extent do you enjoy engaging in activities that are difficult and often end in failure? One way to en- tice struggling readers is to allow them to borrow the books that you have introduced and practiced in the intervention setting. And, of course, it is important to employ materials during instruction that appeal to their interests.

Avoid Unpracticed Oral Reading Unfortunately, students are often asked to orally read a selection for the first time cold, that is, without practice, and in the presence of their peers. The only time a student should be asked to orally read without support or practice is during an indi- vidual assessment procedure such as administration of an informal reading inventory. Have you ever been asked to read orally in front of a group, perhaps at a wedding or a funeral? We are sure that you carefully practiced reading the text until you were satisfied with your performance. And, in spite of your practice, you probably were still quite nervous when you stood up in front of your peers. Struggling readers feel the same way. We are always amazed how many of our students recall painful grade school experiences reading in front of a group, mispronouncing words and often

208 C H A P T E R 9

being ridiculed for it. The old, and hopefully defunct, practice of round-robin oral reading placed many struggling readers in the position of having their mistakes, con- fusion, and overall lack of fluency clearly apparent to their peers. This can be avoided by allowing struggling readers, and all readers for that matter, opportunity to prac- tice a selection before reading it in front of others. Many of the strategies explained in this chapter will provide the teacher with viable alternatives to unpracticed oral reading.

Strategies for Developing Fluency in Context

This section describes strategies for improving the ability to read passages fluently while still paying attention to meaning. Many of these strategies can be combined, such as using the strategy of performance reading with easy text. Some can be imple- mented with a large group; others are restricted to an individual or a small-group set- ting. The case study instruction described at the end of this chapter incorporated many of the following strategies.

Promoting Wide Reading of Easy Text A large amount of reading is critical to developing fluent reading. As students read to enjoy a story or acquire interesting information, they are unconsciously improving their reading fluency.

Getting struggling readers to read is a major challenge for their teachers. To get them to read, teachers must make reading enjoyable, provide regular and daily op- portunities to read, and encourage reading at home. To build fluency, students need to read easy books filled with words they can recognize. Teachers should schedule time for reading. Begin by setting aside periods of about 10 minutes, because many strug- gling readers have difficulty concentrating during long sessions. Then these periods can be gradually increased to 20 or 25 minutes.

Struggling readers often have trouble choosing a book that will foster accurate and fluent word recognition. They often select material that is too hard, or they flit from book to book without really reading any of them. To foster better choices, you can read easy books to students and then prominently display the books in your class- room. Students often choose these books to read on their own. You can also give the student several books and ask that he or she choose from among them. Basically, in order to develop fluency, you want struggling readers to read at their independent level. At this level, they meet few unfamiliar words, and the repetition of words they already recognize fosters fluency.

Using Patterned Books Patterned books, which contain refrains that are repeated over and over, are an excel- lent source of easy books. These books foster word recognition because their repeated refrains provide extensive support for word recognition. Read pattern books to your

Improving Word Knowledge: Fluency 209

children, modeling fluent reading and perhaps inviting them to join in the refrains. After reading a book once, invite students to join you in rereading it. Experiences with joint readings foster confidence and fluency. Then individual students may reread the book with the teacher’s help at troublesome points.

We must offer a word of caution concerning patterned books. Many children easily memorize the text. When they “read,” they may turn pages at appropriate places and seem to look at the page, but they are actually reciting from memory. To foster real reading, periodically ask students to read text-only copies of patterned books so they focus more directly on words. You can also print the words from patterned books on word cards and use them to assess if students can recognize the words.

In addition to their use with primary- and lower-intermediate-grade students, patterned books also appeal to older students who read at primary levels. To help these students, encourage them to read these books to younger children.

Assisted Oral Reading Oral reading practice is an effective way to promote fluency (Caldwell & Leslie, 2013; Johns & Bergland, 2002; Kuhn, 2007; Rasinski, 2003; Reutzel & Morrow, 2007; Stahl, 2004), and it can take many forms. In assisted oral reading, a student or group of stu- dents and a fluent reader (usually the teacher) read material together.

Assisted reading is an excellent way to develop fluency for many reasons:

1. The teacher’s support makes reading a nonthreatening activity. 2. Because word recognition efforts are supported by a fluent reader, students can

pay attention to meaning and enjoy the selection. 3. Assisted reading gives a model of fluent reading. Students are exposed to the way

that reading should sound and have a model to work toward. 4. Assisted reading provides practice reading in context. It also motivates students

to read more, because after joint readings, students often choose to read the same books independently.

Because the eventual goal of assisted reading is to promote independent reading, the teacher must gradually provide less and less support. In the beginning, teachers may simply read to the students and invite them to participate and say words when they feel comfortable—or the teacher may begin by reading an entire selection together with the students. Gradually, however, the teacher’s role should be reduced so that students learn that they can read a new book on their own. There are several forms of assisted oral reading. Paige (2011) used whole-class choral reading as a form of assisted reading. The students read content texts prior to their introduction in the regular classroom, thus providing familiarity with vocabulary, text content, and text structure. Strategy Snapshot 9.1 demonstrates the use of assisted oral reading.

Simultaneous Assisted Reading. In this assisted-reading strategy, the teacher sim- ply reads along with the students. The teacher sets the pace and resists the temptation to slow down to the reading rate of the student, who will always lag slightly behind. When a student meets an unfamiliar word, the teacher pronounces it, and they move on.

210 C H A P T E R 9

Strategy Snapshot 9.1 Assisted Oral Reading

Ms. Bround worked with a small group of fifth-grade struggling readers. Her purpose was to prepare them for the science lesson they would experience in their regular classroom. She used their classroom textbook and focused on a four-page segment on fishes that the students’ teacher had indicated would be covered the following day. All the students brought their sci- ence books to the reading resource room.

Ms. Bround began by initiating a short discussion about fishes to see what the students already knew. She then read the introduction while the students followed along. She pointed out text information about fishes that students already knew: They live in the water; there are many kinds; they have different sizes, shapes, and colors. She then asked the students to read several sentences together with her (simultaneous assisted reading), and they clarified terms such as adapted, fin, and streamlined.

The next section was much longer and contained many unfamiliar terms, such as ectotherm, vertebrate, chordate, and parasite. Ms. Bround read it to the students while they followed along. Then they took each sentence in turn and orally reread it. For some sentences, Ms. Bround em- ployed assisted oral reading. For others, she asked the students to echo read. Occasionally, they read as an entire group. After each sentence, Ms. Bround modeled good-reader strategies such as recognizing unknown words, raising questions, and identifying new information. She involved the students in an active discussion about what they were learning and what still confused them and, whenever possible, modeled use of context and the glossary as aids for determining the meaning of unknown words. New vocabulary words were written on chart paper. Buoyed by the model of a teacher who admitted she also had questions and did not always understand all the vocabulary in the text, students willingly shared their questions and confusions.

After taking each sentence in turn, the group then reread the entire segment orally using assisted oral reading. They also reread the list of new vocabulary. Ms. Bround repeated the process with the next three chapter segments. She added partner reading to the list of oral reading options for the single sentences. If students volunteered to read independently (and they often did), Ms. Bround allowed this and helped with gentle prompting should difficulties occur. After moving through the text sentence by sentence, the students then reread the entire segment, sometimes with Ms. Bround and sometimes without her as a group or as partners.

The focus of the process was comprehension. Reading to the students and various forms of assisted oral reading allowed them to function successfully in a text that they could not handle independently. It also prepared them to participate fully in their classroom discus- sions and activities.

Ms. Bround kept in close contact with the teachers and built her resource room les- sons around the content texts that the students were expected to read in the classroom. This increased her students’ motivation, as they soon realized that they could keep up with their classmates and participate in class activities with greater confidence.

If a group is reading with the teacher, few involved in the activity will even notice that one student did not know a word. At times, you will notice a drop in volume at a certain word. You can then mark this word as a possible problem and teach it after the reading is finished.

Improving Word Knowledge: Fluency 211

Simultaneous reading can be changed to meet the needs and levels of your stu- dents. Sometimes the teacher may fade out at key words and phrases to assess whether students can identify them independently. At other times, the teacher may have several students read a page together without teacher assistance. Simultaneous assisted reading is most effective when combined with repeated reading of the same book or story. To foster independence, the teacher participates less and less in each subsequent reading.

Echo Reading. Modeling oral reading and asking the students to imitate you is an- other form of assisted reading. The teacher reads a few lines or a page of text to the students to model a fluent pace and effective voice expression. The students imitate the teacher’s performance, or echo the text. Echo reading works best for short segments of text and is particularly well suited for beginning readers.

Partner Reading. In partner reading, students read in pairs, usually by alternating pages. This provides extensive reading practice for both students. Partner reading can be an effective way to help students with reading problems develop fluency (Stahl & Heubach, 2005). However, because you want the students to experience success, you should have them read the material alone a few times before they read as partners. This practice avoids the danger of encountering too many unknown words or becom- ing frustrated. Often, other forms of assisted reading are used with a passage before students are asked to read with partners.

Teachers may organize students as reading partners in different ways. Sometimes students enjoy choosing their friends as reading partners. At other times, the teacher can pair students. Low-achieving readers of similar ability work well as partners if pre- liminary support has been provided. Pairing two children with reading problems helps each to realize that he or she is not the only one who has problems with words. Student self-esteem increases through the act of helping others. For example, Danny and Peter became fast friends as a result of consistent partner reading. At one point, Danny con- fided, “Peter didn’t know a word, and I helped him. He helps me, too. When we read together, we are pretty good readers!”

Paired Reading. Paired reading involves teaming a struggling reader with a more capable one. Originally developed by Topping (1987, 1989) as a strategy for parents and their children to read together, it can be used in a variety of other ways. The capable reader can be a parent, a tutor, an aide, or even an older student.

The student selects the material to be read, ideally at his or her instructional level. The student and tutor begin reading together, maintaining a reasonable pace. If the student mispronounces a word, the tutor says it correctly and asks the student to repeat it. When the student chooses to read independently, he or she signals the tutor using a prearranged signal such as a tap or nudge. The tutor stops reading at this point, and the student continues. If the student meets an unfamiliar word, the tutor waits ap- proximately 5 seconds. If the student cannot pronounce the word, the tutor supplies it, and the pair resumes reading together. The paired reading continues until the student signals a desire to once again read on his or her own. Topping recommends sessions of 15 to 30 minutes in length.

212 C H A P T E R 9

Neurological Impress Method (NIM). This read-along strategy (Heckelman, 1969), often abbreviated NIM, involves the teacher and one student reading together. Accord- ing to Heckelman, students learn by emulating a fluent reading model. The NIM tech- nique is particularly effective with adolescents who have reading disabilities. In NIM, the student and teacher read together orally. Begin by reading material at the student’s independent level or material that has been read before. Tell your student not to be concerned about reading accuracy but to try to read fluently, without looking back.

At first, the teacher reads slightly louder and faster. As the student gains fluency and confidence, the teacher begins to read more softly and may even start to lag slightly behind the student. However, if the student encounters difficulty, the teacher should rescue the student in a firm manner. When beginning this procedure, teachers should follow the text with their fingers at the pace of the reading. As the student gains con- fidence, he or she can assume the responsibility for pointing to the words. The NIM strategy is a key component of the Reading Acceleration Program (RAP), a K–8 school- wide intervention aimed at low-income English language learners (Feazell, 2004).

Structured Repeated Reading All of the preceding activities involve some form of assisted repeated reading. However, the term repeated reading generally refers to a more structured format. An individual student rereads a short selection until a certain level of word identification accuracy and fluency is attained (Samuels, 1979). As students read the same selection a number of times, they become more accurate, their reading speed increases, and their reading becomes more expressive (Johns & Berglund, 2002).

To begin repeated readings, give the student a passage of 50 to 200 words written at his or her independent or instructional level. Have the student read the selection orally. As your student reads, record the reading speed and any deviations from the text. Next, discuss any word recognition miscues with your student. Then, over a few sessions, have the student practice the selection until he or she feels capable of reading it fluently. Then have the student read the selection orally again as you record time and accuracy. The process is repeated until a certain accuracy or rate score is reached. At this point, the student moves to another reading selection.

The repeated readings strategy can be readily adapted to different student needs. To provide more extensive assistance, a teacher can read with the student until he or she feels confident enough to read alone—or students can be asked to listen to their own tapes to see if they chunked words into meaningful groups and read with expression.

In choosing material for repeated readings, remember that you need something that will hold a student’s interest over several rereadings. If a student is passionately interested in snakes, a selection about reptiles is a good choice. Other selections might include those featuring humor, lots of action, or sports. You can also use readings from the student’s content-area textbooks or novels because, in addition to improving word recognition, rereading helps the student to learn the material. Repeated reading of con- tent text was a key component of the very successful third-grade intervention described in Chapter 6 (McCormack & Paratore, 1999; McCormack, Paratore, & Dahlene, 2004).

Improving Word Knowledge: Fluency 213

The transfer of fluency to other text depends to an extent on word overlap between the practiced material and the new selection. One way to ensure overlap is to have students read texts on the same theme or content (Hudson, 2011). Many content texts are divided into thematic units focusing on the same topic, such as fossils, cells, ancient Greece, or westward expansion. Three or four relatively short chapters make up each unit. Given the similarity of the overall topic, knowledge from repeated reading of the first segment can transfer to the others because many words are repeated in all segments of the unit.

Performance Reading Students can develop fluency through practice associated with preparing for a perfor- mance. The following forms of performance reading provide motivating and effective activities for fostering fluency.

Choral Reading. In choral reading, a group of students practices orally reading a selection together so they can perform it. The students read the entire selection to- gether, or different groups read different parts. Because students find choral reading enjoyable, they willingly practice the word recognition that helps them to give a pol- ished performance. Low-achieving readers enjoy this activity because it gives them the satisfaction of delivering a well-rehearsed, expressive rendition. Choral reading is particularly suited to selections, such as poetry, that contain rhythm and rhyme.

Reader’s Theatre. Reader’s Theatre involves reading (not memorizing) a script and performing it without scenery, makeup, costumes, or props. It does not involve facial expressions, body movements, or specific acting techniques. The focus is on effective reading. Students read chorally or independently, and they practice their parts until they are ready to perform. Thus, they are engaging in repeated reading and are very moti- vated to do so because of the performance aspect. Worthy and Prater (2002) describe Reader’s Theatre as an “intensely meaningful, purposeful vehicle for repeated reading” (p. 295) and offer guidelines for choosing text and preparing for the performance.

Roser and colleagues (2004) and Rea and Mercuri (2006) recommend Reader’s Theatre as a way of fostering the language development of English language learners. However, English language learners should not rehearse lines that have no mean- ing for them; the teacher should carefully assign roles based upon each student’s cur- rent facility with spoken English. Roser et al. (2004) divided the class into five theatre groups. Each day included the introduction of a new text, revisiting an old one, and a performance by one of the groups.

Young and Rasinski (2009) described Reader’s Theater as a regular part of a second-grade literacy program. Students received their scripts on Monday. They prac- ticed Tuesday through Thursday individually, in small groups, and at home. The final performance was on Friday and involved the entire school.

Admittedly, Reader’s Theater seems better suited to the regular classroom than to an intervention setting because of the time involved. However, because it is so motivat- ing to students and so effective in increasing fluency, short scripts could be practiced over a series of lessons. The final performance could be recorded for students to take home.

214 C H A P T E R 9

Radio Reading. This activity is much like Reader’s Theatre but students read text as opposed to memorizing it (Johns & Berglund, 2002). A student plays the part of a radio announcer and reads a short text to an audience of peers. Only the reader and the teacher have copies of the text; the audience plays the part of active listeners. Text for radio reading is usually factual and does not necessarily involve dramatization. However, the reader must use suitable rate and expression to effectively communicate the message. Accounts of sports or news events provide motivating choices for radio reading (Caldwell & Leslie, 2013).

Making Oral and Silent Reading Effective To develop contextual fluency, readers need to have effective and enjoyable oral and silent reading experiences. This section discusses common problems and suggests guidelines for fostering oral and silent reading in the classroom or intrvention setting.

Difficulty Reading Silently. Because silent reading allows students to process and think independently, it should be used as much as possible with struggling readers. Despite this guideline, some students with reading problems often prefer to read orally. Students with reading problems tend to avoid silent reading for three reasons:

1. Beginning readers link reading with oral language and thus are most comfort- able when they can hear what they read. Although teachers must respect the feelings of these beginning readers, they should gently and gradually move students toward silent reading.

2. Many teachers are more comfortable with oral reading because it allows them to monitor students’ word recognition skills. Although some monitoring is valuable, developing independent silent readers is even more valuable.

3. Many poor readers feel that the purpose of reading is to recognize all of the words for a teacher. For these students, reading is a performance rather than an op- portunity to learn information or enjoy a story. These students must be convinced that silent reading is an important adult activity.

Students should be given direct motivation for reading silently. Stress the in- formation or enjoyment that students will gain. If teachers follow silent reading with discussions that focus on the student’s personal reactions to the text, students will start to see silent reading as meaningful.

Teachers often ask what to do when students point to words or move their lips as they read silently. Sometimes finger pointing and lip moving can act as an aid that makes halting readers more comfortable. In fact, these actions are normal for primary- grade-level readers. In addition, if the reading material is difficult, individuals of any reading level may revert to using their fingers or lips. However, because finger point- ing and lip moving are often signs of frustration, check to make sure that the material your students are reading is not too difficult for them.

If you feel that students need to point or move their lips to feel comfortable, even with easy materials, then do not interfere with these habits. As students become

Improving Word Knowledge: Fluency 215

more fluent readers, these actions usually disappear. However, discourage students from moving their lips or pointing to the words if you sense they are just doing so from force of habit. First, and most effective, the student should be made aware of these habits; told how they slow readers down; and asked, respectfully, to eliminate them. This simple procedure, plus an occasional reminder, often solves the problem. Finger pointing can also be eliminated by providing a marker to replace a finger and gradually eliminating the use of the marker. For lip moving, students may be asked to consciously close their lips while reading.

Making Oral Reading Comfortable. Although silent reading is the preferred mode of reading, oral reading can be an effective way for students to gain reading ex- perience and for the teacher to see how students are dealing with material. However, as mentioned previously, because of past experinces when reading in front of their peers, students often see oral reading as a negative, performance-oriented experience.

Individual oral reading can be made into a more positive, meaning-focused ex- perience in several ways. Students can practice a selection before being asked to read it in front of their peers. The only reason for reading orally to someone without practice is an assessment session that involves only two people: the student and a supportive teacher.

The amount of oral reading should be limited. It is helpful if oral reading serves only a specific purpose, such as finding information, proving a point, or reading a favorite part.

Teachers should remember not to treat oral reading time as a chance to teach phonics. When a student attempts to pronounce an unknown word (and poor read- ers meet many unfamiliar words), try not to interrupt the reading by saying, “Sound it out.” The student’s repeated attempts to decode the word make him or her, and everyone else reading, lose the meaning of the story. Furthermore, the experience is humiliating.

What should a teacher do if a student doesn’t know a word? If readers pause or stumble on an important word, the teacher should simply tell them the word and move on, at the same time marking the unknown word for later teaching.

Not all mistakes are worth correcting. If a reading mistake involves only a small function word (such as it or the) that does not greatly affect meaning, it should simply be ignored.

At times, if a student struggles with a word, a peer will laugh or simply call out the correct term. These unkind responses are all too common for low-achieving read- ers. In fact, poor readers tend to laugh at the errors of other poor readers. You can prevent this situation by taking a few simple precautions:

1. Never ask children to read alone in front of their peers without practicing first or without providing some support.

2. Teach students to signal when they meet an unfamiliar word. They can tap the book or raise a finger (rather than looking up).

3. Stress that group members must always be respectful of one another.

By using these guidelines, teachers emphasize that reading is an enjoyable and mean- ingful experience. This understanding is crucial for struggling students.

216 C H A P T E R 9

Strategies for Developing Sight Words in Isolation

A sight word is a word recognized instantly, without analysis. How do words become sight words? Each time a reader sees the word dog and correctly identifies it, the next recogni- tion of dog becomes a little easier and faster. Think of something you learned to do, such as knitting or driving. The early stages were difficult, time consuming, and often frustrating. As you practiced, the action became easier and easier, and eventually you could do it almost automatically, even while thinking about other things. Similarly, each time you accurately identify a word, it becomes easier and easier, and eventually the word becomes a sight word.

Students with reading problems can best learn to recognize words by reading them in context. However, they may also need additional practice with words in isola- tion to reinforce automaticity and give them a sense of progress. Practicing individual words is useful for readers at many different levels. A core of sight words enables beginning readers to read easy books and serves as a basis for learning phonics. Re- inforcement of sight vocabulary also enables more advanced students to identify the difficult words in their classroom textbooks.

This section first discusses which words should receive additional practice in isolation. Then we suggest some guidelines and strategies for teaching these words.

Choosing Words for Instructional Focus Lists of frequently used words can help the teacher select words for instructional focus; however, choosing words from a list can be problematic. Although many lists of high- frequency words are available, there is no assurance that the words you choose are words that the student will see in the selections he or she is presently reading. Some obviously will (for example the, to, was), but others might not (such as during, between, always, and another). Why is this important? A focus on high-frequency words in isolation is most effective if the student immediately encounters those words in his or her reading. Also, working with words in isolation can unfortunately reinforce the notion that reading is saying words. For this reason we encourage you to choose words for sight vocabulary practice from the selections the students are reading or will read in the very near future. That way you have double reinforcement and, after word practice, you can point to the word in the selection and show how it fits into the meaning of a phrase or a sentence.

We tend to recognize words more quickly if we know their meaning (Stahl & Hiebert, 2005). Providing definitions for many high-frequency words is a bit problem- atic. For example, how can you define some of the most frequent words in our language, such as at, but, and for? Their meaning only becomes clear through seeing them in a sen- tence context. Many high-frequency words are articles, prepositions, and pronouns, often called function words. They have little meaning on their own and take on meaning only by acting as connectors for other words. They are difficult to learn for several reasons:

1. They have abstract meanings. 2. They tend to look alike. Words such as then, than, when, what, where, and were are

easily confused. 3. They tend to have irregular sound–spelling relationships.

Improving Word Knowledge: Fluency 217

Because recognition of function words may be particularly troublesome for poor readers, such words deserve special attention. That special attention can involve ac- tivities such as word cards, word sorts, and flash cards. However, isolated drill should always be reinforced by reading the words in context.

Guidelines for Teaching Sight Words Learning sight words often takes the form of extended practice with individual words. However, reading involves recognition of words in sentences and paragraphs. The teacher must make certain that the student extends practice with single words to words in text. Several guidelines can foster this.

Associate Sight Words with Meaning. This association is particularly critical for function words. When readers are simply given word cards and expected to memorize them, learning becomes a rote task that is meaningless. To make this learning more meaningful, have your students write phrases for words on their word cards. For ex- ample, they might remember in by thinking of the phrase in the garbage. Pictures can be cut out, labeled, and placed around the room to illustrate other function words: a can of Coke; a fish in water; a cat on the fence. The students can then be guided to think of, for example, the contents of other cans, what else can be in water, or what could be on a fence.

Practice Sight Words Frequently. As already emphasized, words are recognized automatically only after repeated exposures. Practice should include activities both with single words and with reading connected text. Frequent writing, reading, word games, and other word-centered activities all provide practice that develops sight word recognition. Poor readers need daily opportunities to read, write, and play with words.

Keep Records of Progress. Students with reading problems are motivated by their improvement. Students can keep records or journals of words they have learned. They can form word banks that include words they have mastered. A simple bank can be constructed from a shoe box with dividers for each letter of the alphabet. Words in the bank can be placed behind the appropriate divider. Teachers can demonstrate progress by sorting word cards into three piles: sight words, words I am learning, and words I do not know. Student enjoy watching the last two piles become smaller and finally disappear.

Strategies for Focusing on Words Several strategies provide motivating and important practice in recognizing words. These strategies include word cards, collecting words, word sorts, and word walls.

Word Cards. Word cards provide one way to practice sight words. Either the teach- er or the student can construct the cards. Word recognition clues, such as a sentence containing the word or a picture illustrating the word, can be placed on the back of

218 C H A P T E R 9

the card. Placing words on cards is motivating for students. As the number of word cards increases, students have a concrete reminder of how many words they are learning.

Use word cards in a variety of ways. Many students enjoy forming sentences from the cards. They can also select the word card that correctly fits a missing word in a sentence. Students can collect personal cards to practice at home with a parent or friend.

Collecting words that follow a certain pattern is another way to practice sight vocabulary. The words can emphasize the spelling of the word, its pronunciation, or its meaning. Students can collect words that contain the same letter pattern, such as cat, sat, bat, and so on. They can collect words about a favorite topic, such as football, snakes, or science fiction.

Word Sorts. In word sorting, students are presented with several words to sort according to different categories. The words are on cards, and the student is asked to sort the words into piles and to give reasons for placing each word in a certain pile.

The words used for word sorts can come from many sources: words collected by the students, words the students have found difficult, words from textbooks, or spell- ing words. Words can be sorted according to sound or spelling patterns (Bear, 1994; Bear, Invernizzi, Templeton, & Johnston, 2008), according to the presence of prefixes or suffixes, or according to meaning. Word sorts are enjoyable and give students with reading problems a sense of control over their language. They also offer valuable ex- perience with letter patterns, sounds, and meanings.

Word sorts are of two different types. In a closed sort, the teacher tells the stu- dent how to sort the words. For example, you might tell students to sort the words tree, run, sit, and table by parts of speech (nouns and verbs). Closed sorts are often used to practice phonics, because teachers have patterns in mind that they want the students to notice. For example, they might ask students to sort words into long a and short a piles. In a second type of sort, an open sort, students are free to choose their own categories for sorting. Thus, they might choose long words and short words, happy words and sad words, or a phonics pattern. After sorting in one way, students may often want to repeat the sort using other categories. Strategy Snapshot 9.2 describes how a second- grade teacher used the same words for two different kinds of word sorts.

Sorting words provides many opportunities for students to look at a word and pronounce it accurately. Because low-achieving readers find this game-like activity both enjoyable and motivating, word sorts can help to increase a student’s fund of sight words.

Word Walls. A word wall is an effective device for displaying high-frequency words and making them easily accessible to the students (Cunningham, 2005; Cunningham & Allington, 2007). A word wall can be placed on a bulletin board or a classroom wall. It is divided into sections for each letter of the alphabet (a, b, c, . . .). As words are selected for special emphasis, they are placed on the word wall according to their initial letter. These words may be suggested by the teacher or by students. Sometimes they are dis- played with a picture or sentence clue; sometimes they are displayed alone. Five or so new words are added each week, and sometimes, when a space becomes full, they are

Improving Word Knowledge: Fluency 219

taken down. To ensure that you can change words, either put them on cards or lami- nate each section for individual letters (the a section, the b section) and use erasable magic marker to write the words.

Students can find, write, spell, and say words from the word wall. The teacher can devise riddles and games using the words. Students or the teacher can compose sentences from words found on the wall. If teachers dictate a sentence, students can then find the missing word. Students can also find all the words on the wall that, for example, have seven letters, are verbs, or contain an r-controlled vowel. In the “I’m thinking of” game, one student gives hints about a particular word on the wall, and the others try to guess it. For example, a student thinking of the word beautiful might give the hints that it is an adjective meaning “very pretty.”

An important use of word walls is that they serve as resources for students who have difficulty spelling words. Instead of asking a teacher or struggling for themselves, they simply find the word on the wall. This process also reinforces the learning of alphabetical order. Word walls are an easy way to remind students of important words.

Word Recognition Fluency and Response- to-Intervention (RTI)

Initial efforts to implement RTI have focused on the lower grades and, as a result, have centered on the development of word recognition and fluency. Fluency has played an important part in early RTI programs involving both assessment and instruction.

Strategy Snapshot 9.2 Sorting Words

To start a word sort, Ms. Lessiter gave a group of low-achieving second graders cards contain- ing the words sat, mitt, rat, tin, pin, fan, and fin. This sort was an open one, and the children chose to sort words by spelling patterns. They first placed the words into four piles: (1) mitt, (2) tin, pin, fin, (3) fan, and (4) sat, rat. This sort put the words into the word families it, in, an, at. Ms. Lessiter then asked the students to sort into only two piles. The children sorted on the basis of a single vowel: Group 1 had words with an i (mitt, tin, pin, fin), and Group 2 had words with an a (fan, sat, rat).

Ms. Lessiter then asked the children to sort the words by using the meaning. First, the children sorted according to what could be bought. They agreed that a mitt, a pin, a fan, and a rat could be bought, and the other words could not. Next they sorted according to what was in their houses. They first decided that all except sat, fin, and rat could be found in their homes. One of the group members then asked if pet goldfish have fins. The children decided that they do and placed fin in the “home” pile. The group finally sorted according to what they actually owned. The children grouped mitt and pin together until one student informed the group that she had a pet rat. Word sorting was abandoned as the children discussed the joys of such an exciting pet.

220 C H A P T E R 9

Listening to students read orally and determining their rate as words per minute (WPM) and/or correct words per minute (CWPM) can be a meaningful part of all components of RTI assessment: screening, diagnostics, formative and benchmark monitoring, and summative outcome assessment (Wixson & Valencia, 2011). However, fluency measures should be interpreted with caution when determining if a student is progressing and/or ready to be released from RTI instruction. First, fluency in one selection will transfer to another selection only to the extent that the selections share the same words. This generally occurs at the lower levels, in which texts are replete with the same high-frequency words. However, as text becomes more difficult and apart from such words as the, was, but, and so forth, the number of similar words shared by two selections tends to decrease. For example a fourth- of fifth-grade story may have few words in common with a science selection at the same level. What this means is that acceptable fluency demonstrated in one type of text may not be evident in another type. If the second text is part of progress monitoring or summative assess- ment, the reader may seem to have made little progress.

A second issue is the extreme variability of individual reading rates. No clear-cut rate is acceptable for different levels. Reading rates are highly variable across individu- als at the same chronological grade level and are heavily dependent upon the nature of the text that is read. Progress in fluency is only valid to the extent that it involves a comparison of a student’s rate to his or her own rate in the same text (initial reading versus reading after practice) or in similar text. Similar text has the same basic struc- ture (narrative versus expository) and underlying concepts (two texts on animals or two stories featuring the same character.)

All of the instructional strategies mentioned in this chapter have a viable place in RTI instruction. They can be used with small groups or with individuals. However, the teacher must remember that their purpose moves beyond improving rate and accuracy. Their purpose is to improve a reader’s comprehension. Rate and accuracy are not ends in themselves; they are means to an end, understanding what was read.

Summary

A fluent reader reads accurately, quickly, and expressively. Fluency is an important component of successful reading. Readers who can recognize words automatically and without analysis can pay attention to meaning. Classroom emphasis on fluency with- out linking it to comprehension may result in students who define good reading as fast reading.

Fluency is implicit in the Common Core State Initiative Standards, as students will need to attain a measure of fluency (probably through rereading) in order to meet the standards.

Fluent reading can be assessed in three ways: listening to students read orally, determining student reading rate, and presenting timed administration of word lists.

General guidelines for fluency development include providing models of fluent reading, linking fluency instruction to meaning, encouraging wide reading, and avoid- ing unpracticed oral reading.

Improving Word Knowledge: Fluency 221

Fluency is best developed as students read connected text. Therefore, teachers must promote wide reading of easy text. The use of predictable books and assisted reading is also effective. In assisted reading, students read material with a fluent reader, who is often the teacher. The various forms of assisted reading are simultaneous as- sisted reading, echo reading, choral reading, paired reading, partner reading, simul- taneous listening-reading, and the neurological impress method (NIM). Structured repeated reading is another effective technique for developing fluency. Students re- peatedly read a text until a desired level of accuracy and fluency is reached. Perfor- mance reading using choral reading, Reader’s Theatre, and radio reading can also be used to develop fluency.

Fluency can also be developed by focusing on words in isolation to develop sight vocabulary. This is particularly important for helping students master high-frequency function words. Students can make word cards, collect words, engage in word sorts, and construct word walls.

Assessment of fluency and fluency practice are important components of RTI practice. However, fluency is not an end in itself. It must always be connected to the ultimate purpose of reading, comprehension.

Case Study

Introduction At the beginning of his third-grade year, Ethan was referred to the reading specialist for further testing. Tier 1 RTI assessment had indicated that Ethan was performing well below the level of his classmates with regard to fluency. In addition, classroom assignments were often incomplete and his parents reported that finishing homework was an issue. Ethan did not actively participate in silent self-selected reading time. He tended to stare out of the window, aimlessly flip through pages in his chosen book, and repeatedly leave his seat to select another book.

Assessment On informal reading inventory word lists, Ethan achieved at a fifth-grade level for word recognition. However, his pronunciation of each word was slow and deliberate, suggesting that these represented words that he decoded but did not recognize as sight words. When reading a third-grade passage, he achieved at an independent level for word recognition and at a frustration level for comprehension. The same pattern was repeated with second-grade text.

The reading specialist administered several subtests in a formal measure of read- ing achievement, the Woodcock Reading Mastery Tests (WRMT-III; Woodcock, 2011). Ethan was asked to decode a list of nonsense words (pseudowords); his standard score was well above the level of his peers. When asked to read actual words within a time limit, his standard score fell below the level of his peers. Although his pronunciations

222 C H A P T E R 9

were accurate, Ethan seldom offered his answers within the designated time limit. On a measure of oral reading fluency, Ethan made few errors in pronunciation but received low ratings for expression, phrasing, and smoothness. Ethan’s performance suggested that fluency was his primary problem and that lack of fluency was interfering with his comprehension. The relatively easier and shorter texts read in second grade demanded much less with regard to comprehension than the longer and more complex third- grade selections. The reading specialist asked Ethan what he wanted to do better as a reader. Ethan seemed surprised by her question and responded. “I am a good reader, probably the best in my class because I never make mistakes.” It was clear that Ethan equated successful reading with fast reading.

Instruction Ethan joined a Tier 2 intervention group composed of four third graders. Of the five students, Ethan was the only one who demonstrated grade-level performance in decoding. The other four needed work in decoding as well as fluency and comprehen- sion. The teacher felt that Ethan’s involvement in decoding instruction would help with his fluency, so he was welcomed into the group.

The students met 3 days a week for 45-minute sessions. The structure of the lesson was the same across all sessions and was patterned after the successful interven- tions described in Chapter 6.

For 15 minutes, the students reread text that had been presented in previous lessons. Depending upon the text, they chorally read as a group or engaged in partner reading. The teacher frequently changed partners and often acted as a partner. She also incorporated Reader’s Theatre in this lesson segment when appropriate to the text. After each session, the students discussed what they liked or did not like about the text and connected the text to their own lives and interests. Each student was given an opportunity to pose a question to their peers based upon the text, and the teacher used this activity to expand their understanding of questions beyond a literal level. She constantly reinforced the idea that reading was understanding what you read, not just saying the words.

The next 15 minutes focused on decoding using decoding-by-analogy strategies. Ethan was clearly the “star” in this respect; however, the teacher continually focused on the meaning of the words that were decoded. While she employed word sorts to clarify and reinforce letter–sound patterns, she also asked the student to sort words according to word meanings.

For the final 15 minutes the teacher presented third-grade-level material, choos- ing selections from the students’ classroom text. She attempted to select material they would be reading in their classes within the following week. She divided the text into short segments and read a segment to the students while they followed along in their textbooks. She then reread the text using simultaneous assisted reading and echo read- ing. As in the previous two parts of the lesson, the teacher focused on comprehen- sion using such activities as content-free questions, idea maps, discussion cards, and text coding, all explained in Chapter 12. She constantly reinforced the idea that good

Improving Word Knowledge: Fluency 223

readers understand what they read, constantly ask questions, and reread to find an- swers. By focusing on texts the group would encounter in the classroom, she prepared them for more active participation and greater success in classroom activities.

Ethan and the group remained together for the duration of the year. They en- joyed each other’s company, blossomed in a small-group setting, and found greater success in their regular classroom activities. At the end of the year, Ethan’s fluency had improved to a level considered by the school district to be acceptable for a third grader. Performance on an IRI indicated that his comprehension was at a third- or fourth-grade level depending upon the passage read. Ethan’s performance was higher in expository material than narrative, and the teacher felt this was probably due to his interest in topics such as animals, plants, and historical events.

References Applegate, M. D., Applegate, A. J., & Modla, V. B. (2009). “She’s my best reader; she just can’t comprehend”:

Studying the relationship between fluency and comprehension. The Reading Teacher, 62, 512–521. Bear, D. (1994). Word sort: An alternative to phonics, spelling, and vocabulary. Paper presented at the

National Reading Conference, San Diego, CA. Bear, D., Invernizzi, M., Templeton, S., & Johnston, F. (2008). Words their way (3rd ed.). New York: Macmilan/

Merrill. Caldwell, J. S. (2008). Comprehension assessment: A classroom guide. New York: The Guilford Press. Caldwell, J. S., & Leslie, L. (2013). Intervention strategies to follow informal reading inventory assessment: So what

do I do now? Boston: Allyn & Bacon. Carver, R. B. (1990). Reading rate: A review of research and theory. San Diego, CA: Academic. Cunningham, P. (2005). Phonics they use: Words for reading and writing (4th ed.). Boston: Pearson. Cunningham, P., & Allington, R. (2007). Classrooms that work: They can all read and write. Boston: Pearson. Davidson, M., & Myhre, O. (2000). Measuring reading at grade level. Educational Leadership, 57, 25–28. Feazell, V. S. (2004). Reading Acceleration Program: A schoolwide intervention. The Reading Teacher, 58,

66–72. Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., Hosp, M. K., & Jenkins, J. R. (2001). Oral reading fluency as an indicator of reading

competence: A theoretical, empirical, and historical analysis. Scientific Studies of Reading, 5, 239–257. Good, R. H., Simmons, D. C., & Kame’enui, E. J. (2001). The importance and decision-making utility of

a continuum of fluency-based indicators of foundational reading skills for third-grade high-stakes outcomes. Scientific Studies of Reading, 5, 257–289.

Hasbrouck, J., & Tindal, G. A. (2006). Oral reading fluency norms: A valuable assessment tool for reading teachers. The Reading Teacher, 59, 636–643.

Heckelman, R. G. (1969). The neurological impress method of remedial reading instruction. Academic Therapy, 4, 277–282.

Hudson, R. (2011). Fluency problems: When, why and how to intervene. In R. E. O’ Connor & P. F. Vadasy (Eds.), Handbook of reading interventions (pp. 169–970). New York: The Guilford Press.

Johns, J. (2007). Monitoring progress in fluency: Possible unintended consequences. Reading Today, 24(6), 18–19.

Johns, J. L., & Berglund, R. L. (2002). Fluency: Questions, answers, evidence-based strategies. Dubuque, IA: Kendall/Hunt Publishing Company.

Kame’enui, E. J., & Simmons, D. C. (2001). Introduction to this special issue: The DNA of reading fluency. Scientific Studies of Reading, 5, 203–210.

Kuhn, M. R. (2007). Effective oral reading assessment (or why round robin reading doesn’t cut it). In J. R. Paratore & R. L. McCormack (Eds.), Classroom literacy assessment: Making sense of what students know and do (pp. 101–112). New York: The Guilford Press.

224 C H A P T E R 9

Kuhn, M. R., Schwanenflugel, P. J., & Meisinger, E. B. (2010). Aligning theory and assessment of reading fluency: Automaticity, prosody, and definition of fluency. Reading Research Quarterly, 45, 230–251.

LaBerge, D., & Samuels, S. J. (1985). Toward a theory of automatic information processing. In H. Singer & R. Ruddell (Eds.), Theoretical models and processes of reading (3rd ed., pp. 689–718). Newark, DE Inter- national Reading Association

Marcell, B. (2007). Fluent to a fault: Put fluency in the passenger seat and let comprehension take the wheel! Reading Today, 24(6), 18–19.

McCormack, R. L., & Paratore, J. R. (1999). “What do you do there anyway,” teachers ask: A reading teach- er’s intervention using grade-level text with struggling third grade readers. Paper presented at the National Reading Conference, Orlando, FL.

McCormack, R. L., Paratore, J. R., & Dahlene, K. F. (2004). Establishing instructional congruence across learning settings: One path to success for struggling third grade readers. In R. L. McCormack & J. R. Paratore (Eds.), After early intervention, then what? Teaching struggling readers in grades 3 and beyond (pp. 117–137). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.

Meisels, S. J., & Piker, R. A. (2001). An analysis of early literacy assessments used for instruction. Retrieved from http://www.ciera.org/library/reports/inquiry-2/2-013/2-013.html

Paige, D. D. (2011). “That sounded good!”: Using whole-class choral reading to improve fluency. The Read- ing Teacher, 64, 435–438.

National Reading Panel. (2000). Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction: Reports of the subgroups (National Institute of Health Pub. No. 00-4754). Washington, DC: National Institute of Child Health and Human Development.

Rasinski, T. V. (2000). Speed does matter in reading. The Reading Teacher, 54, 146–151. Rasinski, T. V. (2003). The fluent reader: Oral reading strategies for building word recognition, fluency, and compre-

hension. New York: Scholastic Professional Books, Inc. Rasinski, T. V., & Hamman, P. (2010) Fluency: Why it is “not hot.” Reading Today, 28(1), 26. Rasinski, T. V., Reutzel, D. R., Chard, D., & Linen-Thompson, S. R. (2011). Reading fluency. In M. L. Kamil,

P. D. Pearson, E. B. Moje, & P. P. Afflerbach (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (Vol. IV, pp. 286–319). New York: Routledge.

Rea, D. M., & Mercuri, S. P. (2006). Research-based strategies for English language learners. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Reutzel, D. R., & Morrow L. M. (2007). Promoting and assessing effective literacy learning classroom environ- ments. In J. R. Paratore & R. L. McCormack (Eds.), Classroom literay assessment: Making sense of what students know and do (pp. 33–40). New York: The Guilford Press.

Richards, M. (2000). Be a good detective: Solve the case of oral reading fluency. The Reading Teacher,53, 534–539. Roser, N. L., May, L. A., Martinez, M., Keehn, S., Harmon, J. M., & O’Neal, S. (2004). Stepping into character(s):

Using Reader’s Theatre with bilingual fourth graders. In R. L. McCormack & J. R. Paratore (Eds.), After early intervention, then what? Teaching struggling readers in grades 3 and beyond (pp. 40–69). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.

Samuels, S. J. (1979). The method of repeated readings. The Reading Teacher, 32, 403–408. Southwest Educational Development Laboratory. (2006). Reading assessment database for grades K-2. Retrieved

from http://www.sedl.org/reading/rad/list.html Stahl, S. A. (2004). What do we know about fluency? Findings of the National Reading Panel. In P. McCardle &

V. Chhabra (Eds.), The voice of evidence in reading research (pp. 213–234). Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes Publishing Co.

Stahl, S. A., & Heubach, K. M. (2005). Fluency-oriented reading instruction. Journal of Literacy Research, 37, 25–60.

Stahl, S. A., & Hiebert, E. H. (2005). The “word factors”: A problem for reading comprehension assess- ment. In S. G. Paris & S. A. Stahl (Eds.), Children’s reading comprehension and assessment (pp. 161–186). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Stanovich, K. E. (1986). Matthew effects in reading. Some consequences of individual differences in the acquisition of literacy. Reading Research Quarterly, 21, 360–406.

Topping, K. (1987). Paired reading: A powerful technique for parent use. The Reading Teacher, 40, 608–614.

Improving Word Knowledge: Fluency 225

Topping, K. (1989). Peer tutoring and paired reading: Combining two powerful techniques. The Readng Teacher, 42, 499–494.

Wixson, K. K., & Valencia, S. W. (2011). Assessment in RTI: What teachers and specialists need to know. The Reading Teacher, 64, 466–469.

Worthy, J., & Prater, K. (2002). “I thought about it all night”: Reader’s Theatre for reading fluency and motivation. The Reading Teacher, 56, 294–297.

Young, C., & Rasinski, T. (2009). Implementing Reader’s Theatre as an approach to classroom fluency in- struction. The Reading Teacher, 63, 4–13.

Go to topic 7: Fluency in the MyEducation- Lab (www.myeducationlab.com) for Reading Problems: Assessment and Teaching Strategies, where you can: ◆ Find learning outcomes for fluency, along

with the national standards that connect to these outcomes.

◆ Complete assignments and activities that can help you more deeply understand the chapter content.

◆ Apply and practice your understanding of the core teaching skills identified in the chapter with the Building Teaching Skills and Dispositions learning units.

◆ Examine challenging situations and cases presented in the Iris Center Resources.

◆ Practice targeting instruction and mak- ing content accessible for all students with A+RISE activities.

◆ Strengthen your understanding and usage of the English language in writing with the Grammar Tutorial.

◆ Gain experience in choosing appropriate literature and integrating the best titles into language arts instruction with the Children’s and Young Adult Literature Database.

◆ Track the month-by-month literacy growth of five second graders with the Literacy Portraits.

◆ Create, update, and share quality lesson plans with the Lesson Plan Builder.

◆ Access state licensure test requirements, overviews of what the tests cover, and sample test items in the Certification and Licensure section.

◆ Check your comprehension of the content covered in the chapter with the Study Plan. Here you will be able to take a chapter pre- test, receive feedback on your answers, and then access personalized Review, Practice, and Enrichment exercises to enhance your understanding of chapter content. After you complete the exercises, take a posttest to confirm your comprehension.

10 C H A P T E R

Vocabulary Development and Listening Comprehension

226

Introduction

Importance of Language to Reading Problems With Language Development Impact of Language Disability and Delay Impact of Limited Experiences With Reading Impact of Diverse Language Environments

Assessing Language Abilities Informal Measures Formal Measures

Conditions That Foster Language Learning Exposure to Rich Language Active Participation Planning for Vocabulary and Language

Learning Making Connections

Strategies for Fostering Language: Listening Comprehension

Reading Books to Students

Supplemented Shared Reading Paired Story Reading Directed Listening-Thinking Activity Sentence Stretchers Encouraging Verbal Expression

Strategies for Fostering Language: Meaning Vocabulary

Introducing Words Before Reading Practicing and Reinforcing Meaning

Vocabulary Fostering Vocabulary Learning Through

Rich Literate Experiences Using Strategies to Figure Out Unknown

Words Using Poetry to Develop Language

Fostering the Development of Academic Vocabulary

Summary

Vocabulary Development and Listening Comprehension 227

Introduction

This chapter discusses two important facets of language—listening comprehension and meaning vocabulary—and suggests strategies that help students with reading problems improve their language abilities. Because reading is language, students cannot read material that is above their language level. Thus, the richer a student’s language is, the better he or she will read.

Importance of Language to Reading

Language abilities are critical to success in reading, particularly after the primary grades. Although the greatest challenge to young children in the early phases of learn- ing to read is to recognize, in print, words that they use in everyday speech, the language background that is developed throughout the preschool years provides the foundation for continued success in literacy (Strickland & Shanahan, 2004). As students progress beyond the primary grades, high-level words and concepts are introduced in school reading. Those students who have a rich language background cope well with this new challenge; many who have not had opportunities to use higher-level language begin to struggle. Many of the students in the reading center have developed problems as the material they have to read becomes more complex.

The relationship between vocabulary and the ability to understand text was one of the earliest lines of research in literacy (Davis, 1944, 1968; Thorndike, 1973). Corre- lational studies continue to support the strong connections among meaning vocabulary, listening comprehension, listening vocabulary, and reading comprehension (Carver & David, 2001; Joshi, 2005).

Problems With Language Development Many students who struggle with reading have issues in language development. Three major areas of problems with language are language disability and delay, limited expe- riences with reading, and limited access to language-rich environments.

Impact of Language Disability and Delay A problem with language may severely affect reading abilities. Dawn, a student who had made As in the first and second grades, could read words accurately and fluently. She had a highly supportive family that promoted literacy. In third grade, however, she began to fail science and social studies tests. She could not remember new terms, and her parents began to notice that she had difficulty expressing herself. At the reading center, Dawn’s teacher orally read her social studies text to her. Not surprisingly, Dawn could not summarize, answer questions, or understand key words from the text. These responses indicated that Dawn’s reading problem was related to a language problem.

In some cases, language problems are severe enough to be noticed early, and they affect beginning reading skills. In other cases, like Dawn’s, problems are noticed only as

228 C H A P T E R 1 0

children attempt to meet the complex demands of intermediate-grade material. Chall (1983) referred to this situation as the “fourth-grade slump.” Language disabilities and related problems, such as speech impediments, are further discussed in Chapter 15.

Impact of Limited Experiences With Reading Of course, other students with reading problems have had problems recognizing words from the beginning of their reading instruction. Interestingly, these students also tend to have problems developing rich language. In these cases, language problems may be related to limited experiences with a wide range of reading. How does this happen?

Many difficult words and complex syntactic structures are met only in reading. Therefore, students who read extensively have opportunities to build their meaning vocab- ularies and learn complex sentence structures. Unfortunately, students who have difficulties recognizing words do very little reading, and therefore are not exposed to these rich lan- guage structures. Thus, many readers who start out with only word recognition problems may also eventually develop deficiencies in language (Stanovich, 1986, 1988).

Impact of Diverse Language Environments Some students are not exposed to the complex language found in books in the home and in other everyday environments. Activities done in a language-nurturing home, such as reading books, listening to stories, and engaging in the free exchange of ideas, form an important basis for language skills. However, not all families provide such advantages. Some cultures emphasize oral storytelling traditions, whereas oth- ers value book-reading traditions. Some parents lack the reading skills to foster lit- eracy, others lack time, and others are not aware of the value of such experiences. For some children, their early language environments may be quite rich but may not be well aligned with the language patterns used in school (Gee, 2004). Teachers must be sensitive to these issues in planning instruction. They must convey an appreciation for the early language-learning experiences of all children; children are more likely to engage in the learning experiences and academic language of schools if teachers use their early language-learning experiences as the foundation (González, Moll, & Amanti, 2005).

Thomas, a 10-year-old in the reading center, had been taught to be quiet and respectful. Before each session, his mother warned him to obey his teacher, and after- ward, she asked if he had been a good boy. Thomas’s mother was at first baffled by the teacher’s request that she read to Thomas, because to her, reading was the responsi- bility of the child. After a few months and attendance at our weekly parent program, Thomas and his mother became comfortable with the noise and excitement generated as Thomas talked freely and expressively to improve his language.

Assessing Language Abilities

Language abilities can be assessed using both informal and formal measures.

Vocabulary Development and Listening Comprehension 229

Informal Measures Informal observations while students are interacting with one another or with you can provide many insights into students’ language levels and comfort levels in expressing their thoughts. You can learn much from conducting student interviews or talking with students about their interests and experiences. The normal class- room discourse about text can also provide valuable information about students’ language levels as they respond to text and classroom discussions. However, this interactive assessment is difficult to document unless you are diligent with anec- dotal record keeping. To document students’ progress, a more systematic approach is needed.

Some teachers find that students reveal much about their experiences and lan- guage development through writing. As mentioned in Chapter 3, we often use a writ- ten interview as a get-acquainted activity in our reading center. We have also found diamantes useful in providing a structure for students to share information about themselves. Christensen (1998) found that using “where I’m from . . .” poems gave older students opportunities to share about their home cultural and linguistic back- grounds. Teachers can use this information to plan instruction that is respectful and appreciative of students’ cultural and linguistic backgrounds.

Reading stories to students and asking them to retell the stories in their own words is another way to measure students’ language levels (Morrow, 2011). Many check- lists are available to record students’ abilities to retell stories (Clay, 2002; Gredler & Johnson, 2004; Morrow, 2011; Strickland & Strickland, 2000; Walker, 2005). Paris and Paris (2003) developed an assessment tool for measuring students’ abilities to retell stories. Systematic use of retelling checklists can provide excellent documentation of students’ abilities to retell stories. Retelling checklists are included for the silent read- ing passages in the informal reading inventory analysis that accompanies this text. These materials are provided on MyEducationLab in the Chapter Resources section of Chapter 10.

Teachers can determine how well developed students’ language is by reading orally to them and asking them comprehension questions. If students can compre- hend the material, it is within their language levels. This procedure is described in Chapter  5. Using an informal reading inventory (IRI), read passages orally to a student and ask comprehension questions to determine a listening level—then compare this level with the student’s reading level. Teachers can also read content- area materials to students and ask questions. This procedure was used with Dawn when her teacher read from her social studies textbook to determine whether she had a language problem. When Dawn could not answer questions about the text, her teacher concluded that she needed further language development to support her in reading school materials successfully. Using the listening comprehension component of an IRI as part of a systematic assessment plan is another good way to document students’ progress.

A good way to determine whether students have the necessary vocabulary and concept knowledge to understand a specific selection is to use a cloze procedure. Using the cloze procedure can help teachers assess the ability of students to process

230 C H A P T E R 1 0

the language of the reading selection, construct meaning from that selection, and make connections between ideas encountered in text. This is especially helpful in content areas where the specialized vocabulary is crucial to students’ understanding of the text. Students’ abilities to supply a word where one has been deleted indicate how familiar the readers are with the language and content of a passage. It is also a measure of how closely the language and background knowledge of the readers are matched with the language level and content of the text.

Directions for constructing a cloze test are presented in Figure 10.1. Classroom teachers and reading teachers often use informal measures to de-

termine whether (1) a student’s language abilities are more advanced than reading skills or (2) language abilities and reading are at the same level. If a student’s language abilities are more advanced than reading skills, the student needs word recognition instruction so that the student can learn to read at the language level that he or she can understand. If a student’s reading and language are at the same low level, additional development of language abilities is needed to improve reading. To determine which is the case, a teacher must determine whether a reading problem is due to poor word recognition (part of reading) or a low listening level (part of language).

Teachers can select words from students’ miscue analyses and present those words orally to see if students know the words’ meanings if the word recognition component is removed. This analysis provides valuable information about whether students’ abilities to understand words are higher than their abilities to identify those words.

An informal probe of a standardized test also allows you to compare read- ing and language. First, administer a standardized reading test in the regular manner.

FIGURE 10.1 Constructing a Cloze Test

1. Select a passage from the book students will be expected to read.

  Primary Grades 100 words

  Intermediate- and Middle-level Grades 250–300 words

2. Reproduce the passage, leaving the first and last sentences intact.

3. Delete every fifth word.

  From 15 to 20 deletions are recommended.

  Replace the deleted words with blanks of equal length.

4. Ask students to fill in each blank with a word that makes sense.

5. Estimate the student’s “level” for this text:

  >60% accuracy Independent Level Students can read the text on their own.

  40–60% accuracy Instructional Level Students can read the text with guidance.

  <40% accuracy Frustrational Level Students cannot read the text successfully.

Vocabulary Development and Listening Comprehension 231

Then, administer the same test by reading it to the student (an informal probe). If the student scores about the same on both the reading and listening versions, a need for language development is indicated. If the student scores better on the listening version than the reading version, the student needs to develop more word recognition abilities. To summarize:

If reading and listening levels are equal, language development is needed. If listening level is higher than reading level, word recognition instruction is needed.

You may choose to probe only specific subtests of a standardized test. Eric’s sixth-grade teacher, for example, was interested in whether his difficulties stemmed from poor word recognition or poor language. To find out, Eric was first given the vocabulary subtest of the Gates–MacGinitie Reading Test, Level 4. In this subtest, he read words and chose synonyms for them. After Eric had taken the vocabulary subtest using this standard administration, the teacher orally read the same subtest to Eric and had him give his answers aloud. If Eric’s ability to recognize words had been interfering with his original score, he would have improved his score when the sub- test was read to him. Because Eric did not improve his score, the teacher concluded that his problem was with language rather than with recognizing words. Using the same procedure for the comprehension subtest of the Gates–MacGinitie Reading Test, Eric again failed to improve his score. This result further confirmed Eric’s need for language development.

Formal Measures Many formal tests include subtests that measure language skills. The Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test, Fourth Edition (PPVT-4) and the Expressive Vocabu- lary Test, Second Edition (EVT-2) are designed specifically for this purpose. The PPVT-4 assesses listening vocabulary. In this test, an examiner reads a word, and the student chooses one of four pictures that represents the word. The examiner might say “Point to the pencil,” and the four picture choices might be paper, a pencil, a pen, and a crayon. No reading is involved. In addition, because the student is not required to say any words, the PPVT-4 is a measure of understanding, or receptive vocabulary, rather than expressive vocabulary. The test covers ages 2.5 to adult, has norms enabling comparison to a reference group, and comes in two alternative forms.

The EVT-2 is an individual, norm-referenced test used to measure expres- sive vocabulary using two types of items: labeling and providing synonyms. In the first portion of the test, the examiner points to a picture or part of the body and asks the student a question requiring a one-word response. In the second portion of the test, the examiner shows the student a picture and provides a stimulus word. The student responds with a one-word answer. The EVT-2 was co-normed with the PPVT-4. By comparing the difference between a student’s standard scores in receptive and expressive vocabulary, the examiner may evaluate the student’s word retrieval abilities.

232 C H A P T E R 1 0

Using items from the previous edition of the Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test (PPVT-III), Kearns and Biemiller (2010/2011) developed a group vocabulary test for administration in kindergarten through grade 2. This group test, the Two-Questions Vocabulary Measure, has shown promising results as compared to the results of the PPVT- III. In this test, target words are used in meaningful sentences, and students mark Yes or No responses to indicate their understanding of the words. This brief group test would be quite helpful to teachers who need a quick measure to help them plan instruction.

Conditions That Foster Language Learning

Although research has established a strong relationship between vocabulary knowledge and reading comprehension, little has been done to identify what constitutes “good vocabulary instruction.” In fact, research indicates that programs specifically designed to teach vocabulary have had little effect on reading achievement (Stahl & Fairbanks, 1986). Further, Nagy, Anderson, and Herman (1987) found that explicit instruction in word learning results in approximately 300 words per year being learned. In contrast, Anderson, Wilson, and Fielding (1988) found that students engaged in reading self- selected, less difficult material learn about 2,000 words per year. The National Reading Panel report recommends a combination of incidental and explicit vocabulary instruc- tion (National Institue of Child Health and Human Development, 2000). What can teachers do to foster students’ growth in language?

First, incorporate vocabulary instruction into literacy curriculum. Despite a his- tory of research indicating that vocabulary is related to reading achievement, recent research has shown that little attention in classrooms is focused on vocabulary de- velopment (Blachowicz, Fisher, Ogle, & Watts-Taffe, 2006; Scott, Jamieson-Noel, & Asselin, 2003).

Second, decide which words to teach. Beck, McKeown, and Omanson (1987) suggested a “tiered” approach to making this decision:

◆ Tier I words are comprised of the basic, familiar words that are part of everyday oral vocabulary.

◆ Tier II words are not commonly used by most people in their everyday oral vocabulary, but are considered highly useful in a literate environment.

◆ Tier III words are rarely used or are used in specific content areas.

Tier II words should be the focus of vocabulary instruction because they will have the greatest impact across texts (Beck, McKeown, & Kucan, 2002, 2008).

Third, address the issue of how to teach vocabulary. Blachowicz and Fisher (2010) suggest that teachers follow specific guidelines to ensure effective practice in vocabulary instruction:

◆ Create a word-rich environment that provides for both incidental and explicit learning of words.

◆ Support students’ independent word learning.

Vocabulary Development and Listening Comprehension 233

◆ Use instructional strategies that model good word-learning behaviors. ◆ Use assessment that matches instructional goals.

In a survey of classroom teachers and reading professionals, Berne and Blachowicz (2008/2009) asked teachers what kinds of vocabulary instruction worked most effec- tively for their students. These teachers and other reading professionals identified focusing on word relationships and word parts, using read-alouds and songs, and using games and play as the three most effective approaches to supporting vocabulary devel- opment (2008/2009).

When teachers share the richness of language and their love of the beauty of language with their students, it allows students to enjoy themselves while building an invaluable base for reading.

Exposure to Rich Language The most valuable tools teachers have for increasing students’ vocabulary are books. Books can help teachers bring rich language to their students (Anderson et al., 1988). Although all children hear commands and requests in their everyday lives, they may not all have the rich experiences of listening to detailed verbal descriptions, explaining their own reasoning, or hearing a variety of uncommon words. Similarly, all children study their school texts, but not all get to listen to language-rich books, such as Tikki Tikki Tembo (Mosel) or To Think That I Saw It on Mulberry Street (Dr. Seuss).

The language found in books is richer than that contained in oral language, both in vocabulary (Cunningham & Stanovich, 1998) and in grammatical structures (Purcell-Gates, 1986). Books also tend to contain knowledge that is well reasoned and transcends the limits of personal information (Stanovich & Cunningham, 1993). Therefore, in working with students who have reading problems, teachers should use the language of books.

You will need patience to foster an appreciation of language-rich books in a stu- dent with reading problems, but you will be well rewarded. There is a special magic in seeing a child enjoy rich language for the first time.

Active Participation To gain full control over language, students with reading problems must be comfort- able not only listening to and reading language, but also using it expressively in their own speech and writing. “Doing something” with language gives students a stake in their own learning and helps them overcome the passivity that is a problem for so many low-achieving readers. Language that has been processed deeply, through many different activities, is learned well and used often (Stahl & Fairbanks, 1986).

Planning for Vocabulary and Language Learning Much language learning occurs through incidental learning by absorbing meaning vocabulary, grammatical structures, and concepts from being exposed to rich language.

234 C H A P T E R 1 0

Struggling readers and writers may lack this language-rich background or may need more explicit help to benefit from exposure to rich language and literacy experiences. Although we know that isolated vocabulary instruction is less effective than developing meaning vocabulary through exposure to rich literature, as reading specialists work- ing with struggling readers and writers and with their classroom teachers, we need to restructure instruction so that we provide explicit instruction through rich literacy experiences (Anderson et al., 1988; Nagy, Anderson, & Herman, 1987). Further, we need to plan our instruction so that students have multiple opportunities to use new vocabulary so that it becomes part of their own oral or written language (Stahl & Fairbanks, 1986). Dale (1965) found that vocabulary knowledge could be described in four stages of gradual learning:

1. Never saw or heard this word 2. Saw or heard it but don’t know it 3. Know it in a sentence; know the meaning vaguely 4. Know it well

How do teachers bring students to the “know-it-well” stage of vocabulary learning? Nagy and Scott (2000) found that students need perhaps 20 or more exposures and opportunities to use words in context and over an extended time for full mastery. Students must also learn how to learn vocabulary. Such concepts as word parts, the use of context to infer meaning, and the relationship of a definition to the word it defines are learned gradually and often require teacher intervention. These concepts are called the metalinguistic awareness of vocabulary (Nagy & Scott, 2000).

Students with reading problems often must master unknown words and concepts unique to specific content areas to support them as they read their school assignments. Many interesting and exciting strategies are available to give these pupils the explicit instruction that enables them to have successful reading and studying experiences. We discuss academic vocabulary in a later section of this chapter.

Making Connections As mature readers, when we encounter an unfamiliar word, we are comfortable with incomplete images of word meanings as we continue to read and gather clues about the new word’s meaning. We automatically start trying to solve the puzzle of the word’s meanings as we categorize it with similar known words and construct a more complete meaning. Teachers may need to help students connect new words to information they already know. Blachowicz and Fisher (2002, 2006, 2010) suggest a framework for con- necting unfamiliar words to known information. As presented in Figure 10.2, students reading the sentence, “When I awoke, I saw a huge schalamel outside my window” can start to build a framework for schalamel.

Throughout each step of the process, students “fine-tune” their perceptions of the schalamel until they have an image of a funny, furry animal with long ears and big eyes.

Vocabulary Development and Listening Comprehension 235

Strategies for Fostering Language: Listening Comprehension

Many strategies foster students’ language development through listening. These lis- tening activities are nonthreatening and time efficient and pay handsome dividends in enjoyment and language growth.

Reading Books to Students Reading books aloud to students is a powerful way to provide a text-based discussion of concepts and words from books written above the students’ reading levels (Biemiller, 2001; Edwards Santoro, Chard, Howard, & Baker, 2008). Through listening to reading material containing language and structures, students acquire the language proficiency

FIGURE 10.2 Framework for Connecting Unfamiliar Words to Known Information

Sentence: When I awoke, I saw a huge schalamel outside my window.

Unfamiliar word Schalamel 

  Class visible object 

      A schalamel can be seen

        can be big

Students continue to read and add to framework:

Its furry face was staring at me.

  Class living creature 

      A schalamel can be seen

        can be big

        has a face

        has fur

Students read further and fill in framework.

His huge eyes and long ears gave him a comical look, and I knew I had nothing to fear.

  Class living creature 

      A schalamel can be seen

        can be big

        has a face

        has fur

        looks funny

        is not scary

236 C H A P T E R 1 0

that later enables them to read at a high level. We highly recommend reading to low- achieving students at least a few times per week.

Listening to a teacher read is beneficial for students with reading problems for three reasons: (1) Students absorb rich language, build background knowledge, and learn story organization; (2) students are motivated to learn to read as they become aware of the many interesting things that can be read; and (3) listening to a teacher read is a relaxing activity.

Materials that are above students’ reading level, and on the cutting edge of their language level, are most effective in fostering language growth. These materi- als should contain language that is challenging, but not overwhelming, for students. Read-alouds can be used for enjoyment to enrich students’ language development and to share the rich, sophisticated language found in books as well as to build back- ground knowledge for content areas (Edwards Santoro et al., 2008). Teachers should try to read both short stories and longer books. Reading full-length novels to stu- dents helps them to develop comprehension strategies for longer material. Teachers should also include varied genres: fantasy, poetry, historical fiction, and informational books.

A few suggestions for language-rich books suitable for teacher read-alouds for primary grades include Amos and Boris (Steig), Many Moons (Thurber), and To Think That I Saw It on Mulberry Street (Dr. Seuss). For intermediate and upper grades, try Mrs. Frisby and the Rats of NIMH (O’Brien), Ben and Me (Lawson), North to Freedom (Holm), Sarah Plain and Tall (MacLachlan), In the Year of the Boar and Jackie Robinson (Lord), and The Indian in the Cupboard (Banks). Short stories by Edgar Allan Poe, Jack London, and Mark Twain are filled with sophisticated concepts and vocabulary. Books using figurative language, such as Amelia Bedelia (Parish), help enrich students’ language. Reading informational texts aloud to students is enjoyable and provides important background information so that students with reading problems can ben- efit more from content-area instruction. One group of Title I fourth graders was kept enthralled using the book Fabulous Facts About the 50 States (Ross); they covered one state in each session.

When reading to students, do not be alarmed if they don’t know the meanings of all the words. If, however, you feel that students are uncomfortable or someone asks a question, stop and explain concepts and words. Young children often like to hear favorites reread. Such rereading enables them to get more from the story and to develop a sense of security.

With all the content that teachers are expected to address, it is easy to feel rushed and overwhelmed. Read-aloud time is often the item that is omitted from our busy schedules. It is important to find time for this beneficial component to language development! Try to use times when students may not be at peak energy, such as after lunch or at the end of the day. Read for 10 to 15 minutes at one time. Don’t be surprised, however, when your students become so involved in a book that they beg you to read longer! Try to stop at meaningful points, such as the end of a chapter. This whets your students’ appetites for the next reading and provides you the opportunity to model, reflecting about what you just read and predicting what will happen next.

Vocabulary Development and Listening Comprehension 237

Supplemented Shared Reading Combining reading books to children with explicit vocabulary instruction helps to support young children who may have limited experience with reading or who may have delays in language development (Coyne, Simmons, Kame’enui, & Stoolmiller, 2004). In her work with six primary-grade teachers, Kindle (2009) found that the most effective read-alouds were those that incorporated teacher elaboration that elicited student interactions about words. To be most effective, read-alouds or shared reading should be planned in advance. Teachers should

◆ Select and preview books in advance. ◆ Select target words and plan instructional support for those words.

◆ Choose four or five words. ◆ Select words that are fun to say or hold particular interest. ◆ Keep in mind that Tier II words are most helpful for future instruction. ◆ Consider the purpose for learning each word to select the most appropri-

ate strategy. Some words may just need immediate explanation but may not prove useful later.

◆ Plan the strategy to use. ◆ Have a backup plan. Not all strategies are effective. If a strategy is not working,

abandon it, but have another strategy ready to use. ◆ Use the words in other contexts. Plan for opportunities to use the words in the

classroom.

Kesler (2010) found four specific strategies to be especially helpful in supporting young children’s vocabulary development during shared reading:

◆ Possible sentences. In this strategy, Tier 2 words are selected from a story and pre- sented to students in the order in which they appear in the story. Students are asked to construct sentences using the words (Blachowicz & Fisher, 2002, 2006, 2010).

◆ Cloze procedure variation. In this strategy, a portion of the text is presented to students with significant words covered. As the story is read to the students, they make initial predictions using only context clues. Then the teacher reveals initial consonant sounds so that the students narrow their predictions. As more phonics patterns are revealed, students continue to narrow their predictions until they identify each word accurately (Cunningham, 2009).

◆ Repeated readings. In this procedure, students are given short passages from the text to read. Kesler (2010) provided passages of dialogue from Frog and Toad (Lobel). The students read the passages in pairs, with each student assuming the role of one of the characters. This is a useful strategy to develop fluency, as addressed in the Common Core State Standards Initiative (Chief Council of State School Officers [CCSSO] & National Governor’s Association, 2010).

◆ Using our bodies. In this procedure (Cunningham, 2009), students provide ges- tures or actual physical actions to convey word meanings. Kesler (2010) found this strategy to be especially helpful with his young English-learning students.

238 C H A P T E R 1 0

These strategies to support vocabulary development address several of the Common Core State Standards (CCSSO & National Governor’s Association, 2010) for the pri- mary grades. In the early grades, students are expected to engage in conversations about unfamiliar words in stories and to engage actively in group reading activities.

Paired Story Reading Some teachers are concerned that their students may not be able to grasp the literary style of classic fairytales and folktales, yet recognize that these stories are valuable lis- tening experiences. Further, students are expected from a young age to recognize and distringuish among common types of text, such as storybooks, informational text, and poetry (CCSSO & National Governor’s Association, 2010). Paired story reading pro- vides a way to share the rich language and cultural experiences of the classic tales while providing the background experiences needed to understand the stories (Richek, 1989).

For this strategy, find two versions of the same fairytale or folktale: an easier version and a more difficult version. Many fairytales and folktales are available in beau- tifully illustrated picture books that readily engage students. Some publishers offer adapted versions of many folktales and fairytales to meet guidelines for primary levels. To implement the strategy, follow the guidelines presented in Figure 10.3.

Directed Listening-Thinking Activity The Directed Listening-Thinking Activity (DL-TA) parallels the Directed Reading- Thinking Activity (DR-TA; Stauffer, 1975) presented in Chapter 11. The DL-TA is recommended for primary level children who need to develop a sense of story struc- ture and for students of any age who need to improve their language abilities.

In the DL-TA, students listen to a story being read and predict what will hap- pen next. When reading the story, the teacher stops at several critical points and asks students to predict (Richek, 1987). Freed from the constraints of having to recognize

FIGURE 10.3 Paired-Story-Reading Strategy

1. Find two versions of the same fairytale or folktale: an easier version and the more traditional, classic version.

2. On the first day, read the easy adaptation of the story to students. Discuss the story so that students learn and enjoy the basic plot.

3. The next day, read the more difficult version of the same story. Having the background from the easier version allows students to enjoy the rich language of the more difficult version and to grasp more of the details.

4. Provide opportunities for students to compare the differences between the two stories.

Vocabulary Development and Listening Comprehension 239

words, students can apply all of their energies to thinking about the story. Implementa- tion suggestions for the DL-TA are presented in Figure 10.4.

Formalizing the thinking process is just as important in the DL-TA as in the DR-TA. Thus, when using the DL-TA, carefully write down all of the students’ pre- dictions on the board. This activity encourages a reading response, because students want to read their own language as written on the board. (Adaptations of the DL-TA suitable for early literacy are discussed in Chapter 7.)

Sentence Stretchers Students with reading problems often have difficulty with sentence comprehension. Their verbal expression may be limited, as reflected in their conversations as well as their writing. The sentence-building strategy (Richek, 1999) is a creative way to give students practice in constructing their own long sentences. Although best suited to a group situation, this strategy, presented in Figure 10.5, can also be used individually.

The goal is to create a long sentence. Because students will usually add to the end of a sentence, the teacher should also require that they make additions to the beginning and the middle. After a sentence has been finished, discuss appropri- ate capitalization and punctuation with the students. Finally, young children in a large class often enjoy holding a word card. Then, as the sentence grows, they can move to different places to form a sentence.

Encouraging Verbal Expression How do we address the fact that students with reading problems often fear expressing their thoughts and opinions, when we know that active use of language is essential to building language skills? A few principles, if practiced consistently by teachers, can make pupils feel more comfortable with expressing themselves:

◆ Never interrupt students who are speaking or allow others to interrupt them. Cultivate your own personal patience and insist on respectful behavior of stu- dents toward each other.

FIGURE 10.4 Directed Listening-Thinking Activity (DL-TA)

  Share the title and pictures with the students so that they can predict the content of the text.

  Read the text aloud, stopping at crucial points to allow student to predict what will happen next and confirm or revise previous predictions.

  Write students’ predictions on the board or on chart paper so that you can refer to them when confirming or revising.

  Summarize the story.

240 C H A P T E R 1 0

◆ Genuinely value students’ points of view. This attitude is fostered when you ask students for their opinions. You can model how to express opinions by using phrases such as “I think that . . .” and “It’s my opinion that. . . .” Often, if you express your opinions in long sentences, students will be inspired to follow your example.

◆ Do not judge the quality of what pupils say. Instead, respond to what students say and try not to judge how they express themselves. This attitude gives stu- dents confidence to express themselves more fully. Students who feel that their language is being judged will be intimidated. In contrast, students who feel that their opinions are valued will be more comfortable talking.

FIGURE 10.5 Sentence Stretchers

Instructions Examples

1. Write the words from a sim- ple sentence on word cards or sentence strips. Do not include punctuation or capitalization. Attach the word cards to the board.

the boy walked the dog

2. Tell the students you want them to stretch the sentence. Each student takes a turn making the sentence longer. Each student must read the entire sentence, including the additions.

First student: “the boy walked the dog to the park” Second student: “Johnny and the new boy walked the dog through the alley to the park” Third student: “Johnny and the new boy walked the dog through the alley until they came to the park” Fourth student: “Johnny and the new boy walked the dog through the alley in the pouring rain un- til they came to the park” Fifth student: “Johnny and the new boy walked the lost dog through the alley in the pouring rain until they came to the park”

3. Continue until the sentence is too long to read in one breath.

Final sentence constructed by fourth-grade stu- dents: “Johnny and the muscle-bound new boy walked the lost dog through the alley in the pour- ing rain until they came to the park and found a little girl calling, ‘Samson, where are you?’ ” Final sentence constructed by sixth-grade stu- dents: “Who was the dumb ugly boy with a holey shirt and holey pants who walked the dog all the way home and gave him a bone and gave him some food with water?”

Vocabulary Development and Listening Comprehension 241

Strategies for Fostering Language: Meaning Vocabulary

The first decision teachers must make about vocabulary instruction is “Which words should I teach?” This decision is difficult when each story introduced may include 25 to 30 vocabulary words and each unit or chapter in each content area presents its own list of new “Words to Learn”! The decision becomes even more difficult when working with struggling readers or English learners (ELs) whose English-meaning vocabularies may be limited. Cunningham (2009) offers some suggestions for selecting which words to use for vocabulary instruction:

◆ Select words that are unfamiliar to your students, words for which they do not have rich meanings.

◆ Select words your students need to know, words that they could use in speaking and writing, or that you think they will encounter again in reading.

◆ Select words that are essential to your students’ understanding of the passage to be read or the overall topic.

◆ Select words that have word parts that you want to focus on; selecting root words with multiple derivatives is an efficient way to help students learn many words.

Beck et al. (2008) recommend focusing on Tier 2 words, those that are not com- monly used in everyday speech but are most useful in a literate environment. Often, these are words with multiple derivatives.

The next decision is to select the best instructional strategies. Although research has shown that students learn more words through wide reading than through isolated vocabulary instruction, students with reading problems often need more explicit strat- egy instruction within the context of wide reading (Anderson et al., 1988; McKeown & Beck, 2006).

Students with reading problems need extensive work in developing strategies to learn word meanings. Meaning vocabulary is highly correlated with a student’s abil- ity to comprehend, and words embody important concepts that students will meet in reading (Anderson & Freebody, 1981).

In a wide-ranging review of the literature, Blachowicz and Fisher (2000, 2002, 2010) stress the need for active, personalized, and rich vocabulary instruction. Graves (2000, 2006) states that the four components of a vocabulary program should be extensive language experiences in reading and writing, teaching individual words, word consciousness, and teaching strategies for word learning. Bauman, Ware, and Carr Edwards (2007) report that a comprehensive vocabulary program grounded in Graves’s model proved successful for a classroom of fifth-grade students in a diverse, low-income setting; using these principles, teachers reported increases in their stu- dents’ receptive and expressive vocabulary levels as well as an increase in their use of rich, sophisticated language; the students wrote longer samples and included more low-frequency words in their writing; in addition, students expressed greater interest in and aptitude for learning new words.

242 C H A P T E R 1 0

This section discusses explicit instructional strategies for introducing and practicing words, ways to encourage vocabulary learning, and helping students to figure out words independently. These topics address three of the four compo- nents identified by Graves (2000). Suggestions to foster wide reading are found in Chapter 6.

Introducing Words Before Reading Knowing key words in a story or book helps students read more effectively. Even a short introduction of a word helps, because a large part of learning a word is simply noticing that it exists. Have you ever noticed how often you hear a word after you learn it? This phenomenon occurs because you have become conscious of the word. The strategies presented here are not meant to give students a complete mastery of words before reading, because they will understand the words better after they have read (or listened to) them in a text. Rather, these strategies focus on getting words into use so that students are comfortable enough to read.

Knowledge Rating. The knowledge-rating strategy fosters an awareness of words and gives students control over their own knowledge. The teacher lists the new words for a story or passage and students think about how well they know them. Each student checks one of four categories for each word; the categories are based on Dale’s (1965) four stages of vocabulary knowledge:

1. Never saw or heard this word 2. Saw or heard it but don’t know it 3. Know it in a sentence; know the meaning vaguely 4. Know it well

Students then read the selection, keeping the words in mind. After reading, the chart is reviewed again (Blachowicz, 1986). Students are delighted to find that they know many words better after they have read them in a story or passage (Blachowicz, 1986; Blachowicz & Fisher, 2002, 2006, 2010).

In Strategy Snapshot 10.1, Ms. Laskey, a second-grade teacher, combines several strategies in a science lesson about magnetism.

Classifying. When students classify words into categories, they are actively en- gaged in using higher-level skills to learn vocabulary (Blachowicz & Fisher, 2002, 2006, 2010). To ensure that students are successful, however, the teacher may have to go over some of the words with the students before they classify. To prepare third-grade children to read the story Dragon Stew (McGowen), words were clas- sified into three categories: (1) king words, (2) cook words, and (3) dragon words. The words were stew, royal, castle, throne, palace, fellow, rare, fellow, ordinary, stirred, pork, lit, fiery breath, banquet hall, majesty, proclamations, drawbridge, roast, applesauce, sliced, bubbling, vinegar, simmer, onions, gravy-stained, assistant, fanciful. While doing this activity, the students’ lively discussions about the words helped them deepen vocabulary learning.

Vocabulary Development and Listening Comprehension 243

Strategy Snapshot 10.1 Combining Multiple Strategies for Effective Instruction

For a unit on magnetism, Ms. Laskey included the following words on a Topic Board for her second-grade class:

First, she read the words as her students completed a Knowledge Rating Chart. The only word her students indicated that they didn’t know was repel. To help them figure out the new word, Ms. Laskey made a transparency of a paragraph from the science book and covered the word repel with masking tape:

Ms. Laskey asked her students to read the sentence with the missing word. The students immediately encountered a problem because they had never

heard the word like used as an adjective. Ms. Laskey connected their knowledge of the words like and alike to explain this new use. The students reasoned that if something is attractive, you want it. So opposite poles must pull toward each other. So poles that are alike must push each other away. By the process of elimination, Josh suggested the word repel because that was the only word they hadn’t used in their discussion. Josh “zipped” off the tape to discover his choice matched the author’s!

Magnets have two poles: a positive pole and a negative pole. While oppo- site poles attract each other, like poles each other.

magnet pole opposite attract repel like metal

Predict-o-gram. By classifying words into story grammar categories (see Chapter 11) before they read a story, students become actively involved in learning meanings and pre- dicting story content. To do a Predict-o-gram, list the new words in a story, and then ask students to predict whether each word will be used to describe the setting, the characters, the actions, or the ending. Next, as they read, students can see if these words are used in the way that was predicted (Blachowicz, 1986). If the words are written on Post-it-style notes, students can move them after reading if the words need to be reclassified.

Possible Sentences. This strategy can be used to introduce new vocabulary in ar- eas such as social studies and science texts (Blachowicz & Fisher, 2002, 2006, 2010; Moore & Arthur, 1981). First, give the title of a chapter that the students are about to read, then write the new words on the board (e.g., molecule, proton, atom, electron, neutron). Next, have students construct sentences that might possibly be true using at least two target words in each sentence. An example would be “A molecule could contain two atoms.” Students develop expectations of the chapter as they go through this activity. Then have students read the chapter. After reading, students evaluate the possibly true sentences they have written to see if they are indeed true. They change sentences that are inaccurate and add other sentences reflecting their new knowledge. This simple strategy combines learning vocabulary with the learning of content material.

244 C H A P T E R 1 0

Practicing and Reinforcing Meaning Vocabulary After words have been introduced, several strategies can be used to reinforce word meaning by keeping students actively engaged with words: display and vocabulary pic- ture cards, the multiple-sentence game, and automaticity.

Display Words and Vocabulary Picture Cards. Displaying words they have learned helps students feel a sense of accomplishment and informs others of their achieve- ments. Public displays of words can also help students remember them. A group of eighth-grade students created the web presented in Figure 10.6 as part of their unit study of U.S. government.

Students can become “word experts.” In a seventh-grade classroom, a teacher working with a group of students with learning disabilities placed the study words from a book on individual small cards, which could be flipped up. Each student was given two words and was asked to construct cards for them. On the front, the student wrote his or her name to establish ownership. Inside, the student wrote a definition and a sentence for the word, both of which had to be approved by the teacher. The student who had signed his or her name to the word was an “expert consultant” on that word. All word cards were displayed on the bulletin board. When students wanted to review the words, they went to the board, read the word, and flipped up the word card to check the definition.

United States

Party Election Government Constitution

Republicans Democrats candidate campaign federal laws

vote state Bill of Rights

ballot local

FIGURE 10.6 Vocabulary Web for the U.S. Government

Vocabulary Development and Listening Comprehension 245

Vocabulary cards featuring picture clues are often effective in reminding stu- dents of word meanings. Lansdown (1991) effectively combined the strategies of pic- ture clue word cards and the “expert consultant,” as shown in Strategy Snapshot 10.2.

Multiple-Sentence Game. Students enjoy trying to put a number of their new words into one sentence (Jennings, Caldwell, & Lerner, 2006, 2010; Richek, Caldwell, Jennings, & Lerner, 2002). This difficult (but exciting) strategy is recommended for upper-elementary and secondary students. To do this activity in a group, prepare a list of target words. Next, divide students into small groups and have each group select three new words. Groups now exchange words with one another. When each group gets its new list, they must put the words in the least number of sentences.

Strategy Snapshot 10.2 Picture Cards and Word Learning

To prepare her 20 at-risk sixth graders to read the difficult novel Rascal (by North), Ms. Lansdown chose 100 difficult and important words from the novel and assigned 5 to each student. The individual student became a “word expert” in these words by preparing cards for each one. The word appeared on the outside along with a picture representing it. On the inside was a definition (in the student’s own language) and a sentence. The words stayed up on the bulletin board unless the students were using them. When working with the words, the students were put in pairs. For 10 minutes, each “word expert” drilled a partner on his or her five words and was drilled on the partner’s words in return. Students changed partners for each drill session.

After a week, the students started to read the novel. As they went along, they noticed the words they had been studying. Ms. Lansdown began to give points, cumulative for the entire class, for finding the words either in the book, other reading materials, or nonprint sources (radio, TV, speech). In three weeks, the class had almost 1,000 points.

The excitement of learning these words was matched by the enthusiasm students felt in being able to read Rascal with considerable proficiency. As an ending project, Ms. Lansdown tested the students on all 100 words, and this class of low-level readers averaged 97%. A month later, their proficiency had not slipped. A student word card for perpetually is shown below.

Outside of Word Card Inside of Word Card

246 C H A P T E R 1 0

For a sentence using 1 of the target words, they get 1 point. For a sentence using 2 of the target words, they get 3 points. For a sentence using 3 of the target words, they get 6 points.

As the teacher, you judge the correctness and sense of a sentence before giv- ing credit. Students are allowed to change the form of the word (for example, slow to slowly). Previously unmotivated students have worked on this activity with extraordi- nary interest and have even asked to do it for homework.

Automaticity. To fully master words, students need to recognize them quickly. Spending a few minutes a week having students say words quickly, rapidly supply defi- nitions, or quickly compose sentences is a good way to foster automaticity.

A game of “Beat the Clock” can be readily adapted to help students access mean- ings quickly so that they maintain comprehension when reading in context (Beck et al., 2002; Beck, Perfetti, & McKeown, 1982).

Students can be given statements like the following:

A paleontologist studies space. True False An anthropologist studies humans. True False An archeologist studies buildings. True False

They have to understand the meaning of the words to respond correctly. Some teachers in our reading center used two different sounds to represent true

and false: a bell and a buzzer. Students enjoyed racing each other to push the right button and show off their word knowledge.

Fostering Vocabulary Learning Through Rich Literate Experiences Most meaning vocabulary is learned through listening and reading in the context of a rich literate environment. This section focuses on strategies that help students learn words from their environments. Such activities foster word consciousness, through both knowledge of and interest in words (Graves, 2000).

Modeling Difficult Words in Speech. If teachers consciously try to use “million- dollar words,” students will unconsciously absorb them. Use words that challenge students to expand their vocabularies. Encourage them to ask the meanings of these words and thus to take control of their own learning. For example, in a noisy fourth- grade Title I class, the teacher said, “I find this noise onerous and burdensome.” Fascinated by the words, the pupils immediately quieted down and requested the meaning of this intriguing statement. The teacher wrote the words on the board and discussed them. Teacher use of challenging vocabulary takes a little additional time yet exposes students to many words. Million-dollar words also can become an

Vocabulary Development and Listening Comprehension 247

ongoing game. Teachers can identify a couple of especially challenging words from their vocabulary lists and award points to students when they “catch” a teacher or another student using the word or double points for using the word correctly them- selves. One middle school team has turned this game into a competition among class- rooms. They count the points until one room has earned 100 points, enough to trade in for a pizza or taco party.

Word Collections. Collecting different types of words increases students’ interest in meaning vocabulary. A class of low-achieving fifth graders collected soft words (whis- per, slipper), green words (grass, lime), and happy words (ecstatic, birthday) and placed them in individual canisters.

Semantic Gradients. Students can also collect synonyms for overused words such as say, went, big, little, sad, happy. Then the students arrange the words in order of de- gree (Blachowicz & Fisher, 2002, 2006, 2010). One third-grade class created a list of synonyms for bad after a read-aloud of Alexander and the Terrible, Horrible, No Good, Very Bad Day (by Judith Viorst and Ray Cruz) and arranged them by degrees of “bad- ness,” as presented in Figure 10.7.

The students were surprised to find that bad was the least-bad word they could think of! After the semantic gradient for bad was completed, the group created one for good and wrote their own story about the best day of their lives. As the group read and wrote more stories, they continued to create semantic gradient posters and placed them in the writing center to remind them to use million-dollar words. Scott, Skobel,

FIGURE 10.7 Semantic Gradient for bad

Brainstormed List Ranked from Best to Worst

bad bad disastrous awful awful worst icky sorry horrible blah terrible icky horrendous nasty sorry stinky blah depressing rotten rotten nasty terrible depressing horrible stinky disastrous worst horrendous

248 C H A P T E R 1 0

and Wells (2008) recommend word catcher books, a modification of the vocabulary notebook, in which students maintain individual semantic gradient pages.

Collected Expressions. Other students have collected expressions. One intermedi- ate class’s collection of expressions containing the words gold, green, and black included several figures of speech, such as “golden years,” “golden egg,” “green-eyed,” “green thumb,” “black belt,” and “black hole.” Your students will become quite creative in thinking up categories they would like to pursue. These word collections are especially helpful in enriching students’ vocabulary in their writing.

Relating Words to Students’ Environments. Words become interesting when they relate to the lives of students (Richek, 1987). Students can look up the meanings of their names in How to Name Your Baby books. Car names often intrigue older students. For example, Chevrolet was a famous car racer, Cadillac was the French explorer who founded Detroit, Seville and Granada are names of cities, and Mustang and Pinto are types of horses. Other students enjoy discussing the reasoning behind the names of common household products, such as Tide, Wisk, Mr. Clean, Cheer, and Vanish. Common food names, such as hamburger, frankfurter, tomato, banana, and tea, have origins in other languages. Students may use them to practice dictionary skills as well as to gain geographical knowledge.

Using Strategies to Figure Out Unknown Words This section describes some strategies to teach students to figure out word meanings.

Using Context Clues. Instruction in context clues is an effective way to help stu- dents learn word meanings (Blachowicz & Fisher, 2002, 2006, 2010). Although the context will not always define a word thoroughly, it is effective in giving many clues to meaning (Cunningham, Cunningham, Moore, & Moore, 2004). However, the process of gaining meaning from context is not easy for many students with reading problems. To build vocabulary in this way, they must be encouraged to take risks and to make “intelligent hypotheses” (we often use these exact words to encourage our students).

Word Detectives. Blachowicz and Fisher (2002, 2006, 2010) recommend a four-step process to guide students’ use of context clues, arranged in order from least disruptive to most disruptive to the reading process:

1. Look at the unfamiliar word—then read the sentence before and after the word. 2. Connect what you know with the text. 3. Predict a meaning. 4. Confirm or revise your prediction. Reread the sentence using your prediction.

Are you satisfied with your prediction, or do you need to read further back or forward in the text to see if the author provides more clues? Do you need to use a resource beyond the text? If so, try a dictionary or ask someone.

Vocabulary Development and Listening Comprehension 249

Using word detective posters with these steps on them or giving students word detec- tive bookmarks reminds them to follow these steps as they are reading.

Josel (1988) dramatically demonstrated to low-achieving eighth graders that they used context clues to determine meaning. First, she gave them a list of words taken from a novel and asked them to match the words with their definitions. Because the list contained words such as etesian and clamorous, few students could match any words correctly. Next, she presented sentences from the book that contained these words, such as “We are sailing before the etesian, which blows from the northwest,” and asked students to define the words. Students found they were able to define the majority of the words. This activity demonstrated the helpfulness of context clues in determining word meanings.

After students have become comfortable with context clues, ask them to use these clues consciously as they are reading. First, list new words from a selec- tion students are about to read, and then have students read the selection. When they finish reading, go back to the words and ask students what meanings they hypothesized from the context. The teacher should write down the location of the words in the text so that the class can easily find the words for discussion. If questions remain, the class can consult a dictionary to clarify meanings. This procedure models the way that good readers combine context clues and diction- ary skills.

Students with reading problems can also be taught that when they come to a word they don’t know, they should substitute a word or phrase that makes sense. The substitution is likely to be the definition of the unknown word. For example, in the sentence, “Because prices were going up, we decided to defer buying a car until next year,” many students would substitute the phrase put off or the word delay for the word defer. These words are, in fact, approximate definitions of defer.

After choosing the new words for a selection, display them on a topic board, bul- letin board, word wall, or smartboard. To teach students to use context clues effectively, select a word from the passage that is contextually explained. Display the passage with the target word omitted. A good technique is to cover the target word. Tell students to read the words before and after the omitted word. If the sentence containing the word is not helpful, have students read the previous and following sentences. Guide students to connect what they know with the text.

Predict a possible meaning for the target word. Select the word from your dis- play that best matches the prediction. You may need to reach consensus on a predic- tion. Decide whether they are satisfied with their prediction or need to read further. Remove the tape to reveal the author’s choice. Discuss to reconcile differences, and use references as needed.

Cloze Procedure. The cloze procedure is an excellent way to help students learn to use context clues to figure out word meanings. Instead of deleting every fifth word as you would when using a cloze procedure for assessment purposes, delete the words you want your students to learn from the passage. The cloze procedure can be modi- fied for multiple instructional purposes.

250 C H A P T E R 1 0

Oral Cloze. In an oral cloze, teachers read the passage to students, omitting key words as they read. Students provide possible words to fill in the blanks. As stu- dents select the “best possible fit” for each blank, they engage in rich discussions about word meanings and relationships. A variation of the oral cloze combined with graphophonemic clues was described earlier as part of the shared-reading procedure (Kesler, 2010).

Zip Cloze. In this adaptation of the cloze procedure, Blachowicz and Fisher (2002, 2006, 2010) recommend creating a transparency of the text and using masking tape to cover the target words. As students suggest possible words to complete the sentences, they can “zip off ” the masking tape to immediately compare their predictions with the author’s choices. With electronic books, smartboards, document cameras, and sticky tabs, this procedure is quite easy to use—no need to make a transparency or use mask- ing tape.

Maze Cloze. In another adaptation of the cloze procedure, Blachowicz and Fisher (2002, 2006, 2010) suggest that teachers provide choices for the students when filling in the blanks:

rock Mr. and Mrs. Parker lived in the biggest book on our block.

house

Synonym Cloze. For students who need further support, Blachowicz and Fisher (2002, 2006, 2010) recommend providing a synonym or synonym phrase under the space where the target word is deleted:

The mother cat purred when she found her kitten.

[baby cat]

Using Prefixes, Suffixes, and Roots. The structural parts of words—prefixes, suf- fixes, and roots—are helpful in giving students with reading problems effective clues to meaning (Cunningham, 2009).

Suffixes, or word endings, are common in written English, and they provide valuable clues to recognizing long words. However, students with reading prob- lems often ignore word endings and need to practice focusing on them. Because suffixes are relatively easy to teach, a small amount of effort can dramatically increase the ability to recognize long words. Chapter 8 gives guidelines for teach- ing the easiest suffixes (–s, –ed); this section gives strategies for more advanced suffixes.

Many suffixes change the part of speech of a word. Examples of this are identify- identification (verb becomes a noun) and comfort-comfortable (noun or verb becomes an adjective). Table 10.1 lists some of the most common suffixes in English and their approximate grade levels (Richek, 1969). Because almost all students have some famil- iarity with suffixes, you do not have to teach them one at a time. Instead, simply teach students to be aware of suffixes as they read in context.

Vocabulary Development and Listening Comprehension 251

TABLE 10.1 Graded List of Suffixes

First Grade Second Grade

er, est* bigger, biggest able serviceable s, es (plural)* ponies al seasonal s (possessive)* Jane’s ing singing s (third person)* she dances ly slowly ed (past)* waited ness bigness

Third Grade Fourth Grade Fifth Grade

y cheery ish childish ance insurance tion relation ive impulsive ity serenity ist violist ful beautiful ent excellent ic angelic ency presidency age postage ize idolize ery slavery an musician ment contentment ous famous         ate activate    

*Inflectional suffixes. Other suffixes are derivational.

Three activities are especially useful for helping students to use suffixes:

1. Select a short text and ask students to underline each suffix that they find. Provide the hint that some words contain two or even three suffixes. (Words like illness–es and publish–er–s are found in third- and fourth-grade materials.) Once students have completed this task, review it with them. Few students catch all of the suffixes, and they enjoy finding out about the less obvious ones, such as hurry–hurried.

2. In a slightly more difficult task, students listen to a text read by the teacher. Each time they hear a suffix, they tap a table. For some words, they must tap two or three times. Because this activity requires intense attention, it deepens students’ understanding of suffixes. Older students often enjoy listening to newspaper articles.

3. Select one word and see how many different words students can make from it by using suffixes. For example, from the word sleep, students made sleeping, sleepily, sleepless, sleepy, and sleeper.

Students can also increase their facility with suffixes by collecting words with suffixes and keeping notebooks of suffixed words that they encounter in reading. Have students put a different suffix on the top of each page of a blank notebook. As they encounter words with this suffix, they simply enter them in the book. Figure 10.8 shows a list developed by Ramiro, a 15-year-old student reading on a sixth-grade level.

In addition to suffixes, difficult words include many prefixes (word beginnings) and root words (the main part of the word). Many English prefixes and roots descend

252 C H A P T E R 1 0

from Greek and Latin. Because both prefixes and roots contribute basic meaning to the words they form, students can use them for vocabulary building. Examples of pre- fixes that affect word meanings are pre– (before) and trans– (across). Examples of roots that affect meaning are –port (to carry) and –script (to write). Students who know the meaning of a root such as script have valuable hints to the meanings of such words as postscript, prescription, scribe, and inscription. A list of useful roots and prefixes (Richek, 1969) is given in Table 10.2.

Word history adds variety to the study of word parts. For example, the word part uni is descended from Greek, and the many words that incorporate uni, such as uni- cycle, universe, unity, and unicorn are derived from Greek. The word astronaut, formed in the 1950s, is derived from the Greek elements astro (or star) and naut (or sailor). More mature students can use the dictionary to learn about word histories as related to content-area reading.

FIGURE 10.8 Ramiro’s Suffix List

Vocabulary Development and Listening Comprehension 253

TABLE 10.2 Useful Prefixes and Roots

Prefixes

ante antedate before anti antifreeze against aqua aquarium water endo endoderm inner ex exoderm outer ex ex-president former geo geography earth im impossible not non nonparallel not post posttest after pre pretest before re rewind again semi semisweet sort of sub subterranean below tele television far trans transistor across un undo not

Roots

aque aqueduct water astro astrology stars, heavens auto automation self micro microscope small bio biosphere life dent dentist teeth dict dictate word equi equivalent equal graph biography write itis bronchitis illness ling linguistics language mid amid middle ortho orthodontist straight phobia claustrophobia fear phon phonics sound polit political politics script scripture writing sonic resonant sound spec spectator sight therm thermometer heat viv vivid life

Numbers

mono, uni 1 oct 8 di, bi 2 non 9 tri 3 dec 10 quadr, tetr 4 cent 100 quint, penta 5 milli 1/1000 hex, sex 6 kilo 1000 hept, sept 7 hemi 1/2

Assistive Technology. Many computer-based programs are designed to support stu- dents’ vocabulary development. We would caution that teachers should be judicious in their selection of such programs. Certainly, software applications with electronic books that allow students to highlight unfamiliar words and that provide elaboration can be quite helpful. Game formats that allow teachers to enter their own words to align with units of study provide more quality support than “canned” vocabulary builders. Programs that focus on clusters of morphemic segments of words, such as roots and af- fixes, allowing students to manipulate words and construct derivatives, can be helpful. However, teachers must remember that the most effective instruction occurs contextu- ally. Examine programs carefully to ensure that you can align the technology with your

254 C H A P T E R 1 0

instruction. Otherwise, the supplemental technology can become the equivalent of the weekly approach of Monday, write the 20 words and look them up in the dictionary for Tuesday; Tuesday, spell the words correctly and use them in sentences for Wednesday. Thursday, write a story using all of the words; Friday, take a test.

Using the Dictionary. The dictionary gives students independence in learning word meanings; however, it should not be overused as an instructional tool. Students with reading problems find looking up word meanings tedious, and if they can learn words through other means, they should be encouraged to do so. Interrupting the reading process to look up a word in the dictionary is disruptive to the reading. Fur- thermore, dictionary definitions are often more difficult than the word itself. Finally, because dictionaries do not teach correct usage, sentences using words and discussions of words should accompany dictionary study.

Research has shown that dictionary definitions, even those from children’s dic- tionaries, are difficult to understand (Beck et al., 2002, 2008). For this reason, when students ask what a word means, guide them through the most efficient strategy for that particular word. You might begin with the word-detective process, or you might need to help students break the word into its root and affixes. Then use the dictionary to confirm the meaning they derive.

Even though the dictionary is not the best way to develop word meanings, it does have many uses. It provides definitions, offers a means to distinguish among defini- tions, gives a key for pronunciation, and supplies the different forms of a base word. Dictionary skills, organized from less to more advanced, are as follows:

1. Alphabetizing words. To alphabetize, teach children to use the first letter in a word and then the second letter, third letter, and so on.

2. Locating words. Open the dictionary to the correct half or quarter to locate a word and use key words to determine if a word is on a page.

3. Using the dictionary pronunciation key. 4. Determining the correct dictionary entry for different word forms. For example,

the word slowly should be looked up under the word slow. 5. Determining which of several definitions should be used in a particular context. 6. Determining the historical origin of a word. Usually only advanced dictionaries

provide this information.

Games can help students to learn effective dictionary use:

1. Making dictionary sentences. Students can open the dictionary to a given page and try to construct the longest sentence possible using words from that page (Moffett & Wagner, 1991). Words such as the, and, is, if, and I may have to be added.

2. Drawing pictures of words found in dictionaries. Students can record the page where they found a word and draw a picture of it. Other pupils must then find the word in the dictionary.

3. Seeing who can locate a word in the dictionary using the fewest opening “cuts.” This exercise helps students to locate words quickly.

Vocabulary Development and Listening Comprehension 255

Remember that different dictionaries are helpful for students at different levels. Young students struggling with reading and writing may need a primary-level or inter- mediate dictionary. Older students can profit from college- or adult-level dictionaries.

Using Poetry to Develop Language

Using language in playful, imaginative ways helps students with reading problems en- joy and appreciate it. Poetry is an effective language form because in this medium, sounds and word arrangements assume a special importance. Many teachers have had enormous success using poetry to foster language and personal growth. Because poetry invites students to memorize and recite it, it is an excellent way to build expressive lan- guage skills. Using poetry not only introduces another genre of literature to students, it also connects to the continued development of oral language skills as identified in the Common Core State Standards (CCSSO & National Governor’s Association, 2010).

Simply reading and allowing students to react to the work of outstanding chil- dren’s poets helps them to explore language and ideas. Kutiper and Wilson (1993) found that narrative poetry, which tells a story, is most popular. Students like poems that contain strong rhyme, rhythm, and humor. Familiar experiences and animals are popular poetry topics. Some popular children’s poetry books are as follows:

The New Kid on the Block by Prelutsky Where the Sidewalk Ends by Silverstein A Light in the Attic by Silverstein If I Were in Charge of the World by Viorst Honey I Love by Greenfield

Of course, you may have your own personal choices. For example, Hailstones and Halibut Bones (O’Neill), a book of nonrhyming poems that each reflect a color, became a favorite of several classes of low-achieving third graders. In reading The Giving Tree (Silverstein), a short book with a poetic story, one teacher cried along with her fourth- grade students. When working with poetry, read poems that you enjoy.

Shapiro (1994) suggests many easy ways to encourage students to explore poetry. She urges teachers to make poetry books and poems readily available on a poetry shelf or in a poetry corner. Poetry is an oral medium, and it is meant to be read aloud. To set a mood, poetry can be read at a certain time, perhaps at the beginning of an instructional session. Have a poetry reading once a week. Students can also form a group poetry circle.

Poetry can be effectively shared during read-aloud time. Make sure that you practice beforehand so that you read smoothly and with interpretation. Students will often want to read the poem aloud after you finish it. As you will see, a poem takes on a different interpretation with every individual who reads it.

Students also enjoy reacting to poetry. They can share experiences that the poem reminds them of. They can discuss what they liked or disliked in the poem. They can also discuss their favorite parts, rhymes, or words.

256 C H A P T E R 1 0

Shapiro (1994) has invited students to copy favorite poems into a poetry journal. This is an educational experience, because as they copy poems into a journal, students realize that poets use lines and spaces for a variety of effects. They also begin to learn how poets use rhyme, rhythm, and repetition.

Students who become involved in poetry may wish to give readings of favorite poems. They can perform in choral readings, with partners, or individually. Students should always have the option of memorizing the poem or reading it. Some poetry is particularly useful for performing. For example, Joyful Noise: Poems for Two Voices (Fleishman) contains parts for two voices in rhythmic, nonrhyming poetry. Of course, because fluent, expressive oral reading is the essence of reading poetry, this activity helps improve reading fluency. Remember that students with reading problems may need much practice before they become comfortable performing.

Art and writing are also effective mediums for responding to poetry. After a teacher in a low-achieving fourth-grade classroom shared “Homework Oh Home- work” (from The New Kid on the Block by Prelutsky), each child drew a response to the unpopular topic.

Fostering the Development of Academic Vocabulary In addition to fostering students’ appreciation and understanding of the rich language found in literature, teachers must support students’ understanding of the language of learning. Some define academic vocabulary as the words used in content-area learning; more recently, literacy educators and theorists have presented a broader perspective. Academic vocabulary may refer to the rich language of literary works (Hirsch, 1988). Second, academic vocabulary may refer to the language of standards (Cunningham & Moore, 1986). Butler, Stevens, and Castellon (2007) found that students’ understanding of terms used in the language arts standards actually enhanced students’ performance on literacy assessments. A third category of academic vocabulary includes the language of specific content areas (Marzano, 2004). A fourth area is considered general academic words. The Academic Word List was originally developed by Coxhead (2000) as part of an intervention program for university students who were English learners. This interven- tion program focused on both the morphological features of frequently used words across content areas as well as cognates that had similar features in English and Spanish. Explicit instruction in the morphology and cognates has expanded to the middle and high school levels with the development of the Core Academic Word List by Hiebert (2007).

Such instruction begins quite early when teachers talk about the characteristics of print and books, as described in Chapter 7. Beginning in the earliest experiences with books, parents and teachers point out covers, titles, authors, illustrations, and illustrators (CCSSO & National Governor’s Association, 2010; Clay, 2002).

As students progress through the early phases of literacy, teachers are encour- aged to use the language of phonics by referring to letters as consonants and vowels as well as short, long, and r-controlled vowel patterns. Using this common language of the foundational skills fosters consistency as students progress through subsequent grades (CCSSO & National Governor’s Association, 2010). In intermediate and mid- dle grades, students can identify specific text structures, as well as key words such as

Vocabulary Development and Listening Comprehension 257

main idea, supporting details, compare, and sequence. The accurate, consistent use of the language of learning lays the foundation for continued development as we prepare stu- dents for college and careers, where the technical language of content areas and fields of study will be crucial for success (CCSSO & National Governor’s Association, 2010).

Instructional strategies that focus on the morphological features of words help students to identify similarities across families of words. For example, if the teacher begins with the word confide, students can use affixes to construct the inflectional and derivativational words confident, confidence, confidential, and confidante. Of the 570 gen- eral academic words on the Academic Word List, 76% have three or more words in their “families” (Coxhead, 2000). Similarly, Kieffer and Lesaux (2007) found that using mor- phological features of words to support vocabulary development improved students’ comprehension of text. They developed four principles for teachers to follow:

1. Morphology should be integrated with rich vocabulary instruction. Limit the number of words you expect students to learn, and teach those words within the context of text. Provide multiple contextual opportunities for students to interact with words.

2. Teach students to use morphology as a multistep process. First, they need to use their metacognitive skills to recognize a lack of understanding of the word. Sec- ond, they should analyze the word by breaking it down into roots, prefixes, and suffixes. Third, they should try to determine the meaning of the word based on its parts. Fourth, they should try the word in context to confirm their guesses.

3. Affixes should be taught systematically. Easier affixes, such as –er or –sion, should be taught before more difficult affixes or complex affixes comprised of multiple affixes or affixes that require major changes in spellings of words. For example, it is easier to break down planter into its root and affix than it is to break down categorization.

4. Finally, as with other vocabulary instruction, while students need explicit in- struction in how to analyze words using morphemes, they also need a contextual base for word study (Kieffer & Lesaux, 2010).

Of special interest to content-area teachers are cognates. Additional study of the Academic Word List has revealed that most of the words on the list are of French-Latin origin (Barber, 2000, as reported by Hiebert & Lubliner, 2008). Further, as Spanish is closely related to these origins, the instructional implications for helping students who are English learners connect unfamiliar words they encounter in their textbooks with familiar words in their first languages are tremendous (Lubliner & Hiebert, as reported by Hiebert & Lubliner, 2008)!

Summary

Language is the basis of all reading, and you cannot read language that you cannot understand. Language development is important throughout the grades. Causes of problems with language include language disability and delay, a lack of reading (be- cause reading is the source of much language growth), and a lack of exposure to rich language in the environment.

258 C H A P T E R 1 0

Teachers usually assess students’ language abilities through informal measures, such as observations or conversations. They can also obtain a listening level from an informal reading inventory. Language abilities can also be assessed through for- mal measures, such as the Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test, Fourth Edition, and the Expressive Vocabulary Test, Second Edition.

Conditions that foster language include exposure to high-level language, active responses in learning, and explicit teaching, as well as incidental exposure to rich language in listening and reading.

Strategies for fostering listening comprehension include reading books to stu- dents; paired reading of easy and harder versions of one story; the Directed Listening- Thinking Activity, in which students listen to a story and predict what will happen; building sentences on the board from a short sentence; and encouraging students to employ advanced verbal styles.

Explicit instructional strategies for fostering meaning vocabulary before read- ing include noticing words that appear in text; classifying words into categories; Predict-o-gram, or classifying how words will be used in a story; knowledge rating, or rating one’s knowledge of words; and possible sentences, or composing possibly true sentences before reading. Strategies for reinforcing meaning vocabulary include making word cards with pictures, fitting a multiple number of words into one sen- tence, and practicing responding to words quickly. Vocabulary growth can be fostered by the teacher’s modeling of difficult words in speech, collecting words of different types, relating words to students’ environments, and noticing words as the teacher reads them in a story.

To learn how to figure out unknown words, students can use context clues; struc- tural analysis, such as prefixes, suffixes, and roots; and the dictionary. Because diction- ary definitions are difficult for students, this tool should be used for limited purposes.

References Anderson, R. C., & Freebody, P. (1981). Vocabulary knowledge. In J. Guthrie (Ed.), Comprehension and teach-

ing: Research views (pp. 77–117). Newark, DE: International Reading Association. Anderson, R. C., Wilson, P., & Fielding, L. (1988). Growth in reading and how children spend their time

outside of school. Reading Research Quarterly, 23, 285–303. Bauman, J. F., Ware, D., & Carr Edwards, E. (2007). “Bumping into spicy, tasty words that catch your

tongue”: A formative experiment on vocabulary instruction. The Reading Teacher, 61, 108–122. Beck, I. L., McKeown, M. G., & Kucan, L. (2002). Bringing words to life: Robust vocabulary instruction. New

York: Guilford Press. Beck, I. L., McKeown, M. G., & Kucan, L. (2008). Creating robust vocabulary: Frequently asked questions and

extended examples. New York: Guilford Press. Beck, I. L., McKeown, M. G., & Omanson, R. (1987). The effects and uses of diverse vocabulary instruc-

tional techniques. In M. G. McKeown & M. E. Curtis (Eds.), The nature of vocabulary acquisition. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Beck, I. L., Perfetti, C. A., & McKeown, M. G. (1982). The effects of long-term vocabulary instruction on lexical access and reading comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 74, 506–521.

Biemiller, A. (2001). Teaching vocabulary: Early, direct, and sequential. American Educator, 25, 24–28, 47. Blachowicz, C. (1986). Making connections: Alternatives to the vocabulary notebook. The Reading Teacher,

36, 534–539.

Vocabulary Development and Listening Comprehension 259

Blachowicz, C. L. Z., & Fisher, P. (2000). Vocabulary instruction. In R. Barr, M. L. Kamil, P. Mosenthal, & P. D. Pearson (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (Vol. III, pp. 503–523). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Blachowicz, C. L. Z., & Fisher, P. J. (2006). Teaching vocabulary in all classrooms (3rd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education, Inc.

Blachowicz, C. L. Z., & Fisher, P. J. (2010). Teaching vocabulary in all classrooms (4th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education, Inc.

Blachowicz, C. L. Z., Fisher, P. J. L., Ogle, D., & Watts-Taffe, S. (2006). Vocabulary: Questions from the classroom. Reading Research Quarterly, 41(4), 524–539.

Butler, F. A., Stevens, R., & Castellon, M. (2007). ELLs and standardized assessments: the inter-action between language proficiency and performance on standardized tests. In A. L. Bailey (Ed.), The language demands of school: Putting academic English to the test. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

Carver, R. P., & David, A. H. (2001). Investigating reading achievement using a causal model. Scientific Studies of Reading, 5, 107–140.

Chall, J. S. (1983). Stages of reading development. New York: McGraw-Hill. Christensen, L. (1998). Inviting student lives into the classroom: Where I’m from. Rethinking Schools, 12,

22–23. Clay, M. M. (2002). An observation survey of early literacy achievement (2nd ed.). Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann

Educational Books. Council of Chief State School Officers & National Governors Association. (2010). Common Core State

Standards for English language arts and literacy in history/social studies, science and technical subjects. Retrieved from http://www.corestandards.org

Coyne, M. D., Simmons, D. C., Kame’enui, E. I., & Stoolmiller, M. (2004). Teaching vocabulary during shared storybook reading: An examination of differential effects. Exceptionality, 12, 145–162.

Coxhead, A. (2000), Summer. A new academic word list. TESOL Quarterly, 34(2), 213–238. Cunningham, A., & Stanovich, K. (1998). What reading does for the mind. American Educator, 22, 8–17. Cunningham, J. W., & Moore, D. W. (1986). Developing readers and writiers in the content areas, K-12. New York:

Longman. Cunningham, P. M. (2009). What really matters in vocabulary: Research-based practices across the curriculum.

Boston: Pearson. Cunningham, P. M., Cunningham, J. W., Moore, S. A., & Moore, D. W. (2004). Reading and writing in

elementary classrooms: Research-based K-4 instruction (5th ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon. Dale, E. (1965). Vocabulary measurement: Techniques and major findings. Elementary English, 42, 895–901, 948. Davis, F. B. (1944). Fundamental factors of comprehension in reading. Psychometrika, 9, 185–197. Davis, F. B. (1968). Research in comprehension in reading. Reading Research Quarterly, 3, 499–545. Edwards Santoro, L., Chard, D. J., Howard, L., & Baker, S. K. (2008). Making the very most of classroom

read-alouds to promote comprehension and vocabulary. The Reading Teacher, 6, 396–408. Gee, J. P. (2004). Situated language and learning: A critique of traditional school. New York: Routledge. González, N., Moll, L. C., & Amanti, C. (Eds.) (2005). Funds of knowledge: Theorizing practice in households,

communities, and classrooms. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Graves, M. (2000). A vocabulary program to complement and bolster a middle-grade comprehension pro-

gram. In B. M. Taylor, M. F. Graves, & P. Van Der Brock (Eds.), Reading for meaning (pp. 116–135). Newark, DE: International Reading Association, and New York: Teachers College Press.

Graves, M. F. (2006). The vocabulary book. Newark, DE: International Reading Association. Gredler, M. E., & Johnson, R. L. (2004). Assessment in the literacy classroom. Boston: Allyn & Bacon. Hiebert, E. H. (May 2007). A core academic word list for the middle grades. Paper presented at the Interna-

tional Reading Association, Toronto, ON. Hiebert, E. H. & Lubliner, S. (2008). The nature, learning, and instruction of general academic vocabulary.

In Farstrup, A. E. & Samuels, S. J. (Eds.), What research has to say about vocabulary instruction. Newark, DE: International Reading Association.

Hirsch, E. D., Jr. (1988). Cultural literacy: What every American needs to know. New York: Vintage Publications. Jennings, J. H., Caldwell, J., & Lerner, J. W. (2006). Reading problems: Assessment and teaching strategies

(5th ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

260 C H A P T E R 1 0

Jennings, J. H., Caldwell, J., & Lerner, J. W. (2010). Reading problems: Assessment and teaching strategies (6th ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

Josel, C. A. (1988). In a different context. Journal of Reading, 31, 374–377. Joshi, R. M. (2005). Vocabulary: A critical component of comprehension. Reading and Writing Quarterly, 21,

209–219. Kearns, G., & Biemiller, A. (2010/2011). Two-questions vocabulary assessment: Developing a new method

for group testing in kindergarten through second grade. Journal of Education, 190, 31–41. Kesler, T. (2010). Shared reading to build vocabulary y and comprehension. The Reading Teacher, 272–277. Kieffer, M. J., & Lesaux, N. K. (2007). Breaking down words to build meaning: Morphology, vocabulary, and

reading comprehension in the urban classroom. The Reading Teacher, 61, 134–144. Kieffer, M. J., & Lesaux, N. K. (2010). Morphing into adolescents: Active word learning for English-language

learners and their classmates in middle school. Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy, 54, 47–56. Kindle, K. J. (2009). Vocabulary development during read-alouds: Primary practices. The Reading Teacher,

63, 202–211. Kutiper, K., & Wilson, P. (1993). Updating poetry preferences: A look at the poetry children really like. The

Reading Teacher, 47, 28–34. Lansdown, S. (1991). Increasing vocabulary knowledge using direct instruction, cooperative grouping, and

reading in junior high school. Illinois Reading Council Journal, 19, 15–21. Marzano, R. J. (2004). Direct instruction in vocabulary. In B. Williams (Ed.), Closing the achievement gap

(2nd ed., pp. 48–66). Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. McKeown, M. G. & Beck, I. L. (2006). Encouraging young children’s language interaction with stories.

In K. D. Dickinson & S. B. Neuman (Eds.), Handbook of early literacy research (Vol. 2, pp. 281–294). New York: Guilford.

Moffett, J., & Wagner, B. J. (1991). Student-centered language arts, K–12 (4th ed.). Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann-Boynton/Cook.

Moore, D., & Arthur, S. V. (1981). Possible sentences. In E. D. Dishner, T. W. Bean, & J. E. Readence (Eds.), Reading in the content areas: Improving classroom instruction (pp. 138–142). Dubuque, IA: Kendall/Hunt.

Morrow, L. M. (2011). Literacy development in the early years: Helping children read and write (7th ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

Nagy, W., Anderson R., & Herman, P. (1987). Learning word meanings from context during normal reading. American Educational Research Journal, 24, 237–270.

Nagy, W. E., & Scott, J. A. (2000). Vocabulary processes. In R. Barr, M. L. Kamil, P. Mosenthal, & P. D. Pearson (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (Vol. III, pp. 269–284). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

National Institute of Child Health and Human Development. (2000). Report of the National Reading Panel: Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction (NIH Publication No. 00-4769). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.

Paris, A. H., & Paris, S. G. (2003). Assessing narrative comprehension in young children. Reading Research Quarterly, 38, 36–76.

Purcell-Gates, V. (1986). Lexical and syntactic knowledge of written narrative held by well-read-to kinder- garteners and second graders. Research in the Teaching of English, 22, 128–157.

Richek, M. A. (1969). A study of the affix structure of English: Affix frequency and teaching methods. Unpublished paper, University of Chicago.

Richek, M. A. (1987). DRTA: 5 variations that facilitate independence in reading narratives. Journal of Read- ing, 30, 632–636.

Richek, M. A. (1989). Increasing the achievement of your remedial reading students. Paso Robles, CA: Bureau of Education and Research.

Richek, M. A. (1999). Reading success for at-risk children: Ideas that work. Bellevue, WA: Bureau of Education and Research.

Richek, M. A., Caldwell, J. S., Jennings, J. H., & Lerner, J. W. (2002). Reading problems: Assessment and teaching strategies (4th ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

Scott, J. A., Jamieson-Noel, D., & Asselin, M. (2003). Vocabulary instruction throughout the day in twenty- three Canadian upper-elementary classrooms. Elementary School Journal, 103, 269–312.

Vocabulary Development and Listening Comprehension 261

Scott, J. A., Skobel, B., & Well, J. (2008). The word conscious classroom: Building the vocabulary readers and writers need (Theory into Practice series). New York: scholastic.

Shapiro, S. (1994). From reading poetry to poetry reading in the classroom. Illinois Reading Council Journal, 21, 67–71.

Stahl, S. A., & Fairbanks, M. (1986). The effects of vocabulary instruction: A model-based meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 56, 72–110.

Stanovich, K. E. (1986). Matthew effects in reading. Some consequences of individual differences in the acquisition of literacy. Reading Research Quarterly, 21, 360–406.

Stanovich, K. E. (1988). Children’s reading and the development of phonological awareness. Detroit: Wayne State University Press.

Stanovich, K. E., & Cunningham, A. E. (1993). Where does knowledge come from? Specific associations between print exposure and information acquisition. Journal of Educational Psychology, 85, 211–229.

Stauffer, R. G. (1975). Directing the reading-thinking process. New York: Harper and Row. Strickland, D. S., & Shanahan, T. (2004). Laying the groundwork for literacy. Educational Leadership, 61, 74–77. Strickland, K., & Strickland, J. (2000). Making assessment elementary. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. Thorndike, R. L. (1973). Reading comprehension education in fifteen countries. New York: Wiley. Walker, B. J. (2005). Techniques for reading assessment and instruction. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill

Prentice Hall.

Go to the topic 6: Vocabulary in the MyEduca- tionLab (www.myeducationlab.com) for Read- ing Problems: Assessment and Teaching Strategies, where you can: ◆ Find learning outcomes for vocabulary,

along with the national standards that con- nect to these outcomes.

◆ Complete assignments and activities that can help you more deeply understand the chapter content.

◆ Apply and practice your understanding of the core teaching skills identified in the chapter with the Building Teaching Skills and Dispositions learning units.

◆ Examine challenging situations and cases presented in the Iris Center Resources.

◆ Practice targeting instruction and mak- ing content accessible for all students with A+RISE activities.

◆ Strengthen your understanding and usage of the English language in writing with the Grammar Tutorial.

◆ Gain experience in choosing appropriate literature and integrating the best titles into

language arts instruction with the Children’s and Young Adult Literature Database.

◆ Track the month-by-month literacy growth of five second-graders with the Literacy Portraits.

◆ Create, update, and share quality lesson plans with the Lesson Plan Builder.

◆ Access state licensure test requirements, overviews of what tests cover, and sample test items in the Certification and Licen- sure section.

◆ Check your comprehension of the content covered in the chapter with the Study Plan. Here you will be able to take a chapter pre- test, receive feedback on your answers, and then access personalized Review, Practice, and Enrichment exercises to enhance your understanding of chapter content. After you complete the exercises, take a posttest to confirm your comprehension.

◆ Check the Chapter Resources to find Infor- mal Reading Inventory materials.

1 1Comprehension of Narrative Text

262

C H A P T E R

Introduction

Effective Reading Comprehension The Purpose of Reading Is Comprehension Comprehension Is an Active and Accurate

Process Comprehension Uses Background Knowledge Comprehension Requires Higher-Level Thinking

Comprehending Narrative Materials Narratives Inspire Imaginative Personal Responses Narratives Have Story Organization

Assessing Abilities with Narrative Text Measuring General Comprehension Ability Judging the Comprehension of Specific Materials

A Strategic Approach to Teaching Reading Comprehension

Improving Comprehension Before Reading Building Background Knowledge Making Predictions About Text Reading a Story to Students

Improving Comprehension During Reading Directed Reading-Thinking Activity Monitoring Responses to Reading Making Mental Images Constructing Content-Free Questions Using Discussion Cards

Improving Comprehension After Reading Comprehension Strategies That Develop an

Understanding of Story Structure Comprehension Strategies That Nurture

Personal Response Connecting the Literacy Experience

Conceptually Connected Instruction Using Themes

Studying Different Genres Summary

Case Study

Comprehension of Narrative Text 263

Introduction

Comprehension is the essence of reading—indeed, it is the only purpose for reading— yet, many low-achieving students are unable to read effectively because they lack critical elements of comprehension. They need to develop strategies that help them become active, competent readers who demand meaning from text.

Focusing on reading comprehension is important even when a student’s primary area of difficulty is word recognition. When students understand what they read, they enjoy it and are motivated to read more. This increased reading results in additional practice in recognizing words. In addition, students who are focused on meaning can use their general understanding of a story to help them recognize difficult words.

This chapter describes the general nature of comprehension, and then discusses the comprehension of narrative (or storylike) text, including what it is, how to assess it, and what strategies to use for instruction. The comprehension of informational text is addressed in Chapter 12.

Effective Reading Comprehension

Good readers share subconscious knowledge and attitudes about four important aspects of comprehension:

1. The purpose of reading is comprehension. 2. Comprehension is an active and accurate process. 3. Readers use their background knowledge to comprehend. 4. Comprehension requires higher-level thinking.

The Purpose of Reading Is Comprehension Good readers know that the purpose of reading is to understand, enjoy, and learn from material. In contrast, students with reading problems often think that reading means recognizing words. Some feel that once they have read all of the words orally, they are finished. To help students with reading problems understand that successful reading requires comprehension, you can:

◆ Always ask students for a comprehension response after they read material. You can use questions, story retellings, or some of the more detailed strategies in this chapter. You can also use the think-aloud strategy described in Chapter 12.

◆ Encourage silent reading. Students who read only orally come to think of read- ing as a performance. Silent reading helps them to understand that reading is a personal, meaning-focused activity.

Comprehension Is an Active and Accurate Process As discussed in Chapter 1, reading is the active construction of meaning. Good read- ers construct a text in their minds as they read. This text is similar to the text that the

264 C H A P T E R 1 1

author has written, but good readers use their background knowledge to supply details and draw conclusions not stated explicitly in the text. In contrast, problem readers often focus on remembering small details rather than constructing their own meaning. Struggling readers may need to be taught to monitor their comprehension (Crabtree, Alber-Morgan, & Konrad, 2010; Pressley, 2000; Van Der Broek & Kremer, 2000); that is, when they lose the meaning of the material, they do not go back in the text and try to understand. In fact, disabled readers are often unaware that something is wrong. The ability to monitor one’s own comprehension and employ fix-up strategies is called metacognition.

Reading should be accurate as well as active. Sometimes, when struggling read- ers come across unfamiliar words, they abandon the actual text and substitute words that have little relation to the text’s meaning. Some simply construct a story based on just a few words. Teachers can use these strategies to encourage active, yet accurate, reading:

1. Interest students in the material before they begin. Tell them what is good or ex- citing about a story or topic. Discuss the author to show students that stories are written by real people. Draw parallels between the students’ lives and the events in a story.

2. Provide a structure to aid students’ self-monitoring of their comprehension. Using story structure and asking students to identify the elements as they read is often helpful (Crabtree et al., 2010; Dymock, 2007).

Comprehension Uses Background Knowledge The ability to comprehend is highly dependent on the background knowledge, or schema, that readers bring to reading (Goldman & Rakestraw, 2000). When students understand concepts important to the story, their comprehension increases (Beck, Omanson, & McKeown, 1982).

Unfortunately, students with reading problems may lack the background knowl- edge that ensures comprehension. Mike, a fifth grader, read a story about a boy who found a skunk, which later turned out to be a mink. Unfortunately, because Mike did not know what minks were, he could not understand that most people had different attitudes toward the two animals. In short, Mike lacked the background information to understand the story.

Because print often deals with more sophisticated concepts than conversation, reading helps to build background information needed in school. For example, most of you learned about ancient Greece through school and leisure reading rather than at the family dinner table. However, because students with reading problems do not read much, they do not learn the many sophisticated concepts needed for success in school (Cunningham & Stanovich, 1993; Snider & Tarver, 1987).

Even when students with reading problems do have background knowledge, they may not use it effectively (Pace, Marshall, Horowitz, Lipson, & Lucido, 1989). Some readers underuse their background knowledge and do not summon it to con- sciousness when they read. Other low-achieving readers overuse their background knowledge (Williams, 1993) and let their personal points of view intrude into their

Comprehension of Narrative Text 265

comprehension. To illustrate, Angel, a fourth grader, read a selection about a football game in which the star player was a girl. Unfortunately, Angel’s schema that only boys played football was so strong that she overlooked the information in the text and con- sistently insisted that she was a he.

Research shows that increasing students’ prior knowledge of a topic improves their reading (Paris, Wasik, & Turner, 1991). Many techniques help students to build and use background knowledge:

◆ Help students build background before they read; gently correct misperceptions. ◆ If you are teaching in a resource setting, provide learning experiences that build

the background knowledge students need to comprehend their regular class- room material.

◆ Encourage students to modify their own ideas when the text presents new information.

Comprehension Requires Higher-Level Thinking Higher-level thinking processes are important to story comprehension. Good readers combine their own background information with the information in the text to draw inferences. As they read, they make predictions, which are confirmed or disproved later in the text (Allbritton, 2004). Teachers can foster higher-level comprehension in several ways:

1. Ask students inferential and prediction questions and limit the number of factual questions asked. When teachers simply ask more inference questions, students improve in their abilities to draw inferences (Hansen, 1981; Sundbye, 1987; Wixson, 1983).

2. Model higher-level thinking skills for students. Low-achieving readers need to see the thought processes underlying skilled comprehension.

Comprehending Narrative Materials

Narrative text is one popular and common form of writing. In narratives, stories are told and plots unfold. Narratives have characters and a plot with a sequence of events. Although most stories are fiction (e.g., Charlotte’s Web by White, the Harry Potter books by Rowling, The Cat in the Hat by Dr. Seuss, The Three Little Pigs) some chronicle real- life events (My Side of the Mountain, by George). Narrative materials inspire personal responses and are organized in certain ways.

Narratives Inspire Imaginative Personal Responses Narratives are written to inspire personal responses (Pearson & Fielding, 1991). Through stories, children and adults leave the limits of their everyday lives and “travel” to a boarding school for wizards with Harry Potter (Rowling) or to rural Wisconsin in the 1800s in Little House on the Prairie (Wilder). In this way, children learn to represent

266 C H A P T E R 1 1

people, objects, and events in their imagination (Graesser, Golding, & Long, 1991). Thus, cognitive growth is fostered by an enjoyable experience.

Good readers become involved in the narratives they read. They put themselves in the character’s place and ask themselves, “What would I do if I were in this situ- ation?” Students who identify with a character comprehend better and read more (Golden & Guthrie, 1986; Thomson, 1987).

Sadly, some struggling readers have limited experience using their own imagina- tions and lack these responses to narratives. One group of low-achieving third graders responded negatively to all types of fiction and anything that seemed unreal. Only after several months of reading and listening to fantasies in books, poems, and stories did they begin to feel comfortable.

To foster personal responses, students must share their reactions to reading. Adults often do this naturally. Typically, if you tell a friend that you saw a movie, the first question is “Did you like it?” Most children also have strong personal responses to stories, yet teachers rarely ask for their reactions (Gambrell, 1986). When you ask students for personal reactions, you honor their opinions, focus on enjoyment, and raise their self-esteem.

To focus on students’ personal responses, ask students to rate their enjoyment of a story (e.g., “I disliked it.” “It was OK.” “I liked it.” “I loved it.”). Ask them if they have anything in common with the story characters or with the situations in a story. When students share responses, they realize that others may have differing opinions and experiences.

Narratives Have Story Organization Narratives are written according to a specific form, called a story grammar, and include different types, or genres, of literature.

Story Grammar. A story grammar includes specific elements. If you recall a story you read recently, it had characters, a setting, events, and a conclusion. In addition, the characters probably had problems to solve. Students need to be able to do the following:

◆ Identify important characters. ◆ Identify the setting: time and place. ◆ Recall the major events in proper sequence and separate important events from

less important ones. ◆ Identify the problem that the character(s) had to solve and explain how that

problem was resolved.

Shanahan and Shanahan (1997) have shown that students who use story grammar and analyze the different perspectives of the characters improve their comprehension of the story. Readers must track the characters and events, remembering relevant infor- mation and ignoring irrelevant information, to read and comprehend narrative text (Gernsbacher, Robertson, Palladino, & Werner, 2004).

Comprehension of Narrative Text 267

Narratives have themes or main points; many narratives, such as fables, have morals. Skilled readers not only understand the characters and events, they also grasp the overall meaning or theme of the story (Zhang & Hoosain, 2005). As most students mature, they grow in the ability to understand themes and morals. Struggling readers may have problems keeping track of the characters and events to construct a coher- ent understanding of the theme of the story. They may not be able to determine the relevance of information presented in the story.

Good readers implicitly identify story features and use them as a road map to guide their comprehension. In contrast, struggling readers are often unaware of story structure. Research shows that low-achieving students benefit from explicit instruc- tion in story grammar (Goldman & Rakestraw, 2000).

Genres of Narrative Text. Different varieties of reading materials are called genres. Narrative genres include the following:

◆ Realistic fiction ◆ Fantasy, including books with talking animals, science fiction, and horror stories ◆ Fairytales, folktales, and tall tales ◆ Fables ◆ Mysteries ◆ Humor, language play ◆ Historical fiction, set in a period in the past ◆ Plays ◆ Narrative poetry: poems that tell stories ◆ Real-life adventures ◆ Biographies and autobiographies

To become good readers, students need to gain experience reading many different genres.

Assessing Abilities With Narrative Text

This section provides guidelines for measuring general comprehension abilities. These guidelines are followed by techniques to help you judge students’ comprehension of a specific story or book.

Measuring General Comprehension Ability Many standardized tests of reading contain at least one subtest measuring comprehen- sion. These tests include the Woodcock Reading Mastery Tests–Revised; the WJ-III Diagnostic Reading Battery; the Gates–MacGinitie Reading Test, Fourth Edition; and the Iowa Tests of Basic Skills. In interpreting these subtests, be aware that a low score on a comprehension subtest does not always indicate a comprehension problem. First, a low score on a comprehension subtest may be due to problems with recognizing

268 C H A P T E R 1 1

words in the passage. If the general test has a vocabulary subtest, you can compare that score with the student’s comprehension score. You can also present the vocabulary test as a probe, reading the words and answer choices to the student. If the student scores high on the probed vocabulary test, his or her problems probably lie in the area of word recognition. If the student’s scores on the probed presentation of the vocabulary test are also low, then the problem probably lies in the area of comprehension.

Second, the actual tasks students are asked to do on comprehension subtests may not reflect what they do in classrooms. For example, in the WJ-III Reading Mastery Battery Comprehension Subtest, students read a paragraph orally and fill in a missing word. In school, however, students must read long stories and answer questions after silent read- ing. Thus, to interpret test information correctly, look at the actual items on the test.

Certainly, comprehension should be included in a systematic assessment plan. Initial measures of comprehension usually occur within the context of a school wide standardized achievement test. If a student’s performance raises concerns, diagnostic tests may be administered to determine specific issues. If a student is diagnosed with reading problems or a learning disability, an instructional intervention plan is devel- oped, and a systematic assessment plan should be part of the instructional plan. In some states, informal measures can be used to document student progress; in others, a brief form of a standardized test must be used.

Judging the Comprehension of Specific Materials Can a student effectively comprehend a specific story? This section gives two strate- gies to determine how well a student has comprehended a story: retelling and ques- tioning. It also describes how these strategies can be used to improve comprehension as well as assess it.

Retelling. When students retell a story, the teacher gains insight into the text they have constructed in their minds. Retelling shows how a student has mentally organized a selection and what information the student considers important enough to remem- ber. Thus, the teacher observes and analyzes comprehension in action.

To elicit a retelling, begin by informing the student that he or she will retell a story to you after it is read. Next, ask the student to read the story. When the student has finished, say, “Tell me about the story as if you were telling it to a person who had never read it.” To avoid undue emphasis on details in a longer story, older students can be asked to summarize rather than to retell.

Do not interrupt as the story is told. When the student has finished, however, you may ask the student to tell more about certain things. This prompting is important for low-achieving readers, because they often know more about a story than they will tell in free recall (Bridge & Tierney, 1981).

Leslie and Caldwell (2001) and Caldwell and Leslie (2008) offer guidelines for evaluating the quality of a retelling. Generally, retellings should include the following:

◆ The presence of the major character(s) ◆ The defining characteristics of the characters (good, bad, curious)

Comprehension of Narrative Text 269

◆ The problem presented by the story ◆ The solution to that problem (or the end) ◆ Events presented in sequential order ◆ The ability to include only those events important to the story and exclude un-

important events

Teachers should be aware of some indications that a retelling may be immature:

◆ Referring to all characters as “him,” “her,” or “they” ◆ Giving a detailed description only of the first page or story segment

When judging retellings, remember that a student’s concept of story structure may not fully mature until the teen years. Thus, young students often produce unsophisticated retellings.

Evidence suggests that students who retell stories improve their comprehension (Gambrell, Pfeiffer, & Wilson, 1985; Koskinen, Gambrell, Kapinus, & Heathington, 1988; Morrow et al., 1986). When teachers give students feedback about their retell- ings, improvement in comprehension increases, especially for young students.

Questioning. Although questioning is perhaps the most common way to assess comprehension, it does have several drawbacks. First, it does not demand an active response from children. Questions enable teachers to determine whether the student knows what adults consider important to the story. They do not provide information about whether students were able to construct the main events in their own minds. Second, formulating good questions is difficult. Third, all questions are not similar (Ciardiello, 1998). A question can be literal or inferential, and each kind can represent various levels of difficulty. For example, answering a literal question may involve a short answer found in one section of the text, or it may involve stringing together sev- eral elements spread throughout the text. Teachers need to be aware of the variation in the difficulty level of questions, particularly those provided in teacher manuals. If you are going to ask questions, remember the following guidelines:

◆ Don’t have students spend too much time. Students should not spend more time answering questions than they spent reading a selection. When using questions from a teacher’s manual, feel free to eliminate some.

◆ Do not provide answers to questions as you ask other questions. ◆ Try to avoid yes-no questions or either-or questions. Students have a 50% chance

of a right answer just by guessing. ◆ Focus on some questions that require long answers. Encourage students to ex-

plain the reasons for their answers. ◆ Focus on asking higher-level questions, such as those calling for inferences and

predictions. ◆ When one student gives an incorrect answer to a question, work with that student

to correct that answer rather than redirecting the question to another student (Crawford, 1989).

270 C H A P T E R 1 1

◆ To increase comprehension, students can be encouraged to formulate their own questions (Caldwell & Leslie, 2012; Van Der Broek & Kremer, 2000).

◆ Teach students to look back in the text to find answers.

A Strategic Approach to Teaching Reading Comprehension

Good comprehension is an important reading skill. Students need to learn strategic approaches to reading to develop this skill. Teachers can support students in learning effective strategies to improve comprehension. In its final report, the comprehension subgroup of the National Reading Panel (2000) identified clusters of instructional strategies grounded in a scientific basis for improving reading comprehension:

◆ Comprehension monitoring to increase students’ awareness of their understand- ing of the material

◆ Using graphic organizers of the material to support students’ understanding of the material with visual representation, including story maps and semantic maps

◆ Answering questions posed by the teacher. As discussed earlier, it is important to pose inferential questions that require higher-level thinking rather than factual details. It is also important to provide immediate feedback.

◆ Generating questions about various aspects of the story. Although this is an important skill, students who struggle with reading and writing often have problems with the sentence structure of questions. Teachers may need to pro- vide additional support for this strategy.

◆ Using story structure to help students remember story content and respond to questions about the text

◆ Summarizing to integrate ideas and generalize information from text

The National Reading Panel further identified cooperative learning as an effective practice in helping students learn reading strategies to improve comprehension.

Although some of these strategies are helpful as stand-alone strategies, they are most effective when used as a systematic, multistrategy approach.

Shanahan (2005) suggests that the reciprocal teaching strategy developed by Palinscar and Brown (1984) is actually an instructional approach to teaching com- prised of multiple strategies. The premise of reciprocal teaching is that teachers should gradually release the responsibility for learning to their students.

The reciprocal teaching approach includes the following:

1. Summarize 2. Question 3. Clarify 4. Predict

The cycle begins with predicting content based on the title and pictures. Students read a segment of text, and then summarize the text in one sentence. Next, students ask a

Comprehension of Narrative Text 271

question about the segment of text. We usually tell our students to ask a question they think we would ask about the whole section if we were constructing a question for a test. Next, students clarify any concepts or words that presented problems. Finally, they predict what will happen next. In implementing the reciprocal teaching strategy, as developed by Brown and Palinscar, teachers divide text into one- to two-paragraph segments. This breaks the chore of comprehension into a manageable task for strug- gling readers.

Shanahan (2005) identifies the components of this mega-strategy as individual strategies integrated into a highly effective approach for teaching. Teachers model each component and explain its purpose. Students have multiple opportunities to prac- tice these components as teachers guide them to gradually assume responsibility for each component. Reciprocal teaching has a strong research base that has shown dra- matic increases in students’ comprehension of text. One word of caution: Some teach- ers have relinquished responsibility too soon; students’ comprehension of text tends to increase quickly. However, this does not mean they have learned the components of the strategy well enough to implement them independently. An example of a teacher using reciprocal teaching with a student who had excellent word recognition skills but comprehended narrative text at significantly lower level than his chronological grade level is presented in the case study at the end of this chapter.

Reciprocal teaching begins with teachers modeling the strategy and explain- ing its components. Then students are given opportunities to “take turns” being the teacher for each component of the strategy as the teacher monitors their progress. Gradually, students assume all of the roles and become self-sufficient in implementing the strategy.

Improving Comprehension Before Reading The remainder of this chapter focuses on strategies to develop comprehension in nar- rative text. These strategies are presented based on their emphasis. First, we present effective practices to support comprehension before students actually begin reading the text. Next, we present effective practices to support comprehension during the actual reading of the text. Then we present practices that occur after reading as stu- dents process the information from the text and assimilate it. An effective strategic approach draws from all three categories to support students’ efforts to comprehend text throughout the process.

This section describes strategies to use before students read. In a classic study, Durkin (1978–1979) found that the first part of a reading lesson is the most crucial but often the most neglected. This section describes instructional practices to use for building background knowledge, making predictions, and reading a selection to stu- dents before they read it for themselves.

Building Background Knowledge Because background knowledge greatly influences comprehension, it is essential to build knowledge of specific concepts in a story before students read it. How can you do this?

272 C H A P T E R 1 1

Before students read, teachers can provide factual information about key concepts they will meet in a story (Richek & Glick, 1991). Often, teachers can simply read infor- mational material to students. Factual books, such as The Kids’ Question and Answer Book (edited by Owl Magazine), Mammoth Book of Trivia (Meyers), and a children’s encyclo- pedia are good sources for these read-aloud selections. When you read factual material to low-achieving students, you remind them of what they know about a topic and supply them with new facts. You also increase vocabulary because factual articles mention new vocabulary words that children will meet later in the story they read. Finally, you model the process of summoning up background information before reading.

In one example, before children read a story about a heroic horse, a third-grade teacher read aloud a children’s encyclopedia article on horses. The article contained unfamiliar facts, and it used words, such as mare and foal, that the children later found in the story.

Objects and displays can also help children absorb background knowledge. In preparation for reading a folktale about Russia, teachers of at-risk fourth graders brought in Russian nesting dolls, ruble currency, postcards, and books written in Russian.

Students can be actively involved in building their own background knowledge. Rather than simply supplying information, begin your lesson by asking them what they know about a subject or topic. Before low-achieving third graders read a story about two child detectives, they listed all of the different detectives they knew about. This activity dramatically increased their involvement in the story.

Access to the Internet provides an excellent resource for building background knowledge. Before reading, students can access information about topics. The flow of text and video presentation available through the Internet builds background knowledge by elaborating topics. With touchscreens, students can highlight words or concepts to open links that elaborate vocabulary and concepts that will enhance their understand- ing of an upcoming topic of study. Pelekis and Phillips (2012) found that designing classroom wikis for their primary-grade children to use for their units of study allowed them to ensure that children accessed accurate information appropriate for their ages and grade levels. This has become part of the instructional planning process, but allows the students to work independently on building backgrounds with extensive concept and vocabulary development while the teachers work with small groups of students.

Students can also respond actively to information that the teacher presents. For example, to prepare first graders to read a story about a “sleep out,” the teacher read A New True Book: Sleeping and Dreaming (Milios) to them (Richek & Glick, 1991). Then the students dictated their favorite facts as the teacher listed them on the board:

You grow when you sleep. Your eyelids flutter when you sleep. When you sleep, you dream.

Making Predictions About Text Predicting what a story will be about before reading it gives students an active orienta- tion toward learning and encourages them to use background knowledge. Struggling

Comprehension of Narrative Text 273

readers often don’t predict what stories will be about (Beers, 2003). Teachers can help students predict by using specific strategies that support predicting.

Predicting. To help students predict, write the title of a book or selection on the board and ask students what they think it will be about or what kind of story it will be. “The Skates of Uncle Richard” will probably involve sports. “How the Duck Learned to Talk to the Pig” probably involves some fantasy.

Students can also predict what a story is about from a list of important story words. For example, after you list the words witch, invisible, and wand, students might hypothesize that the story is about magic.

You can also read a story in segments, stopping and asking students to predict what will happen next. As you read the subsequent material, allow students to revise or confirm their predictions.

We must offer one word of caution regarding prediction. Often students misin- terpret the purpose of predicting and look on it as they do teacher questions. They want to provide the right answer. They do not understand that all readers make predictions as they read, and they do not comprehend the fun of being surprised when the story turns out quite differently from what they predicted. Sometimes, when teachers ask students to predict, some students peek ahead in the text to find out what really hap- pened, thus allowing them to make the “right” prediction. Therefore, teachers’ model- ing the excitement of predicting and the fun of being surprised is extremely important.

Semantic Impressions. This predictive strategy (McGinley & Denner, 1987) enables students to create their own stories by using words that they will later meet in a pub- lished story. By writing or dictating their own stories, they are actively employing story grammar, using specific vocabulary, and drawing on their own background knowledge. Students may write individual stories, or a class can write a group story. In some classes, students have become so fond of their stories that they have bound them into class books. The teacher should follow the procedure presented in Figure 11.1 when using the seman- tic impressions strategy. Two excellent books to use with this strategy are The Paper Bag Princess (Munsch) and, for young children, Harriet and the Roller Coaster (Carlson). Strat- egy Snapshot 11.1 shows how semantic impressions were used with The Paper Bag Princess.

FIGURE 11.1 Semantic Impressions Strategy

1. Before students read a story, write important words from it on the board. The words should be written in the order they appear in the story.

2. Have students use the words in the order in which they appear on the board to com- pose their own story. Words can be reused. You may have the students dictate their stories or they can write their own.

3. After the students have written their stories, have them read the published version, and then compare the two versions. Often, intermediate and middle-level students like to write about which story they prefer.

274 C H A P T E R 1 1

Strategy Snapshot 11.1 Semantic Impressions

The Paper Bag Princess (by Munsch) is an excellent story to use with the semantic impres- sions strategy. In this “twisted” fairytale, a princess refuses to marry a less-than-gallant prince. Begin by putting the following words from the book on the board:

princess prince dragon carried off chase bag forests fiery breath meatball sleep mess bum marry

Ms. Walega’s second-grade class, which included several struggling readers, dictated this story:

There once was a princess and a prince. The prince went to fight the dragon. The dragon got past the prince and carried off the princess to his cave. The prince chased the dragon. The dragon caught the prince in a bag. The dragon went into the forest with the prince in a bag. The dragon spit his fiery breath and made a fire. He ate a magic meatball. Then the dragon fell asleep. The dragon made a mess of his cave be- cause he was real mad. The prince called the dragon a bum! The prince married the princess and then he killed the dragon.

After they finished, each struggling reader in the class was paired with an on-level student and assigned one sentence to illustrate jointly. The resulting book, entitled “The Horrible Dragon,” became part of the classroom library.

Ms. Smith’s low-level fourth-grade class (Room 204) produced a somewhat more sophisticated story, which they entitled “The Fire-Breathing Dragon.” After reading the published story, students wrote comparisons:

KEVIN: I like 204’s story better because it had a happy ending. CRYSTAL: I like The Paper Bag Princess because I hate the prince and the book has a real

author. MICHEL: I like “Fire Breathing Dragon” because it is longer, and we made it. KATRINA: I like “Fire Breathing Dragon” because it had a lot of activities, and a dragon can’t

fly, and the prince saved the princess. And boys are supposed to save girls.

Comprehension of Narrative Text 275

The semantic impressions strategy has been shown to improve comprehension across a wide variety of grade levels and is particularly effective with low-achieving readers (McGinley & Denner, 1987; Pearson & Fielding, 1991; Richek, 2009). This valuable method, which can be used with any story or book, encourages students to think like authors and fosters comparison, a higher-level skill.

Predicted or Probable Passages. Predicted or probable passages is a strategy that combines elements of semantic impressions and story structure. In predicted passages, the teacher gives students a list of words from the text to be read, and the students cat- egorize the words as they might be used in the story. Figure 11.2 presents a predicted passage framework completed by a group of seventh-grade students preparing to read Seedfolks (by Fleischman). When one teacher started using the predicted passage strat- egy, she used a photocopied paper and students wrote the words into the boxes for the categories. Then, as they read, if they changed their minds about where words belonged, they erased those words and rewrote them into new cells. This erasing or scratching out proved to be frustrating and messy. Now the teacher laminates a small poster or large cardstock and either gives the students words on removable labels or has them write the words on small sticky notes so that they can move the words to their appropriate cells as they read. Students enjoy the strategy much more this way.

Reading a Story to Students When a story is long or difficult, teachers can read it to students before the students read it for themselves. This strategy enables them to learn the story format, sequence

Title of Selection: Characters

Kim Wendell

Sam Curtis

Maricela Nora

plant water

protection

rain

pots

apartment April

Cleveland garden

vacant lot

sick

trash

cans

rain

lonely

homesick

City Hall

Attempts to Solve Problem

Setting Name:

Problem

More to Find OutSolution

Summary Statement Kim planted seeds in a vacant lot in Cleveland. The neighbors started gardening too, but they had to find a way to water the plants. The whole neighborhood got to know each other better because of the garden.

FIGURE 11.2 Predicted Passage Framework for Seedfolks Completed with a Group of Seventh-Grade Students

276 C H A P T E R 1 1

of events, and many words in the story before they attempt to read it independently. Prereading stories to students is particularly effective if they are asked to predict what will happen next as they listen. However, prereading should be followed by opportuni- ties for students to read the stories on their own.

Sometimes simply reading part of a story to students is useful. One middle school teacher reads the first couple of paragraphs of exciting short stories to her students. After their interest has been sparked, students continue to read these stories indepen- dently for homework. Reading the first chapter of a chapter book or novel while model- ing the process works well. Teachers’ modeling of strategies is a highly effective method of conveying practices of good reading to students (Fisher, Frey, & Lapp, 2008).

Improving Comprehension During Reading

Many strategies encourage understanding and enjoyment while students read. This sec- tion discusses the Directed Reading-Thinking Activity (DR-TA), using imagery, Post-it– style note reactions, constructing content-free questions, and using discussion cards.

The Directed Reading-Thinking Activity A basic predictive comprehension strategy is the Directed Reading-Thinking Activ- ity (DR-TA). This strategy, developed by Stauffer (1975, 1980), models the processes good readers use to comprehend text. The DR-TA provides a strong foundation for other predictive comprehension strategies to build on:

◆ Using the title and pictures to predict what the story will be about ◆ Reading a section and stopping to confirm initial predictions or revise them to

suit the content ◆ Predicting what the next section will be about ◆ Reading to a crucial point and revising or confirming previous predictions ◆ Following a cyclical pattern of predicting/reading/confirming or revising pre-

dictions to the end of the story ◆ Reflecting about the entire story after reading

For maximum benefit, the DR-TA should be used on a long-term basis so that students’ reading processes can mature and they can internalize the components of a good comprehension strategy so that they can apply it independently.

The DR-TA should be used with stories that students have not yet read. To im- plement the DR-TA, teachers should follow the procedures presented in Figure 11.3.

While working with a group of fourth-grade students in a resource room, the reading specialist used the DR-TA to guide the reading of Nate the Great and the Sticky Case (Sharmat). The students predicted “Something will be stolen,” “It’s about glue,” and “Nate will be stuck somewhere.”

The teacher wrote the individual students’ predictions on the board. As each pre- diction was stated, he asked the student his or her reason for making that prediction.

Comprehension of Narrative Text 277

The student who predicted that “Something will be stolen” gave as his reason that “the title says ‘case’ and that means a crime, and that’s stealing.”

After several predictions were written and explained, the teacher read the first two paragraphs to the students and asked them to review their earlier predictions. He asked which ones had actually happened in the story. He put a check by each prediction that had happened, and then asked which might still happen. He left those predictions on the board. The group then decided which predictions should be revised or com- pletely erased. Finally, the teacher asked if they would like to add any new predictions.

Students read the next section of the story silently and, after reading, they again re- vised their hypotheses. This sequence continued until they had completed the story. The teacher asked how the case was finally solved, and if that is how they would have solved the case. Some students liked Sharmat’s ending of the story; others preferred their own endings.

The DR-TA and other predictive strategies are extremely motivating. Asking students to make predictions, especially if they write those predictions, draws them into the story. They become actively engaged and participate in the events of the story as they unfold. Predictive strategies often stimulate students to read longer selections and to read silently. In their predictions, students naturally combine background in- formation with the clues in the story to anticipate the ending before they actually read it. Readers also begin to use story structure to form predictions. After much practice, students can implement the strategy independently as they read longer selections, making predictions at the beginning of each chapter and confirming or revising those predictions at the end of each chapter.

Using the DR-TA is no more time consuming than reading stories in a tradi- tional manner. Almost any narrative story can be used with this strategy. However,

FIGURE 11.3 The Directed Reading-Thinking Activity (DR-TA)

Before introducing the story to students, read the story and decide on the theme. Then divide the story into four to five segments that help guide the student to the theme. Construct questions that help students predict content, then reflect on their predictions as they relate to the actual events in the story. Finally, construct a summative question that will tie the segments of the story together. 1. Introduce the story to students. Write the title on the board and ask students what they

think the story will be about based on the title and any pictures. 2. Write students’ predictions on the board. Ask them why they made each prediction.

Develop the habit of substantiating predictions. 3. Ask students to read the first segment. When they have finished, ask them if what they

predicted actually happened. Give them opportunities to confirm or revise their predic- tions by referring to the text. For example, ask, “What in the story made you change your mind?” or “What in the story shows that your prediction is what happened?” Then ask them what they think will happen next and why.

4. Continue in the predict-read-revise/confirm-predict-read cycle to the end of the story. 5. Ask students a summative question at the end of the story so that they can tie all the

segments together.

278 C H A P T E R 1 1

students with reading problems do not always participate freely in a DR-TA activity. Some read so passively that they have trouble making predictions. In a group situation, shy students can be encouraged to participate by voting “yes” or “no” on some hypoth- eses. Allowing “abstentions” ensures that even the most passive students will take part. When using the DR-TA in an individual situation, a teacher can model involvement by making hypotheses along with the student.

When using the DR-TA, students should be told to not look ahead into a follow- ing section in the story. The occasional student who looks ahead should be pulled from a group DR-TA and asked to sit on the side without making comments. Of course, such students are unconsciously demonstrating that they see reading as “showing off” the right answer rather than thinking about the material. After using the DR-TA several times, even these students will value the role of their own thinking in reading stories.

When low-achieving readers do their first DR-TA, their predictions are often highly implausible. Strategy Snapshot 11.2 presents a description of a teacher using

Strategy Snapshot 11.2 The DR-TA in a Low-Achieving Fifth-Grade Class

The 31 students in this room used the DR-TA process with the stories in their fourth-grade reading series. The first story described the adventures of a misbehaving boy who interfered with a class experiment on feeding rats.

We first put the title on the board and asked for hypotheses about the story. The four hypotheses focused on a laboratory with a scientist. We then passed out the story and asked children to read the first page silently and reformulate their hypotheses. After reading page 1, students correctly refocused their predictions on the boy, Otis, and a classroom. However, the students identified the animal as a mouse rather than a rat, so they were asked to go back and re- read. We finished two more sets of predictions on the first day, for pages 2–3 and 4–5 of the story.

As we proceeded, student excitement mounted. More students made predictions, and the predictions became more plausible. We ended the day by taking a vote on the weights of the rats in the story. At the conclusion of the lesson, one student, Perry, copied the predictions from the board for use the next day. In fact, three other students also copied them, just to ensure accuracy.

On the second day, Perry recopied the predictions onto the board, and the class did two more prediction segments. Students continued to increase their hypotheses, until we had so many that we were unable to call on all students who wanted to contribute. As the story pro- gressed, students began to agree on their hypothesis for the ending. Thomas, who had been making the others wait because of his slow silent reading, started to speed up his reading rate.

On the third day, the children realized that the story would end. Keana and Ryan met us in the hall before school and asked us whether we could reveal the ending if they wouldn’t tell the others. We declined to do this. In class, the ending was finally revealed, to the delight of the children. After the reading was completed, the class had an in-depth discussion of the clues the author gave about the conclusion and of other stories that had similar plots.

Comprehension of Narrative Text 279

the DR-TA with low-achieving students. As they continue using the process, predic- tions will improve. In addition, as a group of students approaches the end of a story, individuals will start to agree on plausible endings. These reactions are important signs of progress in reading narrative text.

The DR-TA is a versatile strategy that can be done in many different ways. At times, you may want to write predictions on the board; at other times, you may want students simply to give them verbally. Sometimes students who disagree with the author’s ending for a story enjoy writing and illustrating their own endings.

DR-TA Without Justification. In this activity (Richek, 1987), readers give pre- dictions but are not asked to supply reasons for them. We began to use the DR-TA without justification when we found that many of our students were able to predict but could not give reasons for their predictions. In fact, when asked for justification, some became quite uncomfortable. Some low-achieving students may need to use the DR-TA without justification for a brief time before moving on to the more chal- lenging step of supplying reasons. However, you want students to substantiate their answers early in the process.

Silent DR-TA. In this strategy, students are each given a story with prearranged, written stopping points. Each student reads the selection individually and silently un- til he or she comes to the first stopping point. Students then write their predictions at their desks without discussing them. They then read until they come to another stopping point and write that prediction. In the last part of the story, the ending is, of course, revealed, and each student can see how close he or she has come to predicting the author’s ending.

Silent DR-TA helps older students take responsibility for their own reading and avoids the embarrassment of public discussions (Josel, 1986; Richek, 1987). In addi- tion, making written records of their predictions helps students to monitor their own comprehension. Silent DR-TA motivates students to read silently and respond in writ- ing. After they have completed the story, students look back at their predictions to see how well they caught the clues given in the story.

Monitoring Responses to Reading The Post-it note strategy (Caldwell, 1993) gives students the opportunity to “talk back” to authors as they are reading silently. The Post-it notes, pieces of paper with one sticky edge, can be easily placed on text, removed, and reused. Using small notes helps students to pinpoint the precise part of the reading to which they are reacting.

The Post-it notes contain three graphic messages: Each reader is given three of each type of note per story or chapter. They can have more if needed.

280 C H A P T E R 1 1

! indicates that a reader has been surprised by something.

shows that the reader likes something that happened in the story.

? notes that the reader has a question about something in the story.

As students read silently, they place a Post-it note wherever they meet some- thing in the story that surprises, delights, or baffles them. In this way, they are recording their own reactions to the text. After they read, the Post-it notes make an excellent starting point for discussing a story. For low-achieving students, start by discussing the question-mark Post-it notes and then moving to surprising and well-liked parts. Students enjoy seeing that others have the same questions and appreciate the same parts as they do. Sharing responses to reading helps students build confidence, self-esteem, and a sense of participation. Alvermann (2000) has found that middle school students have particularly positive views toward such participation.

Making Mental Images Developing mental imagery in response to reading is an effective way to improve comprehension and interest for students with reading problems (Gambrell & Bales, 1986; Gernsbacher et al., 2004; Pressley, 2000). When students form mental images as they read, they combine their background information with the text. Reading becomes more personal and relevant as students construct their unique images. In focusing on their own internal responses to text, students become more willing to read silently. Finally, mental imagery helps students to become comfortable reading text without pictures because they create pictures in their own minds.

Comparing their mental images is both enjoyable and instructive for students. When students realize that no two people see precisely the same thing, they learn to value personal response in reading (Sadowski, 1985).

Laying the Foundation for Mental Imagery. To prepare students for reading ac- tivities, first develop the students’ abilities to form images while listening by doing one of the following activities:

◆ Ask students to close their eyes and imagine that they are seeing their mother, father, or other adult. Each student, in turn, describes what he or she sees.

◆ Instruct students to imagine a hot-fudge sundae as you, verbally, build it, giving such clues as “I put in two scoops of vanilla ice cream, I slowly pour hot fudge over the top. . . .” Ask students to describe the colors they see. Then, without describing the container, ask students the types of containers they imagine. By imagining something that is not directly described, students develop the ability

Comprehension of Narrative Text 281

to build a complete mental picture from partial clues, precisely what readers do when they make mental images during reading.

◆ Read short stories to students and ask them to describe their mental images of the characters.

◆ The book Hurricane (Weisner) is excellent for developing imagery. In this book, a hurricane knocks over a tree. Two brothers use their imagination to incor- porate this tree into imaginary scenes, such as a safari and a space ship. After reading it, ask students to individually tell you what else they could imagine the tree to be. Responses have included a submarine, gym, airplane, raft, tank, and limousine. One fifth grader saw the tree as a castle and reported seeing dragons, a princess, and birds (because she was up high).

Mental Imagery in Reading. After forming mental images while listening, stu- dents are ready to apply imagery to reading. Ask students to read something silently and then focus on their own mental images.

Imagery can be used at several points in a story. Asking for a mental image after the students have read the first few paragraphs of a story helps them to make the rest of the story more vivid. Teachers may also ask for images at places in the story where students would normally be stopped for questions. You can ask students to stop at cru- cial points in the story and ask them to draw what they see or write a brief description of what they see. Finally, if students have read a story independently, imagery can be used as a follow-up strategy.

When working with imagery, ask students to focus on the most important or exciting part of a story and describe it. Focusing on only one image helps students to organize their thoughts and avoids confusing or conflicting responses. You might have students close their eyes immediately after reading to hold their images in their minds. Despite the value of imagery, some students with reading problems find the strategy difficult to use at first. Teachers need to be patient with a student who reports seeing “nothing” on the first day of instruction. Within a week, such readers will often start to construct images. If students simply list a sequence of events in the story, special attempts should be made to focus on exciting story parts so that they will become per- sonally involved enough to form an image. You can also focus students on imagining what a character looks like.

If students report seeing images that do not match the text, they have probably misread something. Encourage them to reread the material silently and see if their im- ages change. If students consistently misread, break up stories into shorter segments and follow silent reading with oral reading. This strategy focuses the students’ atten- tion on the need to read more carefully.

Mental imagery was used to help Bobby, a fourth grader who had poor compre- hension and found silent reading difficult. Bobby silently read the first two paragraphs in a story about a snowstorm. When he was finished, he was asked to describe his image. At first, Bobby could not report anything, but after rereading the paragraphs, Bobby said he saw snow on the lawn, children building a snowman outside, and a car up the street. This imagery activity made him interact with the text, and his compre- hension of the story improved dramatically.

282 C H A P T E R 1 1

Constructing Content-Free Questions Teaching students content-free questions can show them how to approach reading strategically and foster independence. What are content-free questions? Consider the following two questions: “At the beginning of the story, what was Simon’s problem?” and “What was the main character’s problem?” Text content or the character’s name is embedded in one question but absent in the other. Caldwell and Leslie (2012) describe content-free questions as general questions that students can ask about any narrative selection. They are questions that are based on the elements of story structure previ- ously discussed. They are questions that a reader can ask about any narrative, and they help to set expectations for reading.

Students tend to regard questions as content-specific; that is, questions about one story are different from those about another story. In reality, questions about narrative selections may be very similar in their focus on characters, settings, prob- lems, and solutions. However, because they contain text-specific names such as Simon, students do not see their similarity. Students need to be taught the value of general questions that can be asked of any narrative selection and to model how such questions help them to comprehend.

Caldwell and Leslie (2012) list possible content-free questions for narratives based on narrative structure and the typical reactions of readers to any narrative text:

◆ Who is the main character? Why do I think so? ◆ Who are other important characters? Why are they important? ◆ What is the character’s problem? ◆ How is the character trying to solve his or her problem? ◆ How is the setting important to the story? ◆ What do I predict will happen next? Why do I think so? ◆ Do I agree or disagree with what the character did? Why? ◆ Do I like or dislike this part of the story? Why? ◆ Is this story true to life? Why or why not? ◆ How did the story end? ◆ Is there anything I don’t understand? ◆ What surprised me about this story? ◆ If I were going to write to the author, what would I say?

You want students to read with questions in mind. Questions build expectations in the mind of the reader, and these expectations, in turn, improve comprehension (Geiger & Millis, 2004). After all, if you know what you are looking for, you have a better chance of finding it. Use content-free questions to set up expectations prior to and during reading. Place the questions in a prominent place so that students can refer to them during reading. Model the process of asking content-free questions and finding answers to them. Occasionally stop during reading and discuss if the questions were answered and what new ones might be generated. However, learning to read with content-free questions in mind is not a quick fix. It takes a long time and a lot of practice, but it can be a very motivating experience. Struggling readers often find

Comprehension of Narrative Text 283

answering questions an intimidating process, and they enjoy the experience of forming their own questions and reading to find the answers.

Modeling the implementation of these strategies while reading is a highly effec- tive technique. Teachers can share text using a think-aloud to introduce a book, and give students opportunities to practice the strategies they employed (Lapp, Fisher, & Grant, 2008). Teachers sometimes feel pressure to use more direct approaches during literacy instructional time, but it is actually a good use of time to show students how to question as you read and how to reread segments of text to answer those ques- tions (Parker & Hurry, 2007). Modeling misunderstandings or questioning our own responses and searching for confirmation or information to revise our responses con- veys important messages to students. Sometimes students who are struggling with text become discouraged because they think everyone else is sailing through the book. It is important for them to be aware that asking questions, thinking about what we are reading, and rereading are all acceptable, even effective, practices.

Using Story Structure. Although story structure is often used to provide opportu- nities for students to respond to narrative text after reading, the structural features of stories also provide a framework for monitoring predicting the content of stories and for asking questions during reading. Dymock (2007) has found that teaching students about the structure of narrative text helps to integrate those elements with other com- prehension strategies. Just as the content-free questions can be posted in a prominent place in the classroom or included in a bookmark, students’ understanding of text struc- ture can help them generate their own questions as they read. Knowing the structural features of text is part of developing literate language, the common terminology we use in school to talk about books. The Common Core State Standards (Council of Chief State School Officers & National Governors Association, 2010) indicate that the foundation of this language begins in preschool and continues to increase in complex- ity throughout students’ learning experiences with literature. We should expect even young children to talk about titles, authors, and illustrators; as they progress, we should expect them to be able to analyze aspects of stories as related to the structure of the text.

Using Discussion Cards Discussing a story is a common activity in literacy classrooms, but it is very often an ineffective and poorly handled procedure. The teacher asks questions, and the students answer them—or at least some students do. Often the same students participate each day, while others slide down in their seats and try to appear as unobtrusive as pos- sible. Discussion questions are often relatively low level and focus on identification of literal elements in the text as opposed to higher-level thinking. All readers must learn to generate specific and thoughtful reactions to what they read or practice thoughtful literacy (Allington, 2001, 2006, 2012). Discussion cards can help students engage with what they are reading (Caldwell & Leslie, 2012).

Discussion cards provide suggestions as to possible comments that a reader might make. This activity can be an effective lesson on how readers should react dur- ing reading. Each student should have a set of cards labeled with possible topics, such

284 C H A P T E R 1 1

as character, setting, or problem. You can make them or have the students construct their own packs. Always have additional sets available because card packets can easily become lost or misplaced.

The student chooses a card to indicate what he or she wishes to talk about and holds it up. If the student holds up the character card, he or she must talk about the character. If he or she holds up the problem card, then he or she must comment about a character’s problem. The students can make any comment as long as it is tied to the card they hold up. During discussion, students sometimes make observations that are unrelated to the text. Having students select a specific discussion card and limiting re- sponses to the topic on the card tends to prevent students from digressing. The cards actually play two roles: They suggest topics for comments, and they focus the discus- sion on the text as opposed to unrelated items.

Caldwell and Leslie (2012) suggest the following topics for narrative discussion cards:

◆ Character: The student may identify a main character or another important character, comment on a character’s actions, suggest a motivation for a char- acter’s actions, predict what might happen to the character, or note a similarity between a character and a character in another selection.

◆ Setting: The student may indicate where and when the action occurs and com- ment on the importance of the setting.

◆ Problem: The student may identify a problem of the main character or other characters, predict a problem that might occur later, relate the problem to his or her own life or to another selection, or offer suggestions for solving the problem.

◆ Solution: The student may identify or predict the solution, question the solution in some way, indicate another solution, or comment on the steps that led to the solution.

◆ Question: The student may ask a question about something that was not under- stood, ask a question about a character’s actions, or ask why an author wrote what he or she did.

◆ My Idea: The student may relate the text to his or her life, make a judgment about a character’s actions, indicate like or dislike for the entire selection or for specific parts, or indicate how he or she might write it differently.

In addition to these basic topics, teachers may want to add others, such as Predic- tion and Vocabulary. If a student wishes to make a prediction or comment on a previ- ous one, he or she holds up the Prediction card. If the student wants to comment on a new word or a new meaning for a familiar word, he or she holds up the Vocabulary card. Another possible card is Author’s Purpose, where the students comment on why the author wrote what he or she did. Choose four or five cards to use in each discus- sion so that you don’t overwhelm students with too many choices. Select the cards that match your goals for the discussion.

Some card topics overlap. A student could hold up a Character card to offer an opinion about a character’s actions. The My Idea card could signal the same intention. The key issue is that the student can justify his or her choice of card

Comprehension of Narrative Text 285

if questioned. Pictures or icons on the cards can be very appealing, especially for younger readers. Caldwell and Leslie (2012) suggest the following: a simple stick figure for the Character card, a picture of a house and tree for Setting, a frown face for Problem, and a lightbulb for Solution. One clever teacher pasted pictures of her students on their My Idea cards. What happens if a student holds up the same card time after time? This student was probably successful with one topic and is not will- ing to risk possible failure with a different card. Gently nudge him or her to other cards. Have the students spread out their cards face up. When they have held up a specific card and offered an appropriate comment, they must place that card face down. They cannot select it again until all cards have been used.

How much text should you read before asking students to hold up their cards? That will vary with the type of text and the age of the students. Discussion cards work well for an individual student, a small group, or an entire class. You can also pair stu- dents to decide on the card and the comment. One interesting benefit of discussion cards is to force teachers to wait longer before calling on a student. Generally, teachers tend to not wait long enough for a response.

Improving Comprehension After Reading

Comprehension strategies that can be used after reading include those that develop a sense of story grammar, encourage a personal response, and connect the literacy experience.

Comprehension Strategies That Develop an Understanding of Story Structure As discussed earlier, narratives are usually written according to certain conventions, called story grammar. Most narratives contain the elements of characters, setting (time and place), and plot. The plot is generally further broken into a problem that a charac- ter must solve and different events (or episodes) that take place in the story. The end of the story has a solution or resolution to the problem. When students recognize these common elements of narratives, they read with more understanding and are better able to make sense of a narrative.

You can begin with simple story structures for young children and increase the complexity as students mature.

Story Maps. Story maps are visual diagrams that show students the elements that all stories contain. When students use these maps, they learn to identify the com- mon elements of narrative text. Story maps are suitable for both shorter stories and novels. A common story frame map contains (1) characters, (2) setting, (3) problem, and (4) solution. Figure 11.4 presents a story map that has been filled out for the story “Catalog Cats” in the book The Stories Julian Tells (Cameron). In “Catalog Cats,” Julian tells his brother, Huey, about special kinds of cats that work in the gar- den. More complex story maps suitable for older students contain episodes to link the problem and solution (or resolution) and goals for the characters.

286 C H A P T E R 1 1

Teachers can introduce story maps before students read and ask them to fill in the frame either during or after reading. They can also give the maps to the students after a story has been read and ask them to identify story elements. Students with read- ing problems often enjoy working on maps in pairs.

Shanahan and Shanahan (1997) and Emery (1996) suggest using character per- spective charts. Students make separate charts for the story elements, as seen from the perspective of different important characters. For example, for the folktale The Three Little Pigs, students make two charts: one for the three little pigs and one for the wolf. Each chart contains the setting, problem, goal, attempts to solve the problem, outcome, reaction, and theme from the point of view of the character it charts—in this case, the pigs or the wolf.

Struggling readers often need teacher modeling before they can successfully generalize the features of story grammar. Patient teacher demonstration followed by discussion will lead students to using story grammar independently. Remember that story structure is learned gradually and must be practiced consistently over an ex- tended period of time.

At times, you will find that students focus on only one part of the story, usually the first part or the most exciting part. To help them refocus on the story as a whole, place a story grammar frame on the board or on an overhead projector and read a short story to them. As they listen to the story, students should try to fill in the story grammar frame. Then reread the story and have them confirm or revise their story grammar frames.

As students become more comfortable with story grammar, they will become independent of visual maps. At that point, simply use a story grammar framework to guide comprehension by asking such questions as “Who was the main character?” and “What was the central problem in the story?” Students might also enjoy asking one another these questions.

Somebody Wanted But So. A related strategy that helps students focus on charac- ters and their goals is the somebody-wanted-but-so (SWBS) strategy developed by

FIGURE 11.4 Story Map of “Catalog Cats” from The Stories Julian Tells

Title of Story: Name:

Characters Setting

Julian Huey In Julian and Huey’s house

Father  

Problem Solution

Julian tricks Huey into believing that you

can order cats from a catalog to do all the

work in a garden.

Father tells Huey that catalog cats

exist, but they are invisible and don’t do

all the work. Also, you have to request

them, not order them.

Comprehension of Narrative Text 287

Macon, Beweel, and Vogt (1991). In this strategy, students focus on a character, that character’s goal(s), what happened when that character tried to accomplish his or her goal, and the outcome. Figure 11.5 presents a framework for SWBS based on Bread- winner (by Ellis). Identifying a specific character and following that character through the text helps students to make personal connections to the story and improves com- prehension (Roser, Martinez, Fuhrken, & McDonald, 2007).

Problem–Solution Identification. Identification of the problem and the solution to that problem in a story is a shortened form of story grammar that is useful for intermediate and secondary students. To encourage long-term learning, students can make charts showing the problem of the story in one column and the solution in an- other. Because the ability to identify the problem and solution is a sophisticated skill, it requires careful teacher guidance. At first, students may confuse the main problem of the story with the first event. When this situation occurs, teachers should carefully review story structure.

Story Pyramids. Students often enjoy creating their own personal “pyramids” of stories they have read. In pyramids, students are allowed only eight lines and may only use a certain number of words per line. Each line must describe something different. The form of a pyramid is as follows:

◆ One word naming the main character ◆ Two words describing the main character (for students in grades 3 and above,

encourage the use of adjectives) ◆ Three words describing the setting (time and place) ◆ Four words describing the problem (for students in primary grades who have dif-

ficulty with problem identification, ask them for four words describing the first thing that happened)

◆ Five words describing the next important event ◆ Six words describing another important event

FIGURE 11.5 Somebody-Wanted-But-So Strategy for Breadwinner Used with a Group of Sixth-Grade Students

Title of Story:       Somebody Wanted But So

Parvana to work to help her family

The Taliban For- bade girls to go out in public

Parvana dressed like a boy and got a job

Mother wants Parvana to go to Nooria’s wedding

Parvana wants to wait for Father to get out of prison

Mrs. Weera stays in the apartment with Parvana

288 C H A P T E R 1 1

◆ Seven words describing another important event ◆ Eight words describing the ending

If used in a group, the teacher should write the class pyramid on the board for all to see. If used individually, students often like to decorate and illustrate their personal constructions. Pyramids can be used by struggling readers from kindergarten through high school.

Students with reading problems have made many creative constructions using the pyramid format. Of course, because a pyramid is a personal response, each pyra- mid will be a little different. Here are two pyramids from third-grade Title I classes in response to reading a version of the Cinderella story:

Cinderella cute nice

palace house backyard her mother was dead

stepmother made her sweep floor She went to the palace ball.

She danced with the prince and ran. They got married and lived happily ever after.

Cinderella nice person

past palace house had mean stepmother

had two mean stepsisters She could not go to the ball.

prince found the glass slipper for Cinderella After they got married they lived very happily.*

*Full sentences are given capital letters and periods.

In constructing these pyramids, the children chose the characters, descriptions, and events that were most important to them. However, because a set number of words was needed, they had to manipulate words and combine them creatively. At times, they had to leave out words. This format encourages creative responses; and in fact, a group of boys in one class insisted on writing an alternative version, using the prince as the major character.

Story pyramids develop many important skills. If students work in groups, they naturally tend to discuss the story, an activity that fosters active comprehension. Pyramids give students practice with the major elements of a story (characters, setting, events). Students learn to separate important events from unimportant ones. Students develop language by manipulating and elaborating words to fit into a specified format. Students review vocabulary and concepts mentioned in the story. Building a pyramid is fun. Young- sters look forward to building and displaying their creations.

In intermediate and upper grades, pyramids make excellent alternatives to tradi- tional book reports. Used as a response to independent reading, the pyramid activity

Comprehension of Narrative Text 289

does not require much writing, but it enables students to respond actively to their reading. Furthermore, you will always be able to tell if students have read the book.

Comprehension Strategies That Nurture Personal Response Readers experiencing difficulties often have problems reacting fully to reading. This section describes strategies that foster creativity, engagement, and enjoyment, so that low-achieving students can see that reading belongs to them.

Drama. Acting out a story immediately involves readers. As they experience story events from the character’s point of view, students with reading problems deepen and improve comprehension (Sebesta, 1993; Wolf, 1998). Drama encourages discussion of a story and fosters cooperation and other social skills in at-risk students.

The tableaux strategy is one way to dramatize a story (Purves, Rogers, & Soter, 1995). It has been used effectively at elementary- and secondary-grade levels. In tab- leaux, students form still lifes, or tableaux, to dramatize story events. To illustrate the scenes, they assume appropriate expressions and body postures. In tableaux, students put themselves physically into the story. They discuss events as they decide which scenes they will act out. Furthermore, because tableaux involve the students “freezing” the scene, events acquire a permanence that they do not always have in the ongoing action of the story. Because these still lifes are silent, struggling children are able to focus on the story without the distraction of movement and noise.

Tableaux can be done in many formats. In a large class, students can be divided into several groups. After the class lists the important events, the teacher can assign one event to each group. If more students are in the group than there are story char- acters, some can play houses and trees. For young children, playing a noncharacter role helps establish the difference between characters and scenery. More advanced students often enjoy deciding secretly on the scene they will dramatize and asking classmates who watch the tableau to identify it. Secondary students, who are often reading longer material, should be encouraged to pick the most crucial and exciting events to dramatize.

Character Webs. In this activity, the name or picture of a story character is placed in the center of a page and surrounded by the traits of that character. Then, incidents from the story that illustrate each character trait are listed. A character web done by a third grader reading the story Clifford, the Big Red Dog (Bridwell) is presented in Figure 11.6.

Skinny Books. This strategy, which is most useful for primary grade children, com- bines the review of a story with a chance to create a personal version of it. To make a skinny book (Richek, 1999), the teacher needs to obtain two extra copies of the chil- dren’s reading series. Illustrations are cut from a story that the children have just com- pleted reading and pasted into a skinny book. (Two copies are needed because many illustrations are on the back sides of facing pages.) A front page should be left for a cover.

290 C H A P T E R 1 1

Now the students have an opportunity to become “authors” of the story they have just read by dictating their own text to match the story pictures. Generally, stu- dents take turns dictating pages. Individuals may want to sign each page that they have dictated. One group of Title I third graders made a skinny book of the book Miss Nelson Is Missing (Marshall). Authors Robert, Sherri, Travis, and Chris entitled their skinny book “Where Is Ms. Schultz?” Each student dictated a separate page as the teacher recorded their responses in magic marker. As they summarized the story, they changed it into their own words. These four students proudly carried their skinny book back to their regular class and read it to their peers.

Connecting the Literacy Experience

Students deepen their comprehension as they compare different texts and share their literacy experiences with one another. This section discusses two strategies that help students connect literacy experiences: conceptually connected instruction (themes) and genre studies.

FIGURE 11.6 Character Web of Clifford, the Big Red Dog by Norman Bridwell © 1985, published by Scholastic, Inc.

Adapted from If You Grew Up with George Washington by Ruth Belov and Emily Arnold McCully, 1993, Scholastic.

Comprehension of Narrative Text 291

Conceptually Connected Instruction Using Themes Thematic instruction is really an approach to providing learning experiences rather than a specific strategy. However, concentrating on one interesting topic and focus- ing all literacy activities around it offers teachers an opportunity to use students’ interests for instruction. It also helps students relate associations from known to unknown material. Thus, a student’s interest in football may lead to understanding the business concept of negotiating contracts, bringing lawsuits, and judging profit margins.

A theme can also lead students to varied types of reading materials. Students may explore football through stories, newspaper activities, score sheets, encyclopedias, books, and manuals. They will be better able to grasp the structure of sophisticated types of text if they deal with familiar topics. The theme approach is particularly suc- cessful with students who are quite far behind in reading and need highly motivating instruction. Elizabeth, a 17-year-old reading on a fifth-grade level, decided to research successful women who had, in her words, “made it.” Role models were chosen from entertainment, sports, and business. Elizabeth read books, collected newspaper arti- cles, watched TV programs, and listened to audiotapes and compact discs. Her teacher brought in technical terms from the three fields. At the end of 3 months, Elizabeth had dramatically improved her reading skills.

Edmund, a fifth grader reading on a second-grade level, became interested in Hawai’i and volcanoes and collected many vivid pictures. For homework, his reading teacher asked him to find all the ways pineapples were sold in the supermarket. His results became a written essay featuring 15 different types of pineapples. Edmund also read travel brochures, maps, and social studies textbooks. At the end of the semester, he gave his teacher a fresh pineapple as a gift.

Twelve-year-old Eugene, who was reading on a third-grade level, was intrigued by the escape artist Houdini. After starting with some easy books, he read through all the books in the school and local libraries. Before another hero replaced Houdini, Eugene had made several trips to the central New York City Public Library to read about him.

Sometimes teachers must suggest a topic for a passive student. In the case of Oneka, a 14-year-old student, her tutor chose food. She explored the history of pop- corn, the taste of eggrolls, and how to eat gyros, and incidentally gathered much information about the world.

The theme approach motivates low-achieving students to read a wide variety of reading materials. At the same time, teachers can focus on specific comprehension strategies.

Studying Different Genres Studying a genre, such as mystery stories or fairytales, allows struggling readers to connect and compare their readings. Students should read many examples of one genre and then compare their common features. For example, Marcus, a sixth grader who loved watching mysteries on TV, was motivated to read several books with his tutor. Marcus made a chart listing how each story contained the crime, the detective, the clues to solve the mystery, and the solution.

292 C H A P T E R 1 1

Students with reading problems also love to explore fairytales and folktales. Students can chart the features of magic, hero, villain, beginning words (such as “once upon a time”), and ending for each tale.

Students can also compare different versions of one tale. The Cinderella story has been told in many versions. For instance, in Prince Cinders (B. Cole), the lead is cast as a picked-on boy. The story of the three little pigs has been published as The True Story of the Three Little Pigs (Szieska), a hilarious revisionist version told from the wolf’s point of view, and The Three Little Wolves and the Big Bad Pig (Trivizas), which reverses the usual roles. Hans Christian Andersen’s tale “The Emperor’s New Clothes” has been recast in a school as The Principal’s New Clothes (Calmenson).

Students can compare two versions of a tale using a Venn diagram, or two par- tially overlapping circles. The common portions contain the things that are alike about the two tales. The unique portions list things that appear in only a single tale. Figure 11.7 shows a Venn diagram that Sheila and her tutor constructed for two versions of Cinderella. In exploring and recording differences between these different versions, students gain flexibility in thinking.

FIGURE 11.7 Venn Diagram for Cinderella

Comprehension of Narrative Text 293

Summary

The purpose of reading is comprehension. General features of effective comprehension include (1) realizing that you read to comprehend; (2) realizing that comprehension requires the reader to actively construct a text in his or her mind, a process that accu- rately reflects the material that the author has written; (3) applying personal background knowledge appropriately to text; and (4) employing higher-level thinking to understand text. Too much teacher questioning discourages active responses to stories.

Narratives, or texts that tell stories, inspire imaginative personal responses. They also have certain organizational factors, including story grammar (characters, setting, plot). They include many different genres, such as adventure, fantasy, and science fic- tion. To assess abilities with narrative text, you can use the comprehension tests from general standardized tests. In addition, you can judge whether a student has compre- hended a specific text by using story retelling and questioning.

Reciprocal teaching is a highly effective way to teach comprehension strategies. Strategies for improving comprehension before reading include building background knowledge, predicting what will happen in a story, having students build a semantic impressions story from selected story words, and reading students the story to support comprehension.

Strategies for improving comprehension during reading include using the Directed Reading-Thinking Activity, a prediction strategy used while reading; using Post-it notes to mark pleasing, surprising, and puzzling parts of text; responding with mental images; constructing content-free questions; and using discussion cards.

Strategies for improving comprehension after reading can develop an under- standing of story structure through story maps and identifying the problem and solution. Ways to nurture a personal response after reading include drama, art, char- acter webs, and skinny books that rewrite stories in students’ own words. Finally, the literacy experience may be connected through the study of one theme or doing genre studies.

References Allbritton, D. (2004). Strategic production of predictive inferences during comprehension. Discourse

Processes, 38, 309–322. Allington, R. L. (2001). What really matters for struggling readers: Designing research-based programs. New York:

Longman. Allington, R. L. (2006). What really matters for struggling readers: Designing research-based programs (2nd ed.).

New York: Longman. Allington, R. L. (2012. What really matters for struggling readers: Designing research-based programs (3rd ed.).

Boston: Pearson. Alvermann, E. (2000). Classroom talk about texts: Is it dear, cheap, or a bargain at any price? In B. M. Taylor,

M. F. Graves, & P. Van Der Brock (Eds.), Reading for meaning (pp. 136–151). Newark, DE: Interna- tional Reading Association, and New York: Teachers College Press.

Beck, I. L., Omanson, R. C., & McKeown, M. G. (1982). An instructional redesign of reading lessons: Effects on comprehension. Reading Research Quarterly, 17, 462–481.

Beers, K. (2003). When kids can’t Read: What teachers can do. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

294 C H A P T E R 1 1

Bridge, C. A., & Tierney, R. J. (1981). The inferential operations of children across text with narrative and expository tendencies. Journal of Reading Behavior, 31, 210–214.

Caldwell, J. S. (1993). Developing a metacognitive strategy for comprehension monitoring for narrative text. Milwaukee, WI: Cardinal Stritch College. Unpublished strategy.

Caldwell, J. S., & Leslie, L. (2008). Intervention strategies to accompany informal reading assessment: So what do I do now? (2nd ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

Caldwell, J. S., & Leslie, L. (2012). Intervention strategies to accompany informal reading assessment: So what do I do now? (3rd ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

Ciardiello, A. V. (1998). Did you ask a good question today? Alternative cognitive and metacognitive strate- gies. Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy, 42, 210–219.

Council of Chief State School Officers & National Governors Association. (2010). Common Core State Stan- dards for English language arts and literacy in history/social studies, science and technical subjects.

Crabtree, T., Alber-Morgan, S. R., & Konrad, M. (2010). The effects of self-monitoring of story elements on the reading comprehension of high school seniors with learning disabilities. Education and Treatment of Children, 33, 187–203.

Crawford, J. (1989). Instructional activities related to achievement gains in Chapter I classes. In R. E. Slavin, N. L. Karweit, & N. A. Madden (Eds.), Effective programs for students at risk (pp. 264–290). Boston: Allyn & Bacon/Simon and Schuster.

Cunningham, A., & Stanovich, K. (1998). What reading does for the mind. American Educator, 22, 8–17. Cunningham, A. E., & Stanovich, K. E. (1993). Children’s literacy environments and early recognition sub-

skills. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 5, 193–204. Durkin, D. (1978–1979). What classroom observations reveal about reading comprehension instruction.

Reading Research Quarterly, 14, 481–533. Dymock, S. (2007). Comprehension strategy instruction: Teaching narrative text structure awareness. The

Reading Teacher, 6, 131–167. Emery, D. W. (1996). Helping readers comprehend stories from the characters’ perspectives. The Reading

Teacher, 49, 534–541. Fisher, D., Frey, N., & Lapp, D. (2008). Shared readings: Modeling, comprehension, vocabulary, text struc-

ture, and text features for older students. The Reading Teacher, 6, 548–556. Gambrell, L. B. (1986). Functions of children’s oral language during reading instruction. Paper presented at

the 36th annual meeting of the National Reading Conference, Austin, TX. Gambrell, L. B., & Bales, R. J. (1986). Mental imagery and the comprehension-monitoring performance of

fourth- and fifth-grade poor readers. Reading Research Quarterly, 21, 454–464. Gambrell, L. B., Pfeiffer, W., & Wilson, R. (1985). The effects of retelling upon reading comprehension and

recall of text information. Journal of Educational Research, 78, 216–220. Geiger, J. F., & Millis, K. K. (2004). Assessing the impact of reading goals and text structures on comprehen-

sion. Reading Psychology, 25, 93–110. Gernsbacher, M. A., Robertson, R. R. W., Palladino, P., & Werner, N. K. (2004). Managing mental represen-

tations during narrative comprehension. Discourse Processes, 37, 145–164. Golden, J., & Guthrie, J. (1986). Convergence and divergence in reader response to literature. Reading

Research Quarterly, 21, 408–421. Goldman, S. R., & Rakestraw, J. A., Jr. (2000). Structural aspects of constructing meaning from text. In R. Barr,

M. L. Kamil, P. Mosenthal, & P. D. Pearson (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (Vol. III, pp. 311–335). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Graesser, A., Golding, J. M., & Long, D. L. (1991). Narrative representation and comprehension. In R. Barr, M. L. Kamil, P. Mosenthal, & P. D. Pearson (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (Vol. II, pp. 171–205). White Plains, NY: Longman.

Hansen, J. (1981). The effects of inference training and practice on young children’s reading comprehen- sion. Reading Research Quarterly, 16, 391–417.

Josel, C. A. (1986). A silent DRTA for remedial eighth graders. Journal of Reading, 29, 434–439. Koskinen, P. S., Gambrell, L. B., Kapinus, B. A., & Heathington, B. S. (1988). Retelling: A strategy for

enhancing students’ reading comprehension. The Reading Teacher, 41, 892–896. Lapp, D., Fisher, D., & Grant, M. (2008). You can read this text—I’ll show you how: Interactive comprehen-

sion instruction. Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy,51, 372–383.

Comprehension of Narrative Text 295

Leslie, L., & Caldwell, J. (2001). The Qualitative Reading Inventory III. New York: Longman. Macon, J., Bewell, D., & Vogt, M. (1991). Responses to literature. Newark, DE: International Reading

Association. McGinley, W. J., & Denner, P. R. (1987). Story impressions: A prereading/writing activity. Journal of Read-

ing, 31, 248–253. Morrow, L. M., Gambrell, L., Kapinus, B., Koskinen, P., Marshall, N., & Mitchell, J. N. (1986). Retelling:

A strategy for reading instruction and assessment. In J. A. Niles & R. Lalik (Eds.), Solving problems in literacy: Learners, teachers, and researchers: Thirty-fifth yearbook of the National Reading Conference (pp. 73–80). Rochester, NY: National Reading Conference.

National Reading Panel. (2000). Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implicationas for reading instruction: Reports of the subgroups (National Institute of Health Pub. No. 00-4754). Washington, DC: National Institute of Child Health and Human Development.

Pace, A. J., Marshall, N., Horowitz, R., Lipson, M. Y., & Lucido, P. (1989). When prior knowledge doesn’t facilitate some text comprehension: An examination of some of the issues. In S. McCormick & J.  Zutell (Eds.), Cognitive and social perspectives for literacy research and instruction: Thirty-eighth Yearbook of the National Reading Conference (pp. 213–224). Chicago: National Reading Conference.

Palincsar, A., & Brown, A. L. (1984). Reciprocal teaching of comprehension: Fostering and comprehension- monitoring activities. Cognition and Instruction, 1, 117–175.

Paris, S. G., Wasik, B. A., & Turner, J. C. (1991). The development of strategic readers. In R. Barr, M. L. Kamil, P. Mosenthal, & P. D. Pearson (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (Vol. II, pp. 609–640). White Plains, NY: Longman.

Parker, M., & Hurry, J. (2007). Teachers’ use of questioning and modeling comprehension skills in primary classrooms. Educational Review, 59, 299–3174.

Pearson, P. D., & Fielding L. (1991). Comprehension instruction. In R. Barr, M. L. Kamil, P. Mosenthal, & P. D. Pearson (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (Vol. II, pp. 815–860). White Plains, NY: Longman.

Pelekis, K., & Phillips, C. (2012). Internet inquiry for grades K-2. Presentation in fostering literacy with research-based instructional practices and Web 2.0 technologies. Chicago: Preconference Institute, Inter- national Reading Association.

Pressley, M., (2000). What should comprehension instruction be the instruction of? In R. Barr, M. L. Kamil, P. Mosenthal, & P. D. Pearson (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (Vol. III, pp. 545–561). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Purves, A. C., Rogers, T., & Soter, A. O. (1995). How porcupines make love: Readers, texts and cultures in the response based literature classroom. White Plains, NY: Longman.

Richek, M. A. (1987). DRTA: 5 variations that facilitate independence in reading narratives. Journal of Reading, 30, 632–636.

Richek, M. A. (1999). Reading success for at-risk children: Ideas that work. Bellevue, WA: Bureau of Education and Research.

Richek, M. A. (2009). Words are wonderful: Interactive, time-efficient strategies to teach meaning vocabu- lary. In M. F. Graves (Ed.), Essential readings on vocabulary instruction. Newark, DE: International Reading Association.

Richek, M. A., & Glick, L. C. (1991). Coordinating a literacy-support program with classroom instruction. The Reading Teacher, 45, 474–479.

Roser, N., Martinez, M., Fuhrken, C., & McDonald, K. (2007). Characters as guides to meaning. The Read- ing Teacher, 60, 548–556.

Sadowski, M. (1985). The natural use of imagery in story comprehension and recall. Reading Research Quar- terly, 20, 658–667.

Sebesta, S. (1993). Creative drama and language arts. In B. E. Cullinan (Ed.), Children’s voices in the classroom (pp. 33–46). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.

Shanahan, T. (2005). The National Reading Panel report: Practical advice for teachers. Naperville, IL: Learning Point Associates.

Shanahan, T., & Shanahan, S. (1997). Character perspective charting: Helping children to develop a more complete conception of story. The Reading Teacher, 50, 668–677.

296 C H A P T E R 1 1

Snider, W. E., & Tarver, S. G. (1987). The effect of early reading failure on acquisition of knowledge among students with reding disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 20, 351–356.

Stauffer, R. G. (1975). Directing the reading-thinking process. New York: Harper and Row. Stauffer, R. G. (1980). The language experience approach to the teaching of reading (2nd ed.). New York: Harper

and Row. Sundbye, N. (1987). Text explicitness and inferential questioning: Effects on story understanding and recall.

Reading Research Quarterly, 22, 82–98. Thomson, N. (1987). Understanding teenagers’ reading. New York: Nichols. Van Der Broek, P., & Kremer, K. E. (2000). The mind in action: What it means to comprehend during

reading. In B. M. Taylor, M. F. Graves, & P. Van Der Broek (Eds.), Reading for meaning: Fostering comprehension in the middle grades (pp. 1–31). Newark, DE: International Reading Association, and New York: Teachers College Press.

Williams, J. P. (1993). Comprehension of students with and without learning disabilities: Identification of narrative themes and idiosyncratic text representations. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93, 631–641.

Wixson, K. (1983). Questions about a text: What you ask about is what children learn. The Reading Teacher, 37, 287–293.

Wolf, S. A. (1998). The flight of reading: Shifts in instruction, orchestration, and attitudes through class- room theater. Reading Research Quarterly, 33, 382–415.

Zhang, H., & Hoosain, R. (2005). Activation of themes during narrative reading. Discourse Processes, 40, 57–82.

Case Study

Robert entered the Literacy Center at age 10. In the parent interview, his mother described him as an “excellent reader—he just can’t remember anything he reads.” When we interviewed Robert, he also described himself as “one of the best readers in his class.” However, the end-of-year test scores from his school did not support these descriptions. When we asked Robert to describe a typical reading lesson, he said, “We take turns reading the story.” When we asked him to describe a typical social studies lesson, his response was similar.

As we began our assessment procedures with Robert, he read the isolated word lists through Level 8 at the independent level. We began his oral reading passages at Level 6. Robert’s oral reading was accurate, and his rate was excellent. However, Robert scored 25 percent on comprehension questions. We were unable to obtain an independent level in oral reading, but we did obtain an instructional level at Level 1. Similar results occurred in the silent reading passages. Rates were excellent, but com- prehension measured through retellings and through responses to comprehension questions were extremely low. Again, we could not obtain an independent level, and his instructional level fell to Primer Level. Vocabulary development, as measured by the Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test, was low average.

We began instruction at the Primer Level, using science and social science books of high interest to Robert, with an emphasis on developing metacognitive strategies to support comprehension through the use of reciprocal teaching. Robert’s teacher explicitly modeled the processes of the following:

1. Using the title and pictures to predict what the book or article will be about. 2. Summarizing what he just read from small segments of text. 3. Asking an important question about the material read.

Comprehension of Narrative Text 297

4. Clarifying any words or concepts he didn’t understand 5. Predicting what the author would include next.

Robert frequently commented that he had never thought of asking himself what a book or article might be about or thinking about whether his questions were an- swered; he was amazed to discover how much information authors provided about unfamiliar words!

For vocabulary instruction, we incorporated a morphological approach to ana- lyzing words, so that Robert was able to use his strong word identification skills but could apply the ways that adding affixes changed the meanings of words.

Robert’s teacher integrated writing into Robert’s instruction, beginning with summarizing what he read and gradually including more personal responses to text.

At the end of the semester, Robert was administered an informal assessment to monitor his progress. After one semester of explicit instruction in comprehension strat- egies, Robert’s independent level was Level 4, and his instructional level was Level 5.

Go to the topic 9: Reading Comprehension in the MyEducationLab (www.myeducationlab .com) for Reading Problems: Assessment and Teach- ing Strategies, where you can: ◆ Find learning outcomes for reading com-

prehension, along with the national stan- dards that connect to these outcomes.

◆ Complete assignments and activities that can help you more deeply understand the chapter content.

◆ Apply and practice your understanding of the core teaching skills identified in the chapter with the Building Teaching Skills and Dispositions learning units.

◆ Examine challenging situations and cases presented in the Iris Center Resources.

◆ Access video clips of CCSSO National Teachers of the Year award winners respond- ing to the question, “Why Do I Teach?” in the Teacher Talk section.

◆ Practice targeting instruction and mak- ing content accessible for all students with A+RISE activities.

◆ Strengthen your understanding and usage of the English language in writing with the Grammar Tutorial.

◆ Gain experience in choosing appropriate literature and integrating the best titles into language arts instruction with the Children’s and Young Adult Literature Database.

◆ Track the month-by-month literacy growth of five second-graders with the Literacy Portraits.

◆ Create, update, and share quality lesson plans with the Lesson Plan Builder.

◆ Access state licensure test requirements, over- views of what tests cover, and sample test items in the Certification and Licensure section.

◆ Check your comprehension of the content covered in the chapter with the Study Plan. Here you will be able to take a chapter pre- test, receive feedback on your answers, and then access personalized Review, Practice, and Enrichment exercises to enhance your understanding of chapter content. After you complete the exercises, take a posttest to confirm your comprehension.

12Comprehension of Informational Text

Introduction

Organization of Informational Text Difficulties Presented by Informational Text Importance of Informational Text

Informational Text and Grade-Level Competence

Informational Text and the Common Core Standards

Assessing Abilities With Informational Text: Using the Informal Reading Inventory

Strategies for Helping Students Read Informational Text

Using Read-Alouds With Grade-Level Text

Content-Free Questions Text Coding Discussion Cards Topic–Detail–Main Idea Strategy Think-Aloud Strategy Question–Answer Relationships

Strategies for Transforming Informational Text

Main Idea Grid Idea-Mapping

Improving Comprehension of Informational Text and RTI

Summary

Case Study

298

C H A P T E R

Comprehension of Informational Text 299

Introduction

As students move through the grades, the reading tasks that confront them change dramatically. Narrative text becomes less important, and work with informational, or expository, text increases.

The ability to read and comprehend informational text is often referred to as content literacy. Students are often assigned to read science and social studies textbooks independently. Thus, without any help, students are expected to read a chapter, com- plete a written assignment, and participate in class discussion. Not surprisingly, many struggling readers cannot do these tasks.

This chapter first describes the nature and importance of informational material and discusses why it tends to be more difficult to read than stories and novels. Then it focuses on the ability to comprehend informational text as a critical component of grade-level competence and mastery of the Common Core State Standards Initiative (2010). Next, it describes strategies for assessing the abilities of students to read and study from informational text. Finally, it discusses strategies for helping students with reading problems deal with informational material. The focus is on developing inde- pendent readers who eventually apply these strategies in the absence of a teacher. A case study of a sixth grader with difficulties in comprehension concludes this chapter.

Organization of Informational Text

Informational, or expository text, conveys information, explains ideas, or presents a point of view. Informational material is usually organized in one of five ways (Caldwell & Leslie, 2013; Moss, 2004).

Sequence or time order is often used to present events such as the French and Indian War (in history class) or cell division (in biology class). Signal words for the sequence structure include first, second, third, next, last, before, after, during, while, and finally.

Listing or description is used to explain the features of an object or event. Biol- ogy textbooks list the features of reptiles, giving their body temperature, reproductive habits, eating habits, and so forth. No specific signal words are associated with the listing pattern.

Compare and contrast involves discussing similarities and differences. A social studies text might compare a congressional system of government with a parliamen- tary system; a science text might contrast several planets in the solar system. Signal words include alike, similar to, same as, resembles, is compared to, unlike, different from, both, but, and yet.

A cause–effect pattern outlines reasons for events. The author describes an event (such as the fall of Fort Sumter) and explains what caused the event and the effects that followed from it. Signal words are if, so, so that, because, as a result of, in order to, since, therefore, cause, and effect.

Authors using the problem–solution pattern discuss a problem and then suggest possible solutions. A history author might discuss the events in a U.S. president’s life in terms of the problems he faced and how he solved them. Signal words include problem, solution, because, so that, and as a result.

300 C H A P T E R 1 2

Skilled readers recognize these organizational patterns and use them to facilitate comprehension. However, recognizing such patterns is not always easy. The ability to recognize and remember these patterns depends to a large degree on the reader’s familiarity with informational text and resulting sensitivity to organizational patterns. In addition, informational materials often do not conform precisely to the patterns described. Authors may combine two patterns. For example, a listing or description of the battle of Vicksburg may be intertwined with the cause–effect pattern. Also, two readers may see different patterns in the same text. An account of how trade goods in the Middle Ages were brought from Asia to Europe could be interpreted as descrip- tion, problem–solution, or sequence. Another issue is that an organizational pattern may be contained in a single paragraph or may be spread over several paragraphs.

Difficulties Presented by Informational Text Informational text presents difficulties for many able readers, not just struggling read- ers. Caldwell and Leslie (2003–2004) found that proficient middle school readers dif- fered significantly in their ability to read and understand narrative and informational text. They were more successful retelling and answering questions on a narrative selection as opposed to social studies and science selections. Part of this difficulty may be due to a lack of familiarity with informational text; students tend to read more narratives than informational selections, especially in elementary school (Goldman & Rakestraw, 2000). However, even if exposure to both types of text was equal, informa- tional text tends to be more difficult. Why is this?

◆ Recognizing and using the author’s organizational patterns is a complex task. Such patterns are not always explicitly signaled.

◆ Informational text is less personal than narrative text. ◆ In reading informational text, students are often required to demonstrate their

understanding by taking tests, writing a paper, or carrying out an experiment. ◆ Informational text usually contains more difficult vocabulary and technical terms

than narrative text. ◆ Informational text tends to be extremely concept dense. Four to five new ideas

may be included in a single paragraph. For example, a sixth-grade paragraph on weather includes the following concepts: humidity, water vapor, evaporation, relative humidity, condensation, and dew point. In addition, many of the con- cepts tend to be extremely unfamiliar such as oligarchy and lipid bilayers.

◆ Much informational text presented to students contains new and unfamiliar concepts, which they are expected to learn. It is assumed that they do not have knowledge of such concepts as prokaryotic and eukaryotic cells, for example. Their role as students is to gain such knowledge. Whenever we read text without any accompanying background, comprehension becomes more difficult.

◆ Informational text tends to be longer than narrative text. This length may simply overwhelm struggling readers.

◆ The reading level of school textbooks is often well above the frustration level of struggling readers.

Comprehension of Informational Text 301

Importance of Informational Text Students must be taught effective strategies for understanding and remembering expository material (Goldman & Rakestraw, 2000; Moss, 2004; Pearson & Duke, 2002; Rhoder, 2002). We live in what has been called the Information Age. Being literate in this age demands that students be familiar with and understand informational text. Ours is also a technological society, and students must be able “to read and write not only in the print world but also in the digital world” (Moss, 2004, p. 711). Schmar-Dobler (2003) emphasizes that the ability to effectively use the Internet to access, select, and synthesize information is critical to academic success as well as to success in the work- place. Most of the text on Internet websites is informational in nature; therefore, it is crucial that all readers become somewhat comfortable reading informational text.

An additional reason for teaching students to read informational text is the increasing importance being placed on standardized tests (Moss, 2004). Performance on such measures is used to evaluate students for promotion and for acceptance into various programs and educational institutions. Informational text represents a large portion of standardized test content.

Informational Text and Grade-Level Competence

In Chapter 6, we made the case that the ultimate aim of any intervention structure is to bring a reader up to his or her chronological grade level, that is, to prepare him or her to succeed in the regular classroom. We described several interventions that succeeded in this respect; however, these primarily focused on the lower grade levels. We discussed the concept of transfer and explained that in order for students to use what they have learned in a new situation, the two situations must share similar cognitive elements. A fifth-grade informational passage on the cell may share some similar concepts such as cell function and cell parts with a middle school or high school text on the same topic. However, the middle school and/or high school text will be longer. It will contain more complex sentences, extensive unfamiliar vocabulary, and the addition of many new con- cepts, such as organelles, vacuoles, vesicles, lysosomes, and cell cytoskeleton. Ability to read and comprehend the fifth-grade text will not prepare the struggling reader for the high school version! The struggling middle school reader must be exposed to middle school text; the struggling high school reader must be similarly exposed to high school text. A football player who only plays at a high school level will never succeed in the NFL. We must involve struggling readers in what has been avoided for years, text at their frustration level. This chapter will offer suggestions for doing this.

Informational Text and the Common Core Standards

The Common Core State Standards Initiative (2010) lists 10 standards for infor- mational text that students in this country should meet. Although there are some differences across the grades, the 10 standards for informational text tend to fall

302 C H A P T E R 1 2

into a similar pattern. Students are expected to cite textual evidence that supports an inference or an analysis; determine main ideas and/or summarize the text; explain and analyze text; determine word meanings from context; analyze text structure; determine point of view or purpose; interpret visuals; evaluate arguments and claims; analyze the similarities and differences of two authors writing on the same topic; and read and comprehend nonfiction at chronological grade level. If struggling readers are to do this, it is imperative that they are taught how to deal with grade-level mate- rial. Most college recruits seldom succeed immediately in the NFL; however, with coaching, practice, scrimmages, and games at an NFL level, many become effective and efficient players.

The Common Core standards are a far cry from how we typically view com- prehension as either literal or inferential. Actually, there are many different forms of inferences, many of which are tied to specific question stems (Applegate, Quinn, & Applegate, 2002; Bloom & Krathwohl, 1956; Ciardiello, 1998; Grasser, Ozuru, & Sullins, 2010). Unfortunately, the exact meaning of and/or the difference between typ- ical question stems are quite general and not necessarily clear. For example, what “ana- lyze” means to one individual may be very different from what it means to another. Just ask someone to define “analyze” and you will understand what we mean. Fortunately, the Common Core standards are quite specific and clearly tie question stems such as “cite,” “analyze,” and “determine” to specific descriptions of what should be cited, analyzed, and determined. This means that teachers and intervention specialists must become very familiar with the Common Core standards for informational text in order to know what comprehension skills to teach and how to teach them.

We must address another aspect of the Common Core standards with regard to informational text. In the last 20 years, we have focused on the importance of prior knowledge to comprehension. We realized that a reader who possesses prior knowl- edge of a specific topic reads text on that subject more fluently and with greater com- prehension than someone who lacks such knowledge. For example, a nurse reading a chapter on kidney functions will understand more than the high school student taking his or her first biology course. Recognizing this, we recommended various strategies to teachers for preparing students to read difficult and unfamiliar text by engaging in pre- reading activities such as expectation grids (Leslie & Caldwell, 2011) and KWL (Ogle, 1986). However, the Common Core standards make no mention of prior knowledge. The standards clearly list what students “should understand and be able to do by the end of each grade” (Common Core Standards Initiative, 2010, p. 25), irrespective of the prior knowledge they may or may not possess.

We are not suggesting that teacher activities to prepare students to read text by developing prior knowledge are not helpful. They probably are; however, we know that all teachers do not engage in them. Many content teachers expect their students to read the text on their own and come to class prepared to answer questions, engage in discus- sion, solve problems, and/or perform lab and research activities. In simple terms, the Common Core standards expect that students will be able to learn from text whether or not they have any prior knowledge of the topic. For example, before entering an earth science class, how many high school students have any prior knowledge of the makeup of the ocean floor, differences between various forms of sonar, and the composition,

Comprehension of Informational Text 303

location, and value of sea floor sediments? Yet it is expected that they can use their text to learn about these issues and, in many cases, successful completion of activities sug- gested in the teacher manual depend on prior reading and comprehension of the text.

What does this mean for intervention instruction? Instead of focusing on teacher strategies such as KWL, we should focus on student strategies for dealing with unfa- miliar material in the absence of a supportive teacher who prefaces instruction with a focus on prior knowledge and completion of KWL charts. The instructional strate- gies presented in this chapter focus on understanding the text, not on methods for preparing students to read. They focus on student strategies that will lead to indepen- dence in approaching text, as opposed to dependence upon the teacher to set the stage. They focus on strategies the students can use to “interact with complex vocabulary and language structures and become familiar with the discourse of the domain (Goetze, Laster, & Ehren, 2010, p. 179).

Assessing Abilities With Informational Text Using the Informal Reading Inventory

This section presents strategies for judging how well students can handle informa- tional materials. It is often the case that a student will demonstrate grade-level com- petence when reading narrative text but present a far different profile when dealing with informational materials. That is why it is important to assess a reader using both narrative and expository passages.

Some informal reading inventories, such as the Qualitative Reading Inventory–5 (Leslie & Caldwell, 2011), have both narrative and expository selections. You may wish to determine a student’s instructional level in narrative text first, and through admin- istration of word lists and oral reading, determine if word recognition difficulties are interfering with comprehension. Once you have done this, have the student silently read an informational selection at the same instructional level and ask the accompany- ing questions. If the student scores below 70%, have the student look back in the text to find the answers to the missed questions. If a student can raise his or her score to an instructional level after looking back, the initial low score was probably due to memory problems rather than lack of comprehension.

If the student is unsuccessful when looking back, provide a clue and see if he or she can use it to arrive at a correct answer. If a student does not attain an instructional level in informational text that is the same as in narrative text, ask the student to read informa- tional passages at lower levels until his or her instructional level is reached. It has been our experience that many students, even those at an instructional level for grade-level text, have an instructional level for informational materials well below their level for narratives.

To study effectively, students must transform the text in some way so that they can remember it. For example, they must reorganize the text to identify and set apart important ideas. Students often use the tools of underlining, note-taking, and filling in semantic maps to help in this transformation. You can use the same informal reading inventory (IRI) informational passage (or a different one if you prefer) to assess a stu- dent’s ability to study from text. Ask the student to choose the form of note-taking

304 C H A P T E R 1 2

that he or she prefers or present the student with a semantic map (such as the ones we will focus on later in this chapter) and ask him or her to complete it. Either method enables you to identify the student who cannot pick out important main ideas or take effective notes.

Strategies for Helping Students Read Informational Text

This section focuses on strategies that can lead students to read and study informa- tional text independently. The strategies presented are learned slowly and must be used on a long-term basis. As a teacher, you will need to model them repeatedly. You must encourage students to verbalize what they are doing, why they are doing it, and how they are proceeding.

Using Read-Alouds With Grade-Level Text When teaching students with reading difficulties to deal with informational text, you cannot assume that strategies mastered at an instructional level will automatically transfer to grade-level text. They may if the levels are relatively close together, that is, a sixth grader who is instructional at the fifth-grade level. But many struggling readers are 2 years or more below their chronological grade level. They fell behind in the very early grades and never caught up. As a result, it is unfortunately typical to see strug- gling fifth graders with instructional levels of third grade and high school struggling readers below the middle school level. It seems counterproductive as well as unkind to present them with grade-level text that they cannot read successfully. However, this is where read-alouds enter the picture. The teacher selects a text at the students’ chrono- logical grade level and reads it aloud to the students in one- to three-paragraph chunks while they follow along in their books. Read-alouds can also combine forms of assisted or repeated reading, as described in Chapter 9. McCormack, Paratore, and Dahlene (2003) found that teacher reading in combination with various forms of assisted and repeated reading effectively compensated for use of frustration-level text.

Struggling readers are all too aware of the fact that they are not as skilled as many of their peers. Even if they improve to the extent of raising their reading level, they still know that they are behind. Glasswell and Ford (2010) state that readers can succeed in grade-level text if the teacher facilitates the process through reading and thinking aloud. “This is both necessary if we want to accelerate growth and desirable if we want our below level readers see themselves as competent and confident readers” (p. 57).

Does this mean that an intervention session should never deal with instructional- level text? “Work with leveled text may focus on word recognition and mastery of basic comprehension strategies, whereas work with grade-level text would focus on manipulating complex language involved in higher level thinking skills within a content area and expansion of such cognitive skills as inferential reasoning (Goetz et al., 2010, p. 179). An intervention session can utilize instructional- and frustration-level text for different purposes.

Comprehension of Informational Text 305

It is important to note that reading aloud involves much more than just reading to the students. It involves three critical components: teacher modeling of strategies for comprehending text, active participation by the students in attempting to under- stand the text, and rereading as a form of clarifying what they have understood and learned. Strategy Snapshot 12.1 provides an example of a read-aloud session using grade-level text. The case study of Ethan at the end of this chapter illustrates the implementation of read-alouds.

Strategy Snapshot 12.1 Read-Alouds with Grade-Level Text

Mr. Hart worked with a group of four middle school students who, according to IRI assess- ment, were 2 to 3 years below their chronological grade level for informational text. He com- municated with their classroom teachers in order to choose text for intervention emphasis that would be presented in their content classes at a later date. This Strategy Snapshot focuses on a science selection about fossils.

Mr. Hart explained the purpose of the lesson to the students. “Textbooks contain a lot of difficult material about very unfamiliar topics. Although you are expected to read the text and learn from it, it is not always easy. So I am going to read your textbook out loud while you follow along. We will stop along the way to try to make some sense of it. I am going to expect you to be an active part of this process. I will demonstrate how to do something and help you to do it. Eventually you will be able to do it on your own. Let’s begin with the first section.”

Before Mr. Hart read the first two paragraphs about how fossils formed, he asked the students what fossils were. They offered a vague idea of something very old. “That is the purpose of reading a book like this. Fossils are old but now you are going to learn a lot more about them and why people study them. The author gives us a great definition. I will read, you follow along in your book and when you hear a definition of fossil, raise your hand.” The students raised their hands at an appropriate place.

“So we have a definition, but why do people study fossils? Try rereading the paragraph on your own silently. See if you can find the answer. Then check with your partner.” The groups had little difficulty in finding why scientists study fossils.

“Now there are a lot of ideas crammed into this chapter and the next section explains how fossils are formed. How do I know this? Because I have read the chapter before? No, not really. I have read it before but there is another way that you can learn what the author is going to talk about. What comes before many paragraphs and really sticks out. You got it! A heading. Don’t ignore headings. They can tell you a lot. So the heading How Fossils Form tells you what you are going to learn about. I will read the next section while you follow along.”

After reading, Mr. Hart continued with his modeling of good reader behaviors. “As I read, the same word came up over and over again. What was it? That’s right; it was sediment. What does sediment mean?”

No one volunteered an answer. Mr. Hart reminded them that new terms are sometimes defined in the text but you have to be on the look-out for them. “Well, we will probably have to reread. Good readers reread all the time, especially in difficult material. Let’s reread out loud together. Listen for the author explaining what sediment is. Raise you hand when you hear it.”

Continued

306 C H A P T E R 1 2

Strategy Snapshot 12.1 (Continued)

The students found the definition and Mr. Hart asked them to read it orally as a group. Mr. Hart then continued, “Some times definitions come with examples. Are there any ex- amples of sediment? Look for the word example. Reread to yourself silently and then work with your partner to find examples of a sediment.”

When the group found several examples of a sediment, Mr. Hart asked them if sediment was an important word. They said they guessed so but did not seem certain. Mr. Hart asked them to count how many times sediment appeared in the paragraph. They counted seven examples of either sediment or sedimentary.

“If a word appears many times it has to be important, so you have to pay attention to it and find out what it means if you don’t already know.” Mr. Hart asked them to say in their own words what sediment means. “If you can’t say it in your words you probably still don’t understand it.”

After some brief discussion of the meaning of sediment, Mr. Hart continued, “Now we have to connect sediment with what?” The students seemed unsure. “What is the title of this chapter? That’s right. It’s fossils. So we have to connect fossils to sediment. Chapters like this contain a lot of details and the job of the reader is to connect them to the main topic which is fossils. Let’s reread together out loud and your job as a reader is to figure out the connec- tion between fossils and sediment. “ After rereading, the students worked with their partner to make connections between fossils and sediment and engaged in some silent rereading as they did so.

The next section described four kinds of fossils. Mr. Hart read the four headings: Molds and Casts, Petrified Fossils, Carbon Films, and Trace Fossils. “We are gong to take one at a time. What should we be looking for? Good readers always read with a purpose in mind.” The students agreed that they should be listening to how each of these fossils form and how they are different. Mr. Hart read each section out loud, stopped, and asked the students to explain how each fossil was formed. If they seemed unsure, Mr. Hart reread the section or asked then to read it with him. He also let them silently read and check with their partners.

After determining how the four types of fossils were formed, Mr. Hart said, “Have you come across any unfamiliar words? You know how to pronounce them by listening to me. But you have to get the meaning. Reading isn’t just saying words; it’s learning their meaning. In many cases the text will give you the meaning; we call that using context.” The students identified petrified, seeped, and film, and Mr. Hart showed them how context can help. For ex- ample, after reading about water that seeped into spaces in plant cells, they were able to define it as moving or leaking. The context “thin film of carbon” helped them to think of film not as a movie but as a thin covering. Petrified was defined in the sentence following it. They talked about how words such as film and petrified have other meanings.

Mr. Hart concluded the lesson by asking them to verbally list the important parts of what they read. “We can’t remember everything, so we want to pick out what might be on a test. We want to remember what is important. So play like a teacher and decide what is the most important to understand and remember. Work with partner. You might have to reread, but remember, good readers do a lot of rereading.” After active discussion and some reread- ing, the students indicated what they felt was important: what a fossil is, what sediments are, and how the different kinds of fossils are formed.

Mr. Hart met with his group three times a week, and by the end of the week they had covered the material that would be presented in class the following week. At the last class, the group completed main idea grids (Figure 12.2) and made a list of new words they had learned.

Comprehension of Informational Text 307

Content-Free Questions For many struggling readers, questions come after reading. The teacher asks them, and the students provide answers or attempt to. This may represent an extremely limited view. Good readers ask themselves questions before they read and as they read, and they read to find the answers. Questions are what keep you up past your normal bedtime as you attempt to find out how the chapter or novel ends. We also read informational text with questions in mind. What is the senator’s point of view, and do I agree with it? Why is the movie so successful, and do I want to see it? How is the stock market behaving, and will its behavior affect my portfolio? What caused the team to lose the game? Struggling readers need explicit guidance in recognizing the importance of self- questioning and using such questions to monitor their comprehension. Content-free questions are a strategy for providing such guidance (Caldwell & Leslie, 2012).

Content-free questions are general questions that can be asked of any selection. They are not specifically tied to content. Consider the following question pairs and how the first question differs from the second.

How did the Egyptians mummify their pharaohs?

What process is the author describing, and what are its steps?

Both of the previous questions deal with a process, but the content elements of Egypt, mummify, and pharaoh are part of one question and missing in the other. Let’s look at another example:

What new nations were formed after the Treaty of Paris?

What important information is the author sharing?

The first question is specifically tied to content components such as nations and Treaty of Paris; the second is not. If students learn examples of content-free questions, they can use these to guide and monitor their comprehension of varied examples of informational text. Content-free questions can provide their map for navigating and comprehending the text.

The following are examples of content-free questions for informational text (Caldwell & Leslie, 2012):

◆ What is the topic of this section? ◆ What is the author’s purpose in writing this selection? ◆ What are the most important or main ideas? ◆ What process is the author describing, and what are its steps? ◆ What is most interesting to me? ◆ What did I learn? ◆ What did I already know about this? ◆ How is this different from what I already knew? ◆ What surprised me? ◆ How could I explain this in my own words?

308 C H A P T E R 1 2

◆ What are some words that I do not know the meaning of? Does the text give me a hint?

◆ What new words did I learn? ◆ What don’t I understand? ◆ How is this connected to me?

Teach students to read with content-free questions in mind. Place examples of content-free questions in a prominent place in the classroom and guide students to monitor their understanding of the text by asking and answering such questions as they read. Content-free questions work well as a basis for read-alouds of grade-level text. Some teachers may be a bit hesitant to use read-alouds because they are not sure how to model strategies or what they should say. Use the content-free questions as discussion starters and gradually lead the students to initiate such questions before, during, and after reading a segment of text. Begin with two or three examples and gradually build up the students’ repertoire. Strategy Snapshot 12.2 describes a lesson focusing on content-free questions, as does the case study at the end of the chapter.

Strategy Snapshot 12.2 Content-Free Questions

Ms. Raines worked with a small group of struggling fourth graders. When working with grade-level material, she chose selections that the students were expected to master in their content classes. This Strategy Snapshot focuses on a social studies unit about the regions of the United States. Ms. Raines began by focusing on the importance of questions.

“When we read, we want to read with questions in mind. Teachers are not the only ones who ask questions. Good readers always ask questions and then they read to find the answers. I know one of you said that you can’t ask questions until after you read the passage but you can. Think about going to a movie. You do the same thing. You have questions before you ever see the movie and as the movie goes on, you raise more questions. What are some questions you might have about a movie?”

The students offered a variety of possibilities: What is it going to be about? Is it science fiction? Is it a funny movie? Will there be a lot of fights? Where will it take place? Will there be a happy ending? They offered the names of current movies and used these to suggest additional questions based upon the title and the actors.

“So you all know how to come up with questions. When you read, it is the same process. I am going to raise three questions that you can ask about any selection, any selection at all. They will act like a map. They will help us to understand what we read.” Ms. Raines the noted the following questions:

◆ What is the topic? ◆ What did I learn? ◆ What is most interesting to me?

“Now I am going to read the first paragraph and you follow along as I do.” After reading, Ms. Raines continued. “Now let’s just pay attention to these three ques-

tions. What is the topic of what we read? A topic is just a few words, just what the author is

Comprehension of Informational Text 309

Strategy Snapshot 12.2 (Continued)

writing about. A lot of times you find the topic in the heading. That’s right. The topic is re- gions of the United States. What did you learn? What do you know now that you didn’t know before? Do you want me to reread? Okay, but you read along with me.”

The students offered varied answers. They learned what a region is. They learned what a landform is. They learned the names of the five regions in the United States.

“What was most interesting?” The students admitted that they did not find much to interest them except for the colorful map that accompanied the selection. So Ms. Raines spent some time talking about the map and helping the students to identify boundaries of the five regions.

“Okay, on to the next section. We are staying with the same three questions. Let’s read this out loud together.”

After reading, the students readily identified the topic as the Northeast region. They learned about two main things: the natural features in this region and Niagara Falls. All agreed that Niagara Falls was the most interesting, so Ms. Raines suggested they read the paragraph together and then say exactly what they found most interesting about the Falls. After discussing what they found interesting, Ms. Raines continued the process with the rest of the chapter.

After several lessons focusing on the three questions listed earlier, Ms. Raines added two more:

◆ What are the main ideas? ◆ What new words did I learn?

As the students became acquainted with the full list of possible content-free questions, Ms. Raines often asked to students to select the questions to drive their reading of the text.

Text Coding Text coding (Caldwell & Leslie, 2012) teaches struggling readers to recognize and remember known information, newly learned information, and remaining questions. Teaching struggling readers to recognize these three things is an important first step in helping them to monitor their comprehension. To make this activity short and con- crete, teach them to use symbols to code text: Use a plus sign (+) to indicate some- thing the reader already knows. Mark new information with an exclamation mark (!). Mark questions with a question mark (?). To avoid defacing books, the students can place these symbols on small Post-it notes.

Teacher modeling is the best way to show students how to code text. Remember that you are teaching a mental process, one that you would like students eventually to do in their heads without the aid of written codes. At first, the coding symbols help to make the thinking process visible and bring it to the students’ attention. Later, how- ever, you will want the students to do this mentally.

When you teach students to use text coding, begin by getting an oral re- sponse. First, read an informational selection to them and model the coding process by stopping periodically to report information that you already knew,

310 C H A P T E R 1 2

information you just learned, and questions you have. Invite the students to join you in talking about what they already knew or something they just learned. Do they have any questions? As you proceed, stop at specific pieces of information in the text and ask students to respond to them according to one of the three coding responses.

Many students tend to say they already knew an item of information when, in fact, they didn’t. Refrain from criticizing them in this first stage. As the strat- egy proceeds, they will become more comfortable identifying new information. If students continue to say that everything was known, you might want to simplify the process by using only two categories: unknown facts and questions. In addi- tion, students just beginning this process will have difficulties framing questions. Again, their abilities to ask good questions will increase as you model and guide their efforts.

If some students simply echo what their peers say, you might require each stu- dent to make a personal decision about text by constructing individual coding cards. Take index cards and print the coding symbols (+, !, ?) on each one. After giving each student one card for each coding symbol, read a segment of expository text to them. Ask them to hold up one of the cards to indicate whether they already knew this in- formation, had just learned it, or had a question. When doing this activity, ask for a student’s explanation.

After students have grasped the idea of identifying what they already knew, what they just learned, and what questions they have, move on to a written format. Choose a short segment of informational text. Students in a small group can sit around you and watch as you write the coding symbols on the page. As you read the text, think aloud about what you already knew, what you just learned, and what questions you have. At each item, mark the coding symbols on the text. (You can lightly pencil them in on the page or attach Post-it-style notes containing !, +, ?) The use of written symbols is an important step that makes a mental strategy visible for the students.

As a next step, students should each receive an individual copy of a short text (no more than one page) to read silently and code for themselves in the margins or above a line of print. Before students read, you should decide how often they need to react. At lower levels, you should code each sentence. However, as text becomes more difficult, many different items of information can be included in a single sentence, so one sentence could have several different codes. For example, Kenneth coded one sentence by indicating already known (+) for the fact that cicada eggs hatched but just learned (!) for the fact that the animals from hatched eggs are called nymphs. He also had a question (?) because he wondered why they were called nymphs.

Coding is a flexible strategy that can be used orally or in writing to guide the understanding of any type of expository text. However, teaching this strategy requires a generous amount of teacher modeling and student response. Students need to ver- balize what they are doing, why they are doing it, and how it should be done. Amory’s text coding is described in Figure 12.1.

Comprehension of Informational Text 311

Discussion Cards Every teacher has experienced a discussion that never got off the ground. After asking a discussion question, several things may happen. The more able students eagerly raise their hands and dominate the discussion, whereas struggling or disinterested readers sink down in their seats or look out the window. Sometimes so few students volun- teer and their responses are so vague and general that the teacher finds himself or herself answering the questions as well as asking them. Sometimes the responses of the students are inappropriate and unrelated to the text and the teacher is unsure how to respond in a positive manner. All of these experiences are often magnified in the intervention setting and particularly with regard to informational text.

All students, not just struggling readers, must learn to independently generate thoughtful reactions to what they read. Using discussion cards can help struggling read- ers do this by providing cues to the reader as to comments they might make (Caldwell & Leslie, 2013). Each student has a set of cards labeled with possible subjects such as Topic, Main Idea, and Important Detail. After reading a section of text, pause and say, “Hold up a card to show what you are thinking.” The student then holds up a card to indicate what she or he wants to talk about. If it is the Topic card, she or he must identify or talk about the topic. If it is the Main Idea card, the student must identify the main idea or com- ment about it in some way. Students can make any comment they wish as long as they can connect it to the card they hold up. Discussion cards play two roles: They not only suggest possible topics for students’ comments but they also focus the discussion on the text and not on irrelevant topics that students often insert in classroom discussions.

Reptiles do not look like mammals. +However, they are alike in some ways. Their heads look alike because the eyes mouth and nose are arranged in the same way. They have simi- lar lungs and stomachs. !Reptiles are different from mammals. Mammals have hair or fur that covers their body. ?Reptiles have skin that is tough and dry and covered with scales. Reptiles are cold-blooded. The temperature of their bodies changes as the water or air tem- perature changes. ?If they are in the sun or in warm water, their body temperatures will be warm. Young reptiles look like their parents just young mammals do. +But mammal babies cannot live on their own for some time and they need their mothers to protect them. Reptile babies are on their own as soon as they hatch from their eggs.? Amory’s comments and questions, each corresponding to a mark on the paper, were:

+I knew that they are different. !I didn’t know a snake’s stomach is like a dog’s. ?Does that mean if you don’t have hair or fur, you aren’t a mammal? I heard about a hairless dog. Is he still a mammal? ?Does this mean that if they are in the cold, they won’t really feel it? Will they freeze? +I already knew this. I saw some baby snakes at my grandfather’s farm. ?Is this like a chicken?

FIGURE 12.1 Amory’s Text Coding

312 C H A P T E R 1 2

Discussion cards that are specific to informational text are as follows: Topic. The student may

Identify a topic Comment on its importance Comment on its interest

Main Idea. The student may Identify the main idea Comment on its importance Comment on the author’s intention

Important Detail. The student may Identify important or explanatory details Comment on how a detail is related to a topic or main idea

Text Structure. The student may Identify a structure such as description, problem/solution, compare/contrast, cause/effect, sequence Comment on the structure as helpful or not helpful

Process. The student may Identify a process that is explained in the text Comment on the process

My Idea. The student may Relate the text to his or her life Make a judgment about a segment of text Indicate like or dislike for text contents

Vocabulary. The student may Identify new and/or unknown words Comment on a specific word Pose a question about a word

I Knew. The student may Comment on what he or she knew or did not know about the topic

I Learned. The student may Indicate what he or she learned

Question. The student may Pose a question about any aspect of the text

Visual. The student may Draw attention to a picture or graph Demonstrate understanding or lack of understanding regarding the visual

Comprehension of Informational Text 313

Discussion cards work well with read-alouds and can be combined with various forms of assisted and independent oral reading and with silent reading. With care- ful introduction, they are effective devices for helping struggling readers to compre- hend and discuss grade-level text. Obviously, you are not going to introduce all the cards at one time. Begin with three or four. This number allows the students some choice in what they say. Good introductory cards are Topic, Question, I Learned, and Vocabulary. As students become comfortable with the process, you can substitute or add cards. Sometimes you will find that certain cards are particularly relevant for spe- cific selections.

Even with the use of discussion cards, students do not always make comments that are specific and relevant. You will need to take what they have said and model how to make it more specific to both the card and the text. However, the use of discussion cards ensures that the student’s initial comment, even if somewhat vague, will be more germane to the topic than a comment offered in a less structured discussion format.

Often you will find that a student holds up the same card time after time. This may be because he or she feels comfortable with the topic of the card and is not willing to risk venturing into the unknown territory or a new card. Have the students place the cards face up. When they volunteer and use a card to offer a comment, they must then turn the card face down and they cannot raise it again until all cards have been used. Discussion cards also work well as a group activity. Instead of each individual having a set of cards, the group holds the set and decides which card to hold up and what to say about it.

When should you ask students to hold up a discussion card and offer a comment? In other words, how much text should you read before doing this? That is your deci- sion and it is often based on the age of the students and the difficulty level of the text.

Discussion cards also lend themselves to writing activities. At times, you can select a specific card as a writing prompt; at other times, the student can select a card. Another activity is a “blind prompt.” The student selects a card at random and has to use that card as a prompt.

Topic–Detail–Main Idea Strategy As they read informational text, competent readers consciously try to determine the main ideas and supporting details. Finding the main idea “involves identifying the single most important idea in a section of text” (Klingner, Morrison, & Eppolito, 2011, p. 234). Standard 2 of the Common Core State Standards focuses on determining the main idea of informational text.

Determining main ideas is a difficult task. Because main ideas are often not stated directly in the text, learning to identify them requires careful and systematic teaching over an extended period of time. Struggling readers often tend to remember interesting, rather than important, information. Often these intriguing details obscure the more important main points (Alexander & Jetton, 2000).

Many students, not just struggling readers, often have misconceptions about main ideas, sometimes based on previous instruction. They believe that every para- graph contains a main idea, which is stated in a topic sentence. However, the reality is

314 C H A P T E R 1 2

much more complex. An analysis of social studies texts in grades 2, 4, 6, and 8 found that only 44% of the paragraphs contained topic sentences. The same study discovered that only 27% of short passages in the social studies texts had topic sentences stat- ing the main ideas (Baumann & Serra, 1984). In addition, Jitendra and Gajria (2011) suggest that main ideas in informational text are domain specific; that is, their identi- fication is closely tied to recognition of the structure of the passage such as sequence, cause–effect, and compare–contrast.

Some students also believe that the first sentence in the paragraph is the topic sentence. When asked to take notes on main ideas, Allison cheerfully underlined the first sentence in every paragraph. She then put down her pencil and announced, “I’m all done. It was real easy.” In reality, finding the main idea requires hard work and careful monitoring of one’s comprehension. As you read, you need to be aware of the topic of the paragraph, what you are learning about the topic, and what is the most important statement that the author has made to explain the topic. Determining the main idea primarily demands generation, not recognition.

The topic–detail–main idea strategy is based on the strategies used by mature readers to generate main ideas. As with all informational text strategies, you will need to model the topic–detail–main idea strategy on a regular basis. In this strategy, stu- dents first identify the topic of a paragraph. Often, in informational text, this is found in a heading or chapter title. They then read the details and connect them to the topic. Finally, they identify or generate the main idea. Note that unlike what many students believe, the main idea comes last. Only after recognizing the topic and reading the details can one generate and/or identify the main idea. In most cases, the main idea has to be generated by the reader based upon the topic and the relevant details; that is, it is not explicitly stated in the text. Finally, in much upper-level text, a main idea can stretch across several paragraphs.

The steps of the strategy are as follows:

1. Read the entire selection. 2. Reread the first paragraph and identify the topic of the paragraph. (The topic is

what the paragraph is about.) State the topic in only one or two words. You can figure out a topic by asking yourself what each sentence is talking about.

3. Now, underline, in your paragraph, each thing that the author tells you about the topic. These ideas are the details.

4. Now that you have the topic and details, check to see if there is a main idea sen- tence (often referred to as a topic sentence). Remember that each detail should be connected to this sentence in some way.

5. If you don’t find a main idea sentence, and you probably won’t, construct one. Asking yourself these questions helps: ◆ Is the author describing something: a person, a thing, a process, or an event? ◆ Is the author comparing or contrasting two or more things? ◆ Is the author explaining a problem or a solution? ◆ Is the author explaining a cause and effect?

As students begin to construct their own main idea sentences, they often use statements such as “The author is describing the cicada’s life cycle” or “The author

Comprehension of Informational Text 315

is listing problems with the way we get rid of garbage.” These main idea statements provide a good framework for clustering details.

In modeling the topic–detail–main idea strategy, duplicate a section of the stu- dents’ textbook and write directly on the page while the students watch what you do. You might write the topic in one color and underline the details in a second color. If the paragraph contains a topic (main idea) sentence, underline it in a third color or use this color to write your constructed main idea sentence. The different colors help students to visualize a strategy that, like the other strategies discussed, should eventu- ally be done mentally.

Share with students that not every paragraph contains a main idea. Often several small paragraphs can be joined together to form one main idea unit, or long para- graphs can be split into two main idea units. A selection may also include introductory, transition, and summary paragraphs that do not really contain main ideas. Students often call these paragraphs “get going” paragraphs, “glue” paragraphs, and “bye-bye” paragraphs. See an example of the implementation of this strategy in the case study at the end of the chapter.

Think-Aloud Strategy In this strategy, the teacher thinks out loud and models the way that a skilled reader makes sense of text. Pressley and Afflerbach (1995) provide an extensive summary of the cognitive behaviors that readers engage in as they read. Think-aloud procedures have been studied with readers of all ages and, with appropriate modeling, most ages can engage in think-alouds. Think-alouds work very well as a vehicle for discussing and comprehending grade-level text. The think-aloud strategy has the potential to be used effectively as an instructional activity (Wilhelm, 2001).

To use the think-aloud strategy, select a short passage that contains unknown words and other points of difficulty. Give the passage to each student and retain one copy for yourself. Read the passage aloud, stopping after each paragraph. Verbalize the thought processes you used in trying to make sense of the passage and ask students to do the same. Encourage their active participation and suggest comments that they might make. Leslie and Caldwell (2013) modeled the following activities and guided students to do the same:

◆ Paraphrase or summarize the text in your own words. For example, say “People used to believe the continents were always in the same place, but in 1912 Wegener noticed that the coastlines looked as if they could fit together, and he thought they were once one large continent that broke apart. It is important to summarize what you read. How would you summarize the next paragraph that we are going to read?”

◆ Create new meaning. Make an inference. For example, say, “Wegener’s idea of the continents drifting apart was a very new and different idea, and sometimes people don’t accept new ideas even with a lot of evidence. Authors don’t always tell you everything. As we read on, think about what you could add to what the author said.”

316 C H A P T E R 1 2

◆ Ask questions about the topic or events and offer probable answers. For example, say “What kind of proof did Wegener have besides the shape of the coastlines? He would need a lot of proof if people were to believe him. His evidence was that the same fossils and rocks were found in separate continents. As we read on, think about why this was proof of the continental drift and if more proof was found.”

◆ Mention that you understand what you have read. For example, say, “This part about the trenches in the ocean floor is very interesting and it makes sense that they just might be where the continents moved apart. It’s too bad they weren’t discovered until long after Wegener died. What did you understand about this paragraph?”

◆ Mention that you did not understand what you read and point out the confusing word or concept. Model a possible fix-up strategy. For example, say, “I under- stand how hot liquids rise and cool and then sink. But I have no idea how this is related to Wegener’s theory. Maybe if I read ahead, it will explain further. So let’s read on and maybe you can help me figure this out.”

◆ Explain what you have learned. For example, say, “I never knew about Wegener’s theory of continental drift. I never knew the continents were once joined to- gether and then moved apart. I also learned how long it takes to prove a theory. What did you learn?”

◆ Identify personally with the text. For example, say, “I’ll bet it is neat to propose a new theory even if people don’t believe it at first. I think what a scientist does is fascinating, like measuring the ocean floor. That is really exciting because we can’t see it but now we can imagine it and be pretty close to the truth. Would you like to be someone who studies the ocean? Why or why not?”

As you model the think-aloud process, continually encourage students to share their own thoughts and help them to do so. This process tends to be nonthreatening to struggling readers, who are often asked to respond to questions for which they do not know the answers. In the think-aloud process, no answer is wrong, and students soon grasp this point. In the beginning stages, students often copy what the teacher said, saying, “I thought that, too,” or “I didn’t understand that either.” As they begin to feel more comfortable with think-alouds, they offer more original thoughts. They take on more and more ownership, and the need for modeling diminishes.

Throughout the process, constantly stress that the comments made during think-alouds are what good readers do as they read. In the initial stages, when a student shares a comment, identify the type of strategy that he or she used: for example, say “Alan just tied the text to his own personal experience” or “Kelsey described what she did not understand” or “Perry made a great inference.” Students should understand exactly what they are doing when they offer comments. You can also stress what they are doing by having the students make a bookmark that lists the strategies.

If you are helping poor readers prepare for their content-area classes, the think- aloud strategy has an added bonus. As students share their thoughts and listen to the thoughts of their peers, they actually learn the content of the text.

Comprehension of Informational Text 317

Question–Answer Relationships The ability to answer questions is an important one for academic success. Teachers ask questions, worksheets contain questions, and tests consist of questions. Struggling readers often experience difficulty in finding acceptable answers. Sometimes, they have not understood the text. Sometimes, forgetting what they read and understood in the culprit. Often they just do not understand the structure of the question and lack strategies for locating an answer.

Raphael and colleagues (Raphael, Highfield, & Au, 2006; Raphael & Au, 2005) devised a user-friendly framework called question–answer relationships (QARs) for teaching students how to answer questions by learning where to find the answers. Answers are either in the text or in the mind of the reader. Raphael calls these In the Book and In My Head questions.

There are two kinds of In the Book questions: Right There questions and Think and Search questions. The answer to a Right There question is explicitly stated in the text, usually in a single sentence. The words in the questions and the words in the text are extremely similar. Question: What were the most important crops in ancient Egypt? Answer: The most important crops were wheat and barley.

The answers to Think and Search questions are also explicitly stated, but the reader finds the answers in several sentences often interspersed throughout the text. The reader has to pull different parts of the text together to arrive at an answer. Ques- tion: How did the ancient Egyptians prepare their pharaohs for the afterlife? Answer: They built pyramids, mummified the body, and placed it in the tomb with all the pharaoh’s posses- sions. This answer is drawn from three separate paragraphs.

In My Head questions take two forms: Author and Me and On My Own. Author and Me questions are basically inference questions. The reader must locate clues in the text and construct an inference to answer the question. Question: Why did Egyptian civiliza- tion begin along the Nile River? Answer: The rich land that resulted from flooding allowed people to stay in one place and have enough to eat. To arrive at this answer, the reader must identify the text clues that explain the life-giving properties of the Nile flooding and connect this fact with knowledge of how civilizations develop.

Answers to On My Own questions are not in the text. Sometimes such questions can be answered without even reading the selection. Question: Why would someone build an elaborate tomb? Answer: To impress people; to make themselves feel better about death.

Teach QARs by moving from easy to difficult. In the Book questions are easier. When students have mastered these, move on to In My Head questions. An effective way of helping students deal with QARs is to begin by asking the question, giving the answer, providing the QAR label, and explaining the rationale for the label. Gradually drop the rationale, and ask the students to supply it. Then present the question and the label. Have the students find the answer and provide the rationale. Finally, ask the question and support the students in finding the answer, providing the QAR label, and explaining the rationale. Start with short segments of text and gradually move to longer selections.

Caldwell and Leslie (2012) suggest using visuals to illustrate the four question types. A picture of an open book with a single bolded line on one page is an effective

318 C H A P T E R 1 2

way to describe a Right There question. Several bolded lines across two pages can indicate a Think and Search question. Pictures of a book and a person’s head or a brain indicate an Author and Me question. An On My Own question is effectively illustrated by a picture of a person’s head or a brain.

Strategies for Transforming Informational Text

In addition to understanding informational text, students must also study and remem- ber what they read so that they can discuss it and pass tests. Effective studying requires students to do two things: recognize important information and actively process, or transform, it (Anderson & Armbruster, 1984). Taking notes and reconstructing the text in a visual fashion are ways of transforming the text.

One college student took a course in neuropsychology that involved remember- ing many details about brain structure and function. To master this difficult informa- tion, the student transformed it by creating labeled pictures of the brain and making diagrams relating the brain to body parts. She underlined the text, took notes on the underlined parts, and rewrote the notes. Finally, she mastered the course content. As this example shows, effective studying involves transforming text and changing it into a form that can be remembered.

Teachers generally expect students to study on their own, yet it is difficult to develop the self-guidance and systematic approaches necessary for this independence. Struggling readers need direct instruction in transforming the text so that they can remember it.

The strategies discussed in the earlier parts of this chapter aid in understanding text and recognizing important information. This section discusses different ways of transforming text content into visual diagrams. Constructing these diagrams involves the student in actively processing the information. The diagrams can also be used as study aids and can be extremely effective in helping students understand and remem- ber text.

Main Idea Grid The main idea grid can be used as a diagram for taking notes as students work through the topic–detail–main idea strategy (presented earlier in this chapter). After students read and analyze a paragraph, the grid is used to record the topic, details, and main idea sentence. A guide is given in Figure 12.2.

The main idea grid serves several purposes: (1) It acts as a reminder of the comprehension strategy students should be using as they read. (2) It involves stu- dents in actively transforming the text. (3) It helps students take brief notes in their own words. Because space for notes is limited, students must often shorten their writing. (4) It provides a simplified and transformed summary from which students can study. Give the students copies of the grid to fill in or they can draw their own grids as they go along.

Comprehension of Informational Text 319

Idea-Mapping Idea-mapping (Armbruster, 1986) visually demonstrates the organizational patterns of informational text and helps students recognize how ideas in a textbook are linked together. Idea-mapping is based on the different patterns of informational text described earlier in the chapter: sequence or time order, listing or description, comparison–contrast, cause–effect, and problem–solution. Each text structure is rep- resented by a unique idea-map form. The students fill in the map with information from the text. Standard 5 of the Common Core standards focuses on understanding and describing the overall structure of text parts.

In the early stages of using idea-mapping, identify an organizational pattern for the students and give them the appropriate map to fill in. The next step involves giving them two idea-map choices. The students read the text and decide which orga- nizational pattern best fits, then they fill in the map. Finally, students independently choose which idea-map to use.

Which idea-map should you begin with? Akhondi, Malayeri, and Samad (2011) recommend beginning with the description structure. The item to be described is written in the top space, and the descriptive characteristics are listed underneath. An idea-map for describing poison ivy might look like that shown in Figure 12.3.

FIGURE 12.2 Main Idea Grid

320 C H A P T E R 1 2

Moss (2006) suggests the sequence pattern as a good beginning point. The item to be described is written in the top space, and the descriptive characteristics are listed underneath. An idea-map for describing the sequence of the French and Indian War might look like the map in Figure 12.4.

We have found that the compare–contrast map is also an effective map for initial presentation. The items that are to be compared are written in the top spaces. The characteristics of each are written next. If the characteristics are simi- lar or identical, the equals symbol (=) is written between them. If the character- istics differ, the symbol is the equals sign with a line drawn through it (=/). An idea-map for comparing and contrasting deciduous and coniferous trees might look like the one in Figure 12.5.

Two other idea-maps represent the informational patterns of problem–solution and cause–effect. The problem–solution idea-map has a rectangle for the problem connected by an arrow to another rectangle for the solution. Characteristics or com- ments about the problem or solution are written underneath each. A problem–solution idea-map might look like the map in Figure 12.6.

The cause–effect idea-map is similar. The cause is written in one rectangle, and the effect is written in another. They are connected by an arrow indicating that the

FIGURE 12.3 Description Idea-Map

Comprehension of Informational Text 321

FIGURE 12.4 Sequence Idea-Map

cause precedes or leads into the effect. Again, description or comments about the cause or effect can be written underneath. An example of a cause–effect idea-map is given in Figure 12.7.

Idea-maps, like most of the strategies presented in this chapter, take time for stu- dents to learn and apply independently. As mentioned earlier, these informational pat- terns are not always clear. Two students may choose different idea-maps to represent the same text. Kelly and Amy were reading about the early years of Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s presidency. Kelly chose the sequence idea-map to represent Roosevelt’s ac- tions. Amy chose the problem–solution idea-map and organized her notes around the many problems faced by Roosevelt and his attempts to solve them.

Of course, students cannot choose just any idea-map. They must choose an ap- propriate one that fits the text, but variation in choices will occur. Your role is to encourage the students to verbalize why they chose a particular map. Students enjoy sharing their choices with their peers, and lively discussion often occurs as students defend these decisions.

In the early stages of instruction, use short segments of text to illustrate idea- maps. Gradually increase the length of the text. As students move into longer text,

322 C H A P T E R 1 2

FIGURE 12.5 Compare–Contrast Idea-Map

FIGURE 12.6 Problem–Solution Idea Map

Comprehension of Informational Text 323

FIGURE 12.7 Cause–Effect Idea-Map

they often have to use multiple idea-maps. Amy used several problem–solution maps to summarize the problems faced by Roosevelt. Kelly divided Roosevelt’s early presi- dency into two sequence idea-maps, one for each of his first two terms. The case study at the end of the chapter illustrates the use of idea mapping.

Improving Comprehension of Informational Text and RTI Early efforts to implement response-to-intervention (RTI) have primarily focused on younger readers who are experiencing difficulty with prereading or beginning-reading skills. However, RTI is gradually moving to elementary and middle school levels (Johnson, 2010; Lipson &Wixson, 2010), and different structures for providing RTI instruction to older students have emerged (Dorn & Henderson, 2010; Gelzheiser, Scanlon, & Hallgren-Flynn, 2010; Goetze et al. 2010).

This demands that informational text must play an important part in RTI efforts. Struggling readers must be exposed to informational text and must learn strategies for successfully dealing with it. All of the strategies described in this chapter would fit well within an RTI framework. We suggest, however, that RTI teachers and curriculum designers choose a single strategy such as content-free questions, text coding, or idea- mapping and stay with it for some time. As we mentioned previously in the chapter, these strategies can be powerful but they are not quick fixes. It takes a lot of time for a student to become comfortable with any one of them.

324 C H A P T E R 1 2

Summary

Informational material is organized around five basic patterns: sequence, listing/ description, compare–contrast, cause–effect, and problem–solution.

Informational text tends to be difficult, especially for struggling readers. Infor- mational text is less personal than narratives and contains more difficult vocabulary. Text organization is often unclear. The Common Core State Standards Initiative includes 10 standards for informational text for grades 4 through 12.

The informal reading inventory can be used to assess a student’s ability to read informational material. The teacher can differentiate memory from comprehension by asking students to look back in the text to locate erroneous answers. Finally, the teacher can assess students’ ability to reorganize text by watching them take notes.

Strategies for helping students read informational text should be student- centered; that is, the student should be able to eventually use the strategies indepen- dently. Such strategies take a long time to learn and apply. Teachers need to focus on a single strategy over a long period of time. Teachers should model the strategy and repeatedly ask students to verbalize what they are doing, why they are doing it, and what procedures they are using.

Teachers can use read-alouds to involve struggling readers with grade-level text. They can involve students in a variety of strategies for developing and retaining compre- hension: content-free questions, text coding, discussion cards, the topic–detail–main idea strategy, the think-aloud strategy, and question–answer relationships. They can help stu- dents transform the text to remember it by using the main idea grid and idea-mapping.

It is important that RTI design include strategies for helping students deal with informational text at their grade level.

References Akhondi, M., Malayeri, F. A., & Samad, A. A. (2011). How to teach expository text structure to facilitate

reading comprehension. The Reading Teacher, 64, 368–372. doi:10.1598/RT.c4.5.9 Alexander, P. A., & Jetton, T. L. (2000). Learning from text: A multidimensional and developmental per-

spective. In R. Barr, M. L. Kamil, P. Mosenthal, & P. D. Pearson (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (Vol. III, pp. 285–310). New York: Longman.

Anderson, T. H., & Armbruster, B. B. (1984). Content area textbooks. In R. C. Anderson, J. Osborn, & R. J. Tierney (Eds.), Learning to read in american schools: Basal readers and content texts (pp. 193–226). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Applegate, M. D., Quinn, K. B., & Applegate, A. J. (2002). Levels of thinking required by comprehension questions in informal reading inventories. The Reading Teacher, 56, 174–180.

Armbruster, B. B. (1986). Using frames to organize expository text. Paper presented at National Reading Conference, Austin, TX.

Baumann, J. F., & Serra, K. K. (1984). The frequency and placement of main ideas in children’s social stud- ies textbooks: A modified replication of Braddock’s research on topic sentences. Journal of Reading Behavior, 16, 27–40.

Bloom, B., & Krathwohl, D. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives. New York: Longmans Green. Caldwell, J., & Leslie, L. (2003–2004). Does proficiency in middle school reading assure proficiency in high

school reading? The possible role of think-alouds. Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy, 47, 324–335. Caldwell, J. S., & Leslie, L. (2012). Intervention strategies to follow informal inventory assessment: So what do I do

now? Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

Comprehension of Informational Text 325

Ciardiello, A. V. (1998). Did you ask a good question today? Alternative cognitive and metacognitive strate- gies. Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy, 42, 210–219.

Common Core State Standards Initiative. (2010). Common Core State Standards for English language arts & literacy in history/social studies, science, and technical subjects. Retrieved from http://www .corestandards.org/

Dorn, L. J., & Henderson, S. C. (2010). The comprehensive intervention model: A systems approach to RTI. In M. Y. Lipson & K. K. Wixson (Eds.), Successful approaches to RTI: Collaborative practices for improving K-12 literacy (pp. 88–120). Newark. NJ: International Reading Association.

Gelheiser, L. M., Scanlon, D. M., & Hallgren-Flynn, L. (2010). Spotlight on RTI for adolescents: An ex- ample of intensive middle school intervention using the interactive strategies approach-extended. In M. Y. Lipson & K. K. Wixson (Eds.), Successful approaches to RTI: Collaborative practices for improving K-12 literacy (pp. 211–230). Newark. NJ: International Reading Association.

Glasswell, K., & Ford, M. P. (2010). Teaching flexibly with leveled texts: More power for your reading block. The Reading Teacher, 64, 57–60. doi:10.1598/RT.64.1.7

Goetze, S. K., Laster, B., & Ehren, B. J. (2010). RTI for secondary school literacy. In M. Y. Lipson & K. K. Wixson (Eds.), Successful approaches to RTI: Collaborative practices for improving K-12 literacy (pp. 173–210). Newark. NJ: International Reading Association.

Goldman, S. R., & Rakestraw, J. A., Jr. (2000). Structural aspects of constructing meaning from text. In R. Barr, M. L. Kamil, P. Mosenthal, & P. D. Pearson (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (Vol. III, pp. 311–335). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Grasser, A., Ozuru, Y., & Sullins, J. (2010). What is a good question? In M. G. McKeown & L. Kucan (Eds.), Bringing reading reearch to life (pp. 112–141). New York: The Guilford Press.

Jitendra, A. K., & Gajria, M. (2011). Main idea and summarization instruction to improve reading compre- hension. In R. E. O’Connor & P. F. Vadasy (Eds.), Handbook of reading interventions (pp. 198–219). New York: The Guilford Press.

Johnston, P. H. (2010). A framework for response to intervention in literacy. In P. H. Johnston (Ed.), RTI in literacy—responsive and comprehensive (pp. 1–12). Newark, NJ: International Reading Association.

Klinger, J. K., Morrison, A., & Eppolito, A. (2011). Metacognition to improve reading comprehension. In R. E. O’Connor & P. F. Vadasy (Eds.), Handbook of reading intervention (pp. 234). New York: The Guilford Press.

Leslie, L., & Caldwell, J. (2011). Qualitative Reading Inventory–5. New York: Longman. Lipson, M. Y., & Wixson, K. K. (Eds.). (2010). Successful approaches to RTI: Collaborative practices for improving

K-12 literacy. Newark, NJ: International Reading Association. McCormack, R. L., Paratore, J. R., & Dahlene, K. F. (2003). Establishing instructional congruence across

learning settings: One path to success for struggling third grade readers. In R. L. McCormack & J. R. Paratore (Eds.) After early intervention, then what: Teaching struggling readers in grades 3 and Beyond (pp. 117–136). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.

Moss, B. (2004). Teaching expository text structures through information trade book retellings. The Reading Teacher, 57, 710–718.

Moss, B. (2006). Teaching English language learners about expository text structure. In T. A. Young & N. L. Hadaway (Eds.), Supporting the literacy development of English learners: Increasing success in all classrooms (pp. 132–147). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.

Ogle, D. (1986). KWL: A teaching model that develops active reading of expository text. The Reading Teacher, 39, 564–570.

Pearson, P. D., & Duke, N. K. (2002). Comprehension instruction in the primary grades. In C. C. Block & M. Pressley (Eds.), Comprehension instruction: Research-based best practice (pp. 247–258). New York: Guilford.

Pressley, M., & Afflerbach, P. (1995). Verbal protocols of reading: The nature of constructively responsive reading. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Raphael, T. E., & Au, K. (2005). QAR: Enhancing comprehension and test taking across grades and content areas. The Reading Teacher, 59, 206–221.

Raphael, T. E., Highfield, K., & Au, K. (2006). QAR now: Question answer relationships. New York: Scholastic. Rhoder, C. (2002). Mindful reading: Strategy training that facilitates transfer. Journal of Adolescent and Adult

Literacy, 45, 498–513.

326 C H A P T E R 1 2

Schmar-Dobler, E. (2003). Reading on the Internet: The link between literacy and technology. Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy, 47, 80–85.

Wilhelm, J. D. (2001). Improving comprehension with think-aloud strategies. Jefferson City, MO: Scholastic, Inc

Case Study

Introduction Ethan, a sixth grader, was referred for testing at the request of his parents, who were concerned about his poor grades. They described Ethan as a “hard worker” who seldom avoided doing homework. In the fourth and fifth grades Ethan had maintained a “B” average, but his performance in sixth grade was barely at a “C” level. His teacher agreed that although Ethan was a cooperative student, he seldom functioned at the level of his peers.

Assessment On an informal reading inventory, Ethan scored at an independent level on the sixth- grade word list and at an instructional level for the upper-middle-school word list. Because grade-level word recognition did not seem to be a problem, Ethan was asked to silently read a sixth-grade narrative passage on Abraham Lincoln. Discussion prior to reading indicated that this was a relatively familiar topic for Ethan. He offered a complete and sequential retelling of the passage contents and achieved at an instruc- tional level for answering questions. Although his errors primarily occurred on infer- ence questions, he was able to correct these when looking back in the text.

Ethan was then asked to silently read an expository social studies passage on a relatively unfamiliar topic. His retelling was extremely sparse, limited to a few general comments, and he scored at a frustration level. Ethan was able to answer literal questions but evinced difficulty with questions that required him to form an inference. He was able to correct only one erroneous answer when looking back in the text.

Ethan was then asked to silently read a second expository passage and engage in the think-aloud process. His think-alouds were brief, general, and tended to focus on the first sentence. Typical think-aloud statements were as follows: “It’s about clouds” or “It’s about cloud shapes.” The examiner asked Ethan if he liked to read informa- tional material. He responded that he enjoyed reading about sports, snakes, and spiders but he did not like what he had to read in social studies (American history) or science (earth science). When asked why not, Ethan stated that he never knew what he should remember and he always seemed to choose the wrong things.

In summary, Ethan achieved at his chronological grade level when reading narrative text on a familiar topic but experienced difficulty with informational text on unfamiliar topics.

Comprehension of Informational Text 327

Instruction Ethan was recommended for instruction that focused on comprehension of informa- tional text. His parents enrolled him in a literacy center attached to a local university. For the first semester, Ethan received individual tutoring. His teacher used Ethan’s regular classroom textbooks as a basis for instruction. She used read-alouds at first in order to model comprehension strategies but because Ethan did not have difficulty with word identification, she soon incorporated silent reading with oral rereading of key sections. She focused on helping Ethan to recognize expository text patterns and then used idea-maps as a vehicle for making text structure apparent. Because Ethan stated that he did not know what to remember, she combined this with instruction in content-free questions and, cognizant of his difficulty with inference questions, fo- cused on those questions that moved beyond a literal level. She continually reminded Ethan that “you have to get the facts but then you have to do something with them.”

After an initial semester of individual instruction, Ethan moved into a small group of four other students similar to him in age and grade. The teacher continued to focus on idea-mapping and content-free questions but also incorporated the topic– detail–main idea strategy. She asked the students to bring their classroom textbooks to the intervention setting. Sometime this worked very well, but occasionally, the stu- dents forgot. When this happened, the teacher chose a grade-level textbook from her library as a focus for the lesson. Her lesson was structured around three parts:

1. Review of the past lesson and verbalization of its strategy focus. 2. Introduction of a new text. For the first half of the text, the teacher read aloud,

modeled the targeted strategy, and worked with the students to guide their efforts. For the second half, the students were expected to take the initiative and worked in pairs to carry out the strategy on their own with the teacher assisting as needed.

3. Focus on vocabulary. The teacher isolated certain key words and worked with the group to determine meaning from context and from the understanding of prefixes, suffixes, and foreign roots.

After two semesters, Ethan, now a seventh grader, showed much improvement in his ability to deal with informational text. His grades also improved. Pleased with his progress, Ethan chose to enroll for a third semester and asked for individual instruction with the same teacher. His “toolbox” of strategies now included idea-mapping based upon informational text structure, the topic–detail–main idea strategy, content-free questions, and use of context and word parts for determining word meaning. Because he was experiencing some difficulty with his science class, Ethan brought his science text to the intervention setting and, whenever possible, the lesson focused on the unit that was being presented in his regular classroom.

328 C H A P T E R 1 2

Go to topic 9: Reading Comprehension in the MyEducationLab (www.myeducationlab.com) for Reading Problems: Assessment and Teaching Strategies, where you can: ◆ Find learning outcomes for reading com-

prehension, along with the national stan- dards that connect to these outcomes.

◆ Complete assignments and activities that can help you more deeply understand the chapter content.

◆ Apply and practice your understanding of the core teaching skills identified in the chapter with the Building Teaching Skills and Dispositions learning units.

◆ Examine challenging situations and cases presented in the Iris Center Resources.

◆ Access video clips of CCSSO National Teachers of the Year award winners re- sponding to the question, “Why Do I Teach?” in the Teacher Talk section.

◆ Practice targeting instruction and mak- ing content accessible for all students with A+RISE activities.

◆ Strengthen your understanding and usage of the English language in writing with the Grammar Tutorial.

◆ Gain experience in choosing appropriate literature and integrating the best titles into language arts instruction with the Children’s and Young Adult Literature Database.

◆ Track the month-by-month literacy growth of five second graders with the Literacy Portraits.

◆ Create, update, and share quality lesson plans with the Lesson Plan Builder.

◆ Access state licensure test requirements, over- views of what the tests cover, and sample test items in the Certification and Licensure section.

◆ Check your comprehension of the content covered in the chapter with the Study Plan. Here you will be able to take a chapter pre- test, receive feedback on your answers, and then access personalized Review, Practice, and Enrichment exercises to enhance your understanding of chapter content. After you complete the exercises, take a posttest to confirm your comprehension.

13 C H A P T E R

Integrating Reading and Writing

Introduction

Importance of Teaching Writing

Assessing Writing

Writing Instruction Writing Process Supporting Students’ Writing

Personal Communication Written Conversations Personal Journals

Strategies for Integrating Reading and Writing

Writing and Reading Narrative Text

Writing and Reading Informational Text Responding to Text

Writing With Poetry

Developing the Ability to Spell Spelling Development Spelling Assessment Spelling Instruction

Handwriting

Summary

329

330 C H A P T E R 1 3

Introduction

Research has consistently shown that strong ties exist between reading and writing (Fitzgerald & Shanahan, 2000; Johnston, 1997; Tierney, 1990; Tierney & Pearson, 1983). Of particular interest to those who work with students with reading problems is the support that writing provides for reading development and the influence of reading on students’ writing. This chapter discusses the writing process and how it re- lates to reading and gives many strategies to foster the development of writing. Some instructional strategies that help students connect reading and writing are included. Finally, suggestions are presented for teaching spelling and handwriting.

Importance of Teaching Writing

Why should a reading teacher focus on writing? The process of writing is highly related to the process of reading because readers and writers are constructing—or composing—meaning. Readers construct meaning from the author’s text; writers compose or construct meaning as they create text. Students who struggle with read- ing and writing need to experience literacy from the perspective of both readers and writers (Anderson & Briggs, 2011). In addition to a greater emphasis on content-area reading, we expect the implementation of the Common Core State Standards Initia- tive (Council of Chief State School Officers [CCSSO] & National Governors Associ- ation, 2010) to have a dramatic impact on the teaching—and assessment—of writing, especially informational writing. Certainly we are aware that much of our communi- cation in our professional lives is conducted through the written word, whether we are writing to share information with colleagues or reading memoranda, postings, or policies that impact our daily activities. A reciprocal nature to our written communi- cation exists, whether we are texting friends about where to meet for lunch or sending a memo to colleagues. We send out information and we expect responses.

The reading–writing relationship begins in early literacy and continues through- out a student’s literacy development (Jacobs, 2002; McGee & Richgels, 2011; Richgels, 2003). In early literacy, the relationship focuses on sound–symbol relationships and concepts about print (Dyson, 2003; Gentry, 2007; Goswami, 2003; Richgels, 2003). As students mature, the relationship between reading and writing becomes more complex. As students read a wider variety of texts, the influence of those texts can be observed in their writing (Calkins, 2004; Fletcher & Portalupi, 2001). Sharing good models of writing through reading provides the support students need to improve their writ- ing. These mentor texts are important tools for supporting students’ writing. When we share our favorite stories and poems with children, we provide supportive models for their writing. They learn how to use words effectively to “paint a picture” of a special scene or how to use punctuation to convey conversations in text (Dorfman & Cappelli, 2007). As students engage in more mature writing, they begin to relate to authors’ perspectives or voices, and this relationship leads to a deeper understanding of text (Calkins, 1994, 2000; Greene, 1995). Students who perceive themselves to be writers are motivated to improve their writing, and they want to use models of written

Integrating Reading and Writing 331

text to help them. We all have favorite authors whose voices beckon us to search for more and more books by them. When we help our students build relationships with favorite authors of their own, they want to read more. Thus, students’ efforts to im- prove their writing foster improvement in their reading as well a greater love for read- ing (Dorfman & Capelli, 2007; Glenn, 2007).

The Common Core State Standards (CCSSO & National Governors Association, 2010) emphasize the relationship between reading and writing as critical in both narrative and informational literacy. As we design learning experiences in reading and writing, we need to keep in mind the ultimate goals established by Common Core standards. Our instruction should provide a developmental framework so that students are prepared to respond to text effectively in their continuing educational experiences or in their work settings. They must be able to convey information to colleagues and supervisors in clear, concise language; they must be able to substantiate their reasons for proposing new ideas or procedures. The Com- mon Core standards identify four categories of standards to guide our work:

1. Text Types and Purposes ◆ Students should be able to effectively convey events or experiences in a nar-

rative format using appropriate details and well-structured sentences. ◆ Students should be able to select appropriate texts as resources, analyze the con-

tent, and organize information from multiple sources to write informational or explanatory text to convey complex information clearly and accurately.

◆ Students should be able to write arguments with substantiation. By this we mean that students should be able to analyze information from multiple sources to de- velop a position and present it in writing with relevant evidence for support.

2. Production and Distribution of Writing ◆ Students should be able to use the processes of planning, revising, editing,

and rewriting to develop and strengthen their writing. ◆ Students should be able to use appropriate organization and style for specific

purposes, tasks, and audiences to produce clear, coherent text. ◆ Students should be able to use appropriate technology to produce and share

their writing and to collaborate with others. 3. Research to Build and Present Knowledge

◆ Students should be able to select evidence from literary or informational text to support their reflections, analyses, or research.

◆ Students should be able to use information from multiple sources, determine the accuracy and credibility of those sources, and integrate the information effectively.

◆ Students should be able to conduct research projects based on focused ques- tions or topics so that they convey understanding of the subject.

4. Range of Writing ◆ Students should be able to write for different tasks, purposes, and audiences,

including both short-term projects and extended projects that require re- search, reflection, and revision.

How do we design students’ learning experiences in a developmentally sound manner to achieve these goals?

332 C H A P T E R 1 3

In early literacy, writing helps students understand that print progresses from left to right and from the top of the page to the bottom. In beginning reading, writ- ing provides students with the practice they need to pay attention to individual words and helps them match letters and sounds in words (Clay, 1998, 2002; Gentry, 2007; Richgels 2003).

Throughout the phases of literacy development, practice in writing increases the understanding of how authors compose text (Calkins, 2004). Tierney (1990) in- terviewed students and found that those who identified themselves as authors viewed reading in a new light. These students expressed more enthusiasm for both reading and writing, and they read more critically. They viewed reading as a resource for new ideas and information for their writing. Teachers can build on this phenomenon to use the literature they are teaching to enhance students’ writing, which, in turn, enhances students’ understanding of and appreciation for text (Dorfman & Capelli, 2007).

Students also use writing to clarify their understanding of what they read. When they make written responses to reading, they increase comprehension (Freeman, 2003; Jacobs, 2002; Jennings, 1991; Wells, 1992–1993; Wittrock, 1984). Writing can help students master information in science, social studies, and other subjects (Button & Welton, 1997; Cawley & Parmar, 2001; Jacobs, 2002; Mayher, Lester, & Pradl, 1983). Writing can be a powerful tool in supporting students’ learning (Unrau, 2008).

Using writing in instruction offers important sources of success and motivation for struggling readers. Students just learning to read may write or dictate messages and read their own words. Freed from the burden of trying to determine what another author meant, these students now have an opportunity to create, read, and display their own meanings.

For more advanced students with reading problems, writing can be used to deepen comprehension responses and to stimulate more reading. These students enjoy the permanence of responding in writing to books they have read, and their responses can be referred to later and shared with others. In addition, students who identify a topic to write about are often motivated to use reading as a way to find information.

Assessing Writing

In their preliminary diagnosis of students, teachers in our reading center collect five or six writing samples and analyze the students’ writing across those samples. They try to collect different genres of writing to measure students’ abilities to match genres to purposes for writing: description, informational, expository, and a personal narrative of an event. For students in the early phases of literacy development, they include at least one piece of dictation, using an adapted language experience approach (LEA). The LEA provides the opportunity to compare students’ abilities to compose and ef- fectively convey meaning through print when the constraints of physically producing letters and sounds are removed. This helps the teachers focus their attention on what students already know about using written language and how to support their contin- ued development (Johnston & Rogers, 2003).

First, the teachers collect background information about students, as described in Chapter 3; then they determine students’ reading levels using an informal reading

Integrating Reading and Writing 333

inventory, as described in Chapter 5, and analyze the results. As they are collecting this information, the teachers ask students to write for several different purposes, and then evaluate the writing samples based on the students’ reading levels. Thus, the writing samples from an eighth-grade student reading at a fourth-grade level would be evalu- ated using the criteria for a student at the intermediate level.

In the early phases of literacy development, reading teachers examine students’ writing for conventions of print: left-to-right progression, top-to-bottom arrange- ment on the page, separation of individual words, and phonological representations of words. They also examine students’ use of print versus drawing or scribbling. Examples of the forms used to analyze students’ writing are included on MyEducationLab in the Chapter Resources section of Chapter 13.

For students reading at a primer level through level 2, examine their abilities to present ideas in sequential order or in logical sequence. Also, consider their abilities to organize words into sentences and beginning paragraph organization, including appropriate punctuation.

For students reading at levels 3 through 5, examine their abilities to select ap- propriate genres of writing for different purposes. Also, consider paragraph organiza- tion, including topic sentences and supporting details. At these levels, teachers should expect conventional representation of spelling patterns and varied punctuation.

For students reading at levels 6 through 12, expect appropriate genre selection, conventional spelling, varied sentence structure, and correct punctuation. Also, expect paragraphs to include topic sentences and supporting details. Teachers should expect students to provide main ideas with subordinate sentences and to present a logical argument with supportive positions.

Interactive assessment should occur throughout instruction to monitor students’ progress and to provide guidance for instructional decisions (Johnston & Rogers, 2003). Thus, as students write summaries of what they have read, write new endings to stories, or write their own stories, periodically compare their writing to their previ- ous samples to ensure that instruction is meeting their needs and resulting in progress commensurate with their progress in reading.

A recent innovation used to assess both reading comprehension and writing is WritetoLearn. Landauer, Lochbaum, and Dooley (2009) observed middle school stu- dents using this web-based instrument to monitor their progress in written responses to informational reading. The instrument integrates students’ reading and writing, compares students’ writing to original text to measure understanding of concepts, and analyzes students’ writing samples to provide feedback and suggestions for subsequent instruction. WritetoLearn has two major components: Summary Street and Intelligent Essay Assessor. Summary Street compares the semantic similarity of a student’s writing to informational text used in instruction. This comparison provides a measure of the stu- dent’s comprehension of the content. The program also provides feedback to the student as well as the teacher that indicates how well the student understood the text; whether there is too much similarity between the summary and the original text, which would indicate copying; whether the student has selected relevant information; whether there is too much repetition; and whether spelling conventions are appropriate. Students and teachers receive printouts with feedback to guide revisions and to suggest directions for subsequent instruction.

334 C H A P T E R 1 3

Intelligent Essay Assessor can be used as a second reader for student responses to prompts or as a measure of comprehension and writing in integrated literacy instruc- tion. This instrument can be used in conjunction with Summary Street to provide feedback to students and teachers about student progress. This new form of assess- ment may provide support to middle school and secondary English/language arts teachers or reading/social science teachers who may have multiple sections of large numbers of students, as it can provide instant feedback and assist teachers in meeting individual students’ needs.

Writing Instruction

Many instructional strategies can be used successfully with students who have reading problems. Students learn that a person writes for different purposes and for different audiences. For example, you use lists to organize your life and letters, e-mail, text mes- sages, Skype®, Facebook®, Twitter®, or blogs to communicate with friends and family, and you use reports to convey information.

This section first describes the writing process that students may use as they develop thoughts into finished written pieces. It then explores three more specific types of personal writing: written conversations, personal correspondence, and per- sonal journals.

Writing Process Teachers use the writing process to help students become joyful, proficient composers of text. This process has several stages, which range from a first idea to the creation of a formal product. In completing these stages, students in the reading center have come to write more easily and naturally. They have also become proud authors of written pieces that are now part of our library.

Planning. Planning consists of several steps:

1. We select a topic. 2. We gather ideas or information and decide what is relevant to this particular

purpose. 3. We organize our information or thoughts. 4. We write a preliminary text, which we may share with trusted friends or colleagues

for feedback 5. We revise and sometimes share again. 6. We edit for sentence structure and mechanics. 7. We share or distribute.

Selecting Topics. Topic selection is a key feature of good writing. Students are more willing to write if they choose what to write about. In shaping their content, they also think about the audience that will listen to or read their pieces.

At first, students tend to do personal writing about their own experiences. Topics may include someone they know, a special event, or themselves. Ideally, students

Integrating Reading and Writing 335

should select their own topics; however, struggling readers often have little confidence in themselves as writers. Teachers can help these students by asking them to make lists of people who are special to them. While students were creating their lists, Ms. Grant, a third-grade teacher, wrote her own list on the board.

Next, Ms. Grant shared her list with the students and explained briefly why she chose these people. Finally, she encouraged students to share their lists. Then, she asked students to choose one person to write about. While students wrote about their topic, she wrote about hers. When beginning the writing process, you may want to stop periodically to support students in their efforts.

Of course, some students may wish to write reports or letters rather than doing personal writing. Because topic selection is important, you should honor these choices.

Writing Drafts. After topic selection, students begin writing drafts. Encourage your students to write what comes to mind about their topics. Students need not worry about spelling, punctuation, or the other mechanical aspects of writing as they draft their thoughts.

Next, give students opportunities to share their writing with a few of their class- mates. Remind the classmates that they should only tell their friends what they like about their writing at this point.

You may devote several writing sessions to topic selection, drafting, and respond- ing positively to students’ writing. This procedure helps students develop the habit of writing on a regular basis and builds their confidence in an accepting environment.

Making Revisions. As ideas become clearer, writers revise their pieces. Mature writers do this constantly, making many insertions, deletions, and other changes. However, students with problems in reading and writing are often reluctant to revise. Sometimes, just writing a draft has required extensive effort and making revisions seems overwhelming.

Teachers can use several strategies to encourage revision. First, teachers can model revision in dictated stories and in their own work so that students view revision as a natural part of the writing process. Share one of your unfinished pieces and ask students for suggestions. Use their responses to make changes in your own writing and share the revised version with students in the next lesson.

When students meet to share their drafts, revision is often fostered through suggestions. Writers may find that others have questions about things that are unclear or suggestions for improvement. However, sharing drafts should also be a positive experience. First, have students identify something they like about the draft that is being shared. Only then should they ask questions and make suggestions. To model the concept that it is acceptable to question each others’ writing and to make suggestions, have students ask questions of an author of a book you have read to them.

For your more reluctant revisers, try transforming an existing text into another genre. For example, you might alter a fairytale from its narrative version to create a play. In this process, students must revise the text to create a script. After trying this activity with well-known stories, students are usually better able to write their own stories and are more willing to make revisions.

336 C H A P T E R 1 3

Editing. When students are satisfied with the content, they are ready to focus on mechanics (spelling, punctuation, and grammar), which are important so that someone else can easily read their pieces. Do not overburden students with changes. Guidelines that foster editing include:

◆ Focus on items that can be changed immediately. ◆ Limit suggestions to items that have been presented in instruction. ◆ Make no more than three suggestions to younger students and no more than five

to older students.

Make notes about items that cannot be changed easily and save these for later instruction. Explicit instruction that addresses revision or editing concerns can be given as short mini-lessons during writing time.

Publishing. When the editing process is complete, the writing is ready to be shared with a wider audience. Graves (1994) refers to this as “publishing.” Publishing is not limited to binding a book and sharing it with the class or placing it in a classroom library. Publishing may consist of a presentation, a bulletin board display, a play, a PowerPoint® presentation, video, or even a puppet show. Opportunities to publish for audiences beyond the classroom are especially motivating for many students. School-wide or cross-school poetry slams and Reader’s Theatre can provide students with opportunities to share their writing as well as enhance their reading and reading fluency. District-wide writing fairs can be held for students to share their best writ- ing. As students write throughout the year, they are aware that they may select one of their pieces to represent their best writing as part of the writing fair (Strickland, Ganske, & Monroe, 2002). As the writing process develops, students’ contributions will fill your literate environment. Technology and digital media have expanded this concept exponentially. Students can communicate through writing with friends and families instantaneously without regard for distance or wait time for delivery and response. Our literate environment is no longer limited to books and bulletin boards!

Evaluation of Writing. In guiding students to improve their writing, teachers must be able to evaluate their pieces. The evaluation of writing should focus on several lev- els, including content, organization of ideas, structure, and mechanics. By evaluating each, they gain a broad overview of a student’s writing capabilities. To permit orga- nized evaluation, start with the most general level—the content—and work toward the most specific—mechanics.

As a teacher, first focus on content, the ability of the student to communicate thought. Ask two questions about the student’s piece: “Does this student have an un- derstanding that writing is a means of communication?” and “Does this student use writing effectively to express his or her ideas?” Spence (2010) calls this kind of evalu- ation “generous reading,” in which we use our students’ writing to understand them more effectively. She finds this kind of writing evaluation to be especially important for English learners. Weighing the content heavily allows us to focus on what our students know rather than what they don’t know.

Integrating Reading and Writing 337

Second, focus on the student’s ability to organize ideas. For students in the be- ginning stages of writing, organization may consist of the ability to write information in sentences. Later, evaluate primary students’ ability to present ideas in sequential order. For intermediate-level writers, evaluate abilities to organize related ideas into paragraphs. For more mature writers, evaluate the ability to organize paragraphs and sections of papers by related ideas.

Third, evaluate structure—the ability to use different writing forms, or genres, appropriately. For older students, focus on the characteristics of specific formats, such as an essay or thesis. For students in the beginning stages of writing, focus on sentences and grammatical structure. For intermediate students, judge paragraph structure as well.

Finally, after a selection of writing has been evaluated for content, organization, and structure, focus on the mechanics. Mechanics include spelling, punctuation, and proper use of capitalization.

From this evaluation, you can make decisions about a student’s instructional needs on several different levels. For example, students may need help on aspects of writing as broad as how to write a letter or as narrow as using an apostrophe.

Evaluation leads you to two instructional decisions. First, decide what the stu- dent should correct to make his or her writing more easily read by others. This de- cision depends on the level of the student’s reading ability. In addition, limit your corrections to areas that the student has been taught previously. The second decision is what the student needs to learn next in instruction. From the second decision, for- mulate instructional plans and present mini-lessons, short lessons focused on specific aspects of writing.

These processing skills are applicable to many types of writing, including nar- ratives, letters, informational or explanatory texts, poetry, and arguments (CCSSO & National Governors Association, 2010). Although genres and formats may change, au- thors take notes, write initial drafts, seek feedback, revise, edit, and share their work. Readers respond to the written work, often in some form of writing, sometimes as a cri- tique—or evaluation—and the cycle continues. Now we turn to how we as literacy teach- ers foster our students’ participation in this cycle of reading/writing/sharing/writing.

Supporting Students’ Writing In the early phases of literacy development, much of students’ writing focuses on developing concepts about print, phonological awareness, and word identification. However, teachers know that the concurrent development of students’ understand- ings about stories and story grammar is also important (see Chapter 7). Thus, in early literacy development, teachers may provide extensive support for the physical act of writing by assuming the role of scribe while students engage in composing texts. As students become more proficient in letter production and sound representation, teach- ers gradually release responsibility for more of the writing process to students. This approach to writing instruction and the gradual release of responsibility to students parallels the reciprocal teaching approach advocated in comprehension instruction (Palinscar & Brown, 1984; Shanahan, 2005). Teachers must constantly assess students’

338 C H A P T E R 1 3

writing to determine levels of expectations and how much responsibility to relinquish. In other words, teachers want to make sure they are guiding students within their zones of proximal development (Vanderburg, 2006). The next section provides de- scriptions of varying levels of scaffolding provided in writing instruction.

Modeled Writing. We begin with modeled writing, often in the form of the morn- ing message. In primary classrooms, teachers often start the day with a morning mes- sage to preview the day and to build background knowledge for the day’s learning experiences. As students become more experienced, this activity shifts to incorporate more student input.

Interactive Writing. As students gain experience and develop an understanding of the teacher’s expectations for the morning message as well as the day’s routines, they begin to contribute to the content of the morning message (Figure 13.1). Although the process shifts to look more like language experience activity, with students dictating the content and teachers assuming the role of scribe, it differs in that the teacher knows some components of the morning message that the students don’t yet know. For ex- ample, the students may contribute to the “news” portion of the morning message while the teacher introduces the story and other learning experiences.

In this example, the teacher began the procedure with the first paragraph already written on the board as the students entered the room. She began the second para- graph, and Luis contributed the fact that his grandfather planned to read a story from Puerto Rico. The teacher asked the students if they could remember what she had told them they would begin studying in math, and the teacher and students constructed the next sentence together. The children added the sentence about needing their counters based on their experience with learning new concepts. The teacher contributed the first sentence of the paragraph about science, and one of the children added the sen- tence about hoping to see pictures of lava based on a television show he had seen. Then the teacher asked if the students had any news to add, and Carol added the information about her new brother.

Thus, the responsibility for composing the morning message flowed back and forth between the teacher and the students. Because this particular morning message

FIGURE 13.1 Morning Message

Today is Wednesday, April, 16, 2012. This morning, we will read a story about a girl named Madlenka, who wants to tell all of her neighbors that she has a loose tooth.

Luis’s grandfather will visit during story time today. He will read a story about his country, Puerto Rico.

In math, we will learn about adding numbers between 10 and 20. We will need our counters.

In science, we will read about volcanoes. We hope we will see pictures of red lava.

Carol has some news. Last week, Carol’s mother had a baby. Carol has a new brother named Josh.

Integrating Reading and Writing 339

occurred late in the year, the teacher carried the process a little further to “share the pen” (Rubadue, 2002). As the teacher was writing, she invited individual children to come to the board and write parts of the message. Luis wrote his own name. David used labels from bins in the classroom to help him write counters. Carol not only con- tributed the news paragraph, but she also wrote her own name as well as the word baby and the beginning letter of Josh.

Another form of interactive writing is collaborative writing, in which students work together to compose text. Some teachers have used Googledocs® to establish collaborator groups; others have created wikis for their students to work together. Wikis can be created for a specific study, and the collaborative writing groups can be established within the class wiki (Pelekis & Phillips, 2012). An advantage of the wiki is that the teacher can see the changes made by students. Woo, Chu, Ho, and Li (2011) have found that students who write collaboratively using wikis tend to make more content-based revisions than grammatical or mechanical revisions. When we connect this with using writing to respond to text, this may mean that students engaged in collaborative writing attend more to interpreting and re-interpreting text to enhance their understanding.

Guided Writing. As students gain understanding and confidence, more of the re- sponsibility for writing is relinquished to them. Guided writing may occur in whole- group, small-group, or individual instruction. In guided writing, the students do the actual writing, but the teacher provides support as needed. Teachers may model topic selection or offer “limited choice” topic selection. Especially when relating reading and writing, teachers may guide the prewriting component of organizing by providing a graphic organizer to help students plan their writing. Teachers also establish classroom routines for sharing, responding to peers, revising, and editing. Guided writing occurs with all kinds of writing: stories, letters, journal entries, or re- ports. It is a gradual release of responsibility to foster students’ independent writing (Olness, 2005).

Writing. As with reading, the goal of writing instruction is independence. In independent writing, students initiate writing, provide their own structures for moving through the process, and engage writing as a natural part of the learn- ing process as well as an avenue for reflection and pleasure. Students may reach independence in writing for some purposes while needing guidance in writing for other purposes. Students who struggle in reading may continue to need support in writing as they progress through their school years (Olness, 2005; Strickland, et al., 2002).

Personal Communication

Writing provides a means of sharing information about our personal lives with each other. As mature writers, we text, e-mail, send cards and letters, and leave notes for family members. Students should emulate the purposes for written communication.

340 C H A P T E R 1 3

Written Conversations In the written conversations strategy, developed by Carolyn Burke (Anderson, 1984), two students, or a student and a teacher, sit beside each other and communicate. The partners cannot speak; writing is the only communication allowed. If one person’s message is unclear, the partner must ask for clarification in writing. Using this activity on a regular basis helps students learn to record their thoughts in writing.

This strategy is often used in our reading center as a way of “catching up on the news” with students. Instead of asking how things are going, the teacher writes a greet- ing and question to the student; the student, in turn, responds in writing. You can use different colored pens or pencils and date each page. We often use electronic tablets or iTouches to conduct these written conversations. If we want to keep a record to add to the students’ files, we either e-mail them to ourselves or simply save the written dialogue.

Some teachers like to have both partners writing at the same time. Other teach- ers prefer to have participants use one paper and take turns writing. Each session can include two or three exchanges.

If a teacher and a student form a partnership, the teacher can model correct spell- ings and grammatical structures in his or her responses. Over several weeks, you often notice significant improvements in a student’s writing. Figure 13.2 presents an example of a written conversation between a teacher and her student in the reading center.

FIGURE 13.2 A Written Conversation

Integrating Reading and Writing 341

Of course, students also enjoy forming partnerships with one another. When two students are paired, they may form friendships and share interests and everyday experiences with their partners.

In a variation of written conversations called personal correspondence, students are assigned a pen pal to communicate with over a longer period of time. Partners may be in the same school, but they should not be in the same class. This activity is especially nice for establishing cross-grade partnerships. The older students’ writing models the patterns the younger students need to learn, and older students become more aware of making their writing clear for their younger pen pals. The teacher can serve as the “mail carrier,” or a student can be assigned the job. Of course, with new technologies available, we can bypass the need for “mail carriers.” In fact, the students don’t have to be in the same school or even in the same country!

Personal Journals In personal journals, students reflect on events or experiences as is done in diaries; they practice recording personal experiences in writing. Usually, journals provide day-to- day records of events in their lives and how they felt about them.

When students maintain personal journals, they create a record of their own thoughts and feelings, which they can later read. To begin, each student needs a per- sonal journal, usually a notebook of lined paper. Students may want to include titles for their journals or decorate them. Time is set aside, usually three or four periods a week, to record personal thoughts in journals. Ask students to write only on one side of a page.

After writing, a few students may choose to read their reflections to their class- mates and ask for their responses. In addition, the teacher can collect journals, read them, and write responses. However, students may not want to share all of their journal entries. To preserve privacy, students can simply fold a page in half, lengthwise, to cover it; the teacher should not read folded pages. In responding to journals, teachers should be care- ful not to correct grammatical and spelling errors, because this practice undermines the student’s confidence and may lessen the amount of writing. Instead, try to respond per- sonally to the content of the student’s message. Try to use words the student originally misspelled in your responses so that the student can see the words spelled correctly.

Sometimes students with reading problems have such low self-esteem that they lack the confidence to maintain journals. They often feel that their lives are not impor- tant enough to deserve recording. Teachers can help students overcome this problem by modeling journal writing about everyday issues.

Students with reading problems sometimes have difficulty thinking of journal topics. To help them, supply one category for each of the first six journal writing sessions and ask them to brainstorm a list within this category. Then, they choose one idea from their list and write about it. Topics might include favorite places, special people, favorite stories, things I like to do, things I don’t like to do, things that make me angry, and things I do well. To help them keep a record of these ideas, students create an “Ideas to Write About” page in their journals.

After engaging in journal writing using this technique six times, students are ready to choose their own topics without guidance. Then, if students have trouble thinking of a topic, suggest they use one of the topics from their “ideas” page.

342 C H A P T E R 1 3

Strategies for Integrating Reading and Writing

This section discusses ways to incorporate writing into reading instruction. Included are strategies for responding to narrative and informational text. Students need opportunities to reflect about their reading and to respond to it thoughtfully. Writing their thoughts about materials they are reading helps students to organize the ideas pre- sented in the text and increases their comprehension (Calkins, 1994, 2000; Fletcher & Portalupi, 2001). As they formulate these responses, they also improve their writing skills.

Much of students’ writing is in response to reading text. Thus, a mega-strategy approach, as presented in Chapter 11, often referred to by Olson (2007) as using cognitive strategies, provides a framework for reading/writing instruction (Gallagher, 2011):

Before Reading and Writing

1. Planning ◆ Set a purpose for reading. ◆ Establish procedures for the task.

2. Connecting to Prior Knowledge ◆ Help students to select relevant prior knowledge.

3. Predicting and Generating Questions ◆ Generate questions about the topic, author, genre, and purpose. ◆ Make predictions about the content. ◆ Establish critical points in the text that will serve as monitoring points for

confirming or revising predictions.

During Reading and Writing

1. First Reading and Writing: Getting the Gist of the Text ◆ Making an initial interpretation ◆ Identifying main ideas ◆ Visualizing/connecting ideas ◆ Organizing information

2. Monitoring ◆ Confirming/revising predictions ◆ Teacher redirection if needed: fix-up strategies ◆ Setting the stage for continued reading and writing

3. Second Reading and Writing ◆ Deeper analysis of text ◆ Substantiating interpretations; may require backtracking or even fix-up strat-

egies to revise initial interpretation ◆ Examining author’s craft and identifying ways author’s craft may be used to

support students’ writing 4. Discussion and More Monitoring

◆ Sharing refined interpretations

Integrating Reading and Writing 343

After Reading and Writing

1. Reflecting ◆ Relating text to experiences

2. Responding Critically ◆ Reviewing information ◆ Assessing quality of responses

As we work with students who may struggle with reading and writing, we need to pro- vide explicit instruction, including modeling, throughout this process. In working with secondary English learners, Olson and colleagues (Olson, Land, Anselmi, & AuBuchon, 2010) have reported dramatic student success in learning to understand and analyze text as well as writing interpretive essays when using a similar cycle of explicit instruction in these cognitive strategies. Teachers in our reading center report similar results using explicit instruction in metacognitive strategies across multiple age groups.

Writing and Reading Narrative Text Many motivating formats can be used to help students with reading problems. These formats include writing as a prereading experience, scripted stories, rewritten stories, using mentor texts, and reader response journals.

Writing as a Prereading Experience. Teachers often use writing prior to read- ing stories to provide support for students’ reading. In the story impressions strategy (Blachowicz & Fisher, 2002, 2010; Fisher, 1998; McGinley & Denner, 1987), teachers present students with a list of words and phrases from a story and have the students construct sentences that predict the plot. Semantic impressions, a strategy similar to story impressions, is presented in Chapter 11 for story comprehension. A teacher in the reading center presented the following list of words from The Knight Who Was Afraid of the Dark (Hazen) to her student:

Dark Ages

Sir Fred

knight

afraid

darkness

bully

Melvin the Miffed

spy

Lady Wendylyn

love

banner

secret meeting

344 C H A P T E R 1 3

The student wrote the following possible sentences: Long ago in the Dark Ages, there lived a knight named Sir Fred.

Sir Fred was the bravest knight in the land, but he was afraid of one thing

darkness.

One day a big bully came to the village, Melvin the Miffed.

Melvin was mad because he wanted to marry Lady Wendylyn, but she said no.

One night Melvin decided to spy on Lady Wendylyn.

He wanted to see if she was in love with someone else.

Melvin saw Lady Wendylyn making a banner for the village fair.

The banner had a picture of Sir Fred on his horse.

Melvin went to Sir Fred and told him that Lady Wendylyn wanted to meet him.

But they had to have a secret meeting at the castle at midnight.

Sir Fred was afraid, but he loved Lady Wendylyn.

Would he be brave enough to meet her?

Two other strategies that have proved successful in supporting students’ under- standing of narrative text include writing the story before reading and autobiographi- cal prewriting. Using these two strategies has helped engage students in their reading and has deepened their appreciation for, and understanding of, text (Weech, 1994; White, 1995).

White (1995) used writing to help ninth-grade students relate to stories to be read. Students were asked to respond to questions that were designed to help them activate background knowledge and personal experiences relevant to the stories to be read. White found this strategy highly effective in increasing students’ engage- ment in the story, identification with characters, and understanding of the concepts presented.

Weech (1994) uses another kind of prereading strategy in which she has stu- dents write the story before reading it. She presents the students with scenarios, actions they must assume to have committed. These scenarios are related to events in the story to be read. For example, in preparing students to read The Rime of the Ancient Mariner (Coleridge), Ms. Weech had students respond to three different situations: (1) Some were friends who revealed a secret they had promised to keep; (2) some were to assume they had lost a precious family heirloom but were to pre- tend they hadn’t; and (3) some were to assume they had accidentally killed a mother bird, leaving the babies in the nest. Having students assume these roles and substan- tiate or defend their actions helped them relate to literature that sometimes seems irrelevant to contemporary adolescents.

Integrating Reading and Writing 345

Scripted Stories. Patterned, or scripted, writing is a good strategy for begin- ning readers. In this strategy, the teacher shares a predictable book or poem with students. Then the students write their own version, altering the author’s version slightly. This activity gives them the security of a writing frame that they can use to form their own personalized response. Children love to substitute people and objects from their own experiences in response to Bill Martin’s Brown Bear, Brown Bear, What Do You See?

Scripted writing encourages students to use their imaginations and practice words they meet in reading as they build their own confidence as writers. Good books to use for scripted writing include Goodnight, Mr. Fly (Jacobs), Polar Bear, Polar Bear (Martin), and Alligator Pie and Jump Frog, Jump (Lee). Useful poems are contained in Beneath a Blue Umbrella, Poems by A. Nonny Mouse, Zoo Doings, and Laughing Out Loud (Prelutsky); Honey, I Love (Greenfield); The Pocketbook Book of Ogden Nash (Nash); Sing a Soft Black Song (Giovanni); and The Big O, The Missing Piece, Where the Sidewalk Ends, and A Light in the Attic (Silverstein).

Children enjoy dictating their own versions of patterned text. The dictation should be recorded as a modified learning experience activity. If each dictated sen- tence is printed on a separate page, the children can illustrate the sentences. Then they can be assembled into a patterned book to be added to the classroom library.

Rewritten Stories. Having students rewrite stories is invaluable in providing a model for story structure, enhancing language development, and comprehending text. This activity can be used along with comprehension strategies, such as the Directed Reading-Thinking Activity or story grammar (see Chapter 10).

After your students have read a story, ask them to re-create it in their own words. Young children who have difficulty with the mechanics of writing may prefer to dictate a story version to the teacher. Older students are usually able to write their own ver- sions. In creating their own rewritten versions of stories, students need to reflect upon the structure of the story they have read. You can provide guidance for this activity in several ways:

◆ Use story grammar and have students identify a character, setting, problem, and events. Then have students make sure they include these elements as they recon- struct the story. Thus, they become familiar with the story grammar elements and begin to use them as they create their own stories.

◆ Students can tell or write about a story they have read but take another point of view. As an example, you might use The True Story of the Three Little Pigs (Sciesza), which retells the classic fairytale from the wolf’s point of view. Then students can create their own versions of classics, for example, rewriting Snow White from the stepmother’s perspective.

346 C H A P T E R 1 3

◆ Students can rewrite by assuming a role within a story they have read. Lauren, a sixth grader in the reading center, read the book If You Grew Up With George Washington (Fritz) and then rewrote it, casting herself as the main character. A selection from the resulting book, “If You Grew Up With Lauren Lang,” is shown in Figure 13.3.

We’ve all read stories with disappointing or surprising endings. Students may be asked to write their own endings to such stories. After reading “The Garden

FIGURE 13.3 A Rewritten Story of “If You Grew Up With Lauren Lang”

Source: Adapted from If You Grew Up with George Washington by Ruth Belov and Emily Arnold McCully, 1993, Scholastic.

Integrating Reading and Writing 347

Party” (Mansfield), Karen, a high school student, wanted to change the ending (see Figure 13.4).

Using Mentor Texts. Teachers use mentor texts to show students how to become good writers. Most teachers select a few specific authors whose craft provides mod- els for students to emulate (Dorfman & Cappelli, 2007). Mentor texts are especially helpful in modeling specific skills for students in mini-lessons. For example, if some of your students have begun to try writing poetry, you might share Honey I Love by Greenfield with them as a model of writing about their own experiences in the genre of poetry. Short stories provide excellent sources of mentor texts for character devel- opment (Fletcher, 2011). If your students are using safe but tired adjectives, you might try Amber on the Mountain by Johnston as a mentor text, which models rich language with an emphasis on strong verbs and adjectives (Dorfman & Cappelli, 2007).

Combining mentor texts with modeling is especially effective (Gallagher, 2011). In this practice, the teacher and students collaboratively construct text using mentor text as their model. Can you imagine how powerful this is when the author of the original text becomes interactive in the process? Johnson (2010) uses authors’ blogs to enhance her students’ learning experiences. Including the authors’ behind-the-scenes insight into their own writing processes provides access to an even deeper examination of the text as well as the processes involved in writing.

Using mentor texts provides another important component to support both comprehension and writing. As we discuss text, we identify the genre and utilize ele- ments of the text’s structure as examples of that particular genre. Incorporating the study of text structure into the discussion of the text provides a model for students to write in that genre (Risko, Walker-Dalhouse, Bridges, & Wilson, 2011).

In working with struggling—or reluctant—readers and writers, we need to search for mentor texts beyond the standard, traditional literature. In working with re- luctant adolescent readers and writers, Hughes, King, Perkins, and Fuke (2011) found that using graphic novels captured their attention and drew them into reading. Their innovative work also incorporated the use of new literacies for their responses to their

FIGURE 13.4 Karen’s Ending to “The Garden Party” by Mansfield

I think Laura would have said, “Isn’t life a learning experience?” The reason why I think

Laura would have said this is because Laura has learned that life isn’t always joy and

happiness, but pain and sorrowful.

Karen’s new ending caused her to reflect more on the story, and she gained further insight into the story and wrote more:

I think Laura also learned about her own life. She has lived a sheltered life. Now she real-

izes that people don’t have to dress nicely to be good. She realizes this when she apolo-

gizes for her hat.

348 C H A P T E R 1 3

reading. Using a combination of photographs, video, graphics, and text, the students, who perceived themselves as poor readers and writers, became engaged and ultimately created their own graphic novels.

Sometimes it is possible to supplement mentor texts with digital media to enhance the learning experience. Google Lit Trips® provides an excellent supplement to reading literature. This interactive program, developed by Jerome Burg (2012) in collaboration with Google®, is designed to accompany children’s and young adult literature by providing virtual tours of the settings in which the stories take place. You can imagine how much more in-depth students’ understanding of the moors in Wuthering Heights (Bronte) is if they can highlight the word in the text and be virtually transported to Yorkshire rather than reading the definition in the dictionary! Although not interactive, many teachers have found that including videos of books as part of their instruction has provided an additional depth to their students’ descriptive writing (Hoffner, Baker, & Quinn, 2008).

Reader Response Journals. A reading journal is used to write personal reactions to reading. Reading journals provide students with opportunities to connect reading to their own experiences.

These journals can also provide teachers with valuable feedback about stu- dents’ understanding of ideas presented in text. When students respond to a story in writing, the teacher can tell whether they understood the story (Cahill, 2004; Farr et al., 1990).

To introduce reading journals, start by writing about something you and your students have read together, such as a short story. Try to connect the story to the students’ own experiences. Students also like to use reading journals as opportunities to critique stories. At times, you can ask students to give “stars” in their journals to something they have read, ranging from one (“I hated it”) to four (“I loved it”). Then, beneath the stars, ask them to explain why a chapter or story received this rating.

Teachers may also ask students to write about their favorite characters. Asking students to write about why they think the author had a character act in a certain way helps to make them more aware of how authors create stories. This awareness helps students when they write their own stories. Keeping a record of their own reactions to a character’s development in a reading journal fosters students’ literary appreciation.

Some teachers write responses to students’ reading journals, thus making them into reading dialogue journals. A special kind of response journal, the dialogue journal, provides an excellent opportunity for students and teachers to interact about a text. In dialogue journals, students use a letter format to respond to materials read. Teachers can initiate the interaction by writing a letter to a student asking about a particular character or about the student’s favorite event in the story. Through these written responses, teachers can enhance a student’s understanding, correct misunderstandings, offer a different perspective, or simply share a mutual appreciation for a story.

When using dialogue journals, students should have opportunities to write not only to teachers but to one another as well. Students write differently to different audi- ences. When writing to teachers, students usually provide more thorough retellings, perhaps to show the teacher they have actually read the story. However, when writing

Integrating Reading and Writing 349

to classmates, students usually write abstracts of the stories and focus more attention on evaluating and recommending books they have read (Wells, 1992–1993).

We have used an adaptation of the dialogue journal with students in book clubs. First, we established book clubs at the primary, intermediate, and middle-level grades. At the first meeting of each club, we collected information about the students, including e-mail addresses. Then we established a listserv for each book club. After the second meeting, when students were engaged in conversations about the books, we initiated a discussion thread for students’ responses. These discussion threads have maintained active participation between book club meetings and provided an avenue for ongoing support as students read outside of meeting time. In another adaptation of the dialogue journal, Ms. Hay established a blog for her fourth-grade students to post comments about books they were reading. When students expressed special interest in books they read, their friends inquired about the books and tried them as well.

Writing and Reading Informational Text This section presents strategies for responding to informational texts that students read. In using these written responses, students are able to absorb, organize, and reflect on information more effectively and fully. Throughout our school years, and, indeed, in our work, most of our writing is informational. Students write in response to assign- ments to provide evidence that they have learned needed concepts. Adults in the work world write memoranda and e-mails to colleagues to share information or reports for supervisors to provide updates or information about assigned projects. As we plan instruction for our students, we must keep real-world writing in mind.

Just as in narrative writing, we begin in early literacy by providing substantial scaffolding for students’ writing. However, even in kindergarten, we expect students to compose, usually through either drawing and/or dictation, responses to questions about text, with sufficient detail to convey that they have understood specific concepts. We expect kindergarten students to sequence events and react to those events. They should be able to state substantiated opinions about shared reading. They should be able to collaborate with their teacher and classmates to conduct research about specific topics and gather information from multiple sources to compose informational or explana- tory text (CCSSO & National Governors Association, 2010). By third grade, we expect students to select appropriate sources to meet the needs of specific tasks or purposes. By fourth grade, we expect students to find evidence from multiple sources of informa- tion to analyze and reflect on as well as to support their positions (CCSSO & National Governors Association, 2010). These developmental expectations continue to grow in complexity throughout the school years as we move toward the goals for college and career writing. In addition, the text to which students are expected to react continues to grow in difficulty and complexity commensurate with grade/reading levels.

Using Mentor Texts and Modeling. Further, just as we use mentor texts to model good writing skills or effective use of language, mentor texts in the content areas are especially important. Using mentor texts in content areas provides models for writing specific to the subject matter. If we want our students to “write like a biologist,” we

350 C H A P T E R 1 3

need to provide models of the techniques and text structures used by biologists. Again, using a gradual release instructional plan has been shown to be highly effective. Not only should the authors of the texts be mentors, but teachers should be mentors for their students as well. Shared writing, thinking aloud through the steps for the students, provides the modeling needed to develop successful writers (Dorfman & Cappelli, 2009). Using mentor texts and modeling the kind of writing done in the “real worlds” of the content areas being studied enhances the authenticity of the tasks. Providing authentic purposes for reading and writing enhances students’ engagement (Bradley & Donovan, 2010; Duke, Purcell-Gates, Hall, & Tower, 2006).

Teachers perform multiple roles in modeling. First, we establish the purpose. Especially as students mature, they need to know why they are writing. Second, we provide the guidelines for the topic selection as well as the format and audience. Even when we allow choice in topic selection, if our purpose is to convey information or understanding of concepts, guidelines must be established to provide an avenue for ac- complishing the task. We also need to model how to match text structure to purpose. If our task is to write a newspaper-type who-what-when-where-how response to an event, we need to select a mentor text from a newspaper. We also need to point out that struc- ture to our students by showing them how to reorganize the text so that this structure is evident. Then we need to model how to select sources of information and to identify important, relevant information from those sources. Next, we need to model, or in a shared writing experience, organize the information from those sources. Once we are ready to begin the first draft, we should continue in a shared writing experience. For example, we may compose the introductory paragraph and the first sentence of the second paragraph, and then ask students to compose the remainder of the second paragraph and share their writing in small groups. After allowing time for revision, we can move to the next paragraph and collaboratively construct the first sentence. As we progress through the article, we must allow time for feedback, collaboration, and revi- sion (Gallagher, 2011).

As Gallagher (2011) describes these practices in his classroom, he models both reading and writing practices that support students’ learning as readers and as writers. He frequently refers to “first draft” readings as well as “first draft” writing as he guides students through initial interpretations of text and more well-developed interpreta- tions that result from reflection and reaction to, finally, an interpretation that results from collaborative learning experiences and shared writing experiences about a men- tor text (Gallagher, 2011). Clearly, teaching students to write in response to content- area text with this much guidance in examining the information and reacting to that information would serve to enhance students’ understanding of the subject matter. More crucial, it models a way of continued study so that students can eventually be- come independent learners and users of information.

Responding to Text Learning Journals. In a learning journal or log, teachers ask students to write the most important things that they learned from a content area, such as social stud- ies or science. Students may respond to a chapter in a textbook, an article, or a les- son. Students are also free to ask questions in their journals, and if a teacher notices

Integrating Reading and Writing 351

a misunderstanding, he or she may clarify it for the student. Learning journals are especially helpful in content areas (Giacobbe, 1986; Strickland et al., 2002). By asking students to describe what they have learned, teachers can see which concepts need reteaching. In this way, writing can help content-area teachers teach diagnostically. Unrau (2008) found that his responses to students’ logs and his sharing of good ex- amples precipitated improved writing as well as improved comprehension. Figure 13.5 presents a sample of a learning journal entry by a student in the reading center. This entry was written in response to a science article about peccaries.

FIGURE 13.5 Robin’s Learning Journal Entry

352 C H A P T E R 1 3

Carter (2009) found that integrating mathematics concepts and vocabulary into her writing workshop helped to improve her students’ learning in both mathemat- ics and writing. Carter’s (2009) project provided the impetus for Wilcox and Monroe (2011) to expand the role of writing to enhance mathematics learning. In addition to learning logs that provided students opportunities to articulate and reflect on their mathematics learning, they suggest several other techniques for integrating writing and mathematics. They divide these techniques into two categories: those that require revision and those that don’t require revision.

Learning experiences that integrate writing into mathematics but don’t require revision include the following:

1. Learning logs give students time to construct meaning from instruction by trans- forming the teacher’s words into their own words as they reflect on instruction.

2. Think-write-share gives students time to respond to teachers’ questions in writ- ing before answering orally. First, the teacher asks the students to respond to a question in writing. Then students are asked to share their responses with each other before answering. By strategically pairing the students, the teacher is able to use grouping to further students’ understanding.

3. Note-taking/note-making expands the notion of note-taking to include students’ reflections and perceptions about content presented in class.

Learning experiences that integrate writing into mathematics that require revision include the following:

1. Shared writing is a modification of a language experience activity and learning log. In this activity, the teacher provides specific vocabulary, and then asks the students to dictate what they have learned about a major concept using the spe- cific vocabulary words as he or she writes their dictation on chart paper. As they progress through this group “learning log,” they often revise and engage in more precise word choices.

2. Class books are a variation of the shared writing activity. Teachers reduce the charts created in the shared writing to produce class mathematics books. For classrooms that have smartboards, this process could be readily streamlined.

3. Alphabet books can be used for younger students. In this activity, teachers assign letters of the alphabet to students and ask them to search their mathematics books for words starting with those letters. When they find the words, they must use them in meaningful sentences and draw representations of them or write about how they connect to the real world.

RAFT. This strategy helps students to develop imaginative responses by assuming different roles and tasks in writing (Santa, Havens, & Harrison, 1989). RAFT stands for:

Role—who is writing Audience—who is being written to Format—the type of writing being done Topic—what is being written about

Integrating Reading and Writing 353

Each of these four parts of writing can vary. For example, a role may include any character or object that has been studied. Students may write from the point of view of a participant in a historical event or of a cell in a biological function. In addition, any other character or object can form an audience. A student may write to another cell or to a historical figure on the opposing side. Formats can also vary. Students can write a letter, poetry, an invitation, a television script, a telegram, or a complaint. Finally, students can choose any one of a number of topics to write about.

One middle school teacher of struggling students was having difficulty teach- ing the scientific concepts of matter. To enliven this subject, she asked each student to choose one of three roles: a solid water molecule, a liquid water molecule, or a gas molecule. Students were also free to choose their audiences, formats, and topics. One student, for example, chose to be a liquid water molecule writing to the cloud from which he had come. His format was a letter, and the topic concerned what it felt like to be in a raindrop. The RAFT activity dramatically increased learning and enthusiasm in this science classroom.

Teachers may assign RAFT tasks or let the students choose them. The more var- ied the RAFT choices, the more students will develop an appreciation for other points of view and possibilities. Santa et al. (1989) suggest that teachers avoid the word write and instead use more precise words, such as describe, convince, or explain, in assignments. These terms encourage students to be more precise in their writing and to develop the ability to write persuasively.

Figure 13.6 shows a RAFT activity written by a fifth-grade student during a unit on the fight for independence. In this RAFT activity, the student has assumed the role of an American officer. The audience was not specified because the format was a per- sonal journal entry. However, the student indicated that he thought the officer would like to keep a journal to give to his children after the war. The topic was provided by the section of the chapter being studied: “Winning the War.”

Writing Arguments. As adults, we often make position statements in which we make claims and support our claims with evidence. These position statements are identified by different labels depending on our contexts. If we are out with friends and one of them has seen a new movie that just opened, we might ask her if she liked it, fol- lowed by “Why?” or “Why not?” Scientists state hypotheses about natural phenomena and proceed to find the evidence to support or negate their hypotheses. Physicians listen to our complaints, form an opinion as to the ailment or source, and then examine us for the substantiating evidence before reaching a conclusion and offering a solution. As concerned citizens, we go to city council stating our positions on issues and provide evidence to support those positions. Similarly, as literacy teachers, we must prepare our students for this type of writing.

In early literacy, we ask our kindergartners if they like a character in a story, fol- lowed by “Why did you like (or not like) her? What did she do that you liked (or didn’t like)?” (CCSSO & National Governors Association, 2010). Although we may be serv- ing as scribes for these young students or they may be drawing their responses on giant butcher paper charts around the room, we are laying the foundation for writing argu- ments. We are asking these students to take a position and to support it with evidence.

354 C H A P T E R 1 3

FIGURE 13.6 Murray’s RAFT About “Winning the War”

Of course, as students progress, the questions become more complex, and the texts in which they must seek the evidence are more advanced and complex. Eventu- ally, we expect students to support their positions with evidence from multiple sources (CCSSO & National Governors Association, 2010). Hillocks (2011) suggests using a police report format as a structure for teaching this important skill. Ms. Davis presents her seventh graders with a mystery to solve (much like the game of Clue!) and asks

Integrating Reading and Writing 355

students to identify the guilty party. Students then work in small groups (based on their “suspects”) to find the evidence to support their claims. As Ms. Davis makes the transition from reading to social studies, she presents an event in history and asks her students to state positions. Now, they have to find evidence in their history textbooks to support their positions.

New Literacies. Taking advantage of students’ use of new literacies can generate interest, provide motivation, and actually make the revising and editing processes easier. Students expect to use digital media in their personal and professional lives. If we are to prepare them for their college and career experiences, shouldn’t we rely on digital formats to support reading and writing instruction? Indeed, the Standards for Reading Specialists established by the International Reading Association (2010) and the Common Core State Standards (CCSSO & National Governors Associa- tion, 2010) include new literacies and nontraditional media in their standard elements (Sweeney, 2010).

Strassman and O’Connell (2007) recommend using video clips to engage stu- dents in writing about content-area learning. After reading about natural phenom- ena, students can access video clips from Authoring with Video (AWV), a free-access website for teachers and students, and use free software, such as MAGpie, to create their own captions for their movies. The instructions for using MAGpie are available on the AWV website. Strassman and O’Connell found that their students were more engaged in revising and editing to produce their movies than they were in traditional writing assignments. This project could be further expanded to include audio. Af- ter the students write scripts for the captions, teachers can use VoiceThread®, also free software, to create sound for the video clips (Podzielinski, Johnson, Pelekis, & Phillips, 2012).

Lawrence, McNeal, and Yildiz (2009) constructed a summer learning experi- ence for adolescents that combined the students’ interest in graphic novels with new literacies. The students engaged in research about African American history. Graphic novels were selected as mentor texts, but students could access additional informa- tion about their topics online as well. Students collaborated to compose their own graphic novels about specific aspects of African American history of interest to them. Some groups also created videos to accompany their graphic novels and posted them on YouTube®.

Writing With Poetry

When students write poetry, they use language actively and express themselves in imaginative ways. However, students with reading problems have difficulty writing poetry that rhymes because imposing rhyming patterns on your thoughts requires almost professional-level skill. For this reason, you should encourage students to write poetry that doesn’t rhyme.

To be effective in teaching students to write poetry, teachers must be willing to become poets as well. They should write their own poetry and write collaboratively

356 C H A P T E R 1 3

with their students. Parr and Campbell (2006) offer these suggestions for teaching poetry in your classrooms:

1. Look at any preconceived notions that you and your students may have about poetry. 2. Develop a poetry-rich environment to share your love and respect for poetry. 3. Discover poetry in everyday experiences. 4. Focus on process rather than product; this will foster students’ enjoyment. 5. Be a poet and engage your students in writing poetry; accept your current level

and move forward. 6. Support students’ writing and move them forward gradually. Take risks yourself

and encourage your students to do so. 7. Create a comfortable environment for sharing poetry. 8. Keep it fun!

Writing poetry as a shared experience is highly supportive and encouraging. This adaptation of a language experience activity with the added structure of poetry provides enough scaffolding that even reluctant writers will contribute (Dorfman & Cappelli, 2007).

Students with reading problems often feel more comfortable creating poetry from even more structured formats. Character poems provide a high comfort level as well as an opportunity for getting acquainted. One of the formats the reading center students enjoy is presented in Figure 13.7.

A third-grade class with many low-achieving students read “Sarah Cynthia Sylvia Stout Would Not Take the Garbage Out,” a poem by Shel Silverstein in Where the Side- walk Ends, about the fate that befell a child who refused to take out garbage. Students were asked to use each of their five senses to describe what they thought the garbage would be like. The class created a book consisting of five pages, one for each sense.

Examples of what the garbage felt like included:

It’s gooey around you. Gook Mashed potatoes

FIGURE 13.7 Character Poem

Format for Character Poem Jennifer’s Character Poem

First name Jennifer

Three words describing yourself Shopper, athlete, pretty

Sister/brother/daughter/son of . . . Sister of Steven

Who likes . . . Who likes birds and basketball

Who fears . . . Who fears the dark

Lives in . . . Lives in Chicago

Last Name Smithers

Integrating Reading and Writing 357

Mud Yuck Nasty stuff A soft chicken

The class book was decorated with illustrations by several students and placed in the classroom library.

Developing the Ability to Spell

To make their writing more easily read by others, students need to learn to spell. Spelling is best developed by practice; daily writing experiences develop good spell- ing abilities. This writing should be done for genuine purposes and specific audiences rather than just being writing “exercises” (Gentry & Gillet, 1993). In addition to writ- ing, however, many students with reading problems need more explicit instruction in spelling.

Spelling is challenging for many people, even some who read well. Students who have reading problems are almost always poor spellers. Spelling is certainly more dif- ficult than reading. The context, structural analysis, and meaning clues that help you to read a written word are not present when you want to spell it. In reading, you can sometimes substitute a word for an unfamiliar one and maintain meaning for the text. In spelling, only one pattern of letters is accepted as correct; no substitutions are allowed. Finally, the correspondence between spoken sounds and written forms in English is not always consistent.

Reading, writing, and spelling are closely related. Learning letter–sound associa- tions in reading helps you use them in spelling. As children read, they repeatedly see words spelled correctly. As their reading and writing develop, students learn regular sound–letter patterns, which they use to read new words and to spell (Ehri, 2000; Gentry, 2004; Henderson, 1985).

Spelling Development Just as children go through stages or phases when learning to talk, they go through stages in learning to communicate in print. Much research has focused on the concept of invented spelling. For example, Read (1971, 1975) has documented that preschool children use the sounds of letter names to write words before formal instruction. Children follow similar sequences as they learn to spell, although they may go through phases at different rates (Gentry, 2004; Gentry & Gillet, 1993; Henderson, 1981; Morrow, 2004).

Drawing and Scribbling. Children in early stages of literacy may draw pictures to communicate ideas. As they become aware that adults communicate through lines and squiggles on paper, they begin to do so too.

358 C H A P T E R 1 3

Precommunicative Stage. When children become aware that writing uses letters, they begin to make strings of letters. They may make no connection between letter sounds and names. Instead, children simply write letters they have seen in their envi- ronment, such as a cursive K made the way it appears on a cereal box. Adults usually cannot read what children have written at this stage. In fact, children often cannot reread what they have written unless they read it immediately.

Semiphonetic Stage. When children become aware that letters are associated with sounds, they begin to use letter names to help them in their writing. They may write only one letter (usually the first sound) to represent an entire word. Frequently, one string of letters, without spaces, represents an entire sentence or several sentences. Although children can often immediately reread what they write, teachers seldom can. Thus, having the child read the message to you is important so that you are aware of instructional needs.

Phonetic Stage. Once children understand what words are, they can identify sounds within them. At the phonetic stage, students write all the sounds they hear in words. Although these “invented” spellings may not look like the English spellings, they are systematic and phonetically correct. Students at this stage still use letter names to determine which letters to write, but each sound is represented, and adults can often read them.

Transitional Stage. As students receive reading and writing instruction, they be- come aware that print represents visual characteristics of words as well as sounds. For example, rather than writing the r that they hear for the last syllable in letter, they now begin to use the conventional English er to represent this final syllable. Frequently, students will overgeneralize patterns. For example, after students learn the word enough, they may overuse the letters gh to represent the f sound in other words. Most students now separate words by spaces. Often students in the transi- tional stage become reluctant to take risks in writing and use only words they know how to spell.

Conventional Stage. In this stage, students use all aspects of print to represent words. They know that letters represent specific sound patterns. They are also aware that some patterns differ from the typical English letter–sound correspondence.

Based on research by Ehri (1997, 2000), Gentry (2007) espouses a phase theory to describe early literacy development. Gentry (2004) describes five levels of early writ- ing, as presented in Figure 13.8. The terms for the levels are attributed to Ehri (1997).

Spelling Assessment Teachers can learn a great deal about students’ word knowledge by analyzing samples of their writing. However, students with reading problems often choose only familiar words in their writing. For this reason, spelling tests provide valuable tools for analyz- ing students’ word knowledge.

Integrating Reading and Writing 359

FIGURE 13.8 Gentry’s Writing Scale Levels of Early Spelling

Level Characteristics

Non-Alphabetic Writer may scribble in letter-like forms but does not use real alphabetic letters.

Pre-Alphabetic Writes random letters with no letter–sound correspondence

Partial Alphabetic Uses letters to represent sounds

  Sometimes uses vowels, but not consistently

  May mix some memorized conventional spelling with developmental spelling

Full Alphabetic Almost all sounds in words are represented by letters, but some may be represented by letter sounds rather than conventional patterns. For example, the letter r may represent an entire syllable: the student may write batr for the word batter.

  Quite a few sight words (from reading) may be mixed with developmental spelling.

Consolidated Alphabetic Begins to use patterns, syllables, and chunks of letters to represent sounds. Can spell most consonant-vowel-consonant patterns conventionally. Uses known words to represent unfamiliar chunks of words. For example, may use the word you to represent the long u sound.

Spelling, writing, and reading develop concurrently and provide support for each other as students engage in literacy experiences. Thus, in the early stages of spelling, instruction should provide connections between phonemic awareness and spelling. As students advance in reading and writing, their spelling instruction should reflect the morphophonemic aspects of word knowledge as they learn base words and affixes. Finally, the focus should be bases and derivatives.

Many different spelling tests are designed to assess students’ abilities to read and write the most common phonics patterns at their levels. Gentry and Gillet introduced a developmental spelling list for primary students consisting of 10 words in 1993. The instructions for administration were to

◆ Pronounce each word. ◆ Tell the students that the words are too difficult for most first and second graders

to spell but for them to write their best guesses. ◆ Classify the students’ responses and analyze specific patterns to determine in-

structional needs.

Adapted with permissions from The Science of Spelling: The Explicit Specifics that Make Great Readers and Writers (and Spellers!) by J. Richard Gentry. Copyright © 2004 by J. Richard Gentry. Published by Heinemann, Portsmouth, NH. All rights reserved.

360 C H A P T E R 1 3

In 2000, Gillet and Temple designed two spelling inventories, consisting of 16 words, presented in two sessions. The directions for administration and analysis of results were quite similar. The analysis provides the basis for planning for word study instruction. Using the pretest as the baseline, teachers can develop a systematic assessment plan to monitor students’ progress as part of their school’s response-to- intervention (RTI) plan.

From the many published spelling assessments, we recommend that you select one that aligns well with your reading instruction. There are spelling tests and directions for analysis in Words Their Way by Bear, Invernizzi, Templeton, and John- ston (2012) and in Word Matters: Teaching Phonics and Spelling in the Reading/Writing Classroom, by Pinnell and Fountas (1998). Both of these books provide suggestions for analyzing the results, placing students along a developmental continuum, and provid- ing developmentally appropriate instruction.

Spelling Instruction Many different formats and strategies can be used for spelling instruction. Gentry (2004) provides guidelines for successful word knowledge instruction:

1. Follow a specific curriculum to provide consistency and continuity. 2. Use techniques that are grounded in research. 3. Select developmentally appropriate words and patterns for instruction. Remem-

ber that spelling levels lag behind reading levels. Students can read words before they can spell them. Indeed, much of our learning and visual memory for spelling is derived from our reading.

4. Provide differentiated instruction. Just as teachers differentiate their reading in- struction, they should differentiate spelling instruction so that they can provide developmentally appropriate instruction as described in number 3 above.

5. Make connections between spelling and word study and reading/writing. Although struggling readers and writers may need intensive, explicit instruction in word analysis and spelling, teachers should take every opportunity to demon- strate the connections between recognizing words and spelling and how those skills are applied in reading and writing. Words that have been learned in read- ing provide patterns for spelling instruction. Writing provides opportunities to practice newly learned words. Good spelling helps to make writing more readily accessible to audiences.

Spelling Workshop. Gentry and Gillet (1993) recommend a workshop approach to teaching spelling similar to that used in teaching the writing process. Such an approach aligns nicely with the reading workshop and writing workshop approaches used in so many schools. It also allows for relatively easy progress monitoring for RTI plans. This approach includes several steps:

1. To foster ownership, students select their own words to study for a week. These words may be selected from their writing folders, or they may be words from stories or topics being studied. Young children should select only four or five new words.

Integrating Reading and Writing 361

Older children may choose 10 or more. In addition, teachers may add words for study based on student needs. Sometimes the class may decide to focus on a specific pattern, such as a word ending.

2. Students keep their own records as they progress through the week’s activities. They may also monitor their progress on end-of-week tests and select missed words for another week’s study. They may keep a spelling log to record their new words.

3. Students work together to learn their words. They may play games, work on common patterns, practice with one another to improve visual memory, and help provide feedback for one another.

Visual Memory. In spelling, students need to visualize patterns in words. This visualization becomes even more important in later spelling development, because they must visualize root words to help them in spelling derivatives (e.g., nation, nationality, nationalize). Visual memory can be developed in many ways. Visualizing words and writing them allows students to learn words independently. It also avoids the useless step of merely having students copy words.

In tactile writing, students use their fingers to trace words cut from felt, sandpa- per, or other textured paper. This technique is a good way to help struggling students remember words and patterns. Using these aids, ask students to trace words within one word family (e.g., rate, mate, skate).

Look-Cover-Write-Check. The look-cover-write-check strategy has been used successfully for years. The steps include:

1. Look at a spelling word. 2. Cover the spelling word. 3. Visualize the covered word in your mind. 4. Write the spelling word from memory. 5. Check your writing with the uncovered spelling word.

Word Walls. Cunningham (2000, 2005, 2012) suggests the use of word walls to sup- port students’ spelling and writing. Teachers can write the words being studied on word cards, order them according to their beginning letter, and attach them to the wall. Word walls are helpful both in giving students ideas for writing and in supporting their spelling. Encourage students to visualize words and try to write them before they look at the wall. For a more complete discussion of word walls, see Chapter 8.

Structural Patterns. Students need to develop an awareness of root words and combining affixes to create more complex words. Compound words provide a good introduction to structural patterns.

Gentry and Gillet (1993) suggest beginning with a compound word from a story or content-area lesson. For example, reading the book Snow (Keats) can serve as a springboard to a lesson on such compound words as snowfall; then brainstorm words to combine with snow to create other compound words (snowbank, snowmobile).

362 C H A P T E R 1 3

Students can also study root words and the prefixes and suffixes that can be added to create derived words. To explore such spelling patterns, students can create lists of words that end with –tion, –ic, or –ence or begin with anti– or e–.

A variation of the game Concentration can help students focus on root words and derivatives (Gentry & Gillet, 1993). To play this game, write sets of derived words on cards. One set might include confide, confidence, confidential, confidante. Another set could be remind, remember, memory, reminisce. To play the game, students try to make pairs of related words (for example, remind and reminisce).

Handwriting

Despite the growing popularity of computers, the physical act of handwriting remains basic to many school and life activities. A student with difficulties in handwriting is greatly hampered. Many students who do not read well also suffer from problems that result in poor handwriting. These problems include poor eye–hand coordination, defi- cient motor development, and limited spatial judgment (Lerner & Johns, 2009; Lerner & Kline, 2006). Because the writing system is adapted to right-handed students, those who are left-handed often have difficulties.

Most children begin writing in manuscript (or printing), which is relatively easy to construct and similar to the typeface in printed material. Students learn cursive writing in second or third grade. Even students without reading problems sometimes have difficulty making the transition from manuscript to cursive writing. Cursive let- ters are complex and require a greater variety of lines, curves, loops, and transitions.

Many teachers report easier transitions from manuscript to cursive writing if the D’Nealian method is used in beginning writing instruction. In this method, stu- dents are taught to write in manuscript, but the manuscript letters are written at a slant and the end strokes end in upward curves rather than straight lines. However, in D’Nealian, the difference between the appearance of their written words and the printed words in books is greater.

Some simple suggestions, if practiced regularly, may help improve handwriting:

◆ Have students practice on the chalkboard before using paper. They can make large circles, lines, geometric shapes, letters, and numbers with large, free move- ments using the muscles of arms, hands, and fingers.

◆ Some students need to trace printing and writing. Make heavy black letters on white paper and clip a sheet of onionskin (thin) paper over the letters. Have students trace letters with crayons or a felt-tip pen.

◆ Put letters on transparencies and use an overhead projector to project the image on a board or large sheet of paper. The student can then trace over the image.

◆ Guide students verbally as they write. For example, say “down, up, and, around” as children form letters.

◆ Because writing is a matter of habit, monitor proper posture and ways to hold writing implements. Students may need lines on a desk to show them how to position the paper.

Integrating Reading and Writing 363

Summary

Reading and writing are related processes that involve constructing, or composing, meaning. Writing strengthens reading by giving insight into spelling for early readers, by helping students to understand how text is organized, and by serving as a spring- board to reading as students need to collect information about the pieces they compose.

Writing instruction should incorporate the writing process: selecting topics, writing drafts, making revisions, editing, and publishing. In this process, students choose and develop their own topics and are not evaluated on mechanics until near the end of the process. To evaluate writing, focus, in this order, on content, organization, format (the ability to use genre properly), and mechanics. Some writing strategies in- clude written conversations (or conversing in writing), personal correspondence with another student, and journals that record personal reactions.

Teachers can help students to integrate reading and writing by using writing to support students’ reading. Several ways to integrate writing and reading are to use writing as a prereading activity, to organize information during reading, and to respond to reading. Students can explore imaginative aspects of writing by compos- ing poetry.

Spelling development occurs in stages, beginning with the precommunicative stage and moving through the semiphonetic, phonetic, transitional, and conventional stages. Students’ writing throughout these stages should be viewed as a natural devel- opmental process. Spelling assessment instruments can provide insight into students’ abilities to apply phonics principles and enable teachers to plan for instruction as well as to monitor progress. Spelling instruction should include connections between phonics and visual memory as well as the derivational aspects of structural patterns in more complex words.

References Anderson, N. L., & Brigs, C. (2011). Reciprocity between reading and writing: Strategic processing as

common ground. The Reading Teacher, 64, 546–549. Anderson, S. (1984). A whole-language approach to reading. Landham, MD: University Press of America. Bear, D. R., Invernizzi, M., Templeton, S., & Johnston, F. (2012). Words their way: Word study for phonics,

vocabulary, and spelling instruction (5th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education. Blachowicz, C. L. Z., & Fisher, P. J. (2002). Teaching vocabulary in all classrooms (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River,

NJ: Pearson Education, Inc. Blachowicz, C. L. Z., & Fisher, P. J. (2010). Teaching vocabulary in all classrooms (4th ed.). Upper Saddle River,

NJ: Pearson Education, Inc. Borman, G. D., & D’Agostino, J. V. (1996). Title I and student achievement: A meta-analysis of federal

evaluation results. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 4, 309–326. Bradley, L. G., & Donovan, C. A. (2010). Information book read-alouds as models for second-grade authors.

The Reading Teacher, 64, 246–260. Brown, A. L., & Palincsar, A. S. (1982). Inducing strategic learning from texts by means of informed, self-control

training. Technical Report No. 262. Champaign: Center for the Study of Reading, University of Illinois. Burg, J. (2012). Google Lit Trips: Enhancing critical literacy skills through 3D virtualization. Keynote presentation

of fostering literacy with research-based instructional practices and Web 2.0 technologies. Chicago: Interna- tional Reading Association Preconference Institute.

364 C H A P T E R 1 3

Button, K., & Welton, D. (1997). Integrating literacy activities and social studies in the primary grades. Social Studies and the Young Learner, 9, 15–18.

Cahill, B. (2004, November). Return to sender: Stories in letters. Writing, 24–27. Calkins, L. M. (2004). The art of teaching writing. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. Carter, S. (2009). Connecting mathematics and writing workshop: It’s kinda like ice skating. The Reading

Teacher, 62, 606–610. Cawley, J. F., & Parmar, R. S. (2001). Literacy proficiency and science for students with learning disabilities.

Reading and Writing Quarterly, 17, 105–125. Clay, M. M. (1998). By different paths to common outcomes. York, ME: Stenhouse Publishers. Clay, M. M. (2002). An observation survey of early literacy achievement (2nd ed.). Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann

Educational Books. Council of Chief State School Officers & National Governors Association. (2010). Common core state

standards for English language arts and literacy in history/social studies, science and technical sub- jects. Retrieved from http://corestandards.org

Cunningham, P. M. (2000). Phonics they use: Words for reading and writing (3rd ed.). New York: Longman. Cunningham, P. M. (2005). Phonics they use: Words for reading and writing (4th ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon. Cunningham, P. M. (2012). Phonics they use: Words for reading and writing (6th ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon. Dorfman, L. R., & Cappelli, R. (2007). Mentor texts: Teaching writing through children’s literature, K-6. Port-

land, ME: Stenhouse Publishers. Dorfman, L. R., & Cappelli, R. (2009). Nonfiction mentor texts: Teaching informational writing through children’s

literature, K-8. Portland, ME: Stenhouse Publishers. Duke, N. K., Purcell-Gates, V., Hall, L. A., & Tower, C. (2006). Authentic literacy activities for developing

comprehension and writing. The Reading Teacher, 60, 344–355. Dyson, A. H. (2003). Writing and children’s symbolic repertoires: Development unhinged. In S. B. Neuman &

D. K. Dickinson (Eds.), Handbook of early literacy research. New York: Guilford Press. Ehri, L. C. (1997). The development of children’s ability to read words. Paper presented at the convention

of the International Reading Association, Atlanta, GA. Ehri, L. C. (2000). Learning to read and learning to spell: Two sides of a coin. Topics in Language Disorders,

20, 19–36. Farr, R., Lewis, M., Fasholz, J., Pinsky, E., Towle, S., Lipschutz, J., & Faulds, B. P. (1990). Writing in response

to reading. Educational Leadership, 47, 66–69. Fisher, P. J. (1998). Teaching vocabulary in linguistically diverse classrooms. Illinois Reading Council Journal,

26, 16–21. Fitzgerald, J., & Shanahan, T. (2000). Reading and writing relations and their development. Educational

Psychologist, 35, 39–50. Fletcher, R. (2011). Mentor author, mentor texts: Short texts, craft notes, and practical classroom uses. Portsmouth,

NH: Heinemann. Fletcher, R., & Portalupi, J. (2001). Nonfiction craft lessons: Teaching information writing K–8. Portland, ME:

Stenhouse Publishers. Freeman, M. S. (2003). Using writing to assess student understanding of informational text. New England

Reading Association Journal, 39, 21–28. Gallaher, K. (2011). Write like this: Teaching real-world writing through modeling and mentor texts. Portland,

ME: Stenhouse Publishers. Gentry, J. R. (2004). The science of spelling: The explicit specifics that make great readers and writers (and spellers!).

Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. Gentry, J. R. (2007). Breakthrough in beginning reading and writing: The evidence-based approach to pinpointing

students’ needs and delivering targeted instruction. New York: Scholastic. Gentry, J. R., & Gillet, J. W. (1993). Teaching kids to spell. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. Giacobbe, M. E. (1986). Learning to write and writing to learn in the elementary school. In A. R. Petrosky &

D. Bartholomae (Eds.), The teaching of writing: Eighty-fifth yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education (pp. 131–147). Chicago: University of Chicago.

Gillet, J. W., & Temple, C. (2000). Understanding reading problems: Assessment and instruction (5th ed.). New York: Longman.

Glenn, W. J. (2007). Real writers as aware readers: Writing creatively as a means to develop reading skills. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 51, 10–20.

Integrating Reading and Writing 365

Goswami, U. (2003). Early phonological development and the acquisition of literacy. In S. B. Neuman & D. K. Dickinson (Eds.), Handbook of early literacy research. New York: Guilford Press.

Graves, D. H. (1994). A fresh look at writing. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. Henderson, E. H. (1985). Teaching spelling. Geneva, IL: Houghton Mifflin. Hillocks, G., Jr. (2011). Teaching argument writing, grades 6–12: Supporting claims with relevant evidence and

clear reasoning. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. Hoffner, H., Baker, E., & Quinn, K. B. (2008). Lights, cameras, pencils! Using descriptive video to enhance

writing. The Reading Teacher, 61, 576–579. Hughes, J. M., King, A., Perkins, P., & Fuke, V. (2011). Adolescents and “autographics”: Reading and writing

coming-of-age graphic novels. Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy, 54, 601–612. International Reading Association. (2010). Standards for Reading Professionals. Newark, DE: Author. Jacobs, V. A. (2002). Reading, writing, and understanding. Educational Leadership, 60 (3), 58–61. Jennings, J. H. (1991). A comparison of summary and journal writing as components of an interactive

comprehension model in social studies. In The fortieth yearbook of the National Reading Conference (pp. 67–82). Chicago: National Reading Conference.

Johnson, D. (2010). Teaching with authors’ blogs: Connections, collaboration, creativity. Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy, 54, 172–180.

Johnston, P. H. (1997). Knowing literacy: Constructive literacy assessment. York, ME: Stenhouse Publishers. Johnston, P. H., & Rogers, R. (2003). Early literacy development: The case for “informed assessment.”

In S. B. Neuman & D. K. Dickinson (Eds.), Handbook of early literacy research. New York: Guilford Press.

Lawrence, S. A., McNeal, K., & Yildiz, M. N. (2009). Summer program helps adolescents merge technology, popular culture, reading and writing for academic purposes. Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy, 52, 483–494.

Lerner, J., W., & Johns, B. (2009). Learning disabilities: Theories, diagnosis, and teaching strategies. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co.

Lerner, J. W., & Kline, F. (2006). Learning disabilities and related disorders: Characteristics and teaching strategies. Boston: Houghton-Mifflin Co.

Mayher, J. S., Lester, N. B., & Pradl, G. M. (1983). Learning to write/writing to learn. Upper Montclair, NJ: Boynton/Cook.

McGee, L. M. & Richgels, D. J. (2011). Literacy’s beginnings: Supporting young readers and writers (6th ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

McGinley, W. J., & Denner, P. R. (1987). Story impressions: A prereading/writing activity. Journal of Reading, 31, 248–253.

Morrow, L. M., (2004). Literacy development in the early years: Helping children read and write (5th ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

Olness, R. (2005). Using literature to enhance writing instruction: A guide for K-5 teachers. Newark, DE: Inter- national Reading Association.

Olson, C. B. (2010). The reading/writing connection: Strategies for teaching and learning in the secondary classroom (3rd ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

Olson, C. B., Land, R., Anselmi, T., & AuBuchon, C. (2010). Teaching secondary English learners to un- derstand, analyze, and write interpretive essays about theme. Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy, 54, 245–256.

Palincsar, A., & Brown, A. L. (1984). Reciprocal teaching of comprehension: Fostering and comprehension- monitoring activities. Cognition and Instruction, 1, 117–175.

Parr, M., & Campbell, T. (2006). Poets in practice. The Reading Teacher, 60, 36–46. Pelekis, K., & Phillips, C. (2012). Internet inquiry for grades K-2. Presentation in fostering literacy with

research-based instructional practices and Web 2.0 technologies. Chicago: Preconference Institute, Inter- national Reading Association.

Pinnell, G. S., & Fountas, I. C. (1998). Word matters: Teaching phonics and spelling in the reading/writing class- room. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Podzielinski, M., Johnson, D., Pelekis, K., & Phillips, C. (2012). Cool tool tips and techniques: VoiceThread. Roundtable presentation. Fostering literacy with research-based instructional practices and Web 2.0 technologies. Chicago: International Reading Association Convention Preconference Institute.

Read, C. (1971). Preschool children’s knowledge of English phonology. Harvard Educational Review, 41, 1–34.

366 C H A P T E R 1 3

Read, C. (1975). Children’s categorization of speech sounds in English. NCTE Research Reports, No. 17. Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English.

Richgels, D. J. (2003). Phonemic awareness, and reading and writing instruction. In S. B. Neuman & D. K. Dickinson (Eds.), Handbook of early literacy research. New York: Guilford Press.

Risko, V. J., Walker-Dalhouse, D., Bridges, E. S., & Wilson, A. (2011). Reading Teacher, 64, 376–378. Rubadue, M. (2002). Sharing the pen. Retrieved from http://www.TeachingK-8.com Santa, C., Havens, L., & Harrison, S. (1989). Teaching secondary science through reading, writing, study-

ing, and problem solving. In D. Lapp, J. Flood, & N. Farnan (Eds.), Content area reading and learning: Instructional strategies. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Shanahan, T. (2005). The National Reading Panel: Practical advice for teachers. Naperville, IL: Learning Point Associates.

Spence, L. K. (2010). Generous reading: Seeing students through their writing. The Reading Teacher, 63, 634–642. Strassman, B. K., & O’Connell, T. (2007). Authoring with video. The Reading Teacher, 61, 330–331. Strickland, D. S., Ganske, K., & Monroe, J. K. (2002). Supporting struggling readers and writers: Strategies for

classroom intervention 3–6. Newark, DE: International Reading Association. Sweeney, S. M. (2010). Writing for the instant messaging and text messaging generation: Using new litera-

cies to support writing instruction. Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy, 54, 121–130. Tierney, R. J. (1990). Redefining reading comprehension. Educational Leadership, 47, 37–42. Tierney, R. J., & Pearson, P. D., (1983). Toward a composing model of reading. Language Arts, 60, 568–580. Unrau, N. (2008). Content area reading and writing: Fostering literacies in middle and high school (2nd ed.). Upper

Saddle River, NJ: Pearson. Vanderburg, R. M. (2006). Reviewing research on teaching writing based on Vygotsky’s theories: What we

can learn. Reading and Writing Quarterly, 22, 375–393. Weech, J. (1994). Writing the story before reading. Journal of Reading, 37, 364–367. Wells, M. C. (1992–1993). At the junction of reading and writing: How dialogue journals contribute to

students’ reading development. Journal of Reading, 36, 294–302. White, B. F. (1995). Effects of autobiographical writing before reading on students’ responses to short

stories. Journal of Educational Research, 88, 173–184. Wilcox, B., & Monroe, E. E. (2011). Integrating writing and mathematics. The Reading Teacher, 64, 521–529. Wittrock, M. C. (1984). Writing and the teaching of reading. In J. M. Jensen (Ed.), Composing and compre-

hending (pp. 78–83). Urbana, IL: ERIC Clearinghouse on Reading and Communication Skills. Woo, M., Chu, S., Ho, A, & Li, X. (2011). Using a wiki to scaffold primary-school students’ collaborative

writing. Educational Technology and Society, 14, 43–54.

Go to topic 10: Reading and Writing in the MyEducationLab (www.myeducationlab.com) for Reading Problems: Assessment and Teaching Strategies, where you can: ◆ Find learning outcomes for reading and

writing, along with the national standards that connect to these outcomes.

◆ Complete assignments and activities that can help you more deeply understand the chapter content.

◆ Apply and practice your understanding of the core teaching skills identified in the chapter with the Building Teaching Skills and Dispositions learning units.

◆ Examine challenging situations and cases presented in the Iris Center Resources.

◆ Access video clips of CCSSO National Teachers of the Year award winners re- sponding to the question, “Why Do I Teach?” in the Teacher Talk section.

Integrating Reading and Writing 367

◆ Practice targeting instruction and mak- ing content accessible for all students with A+RISE activities.

◆ Strengthen your understanding and usage of the English language in writing with the Grammar Tutorial.

◆ Gain experience in choosing appropriate literature and integrating the best titles into language arts instruction with the Children’s and Young Adult Literature Database.

◆ Track the month-by-month literacy growth of five second graders with the Literacy Portraits.

◆ Create, update, and share quality lesson plans with the Lesson Plan Builder.

◆ Access state licensure test requirements, overviews of what the tests cover, and sample test items in the Certification and Licensure section.

◆ Check your comprehension of the content covered in the chapter with the Study Plan. Here you will be able to take a chapter pre- test, receive feedback on your answers, and then access personalized Review, Practice, and Enrichment exercises to enhance your understanding of chapter content. After you complete the exercises, take a posttest to confirm your comprehension.

◆ Check the Chapter Resources to find exam- ples of the forms used to analyze students’ writing.

14Literacy Instruction for Diverse Learners English Language Learners, Literacy in a Culturally Diverse Society, Parents and Families, Adolescents and Adults With Reading Problems

Introduction

English Language Learners Who Are ELLs? Methods for Teaching ELL Students Teaching Reading to ELL Students Classroom Strategies for Teaching Reading

to ELL Students Literacy in a Culturally Diverse Society

The Important Role of Families and Parents in Fostering Literacy

You Read to Me and I’ll Read to You Parent Workshops

Adolescents With Reading Problems Characteristics of Adolescents With

Reading Problems Special Considerations at the Secondary

Level Components of Effective Secondary

Programs Adults With Reading Problems

Postsecondary and College Programs Summary

368

C H A P T E R

Literacy Instruction for Diverse Learners 369

Introduction

In this chapter, we look at literacy instruction for several different populations: (1) English language learners (ELLs), (2) literacy in today’s culturally diverse society, (3) the important role of the family and parents in developing literacy, and (4) adolescents and adults with reading problems.

English Language Learners

English language learners (ELLs) are students whose first language is not English and who are not yet proficient in English. Understandably, ELL students often ex- perience difficulty in understanding or speaking English or in reading or writing in English.

Who Are ELLs? In today’s diverse society, the number of students who come from homes in which a lan- guage other than English is spoken is rapidly increasing. The National Clearinghouse of English Language Acquisition and Language Instruction Educational Programs (NCELA, 2011) put the number of ELL (K–12) students in the United States at 5.3 million. Over one in five students speaks a language other than English in his or her home. The number of ELLs is increasing, rising to three-quarters of a million. The Hispanic population increased to 44.3 million in 2010, making it the largest language group in the United States (U.S. Census Bureau, 2010). Spanish speakers represent 76% of the non-English-language population. However, there are more than 100 dis- tinct language groups served in U.S. schools. Common languages of ELL students in- clude Spanish, Russian, Vietnamese, Hmong, Creole, Korean, Cantonese, Chinese, and Arabic. To make the task of teaching ELL students even more challenging, some ELL students also have a basic learning disability in addition to their limited English profi- ciency. If a language disorder is present in the primary language, it also will be present in the secondary language. Over 15% of students with learning disabilities are identified as Hispanic.

Several federal laws affect ELL students. The No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act of 2001 requires that ELL students take the state standards tests taken by all students in U.S. schools. Further, the scores of ELL students are grouped and reported sepa- rately. Understandably, many ELL students have difficulty with these tests and their low scores can negatively impact the standing of their schools.

The second law that can impact ELL students is the Individual with Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004 (IDEA-2004). This law requires that all students with disabilities take the state standards tests. The scores of students with disabilities also are grouped and reported separately. Individualized education programs (IEPs) must consider their language needs. IDEA-2004 also requires that states report the number of children with disabilities served by race or ethnicity (Klingner, Artiles, & Barletta, 2006; Lerner & Johns, 2012; Slavin, Madden, & Calderon, 2010).

370 C H A P T E R 1 4

Methods for Teaching ELL Students Several different methods are used for teaching students who are ELLs (Díaz-Rico, 2012). These methods include the following:

◆ English as a second language (ESL). This method is used in classes that have students who come from many different language backgrounds. Students learn through carefully controlled oral repetitions of English language patterns. This approach often is used in schools where children come from many different language backgrounds and providing instruction in all native languages is not feasible.

◆ Bilingual instruction. This method is used when all of the students in the class are from one language background. Instruction is provided in two languages. Students use their native language for part of the school day and use the sec- ond language (English) for the other portion of the school day. Academic sub- jects are often taught in the student’s native language and the student receives oral practice in English. The objective of bilingual instruction is to strengthen school learning through the native language and gradually add the secondary language.

◆ Instruction through immersion. In this method, students are immersed in, or receive extensive exposure to, the second language. In fact, where no formal instruction is available for a person learning a second language, immersion is usually what occurs naturally. Individuals simply learn English as they live in the mainstream of an English-speaking society. Immersion is widely employed with schoolchildren in Canada, where it is used to teach French to English-speaking children by enrolling them in French-speaking schools.

Teaching Reading to ELL Students Students who are ELLs often have difficulty in learning to read in English. They are not yet proficient in English, yet must learn to read in English. The following methods can help build reading skills for ELL students (Calderon, Slavin, & Sanchez, 2010; Díaz-Rico, 2012):

◆ Provide abundant oral language practice. Reading is connected to listening and speaking. By providing opportunities for students to speak in English and to converse with one another, students can improve their oral language skills in English, which helps provide a basis for reading in English.

◆ Use easy-to-read English language books. Practice with English language books offers opportunities to strengthen abilities in English. When ELL stu- dents read high-interest, easy-to-read storybooks in English, they improve in reading and in reading comprehension.

◆ Build reading fluency. Reading fluency refers to the ability of students to read easily and quickly, without labored hesitancy. The strategy of repeated reading is

Literacy Instruction for Diverse Learners 371

a useful method for building fluency in reading. Have students reread orally from books they have previously read.

◆ Incorporate writing into the lesson. Have students write a story about a selec- tion that they have just read. Reading and writing are strongly connected, and the process of writing can strengthen reading.

Classroom Strategies for Teaching Reading to ELL Students The school settings in which students spend so much time should reflect their lan- guage backgrounds. The following strategies are examples of ways to make classrooms and materials reflect their language backgrounds:

◆ Encourage ELL students to use their first language around the school. For example, books in the classroom and library, bulletin boards, and signs can be in the students’ native language. Students can also help each other. For example, Jerzy, a child whose native language was Polish, was paired with Irena, a child who had just emigrated from Warsaw. This pairing increased the self-esteem and language skills of both students.

◆ Help students to understand that reading is based on language. They should understand that to read in English, they must understand the English words and sentence structures they meet in books. ELL students should be free to learn sophisticated information and concepts in the language they are most comfortable using. Information and abilities can be learned first in any language and then transferred to another language.

◆ Build oral language skills. At noted, reading is connected to listening and speak- ing. Reading in English can strengthen all language abilities in English. If students have some proficiency in English, reading English books will further all English language skills.

◆ Use English books. Reading books in English can be an excellent way to im- prove general mastery of English. When students learning English are given an abundance of high-interest storybooks in English, their progress in reading and listening comprehension increases. Use books that have repetition in lan- guage structures. For example, predictable books, which repeat refrains over and over, are excellent for learning English. Well-known folktales and fairytales with familiar plots are also useful. Fairytales typically have repeated phrases that children enjoy hearing and saying. Also, attractively illustrated books, in which pictures support the text, are excellent for ELL students. Use books that focus on language use. ELL students who are more advanced in English language skills profit from using books focusing on language use. Using books written in two languages allows students to match their native language patterns with corre- sponding English ones.

◆ Provide numerous opportunities to use English. ELL students must be given many opportunities to move from learning and producing limited word

372 C H A P T E R 1 4

translations and fragmented concepts to using longer sentences and express- ing more complex ideas and feelings. Engage students in increasingly complex reading and writing experiences; check to make sure that they understand the concepts.

◆ Find opportunities to use more complex English. These situations will vary according to the level of students. In one kindergarten class of Russian-speaking children, a game of “Simon Says,” complete with gestures, provided an active response to English. At a more advanced level, a third-grade bilingual Spanish class listened to the hilarious “twisted” fairytale, The True Story of the Three Little Pigs (Scieszka) in both English and Spanish, and then acted it out. Later that year, the class listened to Charlotte’s Web (White) read in English, chose their favorite words, and then matched these words in Spanish.

◆ Use conversation about books to foster natural language usage. In fostering a discussion of a story, the teacher can ask such questions as the following: “What do you think this story will be about?”, “What do you think will happen next?”, “Why do you think that?”, “Tell me more about . . .”, “What do you mean by . . . ?” Encourage students by giving them time to respond. In addition, students may respond in pairs to make the activity less threatening. Conversation about per- sonal reactions to stories is excellent for giving meaning-based practice in using English. Students enjoy discussing their favorite characters and the best parts of a story. To aid them, the teacher may list helpful English adjectives on the board.

◆ Foster hom–school collaboration. Establishing communication with the par- ents and other family members such as siblings is important. More can be accom- plished when the school and home work together. Parents should be contacted frequently to communicate students’ successes as well as the problems their chil- dren encounter. Remember that parents often have valuable information and insights that can be useful in the teaching process. Families can also make valuable contributions to school programs. In one fourth-grade bilingual room, two moth- ers sewed all the costumes for 36 fifth-grade children who sang Venezuelan songs. In helping the school’s celebration, parents, school staff, and students gained a sense of community involvement (Spinelli, 2006).

◆ Develop units for reading and language arts that use literature from a variety of linguistic and cultural backgrounds to reflect the diversity in U.S. society.

Literacy in a Culturally Diverse Society

The value of diverse cultures and the benefits of linguistic and cultural diversity are well recognized in today’s society. Each cultural, racial, and linguistic population makes unique and immeasurable contributions to the U.S. society. The term cultural pluralism reflects this philosophy. Today’s society appreciates the values that stem from different cultural populations. Society is becoming increasingly pluralistic and diverse. As im- migrant groups come to North America with their own languages, cultures, and tradi- tions, the U.S. society increasingly appreciates their rich cultural resources. Schools are called on to meet the challenges of increasing diversity and to respond vigorously

Literacy Instruction for Diverse Learners 373

and flexibly to these new challenges. Teachers have the responsibility to offer the best instruction they can to all students (Curtain & Dahlberg, 2010; Díaz-Rico, 2012).

Diverse cultures may hold different views about many issues that affect read- ing and literacy learning. For example, a student’s family may view reading very differently than the school or the teacher. Schools often expect children to have the kinds of literacy background experiences that middle-class, English-speaking par- ents traditionally provide. For example, middle-class parents frequently read stories with their children (often at bedtime) and discuss them. Through these literacy ex- periences, children become aware of what a book is, how to handle books, how print and speech match, and how a story is constructed. Middle-class parents frequently ask their children questions for which the parents already know the answer. Such lit- erary activities also are common school experiences in kindergarten and first grade. This practice is, again, an experience frequently repeated in school, when a teacher questions children about material they have read. Schools can also show students and parents the benefits of reading and learning. The school can also demonstrate to students and parents the benefits of using two languages. (Armbruster, Lehr, & Osborn, 2006; Calderon et al., 2010; Díaz-Rico, 2012; Lerner, Lowenthal, & Egan, 2003).

However, early literacy experiences may not occur within all cultures and fami- lies. For example, in some cultures, storybook reading to children is uncommon; in others, parents read stories to their children but do not follow up with the adult–child interactions that foster the ability to handle books or talk about stories. Thus, children come to school with different kinds of background experiences with books and with reading. Teachers must honor the experiences that children already have while provid- ing experiences that children do not have.

Cultural differences also are seen in children’s oral language and styles of verbal interactions. In some cultures, children are not encouraged to speak in an extended fashion until they develop enough competence to “hold their own” on a topic. The child may conclude that a good child is a quiet child. If children are not encouraged to display extended language use at home, they may be fearful of offering opinions or engaging in conversations in class. Teachers should realize that some children from diverse cultures may be reluctant to express themselves in class. Teachers should not underestimate the extent of children’s knowledge about a subject, even though they are reluctant to speak in class. It is important that children be encouraged to talk to build language and reading skills. Decades of research show that children in all cultures need to have the following building blocks of reading and writing (Armbruster et al., 2006; Calderon et al., 2010). All children need to

◆ have many experiences in talking and listening ◆ learn about print and books ◆ become aware of sounds in spoken language, such as rhyming words and indi-

vidual sounds in word and language ◆ have knowledge about the letters of the alphabet ◆ have many experiences of hearing parents and others reading stories aloud ◆ have opportunities to expand their vocabulary and knowledge of words

374 C H A P T E R 1 4

Activities for teachers to encourage children to share their linguistic and cultural heritage include:

◆ Using volunteers from the child’s culture. For example, ask grandparents, other relatives, or community members to visit the class or donate time to a school. Community volunteers can relate successfully to the children.

◆ Explain expectations. Fully explain the expectations and routines when work- ing with all students. For example, provide explicit instruction in how to choose a book, what happens during quiet time, how to take turns, and how to listen as the teacher reads a story.

◆ Have students make and share contributions from their own cultures. One teacher had children write raps that summarized their learning in U.S. history and science as well as novels (Spinelli, 2006).

◆ Have children from a diverse culture and the mainstream culture teach each other. For example, in one school, Hispanic children in a bilingual class were paired with children from a mainstream class. Each child taught five words on different topics, such as sports or food from his or her culture. English-speaking children learned Spanish words, and Spanish-speaking children learned English words. This activity culminated in the second grade’s participation in the annual bilingual celebration of the school as well as the communal breaking of a stub- born piñata to celebrate the holiday Cinco de Mayo.

Have families from different cultures share experiences. Families from different cultures often can share experiences and feelings orally or in writing. In one classroom, the children’s older brothers and sisters were asked to write the story of how their families came to the United States.

◆ Display pictures that show people from diverse backgrounds and commu- nities. Include people from culturally diverse backgrounds at work, at home, and in leisure activities.

◆ Use seating arrangements and class organization to encourage students to try new ways of interacting and learning. Students from different cultural groups enjoy sharing ideas and experiences. This environment is best fostered if students have a variety of opportunities in which to sit, talk, and work with others.

◆ Use books about cultural traditions. Books representing the child’s cultural traditions can contribute to a rich and accepting atmosphere. See Table 14.1 for strategies to support cultural diversity.

TABLE 14.1 Strategies to Support Cultural Diversity

◆ Be responsive to cultural and individual diversity. ◆ Create an open, accepting classroom environment to ensure all students from all cul-

tural and linguistic backgrounds feel comfortable in class. ◆ Include books and stories in the curriculum to enhance understanding of other cultures. ◆ Teach about sensitivity and acceptance issues. ◆ Share personal experiences about cultural issues.

Literacy Instruction for Diverse Learners 375

The Important Role of Families and Parents in Fostering Literacy

Learning to read starts at home, long before the child goes to school. Parents and family members play a key role in early literacy and preparing the child for reading. Children begin to understand the nature of written language when parents read stories to them (Armbruster et al., 2006; Slavin et al., 2010).

When the child fails to learn to read, the parents react with feelings of frustra- tion and anxiety. It is important for teachers to talk regularly to parents of children with reading problems. Devoting time to understanding the needs of these families is important because it shows the teacher’s willingness to help. When parents realize how hard the teacher is trying, the parents will often match the teacher’s efforts by reading with their children at home or buying books for them. Of course, during these encounters with parents, teachers must be respectful of parents’ perspectives. In fact, by listening to the parents’ experiences with their children, teachers often gain infor- mation that is important for instruction (Spinelli, 2006).

You Read to Me and I’ll Read to You In this strategy, a child places two books in a large bag. Primary children are expected to engage in 15 minutes of personal reading and to listen to a parent read for an ad- ditional 15 minutes. For older children the times are extended to 20 minutes. To verify that the reading has occurred, parents use a form to list the books read and the number of minutes spent reading and then initial the form.

Parents become participants in the reading process. This also acquaints parents with a variety of formats. Parents may read a high-level book to a child to provide language de- velopment. Parents and children may read different books at the same time, silently so that each enjoys a private reading experience. Or parents and children may read the same book and then discuss it after reading. Parents may read a book to a child, and the child can “echo read” each page that the parent has read. Parents and children can each take turns reading the same book or read a book as a play by taking the parts of different characters. Easy books and tapes can be provided to parents who are uncertain of their own reading abilities.

Parent Workshops Being the parent of a child with a reading problem can be frustrating and discouraging. Workshops for parents provide a way to involve parents. Parents need to share their feelings and experiences with others and perhaps get useful ideas from them. They also need information about the best placement for their child and their rights under the law. Perhaps most important, parents need to share positive literacy experiences they have had with their children.

The parent workshops typically meet once per week for about 10 sessions. During the workshop sessions, parents share experiences and ideas with one another and often develop close relationships with other parents. Parents often ask for infor- mation concerning laws on special education and educational placement. They also seek ways to foster reading in their children.

376 C H A P T E R 1 4

One activity is to ask parents to bring a favorite book that they remember read- ing as a child. The books they bring are usually easy and entertaining and fun to share at the parent workshops. Parents can also be asked to relate the affectionate experi- ences that they and their own parents shared during reading. Parents can discuss ways to foster similar warm experiences with their own children.

Another activity for the parent workshop is to encourage parents to write. A writing activity deepens the parents’ own understanding of literacy and helps them understand how difficult writing can be for children. Parents come to understand the nature of the writing process and how spelling and punctuation should be a last step in writing rather than the first step. At the end of the series of workshops, a piece of writing from each child and participating parent can be bound into a book and read at a final celebration. Each parent and child can receive a copy of this joint book as a memento of a positive experi- ence. Table 14.2 lists activities for parents.

Adolescents With Reading Problems

Adolescence (the 13- to 20-year-old age range) is a well-documented period of social, emotional, and physical change. Adolescents must resolve conflicts between their de- sires for freedom and security, as they are torn between wishing for independence and yet not being ready for the responsibilities of full adulthood. Adolescents must cope with rapid physical changes in growth, appearance, and sexual drive. Peer pressure greatly affects adolescents; they seek group acceptance and are increasingly aware of how their peers are doing. All these characteristics of adolescence present challenges that may negatively affect learning (Flynn, Zheng, & Swanson, 2012).

Characteristics of Adolescents With Reading Problems Teenagers with reading problems not only have difficulty in school, but they must also cope with the normal challenges and adjustments presented by adolescence. Trying to deal with this combination creates special burdens for teenagers, such as the following:

◆ Passive learning. Adolescents with reading and learning problems often develop an attitude of learned helplessness and dependence. They wait for teacher direction instead of actively learning (Deshler et al., 2001; Snowman, McCown, &

TABLE 14.2 Activities for Parents

◆ Make family message boards to encourage literacy. ◆ Read a favorite book over again. ◆ Display books in theme baskets (e.g., Halloween, spring). ◆ Provide suggestions on how to choose books at libraries and bookstores. ◆ Model thinking about what you learned after reading a book. ◆ Suggest ways to purchase discount or used children’s books.

Literacy Instruction for Diverse Learners 377

Biehler, 2009). Poor self-concept. Low self-esteem and other emotional problems result from years of failure (Roe, Stoodt-Hill, & Burns, 2011).

◆ Poor social skills. Adolescents with academic problems often have difficulty making and keeping friends during a period when friendships and peer approval are important (Lerner & Johns, 2012).

◆ Difficulty with attention. Poor attention and concentration are common in teenagers who read poorly (Lerner & Johns, 2012; Lerner, Lowenthal, & Lerner, 1995). Because long periods of concentration are required for high school work, attention problems can be quite serious.

◆ Lack of motivation. After years of failure, many teenagers feel that they are dumb and that their efforts to learn are useless. Adolescents can learn only if they are motivated and can attribute success to their own efforts (Deshler et al., 2001).

Special Considerations at the Secondary Level Adolescents who have reading problems face many challenges in secondary schools. Secondary schools require all students to pass statewide performance tests, and ado- lescents with reading problems often have difficulty taking such tests. Poor perfor- mance on these statewide tests can jeopardize their graduation from high school. States now require that high school students pass state standards tests to receive their diplomas. Only 57% of students with learning disabilities (many of whom have reading problems) receive high school diplomas (U.S. Department of Educa- tion, 2012). Many of these students drop out of school and often face grim futures in the streets. Unless students with reading problems are given opportunities to learn, holding them to higher standards will only victimize these students (Lerner & Johns, 2012).

In addition, many content-area secondary teachers are not oriented to work- ing with low-achieving readers. The training and orientation of secondary teachers is typically in their areas of specialization (history, science, English literature, etc.). Content-area secondary teachers may not have not been trained to adjust their teach- ing for poor readers.

Many strategies help adolescents with reading problems. If the student has a severe reading problem, the teacher might be able to tape lessons. Books recorded for the blind can be made accessible to low-achieving readers. During examinations, students might be allowed to give answers orally, to tape answers, or to dictate answers to someone else. Students who do write could be allowed additional time.

Components of Effective Secondary Programs Effective components for poor readers in the secondary schools include the following:

◆ Intensive instruction in reading. Students with reading problems need rigor- ous individualized instruction.

◆ Direct instruction in high school “survival” skills. Training may be needed for successful functioning in a high school. For example, training in behavior

378 C H A P T E R 1 4

control helps students learn how to stay out of trouble in school. Training stu- dents in teacher-pleasing behaviors allows students to acquire behavior patterns (look interested, volunteer responses) that make teachers view them more pos- itively. Strategies such as organizing time, previewing textbooks, taking notes from a lecture or text, organizing information, and taking tests are needed for academic success.

◆ Successful completion of courses. Students with reading problems may cut classes, come late, and not complete assignments. Empathetic, caring teachers and counselors can foster course completion. Success in the ninth grade is par- ticularly critical for high school.

◆ Planning for life after high school. Adolescents with reading problems need to prepare for a successful transition to higher education or the world of work.

Adults With Reading Problems

For many individuals, a reading disability is a lifelong problem, a problem that does not disappear when schooling is complete. Adult literacy presents an ever- growing challenge. Some adults with problems in reading have dropped out of school and now find themselves blocked from employment. Others may be em- ployed but want to advance in their jobs or enhance their personal skills. Some adults have been denied opportunities because they lived in countries that did not provide a free education. Still other adults are concerned with learning to speak and write in English.

Postsecondary and College Programs Postsecondary education includes community colleges, vocational-technical training, and colleges. Programs in a variety of settings at a growing number of colleges and other postsecondary institutions serve adult learners with reading problems.

Accommodations for students with disabilities for colleges have been triggered by Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act (1973). This law requires educational institu- tions that receive federal funds to make reasonable accommodations for students who are identified as having a disability. Many such individuals suffer from reading prob- lems. Some strategies for helping adult students in postsecondary education cope with academic demands are as follows:

◆ Give students course syllabi 4 to 6 weeks before class begins and provide time to discuss them personally with students.

◆ Begin lectures and discussions with systematic overviews of the topic. ◆ Use a chalkboard or overhead projector to outline lecture material and orally

read what is written on the board or transparencies. ◆ Use a chalkboard or overhead projector to highlight key concepts, unusual ter-

minology, or foreign words. ◆ Clearly identify important points, main ideas, and key concepts orally in lectures.

Literacy Instruction for Diverse Learners 379

◆ Give assignments in writing and orally; be available for further clarification. ◆ Provide opportunities for student participation, question periods, and discussion. ◆ Provide time for individual discussion of assignments and questions about lec-

tures and readings. ◆ Provide study guides for the text, study questions, and review sessions to prepare

for exams. ◆ Allow oral presentations or tape-recorded assignments instead of requiring stu-

dents to use a written format. ◆ Modify evaluation procedures: Include untimed tests, wide-lined paper for tests,

and alternatives to computer-scored answer sheets.

Adults with reading problems express their wishes for a wide variety of life skills. They express needs for improving social skills, career counseling, develop- ing self-esteem and confidence, overcoming dependence, survival skills, vocational training, job procurement and retention, reading, spelling, management of personal finances, and organizational skills. They often express a particular need for help in being successful at a job.

Summary

English language learners (ELLs) are students whose native language is not English, and ELL students may have limited proficiency in English. The number of ELL stu- dents is increasing in U.S. schools. About 80% of ELL students speak Spanish.

The No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 and the Individual with Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004 are two laws that impact ELL students.

Models for teaching English as a second language include the bilingual or native language model, the English as a second language (ESL) model, and immersion.

Several research projects are currently under way to determine the most effec- tive ways to teach reading to ELL students, especially Spanish-speaking students.

Currently, recommended strategies for teaching reading to ELL students in- clude using literature from various linguistic and cultural backgrounds; using interac- tive seating arrangements; using language-based instruction; building oral language skills; using predictable, repetitive books; using conversations about books; and using cooperative learning.

The diversity of U.S. culture is one of the country’s most important strengths. As new immigrant groups continue to come to the United States with their own languages, cultures, and traditions, U.S. society is increasingly enriched in cultural resources. Although cultures differ in their views about literacy and language, teach- ers can make school a welcome place where all children can share their linguistic and cultural backgrounds.

Parents and families play an important role in fostering literacy. Early reading begins in the home.

Many adolescents have reading problems. Secondary programs should focus on content-area reading.

380 C H A P T E R 1 4

References Armbruster, B., Lehr, F., & Osborn, J. (2006). A child becomes a reader: Proven ideas from research for parents.

Washington, DC: National Institute for Literacy. August, D., & Shanaham, T. (Eds). (2006). Developing literacy in second-language learners: Report of the

National Literacy Panel on language-minority children and youth. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Bryan, T. (1991). Social problems and learning disabilities. In B. Wong (Ed.), Learning about learning dis- abilities (pp. 195–231). San Diego: Academic Press.

Calderon, M., Slavin, R., & Sanchez, M. (2010, Spring). Effective instruction for English learners. The Future of Children.

Cazden, C. (1988). Classroom discourse: The language of teaching and learning. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. Curtain, H., & Dahlberg, C. (2010). Language and children—making the match: New language for young learn-

ers, grades K-8. Boston: Allyn & Bacon. Díaz-Rico, L. (2012). A course for teaching English language learners. Boston: Pearson Education. Deshler, D., Schumaker, J., Lenz, B. Bulgren, J., Hock, M., Knight, L., et al. (2001). Ensuing content learn-

ing by secondary students with learning disabilities. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 16, (2), 96–108.

Flynn, L., Zheng, X., & Swanson, H. L. (2012). Instructing struggling older readers: A selective meta- analysis. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 27, 21–32.

Gottesman, R. (1994). The adult with learning disabilities: An overview. Learning Disabilities: A Multidisci- plinary Journal, 5(1), 1–13.

Hudson, R., & Smith, S. (2002). Effective reading instruction for struggling Spanish-speaking readers: A com- bination of two literatures. Retrieved from http://www.ldonline.org

International Reading Association. (2007). Key issues and questions in English language learners literacy research. Newark, DE: International Reading Association and Washington, DC: International Institute of Child Health and Human Development.

Jiménez, R. (2002). Fostering literacy development of Latino students. Focus on Exceptional Children, 34(6), 1–10.

Klingner, J., Artilies, A., & Barletta, L. (2006). English language learners who struggle with reading: Language acquisition or LD? Journal of Learning Disabilities, 39(2), 108–128.

Lenz, B., & Deshler, D. (2003). Teaching content to all: Evidence-based inclusive practice in middle and secondary schools. Boston: Pearson.

Lerner, J., Lowenthal, B., & Eagan, R. (2003). Preschool children with special needs: Children at-risk and children with disabilities. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

Lerner, J. W., & Johns, B. (2012). Learning disabilities and related mild disabilities: Characteristics, teaching strate- gies, and new directions. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Cengage Learning.

Lerner, J. W., Lowenthal, B., & Lerner, S. (1995). Attention deficit disorders: Assessment and teaching. Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.

McCardle, R. (2006). Bilingual literacy research. The DELSS Research Network and beyond. The Interna- tional Dyslexia Association Perspectives, 32(2), 1–5.

The National Clearinghouse of English Language Acquisition and Language Instruction Educational Programs (NCELA). (2011, February). The growing number of English learner students.

Newman, A. P. (1994). Adult literacy programs: an overview. Learning Disabilities: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 5(1), 51–61.

Ortiz, A. (2001). English language learners with special needs: Effective instructional strategies. Retrieved from http://www.ldohline.org/aticle/5622.

Roe, B., Stoodt-Hill, B., & Burns, P. (2011). Secondary school literacy instruction: The content areas. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Cengage Learning.

Snowman, J., McCown, R., & Biehler, R. (2009). Psychology applied to teaching. Boston: Houghton Mifflin. U.S. Census Bureau. (2010). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Congress. Spinelli, C. (2006). Classroom assessment for students in special and general education. Columbus, OH: Pearson

Merrill/Prentice Hall.

Literacy Instruction for Diverse Learners 381

U.S. Department of Education. (2012). 30th annual report to Congress on the implementation of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act.

Vaughn, S. (1991). Social skills enhancement in students with learning disabilities. In B. Wong (Ed.), Learn- ing about learning disabilities (pp. 408–440). San Diego: Academic Press.

Zigmond, N. (1990). Rethinking secondary school programs for students with learning disabilities. Focus on Exceptional Children, 23, 1–22.

Zigmond, N. (1997). Educating students with disabilities: The future of special education. In J. Lloyd, E. Kaménui, & D. Chard (Eds.), Issues in educating students with disabilities (pp. 275–304, 377–391). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Go to topic 14: English Language Learners in the MyEducationLab (www.myeducationlab .com) for Reading Problems: Assessment and Teach- ing Strategies, where you can: ◆ Find learning outcomes for English language

learners, along with the national standards that connect to these outcomes.

◆ Complete assignments and activities that can help you more deeply understand the chapter content.

◆ Apply and practice your understanding of the core teaching skills identified in the chapter with the Building Teaching Skills and Dispositions learning units.

◆ Examine challenging situations and cases presented in the Iris Center Resources.

◆ Access video clips of CCSSO National Teachers of the Year award winners respond- ing to the question, “Why Do I Teach?” in the Teacher Talk section.

◆ Practice targeting instruction and mak- ing content accessible for all students with A+RISE activities.

◆ Strengthen your understanding and usage of the English language in writing with the Grammar Tutorial.

◆ Gain experience in choosing appropriate literature and integrating the best titles into language arts instruction with the Children’s and Young Adult Literature Database.

◆ Track the month-by-month literacy growth of five second graders with the Literacy Portraits.

◆ Create, update, and share quality lesson plans with the Lesson Plan Builder.

◆ Access state licensure test requirements, over- views of what the tests cover, and sample test items in the Certification and Licensure section.

◆ Check your comprehension of the content covered in the chapter with the Study Plan. Here you will be able to take a chapter pre- test, receive feedback on your answers, and then access personalized Review, Practice, and Enrichment exercises to enhance your understanding of chapter content. After you complete the exercises, take a posttest to confirm your comprehension.

1 5 Literacy Instruction for Students With Special Needs

Introduction

Students With Disabilities

The Individuals With Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004

Response-to-Intervention The Individualized Education Program

Contents of the IEP Participants at IEP Meeting

Transition Services Procedural Safeguards

Educational Environments

Learning Disabilities Characteristics of Learning Disabilities Educational Settings for Students With

Learning Disabilities

Eligibility of Learning Disabilities for Special Education

Dyslexia Providing Reading Instruction for Students With Special Needs

Adapting Standard Reading Methods for Students With Severe Reading Disabilities

Differentiated Instruction Differences in Cognitive Processing Multisensory Methods for Teaching Reading Lindamood Phoneme Sequencing Program

Direct Instruction Reading Program

Summary

382

C H A P T E R

Literacy Instruction for Students With Special Needs 383

Introduction

This chapter examines reading instruction for students with disabilities. We look at the 13 categories of disabilities identified in the special education law. We also examine programs for teaching reading to students with special needs. Most students with dis- abilities encounter problems in reading. Further, most of these students today receive much of their instruction in the general education class. Classroom teachers at the elementary and secondary levels often have much of the responsibility for teaching students with disabilities.

Students With Disabilities

Students with disabilities are identified under the special education law called the Individuals With Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004 IDEA-2004; This law indicates that students with disabilities need “specially designed instruction.”

Recent significant changes in the most recent special education law (U.S. Department of Education, 2012) include the following:

◆ The term mental retardation was changed to developmental and intellectual disabilities. ◆ Although learning disabilities remains the largest category of disability, the

percentage of children identified with learning disabilities has decreased considerably.

◆ The category of other health impaired (OHI) includes children with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Because more children are identified with ADHD, the category of OHI has increased significantly.

◆ The number of children identified with autism has increased significantly under the designation of autism spectrum disorder.

There are 13 categories of disabilities recognized in the special education law, and the percentage of children with disabilities, ages 6 to 21, in all categories is shown in Figure 15.1.

It is also useful to classify the categories of disabilities as high-incidence disabilities (those categories of disabilities that have a large number of children) and low-incidence disabilities (those categories with a smaller number of children). See Table 15.1.

TABLE 15.1 High-Incidence Disabilities and Low-Incidence Disabilities

High Incidence Disabilities Low-Incidence Disabilities

Learning Disabilities Language Impairment Intellectual Disabilities Emotional Disturbance Other Health Impairment

Orthopedic Impairment Hearing Impairment Visual Impairment Autism  

Traumatic Brain Injury Blind-deaf Multiple Disabilities    

384 C H A P T E R 1 5

FIGURE 15.1 Percentage of Children With Disabilities, Ages 6–21

Language Impairment,

19.1%

Intellectual Disabilites, 8.8%

Other Health Impaired, 9.9%

Emotional Disturbance, 7.5%

Other Disabilities (Combined),

10.3%

Learning Disabilities, 44.6%

Source: U.S. Department of Education, 2012. The Thirtieth Annual Report to Congress on the Implementation of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. Washington, DC.: Department of Education.

TABLE 15.2 The History of the Special Education Laws

Date Title of the Law Number of the Law

1975 The Education of All Handicapped Children Act

PL 94-142

1990 IDEA Individuals with Disabilities Education Act

PL 101-475

1997 IDEA-1997 Individuals with Disabilities Education Act of 1997

PL 105-17

2004 IDEA-2004 Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004

PL 108-446

The Individuals With Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004

IDEA-2004 is a reauthorization of an earlier law that was passed in 1997. This special education law has undergone many versions. Table 15.2 shows the versions of the special education law and their sequence.

The changes in the law affect the assessment and instruction of students with dis- abilities. Several of the highlights of the 2004 law are described later. A useful website describing key features of IDEA-2004 is www.ideapractices.org.

Literacy Instruction for Students With Special Needs 385

Response-to-Intervention One feature of IDEA-2004 is that it presents a major shift in the procedures for teaching and evaluating all students with a procedure called response-to-intervention (RTI). RTI is discussed in greater detail in Chapter 6. Briefly, instead of identi- fying students with disabilities by using an evaluation to diagnose each student’s problem, the RTI procedure begins with general education instruction. RTI uses an evidence-based or research-based method to instruct students. The student re- ceives instruction through several tiers or levels of instruction. Students who do not respond successfully in one tier of instruction go to the next tier, where they receive more intense intervention. If a student does not respond successfully to several tiers of intervention, the student then may receive an evaluation for spe- cial education (Division for Learning Disabilities, 2007; Fuchs & Deshler, 2007; Hollenbeck, 2007).

The Individualized Education Program

Another feature of IDEA-2004 is that it requires that an individualized education pro- gram (IEP) be written for each student with a disability. An IEP is a written statement for each child with a disability that is developed, reviewed, and revised annually in accordance with the law.

In addition, IDEA-2004 requires that IEPs designate annual goals for each stu- dent. Formerly, these goals were required to include objectives or benchmarks needed to meet these goals. In an effort to reduce the burden of paperwork for teachers and schools, the new law no longer requires that objectives and benchmarks be included. However, the law does require specific indicators of progress and how they will be measured.

Contents of the IEP The contents of the IEP must include the following components (IDEA-2004):

1. Statement of the child’s present levels of achievement 2. Statement of measurable annual goals, including academic and functional

goals 3. Description of how the child’s progress toward meeting the annual goals will be

measured 4. Statement of the needed special education services, related services, and supple-

mentary aids based on peer-reviewed research to the extent practical 5. Explanation of the extent to which the student will not participate with

nondisabled children in the regular class 6. Projected date for the beginning of the services and modifications and the antici-

pated frequency, location, and duration of those services and modifications

386 C H A P T E R 1 5

Participants at IEP Meeting According to IDEA-2004, IEP meetings must include the following participants:

1. Parents of the child with a disability 2. At least one regular education teacher 3. At least one special education teacher 4. A representative of the school district who is qualified to provide or supervise the

provision of specially designed instruction to meet the unique needs of children with disabilities, is knowledgeable about the general education curriculum, and is knowledgeable about the resources of the school

5. An individual who can interpret the instructional implications of the IEP

In addition, other individuals who have knowledge about the child are invited at the discretion of the parent or the school.

Transition Services

Transition planning is required by IDEA-2004. Transition refers to the process of preparing a student to move from the school environment to the adult world. Tran- sition settings include postsecondary education, vocational education, integrated employment, supported employment, independent living, and community participa- tion. IDEA-2004 requires that transition plans be included in the student’s IEP, with the first IEP to be in effect when the student is 16, and that they be updated annually.

Procedural Safeguards Procedural safeguards are protections for the student and the student’s family that are part of the law. Parents who disagree with the recommendations of the IEP team have several options. They can ask for a mediation meeting, at no cost to them, to try to reach an agreement. The school can then ask for a dispute resolution meeting to find agreement. Parents also have the option of calling for a due-process hearing.

Educational Environments

Most students with disabilities become the responsibility of the regular classroom teacher. The educational environments of students with disabilities are classified as follows:

Students who are in regular classes 80% or more 53.7% Students who are in regular classes 40–90% 23.7% Students who are in regular classes less than 40% 17.6% Students who are in other environments 5.1%

Literacy Instruction for Students With Special Needs 387

These statistics reveal that over 77% of students are in regular classes for at least a portion of the day.

Learning Disabilities

The largest category of disabilities is learning disabilities. Moreover, students with learning disabilities are often in general education classes, and teaching them becomes the responsibility of the general education teacher. As noted, “learning disabilities” is a special education category that is recognized in IDEA-2004. About 44.6% of students with disabilities are diagnosed with learning disabilities. About 80% of students with learning disabilities have reading problems (Lerner & Johns, 2012).

The definition of specific learning disabilities in IDEA-2004 is:

a disorder in one or more of basic psychological processes involved in using language, spoken or written, which may manifest itself in an imperfect ability to listen, think, speak, read, write, spell, or to do mathematical calculations. The term includes such conditions as perceptual handicaps, brain injury, minimum brain dysfunction, dyslexia, and developmental aphasia. The term does not include children who have learning problems that are primarily the result of visual, hearing, or motor handicaps, of men- tal retardation or emotional disturbance, or of environmental, cultural, or economic disadvantage.

Characteristics of Students With Learning Disabilities Although many different characteristics are associated with learning disabilities, each individual is unique and will present only some of these characteristics. For example, some students with learning disabilities have serious difficulty in mathematics, whereas others excel in mathematics. Attentional problems are symptomatic for many students with learning disabilities but not all. Further, certain kinds of characteristics are more likely to be exhibited at certain age levels. For example, preschool children are more likely than adolescents to be hyperactive. In addition, deficits are manifested in differ- ent ways at different age levels. For example, an underlying language disorder may ap- pear as delayed speech in the preschool child, as a reading disorder in the elementary pupil, and as a writing disorder in the secondary student (Lerner & Johns, 2012).

Additional information about learning disabilities can be found on the website www.ideaamerica.org. Table 15.3 shows the common learning and behavioral charac- teristics displayed by students with learning disabilities.

Educational Settings for Students With Learning Disabilities Many students with learning disabilities receive instruction in general education in- clusion classrooms. About 85% of the students with learning disabilities are in the general education class for at least part of the day. IDEA-2004 requires that students with disabilities be placed in the least-restrictive environment (LRE) for instruction.

388 C H A P T E R 1 5

TABLE 15.3 Common Learning and Behavioral Characteristics of Students With Learning Disabilities

Poor motor skills Exhibits general motor awkwardness and clumsiness; difficulty with gross-motor and fine-motor skills

Poor attention abilities Difficulty focusing when a lesson is presented; easily distracted, poor concentration

Problems with cognitive processing

Difficulty in interpreting visual or auditory stimuli; memory problems

Poor strategies for learning Passive learning style, lacks organization skills, cannot direct his or her own learning

Oral language problems Problems in language development, listening, and speaking, vocabulary; difficulty in recognizing language sounds (phonological awareness)

Reading difficulties Problems with decoding words, basic word recognition skills, and reading comprehension

Writing difficulties Performs poorly in tasks requiring written expression, spelling, and handwriting

Mathematics difficulties Difficulty with quantitative thinking, arithmetic facts, time, space, and calculation

Poor social skills Does poorly with social interactions

Source: Adapted from Lerner & Johns (2007).

This requirement means that students with disabilities will be included with students who do not have disabilities (Lerner & Johns, 2012).

A challenge for the classroom teacher is to make accommodations for children with learning disabilities in the general education classroom setting. To provide effec- tive instruction for these children, the classroom teacher, reading specialist, and special education teacher can collaborate to develop instructional plans.

Eligibility of Students With Learning Disabilities for Special Education As noted earlier, IDEA-2004 has created major changes in the procedure for determin- ing the eligibility of students with learning disabilities for special education services. The law describes two pathways for determining whether a student is eligible for spe- cial education services:

1. Discrepancy between achievement and intellectual ability. IDEA-2004 states that in determining whether a student is eligible for special education services, the school shall not be required to take into consideration whether a child has a se- vere discrepancy between achievement and intellectual ability in oral expression,

Literacy Instruction for Students With Special Needs 389

listening comprehension, written expression, basic reading skill, reading comprehen- sion, mathematics calculation, or mathematics reasoning.

2. Response-to-intervention (RTI). IDEA-2004 also states that in determining whether a student is eligible for special education services, the school may use a pro- cess that determines if the child responds to scientific, research-based intervention as part of the evaluation process.

The implications of having two methods of identification for eligibility are far-reaching. In the past, schools have used the discrepancy between achieve- ment and intellectual ability procedure to identify students with learning disabili- ties. The discrepancy process for determining reading disabilities is described in Chapter 6.

The Department of Education has ruled that a child has the right to have an evaluation even if the child is receiving RTI.

Dyslexia Dyslexia is a type of learning disability in which the person exhibits severe dif- ficulty in learning to read. For individuals with dyslexia, recognizing letters and words and interpreting information that is presented in print form is extremely challenging.

The severe, persistent, and baffling condition of dyslexia has puzzled the educational and medical communities for many years. For many years, scholars strongly suspected that dyslexia had a neurobiological basis, but until recently they lacked the scientific evidence to support this belief. A major tool for the new brain research is functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI). This new, noninvasive MRI method can study the human brain as it is working or in the pro- cess of reading. The fMRI brain research shows measurable differences in brain activity between dyslexic and nondyslexic subjects (Shaywitz, 2003; Sousa, 2001). The neurological factors associated with dyslexia are discussed in greater detail in Chapter 2.

Individuals with dyslexia are often intelligent in other ways and even excel in areas such as mathematics and art. Dyslexic adults often recall the anguish of trying to cope with this mysterious condition in a world that requires people to read. Even though many people with dyslexia become successful adults, their read- ing problems often continue throughout their lives. A follow-up study of children who were identified with dyslexia in the early grades showed that they continued to display symptoms of dyslexia as adolescents. Charles Schwab, the founder of the suc- cessful and innovative stock brokerage firm, struggled with severe reading problems throughout his life. Schwab says he coped by developing other abilities, such as the ability to envision, to anticipate where things are going, and to conceive solutions to business problems. Schwab believes that his reading problem forced him to develop these skills at a higher level as compared to people for whom reading comes easily (Kantrowitz & Underwood, 1997).

390 C H A P T E R 1 5

Providing Reading Instruction for Students With Special Needs

This section discusses ways to teach reading to students with special needs who have serious reading problems. Teachers may need to adapt or modify strategies that are used to teach reading to other students. Children with special needs require more intensive, explicit instruction, and they may need frequent monitoring of progress.

Students with special needs may acquire skills at a slower pace, particularly in the beginning phases of instruction. For example, Ronnie spent 10 weeks learning eight sight words. Although this progress seems extremely slow, it was a remarkable achieve- ment for Ronnie. In fact, these words were the first that he had been able to learn and retain. Because progress may be painstaking, highlighting every success by charting or graphing progress on the road to reading is especially important.

Adapting Standard Reading Methods for Students With Severe Reading Disabilities Methods or materials designed for teaching reading in the regular classroom can often be modified for use with students with special needs who have severe reading dis- abilities. These modifications require a few specialized materials, but they allow for flexibility in instruction. It is important that all teachers working with an individual student use similar strategies and terminology with the student.

Teachers often adapt word knowledge instruction to meet individual students’ needs. One diagnostic word-learning lesson can help to determine whether a student learns better through a sight word or phonics approach. In this task, a student learns two sets of words: five words are presented as sight words and five words are presented as phonics words. By comparing performance on these two tasks, the teacher can judge the student’s learning strengths. A sample word-learning task with directions is pre- sented in Figure 15.2. Once teachers determine which approach is more effective for the student, they can plan accordingly. Students who learn better through the sight word task might be instructed using a sight or language experience method. Students who perform better on the phonics test can be instructed by first using a phonics teach- ing strategy. In addition to learning about achievement on the two tasks, the process of watching students learn by different methods provides many diagnostic insights.

Adapting a Sight Word Method. The sight word method involves teaching students to recognize the visual forms of words instantly, with further analysis. In using this approach with students with disabilities, words should be selected with care. In gener- al, long words are harder to learn than short words, although an occasional long word adds interest. Concrete words are easier to learn that abstract words. For example, the student’s name, parts of the body, the name of the school, and so on are easier to learn than function words such as the, when, or to.

The words selected for instruction should also be varied in shape or configura- tion and in length to avoid visual confusion. Move carefully from words to sentences to books. Words should also be reviewed many times to firmly establish them in the

Literacy Instruction for Students With Special Needs 391

Sight word task Words are house, children, boy, farm, wagon

1. Use a word processer to print each word on a card.

2. For each word: read it aloud to the student, use it in a sentence, point out the visual features of the word (children has the ch sound; boy has an oy sound)

3. Mix up the cards. Present five trials of each word, mixing the words after each trial. a. For the first three trials, pronounce incorrect words for

the student and use each word in a sentence. b. For the last two trials, do not correct incorrect responses.

Phonics task Words are at, bat, cat, rat, fat

1. Use a word processer to print each word on a card.

2. Show students each at word card; say each word as the student looks at the card.

3. Mix up the cards. Present five trials of the word, mixing the words after each trial. a. For the first three trials, pronounce incorrect words after

each trial. b. For the last two trials, do not correct incorrect responses.

FIGURE 15.2 Example of a Diagnostic Word-Learning Task

Sight word task trial

  1 2 3 4 5

house          

children          

boy          

farm          

wagon          

Response form: Mark correct or incorrect. Compare responses with the sight word task trial and the phonics task trial.

Phonics task trial

  1 2 3 4 5

at          

bat          

cat          

rat          

fat          

student’s memory. Be careful to use standard manuscript writing or a word processor for all teacher-made materials. Because severely disabled readers may focus on small differences, they may be confused by a letter d with a “tail” attached.

Adapting a Phonics Method. Children need developmentally appropriate, sys- tematic instruction in phonics (National Reading Panel, 2000). However, no single approach to phonics instruction has been found to be more effective than other approaches. Cunningham (2005) identified three major approaches to phonics instruc- tion: synthetic, analytic, and analogic. All three approaches can be adapted for use with students with special needs.

392 C H A P T E R 1 5

Synthetic Phonics. In synthetic phonics, students first learn individual letter sounds and then learn how to blend letter sounds or groups of letter sounds into a whole word. For example, children learn the short a sound and the sounds for b and t. Then they learn the words at, bat, and tab. As they learn additional sounds, such as the sound for m and r, they can add mat and bam. As more sounds are added, more decodable words can be read. Although the teacher usually reads “real” stories aloud to the children, all the early stories that the children read are comprised of the sounds they have been taught and a few high-frequency sight words such as a, E, E, and on. Similarly, the children’s writing consists of words that contain the sounds they have been taught (Cunningham, 2005).

The concept of synthetic phonics is often difficult for students with severe read- ing disabilities to grasp at first. Before using a synthetic approach, teachers should make sure the student possesses the needed prerequisite skills, such as phonemic awareness. However, once basic phonics concepts are mastered, the student often gains rapidly in reading performance.

Although intense effort is required, this method works for some severely dis- abled readers. Betty, an intelligent 13-year-old, had a long history of reading failure, but she was anxious to learn. Her teacher taught her the sounds of the consonants, fol- lowed by the short a and long a sounds, and then the rules for using them in a process that took several months. Once these initial steps were mastered, however, progress was much faster. In fact, she learned the other vowels quite easily, and in her second 6 months of instruction, Betty demonstrated gains of more than 2 years.

Analytic Phonics. In analytic phonics, children are taught some words and are then taught to construct generalizations about the words based on similarities and differ- ences. Most basal reading series use an analytic approach to phonics instruction, and children learn to apply their phonics generalizations along with sight words, context, and predictions to read stories. Children are encouraged to read a wide variety of texts and to engage in a wide variety of writing. Although the stories and writing may be more engaging, analytic phonics approaches require a longer period of time to cover the basic phonics patterns than synthetic phonics (Cunningham, 2005).

Ten-year-old Billy was a nonreader who was taught analytic phonics for several months. His initial learning rate was one word family per week for 4 weeks and two families a week thereafter. Billy’s teacher controlled the word families carefully so that they would not be too similar. After each word family was learned, it was presented in a story. The words from the word family were at first color-coded (for example, one family was written in yellow and another in red). Billy’s independent reading was done with books containing rhyming words, such as Dr. Seuss’s Hop on Pop and Green Eggs and Ham. Billy also created his own book of word families that featured one word fam- ily (e.g., –E, –ake) with many example words on each page.

Differentiated Instruction Not all people learn in the same way. Differences in temperamental styles are observed even in infants. Some babies are alert and responsive; others are irritable or passive. Teachers should not assume that everyone learns in the same way. Students with special

Literacy Instruction for Students With Special Needs 393

needs may not respond to a standard curriculum (or a one-size-fits-all curriculum) if it is not geared to their learning differences. These students require teaching that is responsive to their personal talents, interests, and proclivities. The concept of differ- entiated instruction suggests that teachers must find the special approach that will be successful for the individual student (Bender, 2006; Tomlison, 2001).

Differences in Cognitive Processing Cognitive processing refers to the different ways that students process information within the brain (Sousa, 2001). With the understanding that learning occurs in the brain, many psychologists and educators recognize that that individuals have different ways of learning. For example, Howard Gardner (1999) proposes a theory of “multiple intelligences.” This theory emphasizes that children have different ways of learning. Differentiated instruction means that teachers must adjust instruction to the learning styles of individual students.

A basic concept underlying the field of learning disabilities is that individuals have strengths in different modes of processing information. For example, students with strong visual processing skills may be visual learners and learn better through sight word or language experience methods, and students with strong auditory processing skills may be auditory learners and learn better through phonics methods (Lerner & Johns, 2012).

Although the concept of differences in modes of processing is appealing to our common sense, research has not found that they predict reading success. Caldwell (1991) found that the amount of reading done by students with disabilities rather than their auditory or visual aptitude determines reading progress.

Students can also be described active or passive learners. Efficient learning re- quires an active and dynamic involvement in the learning process. Active learners or- ganize information, ask themselves questions about the material, and compare new information to what they already know. They are motivated and have a desire to learn. Students with passive learning styles lack interest in learning, possibly because of frustrating past experiences (Lerner & Johns, 2012). Believing that they cannot learn, these students become passive and dependent, a style that is often called learned help- lessness. Passive learners wait for the teacher to do something to lead them to the learn- ing instead of taking the initiative. In effect, they expect to be spoon-fed, step by step.

Teachers should focus on planning learning experiences that tap students’ diverse strengths and afford them opportunities to approach learning from their strengths. For example, in planning a unit of instruction, provide learning experiences that include listening, speaking, reading, writing, organizing and categorizing information, and re- sponding to text through art or movement.

Multisensory Methods for Teaching Reading Multisensory methods are built on the premise that stimulation of several sensory avenues reinforces learning. For example, multisensory methods use visual, auditory, kinesthetic, and tactile sensory avenues for teaching reading. Multisensory methods

394 C H A P T E R 1 5

are a collection of programs that are based on the use of multisensory teaching (Birsh, 2005). Some of the multisensory methods are the Orton-Gillingham method, Project Read, the Wilson method, Alphabetic Phonics, S.P.I.R.E., the Herman method, the Spalding method, and the SLANT reading program.

The multisensory concept is represented by the acronym VAKT (visual, auditory, kinesthetic, tactile). To stimulate all of these senses, children might hear the teacher say a word, say the word to themselves, hear themselves say the word, feel the muscle movement as they trace the word, feel the tactile surface under their fingertips, see their hands move as they trace the word, and hear themselves say the word as they trace it.

The VAKT method emphasizes the tracing process. Children may trace the word by having their fingers in contact with the paper. To increase the tac- tile and kinesthetic sensation, sandpaper letters, sand or clay trays, and finger paints are sometimes used. The Orton-Gillingham method (described next) was the first multisensory program and is considered the basis for the other programs (Birsh, 2005).

Orton-Gillingham Method. The Orton-Gillingham method, a multisensory approach for teaching reading, is an outgrowth of Samuel Orton’s neurological theory of language disorders (Orton, 1937). More than 70 years ago, Orton, a physician who specialized in treating children with language disorders, worked with a teacher, Anna Gillingham, to de- velop a multisensory, synthetic phonics approach using direct instruction. The approach is associated with the International Dyslexia Society, which is an organization dedicated to finding causes of and treatments for dyslexia.

The original Orton-Gillingham method (Gillingham & Stillman, 1970) is a highly structured approach requiring five lessons a week for a minimum of 2 years. The initial activities include learning letters and sounds, learning words, and using words in sentences.

Letter names and sounds are learned through six sensory associations. These are visual-auditory (V-A), auditory-visual (A-V), auditory-kinesthetic (A-K), kinesthetic- auditory (K-A), visual-kinesthetic (V-K), and kinesthetic-visual (K-V). Instruction takes place in three phases:

1. Phase I: A. The teacher establishes a V-A association with the letter name by showing a

card with a letter on it and saying the letter name. The student repeats the letter name, making an A-K association. This step is the foundation for oral reading.

B. When the student has mastered the letter name, the teacher develops a V-A association with the letter sound by saying the sound while expos- ing the card. The student repeats the sound, making both V-A and A-K associations.

2. Phase II: The student develops the ability to relate the sound to the letter name. The teacher, without showing the card, makes the letter sound, and the pupil tells the name of the letter. This step is the basis for oral spelling.

Literacy Instruction for Students With Special Needs 395

3. Phase III: A. The teacher prints the letter and explains its construction. The student then

traces over the original, copies it, and finally writes the letter from memory while averting his or her eyes from the paper; this makes a V-K and K-V association.

B. The teacher says the sound and the pupil writes the letter that has that sound, thereby developing the A-K association.

After learning letter–sound associations, the student learns to read words. This learning starts by blending letter sounds and spelling the words. The initial words taught contain two vowels, a and i, and eight consonants, E, g, h, j, E, E, E, and E. The blended words follow a consonant-vowel-consonant (CVC) pattern, and blending oc- curs by pronouncing the first consonant and vowel together (e.g., rˇa) and then adding the final consonant (e.g., rat). These words are written on colored cards, which are called the student’s “jewel case.” Sample jewel case words are bat, E, bib, and job. After these words are mastered, words containing other letters are added.

After the student learns a basic set of words, the words are combined into sen- tences and stories, and the student learns to read these. Reading continues to be taught by a phonics method and combines spelling and dictation exercises.

Fernald Method. Over 60 years ago, Grace Fernald (1943–1998) developed a multi- sensory approach for extremely poor readers that simultaneously involves four sensory avenues—visual, auditory, kinesthetic, and tactile. Because progress with this method a word as a total pattern by tracing the entire word and thereby strengthening the memory and visualization of the entire word. The words to be learned are selected by the student. The method consists of four stages:

1. Stage One A. The student dictates a story to the teacher and chooses a word from the story

to learn. The teacher writes the word on a card with a crayon, using print about the size of blackboard script.

B. The student finger-traces over the word written by the teacher. While tracing each letter, the

C. The student repeats Step B without looking at the word. When the student can write the word without looking at it, it is filed alphabetically in a word bank to be used when the student writes stories. Students should read stories from typed, rather than handwritten, copies.

2. Stage Two: This stage does not include tracing every new word. In this stage, the student looks at a copy of the word written by the teacher and says the word while writing it. Students add learned words to their individual word banks and continue to write stories.

3. Stage Three: During Stage Three, students may begin to read from books. Students learn a it. The teacher should continuously check for retention of words in the word bank.

4. Stage Four: In the final stage, students can recognize new words by finding simi- larities to previously learned words or part of words.

396 C H A P T E R 1 5

S.P.I.R.E. Another multisensory reading program designed for struggling readers is S.P.I.R.E. (Educators Publishing Service [EPS]). This program addresses the skills of phonological awareness, phonics, fluency, vocabulary, and comprehension. It uses a step-by-step multisensory approach to teaching reading. For further information, visit the EPS website at www.epsbooks.com.

Lindamood Phoneme Sequencing Program The Lindamood Phoneme Sequencing (LIPS) program is a phonemic awareness and phonics program for children with severe reading problems. It focuses on the con- scious processing of sensory information, particularly involving the mouth and speech mechanism. The program develops metacognitive phoneme awareness of the lip, tongue, and mouth actions that produce the sounds students hear in words. It strives to teach students to use sensory information from feeling, seeing, and hearing to de- velop a feedback system that promotes self-correction in speech, reading, and spelling (Lindamood & Lindamood, 1998; Lindamood-Bell Learning Process, n.d.).

Direct Instruction Reading Program

The Direct Instruction Reading Program has been shown to be highly effective with children who are considered at risk because of poverty (Carnine, Silbert, Kame’enui, & Tarver, 2004). This program is a revision of the former DISTAR reading program (Engelmann & Bruner, 1974, 1995).

This highly structured reading program consists of lessons based on carefully sequenced skill hierarchies. Based on principles of behavioral psychology, the pro- gram contains drills and instructional reading as well as repetition and practice. Stu- dents progress in small planned steps, and teacher praise is used as reinforcement. Teachers are guided in specific procedures and oral instructions through each step of the program. The program uses a synthetic phonics approach, and students are first taught the prerequisite skill of auditory blending to help them combine isolated sounds into words. In addition, the shapes of some alphabet letters are modified to provide clues to the letter sounds. The special alphabet is gradually phased out as children progress.

In this program, the teacher presents fully scripted lessons. The Direct Instruc- tion Reading Program prescribes what the teacher says and does. The students (individ- ually and in unison as a group) provide the anticipated response. The teacher evaluates the degree of mastery of individuals and of the group using criterion-referenced tasks and tests.

The Corrective Reading Program (Engelmann, Becker, Hanner, & Johnson, 1995) is designed for the older student (grades 4 through 12). It consists of two strands: decoding, which follows the regular direct instruction format, and comprehension, which uses text materials of interest to the older student. More information on direct instruction programs can be found at www.sra-4kids.com.

Literacy Instruction for Students With Special Needs 397

Summary

Students with special needs may have severe difficulties in learning to read due to environmental problems, neurological problems, or a lack of proficiency in English.

The Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004 (IDEA-2004) contains many features that apply to reading and to students with read- ing problems. There are 13 categories of disabilities recognized in IDEA-2004. Each student with a disability is required to have an individual education program (IEP). Transition is the process of preparing a student to move from the high school environ- ment to the adult world. Procedural safeguards are protections for the student and the student’s family built into the law.

Learning disability is one of the special education categories that is recognized in the special education law (IDEA-2004). About 80% of students with learning dis- abilities display reading problems. Students with learning disabilities are covered by IDEA-2004 and may receive services through special education. Most students with learning disabilities are placed in general education settings.

Dyslexia is one type of learning disability recognized by IDEA-2004, and is a serious reading disability. Many students with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) have reading problems. Services in the schools for these students are cov- ered under the IDEA-2004 category “other health impaired.” Various instructional methods are used to teach reading to students with severe reading problems. Standard reading methods can be adapted for use with students who have severe reading dis- abilities. Multisensory methods use visual, auditory, tactile, and kinesthetic sensory pathways to reinforce learning. Multisensory methods include the Orton-Gillingham method and the Fernald method. Other methods for students with special needs are the Lindamood Phoneme Sequencing Program, the Direct Instruction Reading Program, and the Corrective Reading Program.

References Allington, R. L. (1982). The persistence of teacher beliefs in the perceptual deficit hypothesis. Elementary

School Journal, 82, 351–359. American Academy of Pediatrics. (2001). Clinical practice guideline: Treatment of the child with attention

deficit hyperactivity disorder. Pediatrics, 108(4), 1033–1044. Barkley, R. (2006). Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder: A handbook for diagnosis and treatment. New York:

Guilford Press. Bender, W. (2006). Differentiating instruction for students with learning disabilities. Arlington, VA: Council for

Exceptional Children. Birsh, J. (2005). Multisensory teaching of basic skills. Baltimore, MD: Brookes. Caldwell, J. (1991). Subtypes of reading/learning disabilities: Do they have instructional relevance? Paper

presented at the Learning Disabilities Association of America, Carnine, D., Silbert, J., Kame’enui, E., & Tarver, S. (2004). Direct instruction in reading. (4th ed.). Upper

Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education. Cunningham, A. E. (2005). Vocabulary growth through independent reading and reading aloud to children. In E. H. Hiebert & M. L. Kamil (Eds.), Teaching and learning vocabulary: Research and practice (pp. 45–68).

Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

398 C H A P T E R 1 5

Division for Learning Disabilities. (2007). Thinking about response to intervention and learning disabilities: A teacher’s guide. Arlington, VA: Author.

Engelmann, S., Becker, W., Hanner, S., & Johnson, G. (1995). Corrective reading series guide. Chicago: Science Research Associates.

Engelmann, S., & Bruner, E. (1974). Reading mastery series. Worthington, OH: SRA Macmillan/ McGraw-Hill.

Engelmann, S., & Bruner, E. (1995). Reading mastery series. Worthington, OH: SRA Macmillan/ McGraw-Hill.

Fletcher, J., Coulter, W., Reschley, D., & Vaughn. S. (2004). Alternative approaches to the definition and identification of learning disabilities: Some questions and answer. Annals of Dyslexia, 54(2), 304–331.

Froehlich, T., Lanpher, B., Epstein, J., et al. (2007). Prevalence, recognition, and treatment of attention- deficit/hyperactivity disorder in a national sample of U.S. children. Archives of Pediatric and Adolescent Medicine, 161, 857–864.

Fuchs, D., & Deshler, D. (2007). What we need to know about responsiveness to intervention (and shouldn’t be afraid to ask). Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 22(2), 129–136.

Gardner, H. (1999). Intelligence reformed: Multiple intelligences for the twenty-first century. New York: Basic Books.

Gillingham, A., & Stillman, B. (1970). Remedial training for children with specific disability in reading, spelling, and penmanship. Cambridge, MA: Educators Publishing Service.

Hollenbeck, A. (2007). From IDEA to implementation: A discussion of the foundational and future response-to-intervention research. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 22(2), 86–118.

Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004 (IDEA-2004). (2004, December 3). Public Law 108-446, 108th Cong. 2nd sess.

Kantrowitz, B., & Underwood, A. (1999). Dyslexia and the new science of reading. Newsweek, 123, 71–80. Lerner, J., & Johns, B. (2012). Learning disabilities and related mild disabilities: Characteristics, teaching strategies,

and new directions. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Cengage Learning. Levine, M. (2002). A mind at a time. New York: Simon & Schuster. Lindamood-Bell Learning Process. Retrieved from http://www.lindamoodbell.com Miller, S., DeVivo, K., LaRosa, A., Pycha, A., Peterson, B., Tallal, P., et al. (1998). Acoustically modified

speech and language training reduces risk for academic difficulties. Paper presented at the Society for Neuroscience, Los Angeles, CA.

National Reading Panel. (2000). Teaching children to read: An evidenced-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and implication for reading instruction. Retrived from http://www .nichd.nih.gov/publications/nrp/smallbook.htm

National Resource Center on AD/HD: A program of CHADD. Retrieved from http://www.help4adhd.org Orton, S. (1937). Reading, writing, and speech problems of children. New York: Norton. Shaywitz, B., & Shaywitz, S. (1999). Brain research and reading: Lectures at Schwab Learning. Retrieved from

www.schwablearning.com Shaywitz, S. (2003). Overcoming dyslexia: A new and complete science-based program for reading problems at any

level. New York: Alfred A. Knopf. Shaywitz, S., Fletcher, J., Holahan, J., Shneider, A., Marchione, K., Steubing, K., et al. (1999). Persistence of

dyslexia: The Connecticut longitudinal study at adolescence. Pediatrics, 104, 1351–1360. Silver, L. (2006). The misunderstood child. New York: Three Rivers Press. Sousa, D. (2001). How the brain learns. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press. Stahl, S., Duffy-Hester, A., & Stahl, K. (1998). Everything you wanted to know about phonics (but were

afraid to ask). Reading Research Quarterly, 33, 338–355. Thomas, A., & Chess, S. (1977). Temperament and development. New York: Bruner/Mazel. Tomlison, C. (2001). How to differentiate instruction in mixed ability classrooms. Alexandria, VA: Association for

Curriculum and Development. U.S. Department of Education. (2012). To assure the free appropriate public education of all children with

disabilities. Thirtieth Annual Report to Congress on the Implementation of the Individuals with Dis-abilities Education Act. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.

Literacy Instruction for Students With Special Needs 399

Go to topic 13: Struggling Readers & Others With Special Needs in the MyEducationLab (www.myeducationlab.com) for Reading Prob- lems: Assessment and Teaching Strategies, where you can: ◆ Find learning outcomes for struggling

readers and others with special needs, along with the national standards that connect to these outcomes.

◆ Complete assignments and activities that can help you more deeply understand the chapter content.

◆ Apply and practice your understanding of the core teaching skills identified in the chapter with the Building Teaching Skills and Dispositions learning units.

◆ Examine challenging situations and cases presented in the Iris Center Resources.

◆ Access video clips of CCSSO National Teachers of the Year award winners re- sponding to the question, “Why Do I Teach?” in the Teacher Talk section.

◆ Practice targeting instruction and mak- ing content accessible for all students with A+RISE activities.

◆ Strengthen your understanding and usage of the English language in writing with the Grammar Tutorial.

◆ Gain experience in choosing appropriate lit- erature and integrating the best titles into language arts instruction with the Chil- dren’s and Young Adult Literature Database.

◆ Track the month-by-month literacy growth of five second graders with the Literacy Portraits.

◆ Create, update, and share quality lesson plans with the Lesson Plan Builder.

◆ Access state licensure test requirements, overviews of what the tests cover, and sam- ple test items in the Certification and Li- censure section.

◆ Check your comprehension of the content covered in the chapter with the Study Plan. Here you will be able to take a chapter pre- test, receive feedback on your answers, and then access personalized Review, Practice, and Enrichment exercises to enhance your understanding of chapter content. After you complete the exercises, take a posttest to confirm your comprehension.

16 C H A P T E R

Literacy Support as a Collaborative Process

400

Introduction

Changing Roles of Reading Specialists Title I Programs No Child Left Behind Act American Recovery and Reinvestment

Act of 2009 Race to the Top Narrowing the Achievement Gap

Role of the Reading Specialist in Assessment

Evaluation of Student Performance Individual Diagnostic Procedures

Role of the Reading Specialist in Instruction

Working With Classroom Teachers Working With Other Professionals

Reading Specialists as Literacy Leaders Providing Support for Teachers Providing Support for Paraprofessionals Serving as Liaison Between Teachers and

Administrators Serving on Student Services Teams Serving on the Instructional Intervention

Team Working With Parents Literacy Advocates in the Community

Summary

Literacy Support as a Collaborative Process 401

Introduction

Reading specialists and literacy coaches must collaborate with classroom teachers, teachers of special education, students, parents, administrators, psychologists, other professionals, and paraprofessionals to provide the most effective instruction possi- ble. From the initial contact, the assessment process involves a multitude of teachers, schedules, program considerations, and student needs. This chapter presents the col- laborative nature of assessing students’ literacy needs and providing for their continu- ing instruction.

Changing Roles of Reading Specialists

In recent years, the roles of reading specialists have changed dramatically. Previously, these teachers received their specialist degrees and certification, gathered their assessment instruments and instructional materials, and set up shop in a small room near the furnace, in a nurse’s office, or even under the stairwell! Teachers sent their lowest-achieving students, and the reading specialist diagnosed the problems and taught remedial reading classes in small groups throughout the day. Sometimes teach- ers were not even involved in the student selection process; it was based solely on achievement test results. Most of the communication that occurred between the read- ing specialist and the teacher involved scheduling. Some carved out more collaborative efforts to support children in classrooms when they weren’t in the intervention class, but that was truly dependent on personal relationships with classroom teachers.

Research conducted in the late 1980s and early 1990s revealed significant problems with this model. Allington (1986) reported that reading specialists were often unaware of the instruction students received in their classrooms, and classroom teachers were not aware of the instruction students received in their remedial read- ing classes. Further, so much time was lost in traveling from classroom to classroom, gathering the appropriate materials, and settling down to work that the very students who needed more reading instructional time were actually engaged in fewer minutes of reading!

Possibly related to the loss of instructional time was the students’ reluctance to leave their regular classrooms: They didn’t want to be labeled as dumb or differ- ent. This stigma of being different or dumb often led to low self-esteem for students assigned to remedial reading classes (Bean, 2004, 2009). Allington (1986) also ques- tioned the cost effectiveness of these pullout programs. Was the instruction provided different enough and extensive enough to outweigh the loss of time, instruction, and self-esteem?

Title I Programs Finally, although the Title I funding legislation for most of these programs clearly identified remedial programs as supplemental to classroom instruction, most class- room teachers viewed the reading specialist as the person responsible for teaching

402 C H A P T E R 1 6

these students to read (Allington & McGill-Franzen, 1989; Bean, 2004, 2009; Bean, Cooley, Eichelberger, Lazar, & Zigmond, 1991; U.S. Department of Education, 1997, 2004). Many of us can remember the difficulties of scheduling students when all the teachers wanted their students to come to reading classes during their first period “reading time.” The specialists tried to explain the concept of supplemental instruc- tion, but they could hardly blame teachers for feeling overwhelmed trying to juggle reading groups and independent work with their limited time and resources for stu- dents who needed extraordinary amounts of attention and different materials than they had available on a regular basis!

Evaluating the effectiveness of Title I programs is difficult because Title I is a funding source rather than an actual set of guidelines for instruction. Individual states and, indeed, individual districts and schools have developed diverse programs designed to best meet the needs of their student populations.

Borman (2003) has conducted extensive, long-term research in the area of the effectiveness of compensatory programs, such as Title I. His analyses have led him to conclude that an achievement gap exists between children entering kindergarten in high-poverty schools and those entering kindergarten in affluent schools, and that this gap increases as these students progress through school. Thus, the achievement gap is a chronic, preexisting condition that continues and worsens throughout students’ early, elementary, middle, and secondary educational experiences.

In fact, a national evaluation of Title I programs conducted in the early 1990s resulted in some policymakers suggesting that the program be eliminated (Borman, 2003; Puma et al., 1997).

However, in their meta-analysis of Title I programs, Borman and D’Agostino (1996, 2001) concluded that students served by Title I programs were better off aca- demically than they would have been without the programs and that, based on data from the National Assessment of Educational Progress, funding and policies could have a positive impact over a relatively short period of time in overcoming educational inequality (Borman, 2003). Borman (2003) reminds us that although individual dis- tricts and schools utilize the funds in diverse ways, Title I has provided extra resources, materials, and personnel that have helped children: “Whenever an inner-city or poor rural school produces an exemplary program that helps its students achieve notable results, Title I funding almost invariably made it possible” (p. 49).

In an examination of evaluations of Title I since 1965, McDill and Natriello (1998) found that some characteristics were common across the most effective pro- grams funded through Title I. Effective programs included:

◆ Clear, specific goals for student achievement ◆ Alignment between those goals and the methods and materials used ◆ Ongoing assessment of student performance ◆ Coordination and integration with the regular instructional program ◆ Additional instructional time through before-school, after-school, or summer

programs ◆ Intensive, high-quality professional development

Literacy Support as a Collaborative Process 403

No Child Left Behind Act Thus, in 2001, the U.S. Congress approved the reauthorization of Title I funds along with the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB). This legislation included some specific guidelines:

◆ To narrow the achievement gap between weak and gifted students, all students should be integrated into a classroom. This means that the use of pullout pro- grams is minimized so that students can receive individualized instruction within the classroom to support them in the subjects with which they are struggling.

◆ Beginning in academic year 2005–2006, all states were expected to implement reading and math assessments in grades 3 through 8 as well as at least once dur- ing grades 10 through 12.

◆ Beginning in academic year 2007–2008, all students were to be assessed in science at least once in elementary school, once in middle school, and once in high school.

◆ Teachers were expected to attend seminars and workshops to advance their knowledge and skills.

◆ Teachers’ assistants were required to have 2 years of college or participate in classes and a paraprofessional examination.

◆ Teachers were to be held accountable for student progress. ◆ Teachers were expected to pass written examinations in their subject areas and in

general education. ◆ By the end of the 2013–2014 academic year, all students in public schools were

expected be at or above proficiency levels in reading, math, and science.

Teachers and other educators have expressed skepticism about some aspects of the leg- islation. First, how will all students ever achieve proficiency as it is currently measured? How can teachers be held accountable for all learning, both in and out of school? How can teachers overcome the preexisting gaps in achievement so that all children receive an equitable opportunity for learning (Birdwell, 2003)? The legislation was to be revised in 2004, but, to date, no revision has been enacted.

In 2011, the Secretary of Education announced that states could request flex- ibility in meeting some of the specific requirements of NCLB to focus on “improving student learning and increasing the quality of education.” (Duncan, 2011). To qualify for this flexibility, states must submit well-developed plans designed to:

◆ Improve outcomes for all students ◆ Close achievement gaps ◆ Increase equity ◆ Improve the quality of instruction

At the time of this writing, 19 states’ requests for flexibility have already been ap- proved; 26 additional states and the District of Columbia have applied for the current review period.

404 C H A P T E R 1 6

American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 In 2009, as part of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, Public Law 111-5 as amended by the Omnibus Appropriations Act of 2009, Public Law 111-8, the Depart- ment of Education was allocated funds to administer under the auspices of the state fiscal stabilization fund. These funds were distributed to states to increase their levels of funding to state and local education agencies. These funds helped to provide the support needed for struggling schools and students and to provide supplemental services.

Race to the Top Over $4 billion of these funds was allocated to establish the Race to the Top, the edu- cational reform fund of the Obama administration (Race to the Top fund, 2009). States applying for Race to the Top funding are asked to demonstrate reform in four areas:

◆ To adopt standards and assessments designed to support student success in col- lege and careers

◆ To construct data systems that measure student growth and success and inform educators about how to provide effective instruction

◆ To recruit effective teachers and principals ◆ To turn around low-achieving schools

Reading specialists and literacy coaches have had major roles to play in each of these programs. First, reading specialists and coaches help to analyze and interpret the results of assessments to identify the instructional needs of students. They work with teachers to plan effective instruction based on those needs. Then they work with teachers and other professionals to determine the professional development needs of teachers and support personnel. Finally, they provide consistent, professional support as teachers improve their practice and provide instructional support to help all students achieve their potential.

Narrowing the Achievement Gap Borman (2003) has offered some specific suggestions for continuing to narrow the achievement gap. First, emphasize early intervention. If the gap exists as students enter kindergarten, start programs with children and parents through preschool programs. Second, provide for the acceleration of learning throughout the school year by reduc- ing class size and offering before- and after-school programs. Third, extend learning into summer programs. Fourth, provide for systemic changes rather than school-by- school implementation. Concerns about fade-out as students progress into the middle and high school years can be addressed by planning for ongoing support (McDill & Natriello, 1998).

What are the implications for reading teachers and reading specialists in the current climate? In its position statement, the International Reading Association (IRA)

Literacy Support as a Collaborative Process 405

recommends a new educational model in which “teachers and reading specialists work collaboratively to provide effective instruction for all students” (IRA, 2000, p. 1). The position statement identifies three primary roles for reading specialists: instruction, assessment, and leadership (IRA, 2000). In 2004, the IRA issued a position statement about the role of coaches. In this statement, the IRA acknowledged that the roles of reading specialists have shifted from direct teaching of students to leadership and professional development roles. In fact, the IRA adopts the definition of coach sum- marized by Poglinco et al. (2003) that coaches are responsible for providing “ongoing, consistent support” to teachers to implement effective instruction. They emphasize that this is a supportive role rather than an evaluative one. In this role, literacy coaches can provide exemplary professional development on a daily basis. Each of these roles requires that the reading specialist collaborate with teachers, administrators, other professionals, and members of the community.

The authors of the IRA position statement emphasize the need for individu- als assuming leadership roles in literacy instruction to be highly qualified. The state- ment identifies five requirements for qualifications to be reading specialists or literacy coaches:

1. These individuals must be experienced classroom teachers, and that experience should be at the level of the grades they will coach.

2. They must have an in-depth knowledge of reading processes, instruction, assess- ment, and acquisition.

3. They must have experience working with teachers to improve practice. 4. They must have experience presenting professional development. 5. They must be able to observe, model, and provide effective feedback to teachers

in their classrooms. This means that they must be able to foster trusting relation- ships with colleagues.

The Standards for Reading Professionals established by IRA in 2010 reflect these shift- ing responsibilities as they emphasize the leadership roles and the responsibilities of working with teachers to support effective instruction. In fact, IRA (2010) devotes an entire standard to this role. Standard 6, Professional Learning and Leadership, states that “Candidates recognize the importance of, demonstrate, and facilitate professional learn- ing and leadership as a career-long effort and responsibility.” The elements within this standard include:

1. Candidates demonstrate foundational knowledge of adult learning theories and related research about organizational change, professional development, and school culture.

2. Candidates display positive dispositions related to their own reading and writing and the teaching of reading and writing, and pursue the development of indi- vidual professional knowledge and behaviors.

3. Candidates participate in, design, facilitate, lead, and evaluate effective and dif- ferentiated professional development

4. Candidates understand and influence local, state, or national policy decisions.

406 C H A P T E R 1 6

To fulfill these roles, reading specialists in literacy coaching roles must be able to work with adults as well as students. In addition to understanding how students learn, they must understand adult learners. Reading specialists/literacy coaches must know that the characteristics of adult learners differ from those of children and adolescents in significant ways (Knowles, Holton, & Swanson, 2011):

1. Adults need to know the purpose of learning something before investing time and effort.

2. Adults expect to be responsible for making their own decisions; we must view our colleagues as capable and self-directed.

3. We must convey respect and value for adults’ prior experiences. Our professional experiences comprise our professional identity. As reading specialists, we must find the shared knowledge across our colleagues’ professional backgrounds and disciplines to build on those experiences as we work toward a common goal of improved literacy learning for students.

4. Adults need to be able to apply new knowledge immediately.

Role of the Reading Specialist in Assessment

Assessment includes evaluation of student performance as an integral part of instruc- tion, evaluating student achievement through formal measures, and assessing student needs for diagnostic purposes. Throughout this book, we have presented suggestions for assessing literacy that require collaboration between the classroom teacher and reading specialist as well as with the student and parents.

Evaluation of Student Performance Throughout instruction, teachers assess student performance. As reading specialists have become more involved in classroom instruction, they are often given the role of ensuring that state and local standards are implemented. These standards may require the development of special rubrics or alternative forms of assessment. Reading special- ists often work with teachers to develop and implement these instruments, both at the individual classroom level and at the school level.

At the conclusion of a topic of study, curricular materials often provide tests to evaluate student performance. This is especially true of commercial reading series. Sometimes teachers need help analyzing or interpreting the results of these tests. Read- ing specialists should be familiar enough with the programs used in their schools and with the analysis and interpretation of results to help teachers make diagnostic teach- ing decisions based on the results of these tests. As coordinators of school literacy pro- grams, reading specialists are involved in the school wide evaluation plan. They should be involved in planning for program evaluation as well as interpreting the results. However, most school wide evaluation plans in public schools operate under the con- straints of district, state, and federal guidelines. Thus, individual public schools often have little input into designing all aspects of their evaluation plans. Reading specialists

Literacy Support as a Collaborative Process 407

in these settings can be most helpful in helping administrators interpret overall results and in using those results to plan for instruction and professional development, based on patterns and trends in test results. Reading specialists may be involved in docu- menting a student’s progress in a response-to-intervention (RTI) program. Schools are expected to develop RTI plans as part of their assessment planning. Classroom teach- ers may need help in selecting, implementing, and documenting appropriate measures of student progress, once an initial achievement level is established.

Individual Diagnostic Procedures In a school setting, the classroom teacher usually initiates the assessment and interven- tion process. In a reading center setting, classroom teachers, reading specialists, or par- ents may initiate the process. We will focus on the school setting because that is where most reading specialists function. Most teachers base their concerns about students’ academic performance on problems students encounter as they complete class assign- ments. This informal assessment often prompts them to contact other professionals for advice and support.

Working With Classroom Teachers. If students are struggling to read and write at a level similar to that of the majority of their classmates in reading or other subject areas, teachers usually contact the reading specialist. Teachers share their concerns through an- ecdotal records of observed behaviors as well as samples of student work. Sometimes the student’s performance on the school wide standardized general achievement test raises concerns, and a more thorough diagnosis is initiated. Reading specialists should begin by visiting the classroom to observe the student firsthand. These visits should occur both during reading instructional time and during content-area instructional time. As reading specialists, we must remember that even if students receive supplemental read- ing instruction, the majority of their instructional time is spent in the general education classroom. Become familiar with the context of each student’s learning to provide effec- tive support for the teacher who will be primarily responsible for instruction. Sometimes students function well in literacy instruction but struggle when reading content-area materials and responding to informational text in writing. Often the reading specialist can offer some concrete suggestions to meet student needs within the context of the classroom. Sometimes these suggestions include providing additional time to complete assignments, pairing the student with a buddy for reading, reorganizing seating arrange- ments, or making minor adjustments in the way information is presented.

More often, if a teacher has sought help, the issue is more complex and will re- quire more extensive support. The individual assessment process may begin with a few visits and a consultation. Then the reading specialist may ask the teacher to administer some screening instruments to confirm the concerns. These instruments may include a fluency snapshot, an informal assessment to determine reading level, and a writing sample. If these measures confirm the teacher’s and reading specialist’s concerns, more in-depth assessment is needed.

To begin an individual diagnostic process, the reading specialist should elicit the help and support of parents; any other teachers or educational professionals working

408 C H A P T E R 1 6

with the student; any other professionals, such as doctors, social workers, or therapists, who have worked with the student; and, of course, the student.

Working With Parents. If the teacher and reading specialist determine that an in- dividual student needs a complete literacy diagnosis, they need to contact the student’s parents. After consulting with the parents and explaining their concerns and plans to address those concerns, the reading specialist or teacher should conduct a thorough parent interview, such as the one provided in Appendix A of this book and on the MyEducationLab in the Chapter Resources section of Chapter 16. Parent cooperation and support will be needed throughout the assessment process, decision making, and instructional planning.

Working With Other Professionals. The reading specialist should contact any other teachers who work with the student, explain that an assessment procedure has begun, and ask for any insight they can provide into the student’s performance in their classes. They should be asked to provide information as indicated in the school infor- mation form, a sample of which is also provided in Appendix A of this text and on the MyEducationLab in the Chapter Resources section of Chapter 16.

Other resource personnel who have worked with the child should be involved in the assessment and decision-making process. Most schools have school-based problem- solving teams, assessment teams, or student services teams. The student’s case should be presented to these teams early in the process so that any information these profes- sionals have can be accessed. The professionals comprising these teams often include social workers, school nurses, speech and language therapists, and psychologists. Any of these professionals who have worked with the student can provide valuable information to the reading specialist and teacher. As the diagnostic procedures progress, the reading specialist may need the services of one or more of these professionals to complete the diagnosis. For example, the student may need a current vision or hearing screening.

Administering Diagnostic Literacy Assessments. The reading specialist should begin with a diagnostic administration and analysis of an informal reading inventory. A diagnostic administration and analysis is more in depth than the leveling informa- tion gained through most informal reading inventories. Using the informal reading inventory for diagnostic purposes is described in Chapter 5.

After the reading specialist has determined whether the student’s major area of instructional need is in the area of comprehension or word recognition, more in-depth diagnosis can begin. If the student is having problems in word recognition, administer a spelling or phonological test. If the student is having problems in comprehension, a language development or vocabulary test should be administered (see Chapter 10). Based on the analysis of the results of these measures, the reading specialist and class- room teacher can develop an instructional plan to meet the student’s needs.

However, if the student’s language level is significantly lower than grade level, the reading specialist may decide to measure the student’s academic potential. Usually, the reading specialist administers a screening instrument, such as the Kaufman Brief Intelligence Test, Second Edition. If the results of this screening instrument indicate a

Literacy Support as a Collaborative Process 409

significant problem, the reading specialist and teacher return to the assessment team with a recommendation for a full psychological evaluation and consideration for ser- vices for students with special needs.

Role of the Reading Specialist in Instruction

Once the in-depth diagnosis is complete, instructional intervention can begin. The read- ing specialist’s role in instruction has changed dramatically in recent years. Previously, students were evaluated for reading services or for special education services. If students qualified for reading support, they were placed in pullout remedial reading classes. If they qualified for special education services, they were placed in pullout special educa- tion classes. Now both services are provided in more inclusive settings so that students remain in their regular classrooms, and special education teachers or reading specialists provide in-class support or instructional support to the general education classroom teacher as the primary person responsible for providing instruction.

Working With Classroom Teachers To provide in-class instructional support, reading specialists must coordinate care- fully with classroom teachers to plan effective intervention. Sometimes the reading specialist works with a small group of students who need additional support to read text during literacy instruction. The reading specialist often provides similar support in content-area classes. Such support requires extensive collaboration among teams of teachers. To accomplish this, reading specialists need to know the curricular content, the standards to be addressed, and the expectations of the classroom teacher, and class- room teachers need to know how reading specialists plan to adapt instruction to meet the needs of struggling students.

Often reading specialists in these coaching roles provide demonstration lessons in classrooms to model highly effective literacy instruction. They may model differenti- ated instruction, and they may help teachers organize their classrooms and their sched- ules to provide differentiated instruction (Guth & Pratt-Fartro, 2010; McKenna  & Walpole, 2008; Vogt & Shearer, 2013).

Working With Other Professionals Under current guidelines, a major instructional goal is to keep students in their regular classrooms for instruction, whether they qualify for special education services or for reading interventional instruction. Thus, students who would have previously left their classrooms for instruction to address specific needs now remain in their classrooms, and specialists in learning disabilities and reading may both come into the classrooms to support the classroom teacher. In these settings, reading specialists working with small groups of students may be involved with students with diverse learning needs. Thus, extensive coordination and collaboration among teams of teachers is needed to provide effective, appropriate intervention. Because most schools have only one or two reading specialists or literacy coaches, they cannot be available as often as teachers

410 C H A P T E R 1 6

may need them to be throughout the day or week. One solution to this problem is for reading specialists to provide classroom teachers with professional development in adapting instruction to support struggling students (Moxley & Taylor, 2006).

Reading Specialists as Literacy Leaders The greatest change in reading specialists’ roles has been in the area of leadership. In its position statements about reading specialists and coaches, the IRA (2000, 2004) describes the leadership role of reading specialists as “multidimensional,” serving as a resource to other educators, parents, and the community. Their roles include the following:

◆ Suggesting ideas, strategies, or materials to teachers to support instruction for struggling readers or to provide enrichment experiences for students reading above grade level

◆ Enhancing teachers’ and administrators’ knowledge about reading instruction ◆ Leading professional development workshops and providing ongoing, consistent

support to teachers to improve literacy learning ◆ Modeling strategies or techniques for teachers ◆ Conducting demonstration and collaborative instructional experiences ◆ Serving as a resource to other educational personnel ◆ Serving on student services teams ◆ Working with parents and helping teachers to learn how to work effectively with

parents ◆ Providing professional development for paraprofessionals or aides ◆ Providing instructional guidance for school volunteers

To be effective in all of these roles, reading specialists must have excellent interper- sonal skills. They must have a strong knowledge of adults as learners and know how to shift roles from supporting other professionals to assuming instructional leadership (IRA, 2000, 2004).

Providing Support for Teachers As reading specialists assume more of the responsibility for providing professional de- velopment for teachers and other resource personnel, they sometimes need additional support themselves. We have worked closely with a group of reading specialists for several years now as they have worked to make the shift from pullout remedial reading teachers to assuming the role of literacy leadership for their schools. We have provided support behind the scenes to help them plan for professional development as well as opportunities to practice demonstration classes for individual teachers. Creating their own support group has helped these reading specialists gain confidence and brain- storm ideas for their own continued professional growth.

In developing a professional development plan, begin by gathering and analyz- ing data from multiple sources. Students’ performance on a school wide standardized achievement test can provide a good starting point. By analyzing the results of these tests, you may identify some general strengths and needs. You should also conduct a

Literacy Support as a Collaborative Process 411

needs assessment with the teachers. This can be accomplished through informal in- teractions, or you may want to ask teachers to complete a brief survey. Once you have obtained the results, work with the teachers to design a professional development plan (Casey, 2006). We typically develop 3-year plans that provide for school wide, grade- cluster, and individual professional growth opportunities.

In helping reading specialists prepare for professional development, we have also helped them find ways to integrate underlying theory with hands-on experiences for teachers learning new strategies. We suggest they provide teachers with strategy “cheat sheets”—one-page summaries of the procedures needed to implement the strategies they present. An outline for developing these cheat sheets is provided in Figure 16.1. Include a brief connection to the theoretical perspective that provides the foundation for strategies so that teachers see how different strategies are related. Also include original sources of the strategies so that teachers can access more in-depth information about each strategy and its development.

Reading specialists have described their new roles as literacy leaders in their schools. They are expected to direct the literacy instructional program for the entire school. They guide teachers in making curricular decisions and selecting appropriate materials. They work as change agents to foster school improvement. This leadership role affords reading specialists the opportunity to exert a strong positive influence on students’ reading achievement (National Reading Panel, 2000).

Providing Support for Paraprofessionals Reading specialists also design professional development for paraprofessionals. First, develop an instructional plan for students. As you develop these plans, think through sets of strategies that work well with struggling students—then consider ways to help adults who may have limited professional education use the strategies to provide effec- tive instructional support for struggling students. A format used for instructional plans for paraprofessionals is included in Figure 16.2. You can also find a sample framework for an Instructional Plan for Paraprofessionals on MyEducationLab in the Chapter Resources section of Chapter 16.

FIGURE 16.1 Template for Strategy Guide

Name of Strategy:

Originator of Strategy:

Theory Underlying Strategy Development:

Purpose of Strategy:

Procedures to Implement Strategy:

Adaptation of Strategy for Struggling Students:

Suggestions for Student Evaluation:

Reference Information for Original Source:

412 C H A P T E R 1 6

FIGURE 16.2 Paraprofessional Instructional Plan

Paraprofessional Instructional Plan

Student: Grade Level:

Age: Reading Specialist:

READING ASSESSMENT

Results of Assessment

  Independent Level Instructional Level

Oral Reading    

Silent Reading    

Language Level    

Student’s Area of Strength    

Student’s Major Area of Instructional Need

INSTRUCTIONAL NEEDS

Guided Reading

Level: Suggested Materials: Recommended Strategies:

Writing

Writing Needs: Skills to Emphasize: Suggested Strategies and Tools:

Word Knowledge

Vocabulary Development Needs: Sight Word Development Needs: Word Analysis Needs: Suggested Strategies and Tools:

Independent/Shared Reading

Suggestions for Reading With an Adult or Skilled Reader: Suggestions for Independent Reading:

RELATED FACTORS TO CONSIDER

Literacy Support as a Collaborative Process 413

Serving as Liaison Between Teachers and Administrators Leadership roles often place reading specialists or literacy coaches in the position of liaison between the administration and teachers. Reading specialists are often re- sponsible for conveying administrative decisions to teachers and for helping teach- ers implement these decisions in their classrooms. As teacher advocates with the administration, reading specialists lobby for additional resources or organizational changes to support teachers’ instructional needs. In this role, reading specialists must stay informed about current materials and funding sources to help teachers obtain appropriate materials. Reading specialists often search for grants and write proposals or help teachers in writing grant proposals to obtain supplemental books and other materials.

Although reading specialists should not be responsible for teacher evaluation, they may be involved in providing support for teachers whose instructional practices present concerns to principals. Principals often ask reading specialists to provide sup- port for teachers who need to improve their practices. In these circumstances, reading specialists’ interpersonal skills may be put to the test. They may need to model best practices through demonstration lessons, conduct collaborative lessons as they co- teach, and suggest quality professional development opportunities or continuing edu- cational opportunities (Rodgers & Rodgers, 2007). After each demonstration lesson or co-teaching experience, the literacy coach and classroom teacher should debrief, analyze the experience, and plan for subsequent instruction and necessary support (Puig & Froelich, 2007).

Serving on Student Services Teams Reading specialists or literacy coaches usually participate on their schools’ assessment teams or school-based problem-solving teams to determine the best instructional intervention for struggling students. The reading specialist is often the first person classroom teachers approach when they encounter a problem with a student. After the reading specialist observes the student in the classroom, the teacher and reading specialist agree on a follow-up plan. If the reading specialist and teacher agree that the student needs more in-depth diagnosis, they try to determine whether the student’s problems are specific to language and literacy, due to a broader learning disability, or due to other factors, such as physical or environmental issues. This decision is based on data collected through assessment procedures.

The reading specialist and teacher should present the student’s case to the stu- dent services team as they begin their collaboration. If other professionals are needed in the diagnostic phase of the process, this initial presentation will have provided the background information they need to assist in the process.

Usually the reading specialist proceeds with a diagnostic informal reading as- sessment, an analysis of writing samples collected from the classroom teacher, any formal assessments needed, and a more in-depth diagnostic instrument to evaluate

414 C H A P T E R 1 6

FIGURE 16.3 Form for Presentation to Staffing Team

SUMMARY OF ASSESSMENT

Student’s Name: Grade Level: Date of Birth:

Reading Specialist: Date of Student Services Team Meeting:

INFORMAL READING ASSESSMENT

Informal Reading Assessment Administered:

Results of Informal Reading Assessment

Mode of Reading Independent Level Instructional Level

Oral Reading    

Silent Reading    

Combined Reading Levels    

Student’s Language Level    

Student’s Area of Strength    

Student’s Major Area of Instructional Need    

FORMAL READING ASSESSMENT

Formal Reading Assessment Administered:

Results of Formal Reading Assessment

Subtests Total # of Items Correct of Possible Items

Percentile Rank

Grade Equivalent Stanine

the student’s language development or word analysis abilities. These findings should be presented to the student services team to decide the most appropriate instruc- tional intervention. Figure 16.3 includes a form reading specialists can use to pres- ent their findings to their student services teams. A copy of this form is available on MyEducationLab in the Chapter Resources section of Chapter 16.

Continued

FIGURE 16.3 Form for Presentation to Staffing Team (Continued)

Interpretation of Results

IN-DEPTH ANALYSIS

Additional Tests Administered:

Results of Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test and Expressive Vocabulary Test

Subtests Total # of Items Correct of Possible Items

Percentile Rank

Grade Equivalent Stanine

PPVT-III        

EVT        

Interpretation of Results

Results of Word Analysis Test

Initial Consonants

Final Consonants

Medial Consonants

Consonant Digraphs

Consonant Blends

Short Vowel

Patterns

Long Vowel

Patterns

R- controlled

Vowels Vowels

Digraphs Vowels

Diphthongs Structural Patterns

Interpretation of Results

RELATED FACTORS

RECOMMENDATIONS FOR APPROPRIATE INSTRUCTION

Comprehension

Word Knowledge

Writing

Suggestions for Independent Reading

415

416 C H A P T E R 1 6

Although the information presented on the form should be limited to a sum- mary of the results, the reading specialist should be prepared to provide more detailed information if requested by any member of the team.

Parents should be invited to the student services meeting to provide input when the instructional intervention decisions are made for their child. At this point, they should receive a copy of the assessment summary.

Serving on the Instructional Intervention Team After the intervention decision is made, the reading specialist, classroom teachers, and any other resource professionals who may be needed develop an instructional plan. Figure 16.4 present a framework for helping the members of the instructional team as they develop their plans. See a sample framework for an Instructional Plan for Teachers on MyEducationLab in the Chapter Resources section of Chapter 16.

As the reading specialist continues to work with the classroom teachers, the team should meet on a regular basis to review the plan and make necessary adjustments.

FIGURE 16.4 Instructional Plan for Teachers

Student Name Instructional Level Independent Level

Grade Level Area of Instructional Need Specific Focus

Reading Specialist Intern Major Interests Impacting Factor(s)

Major Instructional Goals

1.  

2.  

3.  

Specific Objectives for Comprehension

Objective Suggested Material Level Recommended Strategy

Continued

Literacy Support as a Collaborative Process 417

FIGURE 16.4 Instructional Plan for Teachers (Continued)

Specific Objectives for Word Knowledge

Objective Focus Appropriate Strategy

Specific Objectives for Writing

Objective Appropriate Strategy Textual Connection

Suggestions for Independent Reading

Interests Recommended Books Level Follow-up

After the team has worked with the student for 9 to 10 weeks, or the equivalent of a grading period, the reading specialist should prepare a written report to share with the parents at a conference. Guidelines for preparing written reports for parents are presented on the MyEducationLab in the Chapter Resources section of Chapter 16. For new students with whom you conduct a comprehensive assessment and construct a literacy profile, as well as develop an intervention plan, we recommend using the

418 C H A P T E R 1 6

Diagnostic Instructional Report. See both the guidelines for the Diagnostic Instructional Report and a template for the report on MyEducationLab in the Chapter Resources section of Chapter 16.

For continuing students with whom you may have worked for multiple terms, we recommend using the Instructional Progress Report, which includes progress monitoring. See the guidelines for writing an Instructional Progress Report available on MyEducationLab in the Chapter Resources section of Chapter 16.

The initial report to parents is usually quite detailed and lengthy. Remember that you are reporting extensive test results, sometimes from several professionals, as well as the initial intervention plan and implementation.

Brief progress reports should be prepared for each grading period. Try to limit these instructional progress reports to the front and back of a single page. Some read- ing specialists prefer to use a form for these reports similar to the form used in the staffing, but most seem to prefer a less constrictive format. Present the reports in the context of a parent conference so that you can talk with the parents about the contents and explain any terms that might be unfamiliar to them.

A systematic assessment plan should be incorporated into the student’s instruc- tional intervention. This assessment plan should provide documentation of the stu- dent’s response to intervention. General education classroom teachers may need help designing the assessment plan and documenting progress. Careful records should be maintained so that if the student services team questions the student’s progress and decides to consider referral for further evaluation, documentation can be provided.

Working With Parents As coordinators of the literacy program, reading specialists serve as advocates of the literacy program with parents. Parent support is a crucial component to the success of literacy programs as well as student achievement. Children’s early literacy develop- ment is highly correlated with their literacy experiences at home. Research has shown that shared reading experiences that occur through storybook reading enhance chil- dren’s language development and listening comprehension. When parents engage in explicit teaching of literacy skills, they support children’s development of phonemic and phonological awareness (Sénéchal & LeFevre, 2002).

Parents can model fluent reading, guide children’s listening through effective questioning techniques, and play learning games to develop specific literacy skills. In the reading center, teachers share guidelines for selecting reading materials as well as games and learning experiences for families to enhance children’s literacy develop- ment. Parents also provide a captive audience for children to practice their early read- ing skills. After teachers introduce a book in school, children can take copies of the book home to read to family members. Figure 16.5 provides an example of a family literacy plan that may be distributed to parents of primary-age students.

Reading specialists also design home reading projects to support instruction and develop reading incentive programs for the entire school. As students mature, parents’ roles in their literacy development change. Older students usually prefer to read on their own. However, they still need literacy role models. Parents need to model reading and writing for different purposes. Reading specialists and teach- ers should encourage parents to read magazines, newspapers, and books while their

Literacy Support as a Collaborative Process 419

FIGURE 16.5 Family Literacy Suggestions for Primary Students

FAMILY LITERACY SUGGESTIONS

Primary Students Student:

Teacher:

Date:

The most important thing you can do at home is to share books with your child. You should read with your child every day for at least 15–20 minutes. This should include times when you read to your child or listen to a taped book together and follow the text. It should also include times when you listen to your child read.

As you read, you should stop at critical points in the book and ask your child to predict what will happen next. For example, when the main character is faced with a dilemma, ask your child what he or she thinks the character will do. Also ask why your child thinks the character will take that action. You should also make predictions together as you read. After you read further, ask your child if the character did what you and your child had expected. If not, what did the character do instead? How would the story have been different if the character had done what you and your child predicted?

When you read books to Student’s Name, please select books at the 00 grade level or lower.

When Student’s Name is reading books to you, please select books at the 00 grade level or lower.

Student’s Name especially likes to read books about animals.

You can also support what we are doing in the reading center by giving your child addi- tional practice in skill development.

These are our instructional goals for this term:

Include four to five bulleted goals

You can help at home by having Student’s Name practice:

Include four to five bulleted ideas

children are reading. Then they can share items of interest from their reading and ask their children to share interesting items with them. If parents ask their children to substantiate their answers by reading part of the text, children have opportunities to practice fluent reading. Figure 16.6 is an example of a family literacy plan developed for intermediate- and middle-school-age students.

Reading specialists are often included in parent conferences. If they are involved in the student’s instruction, they meet with teachers during parent conferences to describe collaborative instructional intervention for the student.

Reading specialists need to communicate with parents and classroom teachers about how parents can support students as they complete homework assignments.

420 C H A P T E R 1 6

FIGURE 16.6 Family Literacy Suggestions for Intermediate and Middle School Students

FAMILY LITERACY SUGGESTIONS

Middle School and High School Students Student:

Teacher:

Date:

The most important thing you can do at home is to share books with your child. However, most students at this age read silently, and they need to practice silent reading. While Student’s Name is reading, read your own book, a favorite section of the newspaper, or a magazine article. After 20–30 minutes of reading, share an interesting part of what you read with Student’s Name and ask her or him something about his or her reading. If you read an excerpt aloud, you are more likely to encourage Student’s Name to read a short piece of text aloud to you. Possible questions include:

For fiction:

Who is/are the most important character(s) in your book? What problem is the character trying to solve? What is your favorite part so far? How do you think the character will try to solve the problem? Does the character remind you of someone you know or have read about before? Could something like this actually happen?

For nonfiction:

What is the most important thing that has happened? Who are the people involved? What are they trying to accomplish? Does this remind you of anything else you have read about or learned?

Student’s Name should be reading books independently at the 00 grade level.

You can also support what we are doing in the reading center by giving your child addi- tional practice in skill development.

Our instructional goals for this term have been:

Include four to five bulleted goals

You can help at home by having Student’s Name practice:

Include four to five bulleted ideas

Literacy Support as a Collaborative Process 421

Parents of students who are in special education classes or in instructional interven- tion programs frequently report that classroom teachers are often unaware of their children’s limitations and special needs (Munk et al., 2001). Reading specialists need to serve as liaisons in these situations. They need to provide support for classroom teach- ers and collaborate with them so that they have a strong understanding of students’ needs and adaptive instructional strategies to support their literacy development. They can also initiate teacher–parent communication to ensure good home–school relations to best support students’ learning.

If students are administered a complete literacy assessment, reading specialists should remain in contact with parents during and after the assessment to keep them apprised of the procedures and instructional intervention plans for their children. As discussed previously, this contact begins with a conference with the parents and class- room teachers working with each student as well as any resource professionals who work with the student. The initial conference is followed with a parent interview as part of the assessment process.

Literacy Advocates in the Community As leaders of the literacy program for their schools, reading specialists also serve as literacy advocates in the community. This means they must be able to articulate the program to parents, volunteers, school board members, community agencies, and members of the community at large (Moxley & Taylor, 2006).

Reading specialists can arrange for community members to volunteer in schools. Often schools can foster partnerships with community businesses or agencies to pro- vide people to share books with students. Community agencies provide small grants for individual classrooms or schools. Sometimes businesses will provide incentive pro- grams to support students’ reading or writing.

Summary

The roles of reading specialists have evolved from pullout remedial reading teachers to leaders of literacy instruction at the school, district, and community levels. Their respon- sibilities include instructional support, coaching, assessment, planning for instructional intervention, professional development, and coordination of literacy programs.

Reading specialists must collaborate with teachers and other professionals to provide effective instruction for struggling readers. They often work with teach- ers in their classrooms to provide adaptive instruction for small groups of students. They work with student services teams to ensure appropriate placement and in- tervention for students with special leaning needs. They often bring together the appropriate professionals to provide services to meet students’ needs. Reading spe- cialists provide training for paraprofessionals so that they can provide instructional support for students.

Communication with parents and facilitating communication between classroom teachers and parents are important parts of a reading specialist’s responsibilities. Specialists may also conduct parent workshops or participate in parent–teacher conferences to foster students’ literacy development.

422 C H A P T E R 1 6

Reading specialists often serve as liaisons between administrators and teachers. They may convey administrative decisions to teachers or serve as advocates for teachers to obtain the resources needed to support instruction.

References Allington, R. L. (1986). Policy constraints and effective compensatory reading instruction: A review.

In J. B. Hoffman (Ed.), Effective teaching of reading: Research and practice (pp. 261–289). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.

Allington, R. L., & McGill-Franzen, A. (1989). School response to reading failure: Instruction for Chapter 1 and special education students in grades 2, 4, and 8. Elementary School Journal, 89, 529–542.

American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009. (2009, February 17). Public Law 111-5. Bean, R. M. (2004). The reading specialist: Leadership for the classroom, school, and community. New York:

Guilford Press. Bean, R. M. (2009). The reading specialist: Leadership for the classroom, school, and community (2nd ed.).

New York: Guilford Press. Bean, R. M., Cooley, W., Eichelberger, R. T., Lazar, M., & Zigmond, N. (1991). In-class or pullout: Effects

of setting on the remedial reading program. Journal of Reading Behavior, 23, 445–464. Birdwell, J. (2003). High hopes: The 2001 reauthorization of Title I. Retrieved from http://www.Sewanee

.edu/Education/nclb_paper.pdf Borman, G. D. (2003). How can Title I improve achievement? Educational Leadership, 60, 49–53. Borman, G. D., & D’Agostino, J. V. (1996). Title I and student achievement: A meta-analysis of federal

evaluation results. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 4, 309–326. Borman, G. D., & D’Agostino, J. V. (2001). Title I and student achievement: A quantitative synthesis. In

G. D. Borman, S. Stringfield, & R. E. Slavin (Eds.), Title I: Compensatory education at the crossroads (pp. 25–57). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Casey, K. (2006). Literacy coaching: The essentials. Porstmouth, NH: Heinemann. Duncan, A. (2011). Letter from the Secretary of Education to Chief State School Officers. Washington, DC: U. S.

Department of Education. Guth, N. D. & Pratt-Fartro, T. (2010). Literacy coaching to build adolescent learning: 5 pillars of practice.

Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press. International Reading Association. (2000). Teaching all children to read: The roles of the reading specialist—a position

statement of the International Reading Association. Newark, DE: International Reading Association. International Reading Association. (2004). The role and qualifications of the reading coach in the United States.

A position statement adopted by the Board of Directors of the International Reading Association. International Reading Association (2010). Standards for Reading Professionals. Newark, DE: International

Reading Association. Knowles, M. S., Holton, E. F., & Swanson, R. A. (2011). The adult learner (7th ed.). Burlington, MA: Elsevier. McDill, E. L., & Natriello, G. (1998). The effectiveness of the Title I compensatory education program:

1965–1997. Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk, 3, 317–335. McKenna, M. C. & Walpole, S. (2008). The literacy coaching challenge: Models and methods for grades K-8.

New York, NY: Guilford Press. Moxley, D. E., & Taylor, R. T. (2006). Literacy coaching: A handbook for school leaders. Thousand Oaks, CA:

Corwin Press. Munk, D. D., Bursuck, W. D., Epstein, M. H., Jayanthi, M., Nelson, J., & Polloway, E. A. (2001). Homework

communication problems: Perspectives of special and general education parents. Reading and Writing Quarterly, 17, 189–203.

National Reading Panel (2000). Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction.

No Child Left Behind Act of 2001. (2002, January 28). Public Law 110, 107th Cong. 2nd sess. Omnibus Appropriations Act of 2009. (2009, February 23). Public Law 111-8, 111th Cong. Poglinco, S. M., Bach, A. J., Hovde, K., Rosenblum, S., Saunders, M., & Supovitz, J. A. (2003). The heart

of the matter: The coaching model in America’s choice schools. Philadelphia: Consortium for Policy and Research in Education.

Literacy Support as a Collaborative Process 423

Go to topic 15: Parents and Families in the MyEducationLab (www.myeducationlab.com) for Reading Problems: Assessment and Teaching Strategies, where you can: ◆ Find learning outcomes for parents and

families, along with the national standards that connect to these outcomes.

◆ Complete assignments and activities that can help you more deeply understand the chapter content.

◆ Apply and practice your understanding of the core teaching skills identified in the chapter with the Building Teaching Skills and Dispositions learning units.

◆ Examine challenging situations and cases presented in the Iris Center Resources.

◆ Access video clips of CCSSO National Teachers of the Year award winners re- sponding to the question, “Why Do I Teach?” in the Teacher Talk section.

◆ Practice targeting instruction and mak- ing content accessible for all students with A+RISE activities.

◆ Strengthen your understanding and usage of the English language in writing with the Grammar Tutorial.

◆ Gain experience in choosing appropriate literature and integrating the best titles into

language arts instruction with the Children’s and Young Adult Literature Database.

◆ Track the month-by-month literacy growth of five second graders with the Literacy Portraits.

◆ Create, update, and share quality lesson plans with the Lesson Plan Builder.

◆ Access state licensure test requirements, overviews of what the tests cover, and sample test items in the Certification and Licensure section.

◆ Check your comprehension of the content covered in the chapter with the Study Plan. Here you will be able to take a chapter pre- test, receive feedback on your answers, and then access personalized Review, Practice, and Enrichment exercises to enhance your understanding of chapter content. After you complete the exercises, take a posttest to confirm your comprehension.

◆ Check the Chapter Resources to find a Summary of Assessment, School Informa- tion Form, Parent/Guardian Interview, Instructional Progress Report in Reading, Instructional Plans for Teachers and for Paraprofessionals, and Diagnostic Instruc- tional Reports.

Puig, E. A., & Froelich, K. S. (2007). The literacy coach: Guiding in the right direction. Boston: Allyn & Bacon. Puma, M. J., Karweit, N., Price, C., Ricciuti, A., Thompson, W., & Vaden-Kiernan, M. (1997). Prospects: Final

report on student outcomes. Bethesda, MD: Abt Associates. Race to the Top fund. (2009). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education. Rodgers, A., & Rodgers, E. M. (2007). The effective literacy coach: Using inquiry to support teaching and learning.

New York: Teachers College Press. Sénéchal, M., & LeFevre, J. A. (2002). Parental involvement in the development of children’s reading skill:

A five-year longitudinal study. Child Development, 73, 445–460. U.S. Department of Education. (1997). Reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act.

Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education. U.S. Department of Education. (2004). Reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act.

Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education. Vogt, M. E. & Shearer, B. A. (2013). Reading specialists and literacy coaches in the real world, 3rd ed. Boston, MA:

Pearson.

424

A A P P E N D I X

1. School Information Form 425 2. Student Interview for Primary Students 428 3. Parent/Guardian Interview 433 4. Student Interview for Middle and High School Students 440

Appendix A 425

SCHOOL INFORMATION FORM

Student’s Name: _____________________ Grade: _____ Date: _____________________

School or Organization Name: _______________________________________________

Teacher Requesting Information: ____________________________________________

Person Providing Information: ____________________ Position or Title: ___________

School Attendance How long has this student attended this school?

Please describe regularity of attendance.

Reading Performance Is this student having problems in reading?

Please describe these problems.

When were these problems first noticed?

Please describe this student’s areas of strength in reading.

Please describe this student’s areas of weakness in reading.

426 Appendix A

Please describe the reading instruction provided, including whether reading is taught as a separate subject, whether students are grouped and which group this student is in, whether classes are changed, whether a reading series or separate reading book is used for instruction, and what supplementary materials are used.

Please list some books this student is reading.

Please describe this student’s progress in other areas, such as spelling, writing, math, science, social studies, and gym.

Please describe any help this student receives in addition to regular classroom instruction.

Please describe the student’s independence and ability to complete tasks, follow directions, and pay attention.

What kinds of homework is this student given? Is it usually completed?

Does this student read for pleasure?

Does this student seem tired at school?

Does this student seem to have any vision or hearing problems?

Appendix A 427

How does this student’s physical development compare to that of other students?

How does this student’s oral language compare to that of other students?

Has any testing been done at school? If so, please provide a summary below or attach information with the returned form.

428 Appendix A

STUDENT INTERVIEW FOR PRIMARY STUDENTS

Name: ____________________ Age: _____ Grade: _____ Date: ___________________

Who lives at home with you?

What are some things that you and your family do together?

What are some of your favorite books?

Do you read at home?

Do you have a computer at home?

If yes, what kinds of things do you like to do on the computer?

Do you have electronic games at home?

If yes, what kinds of games do you like to play?

Do you get books from the library or store?

What are some of your favorite TV shows?

Appendix A 429

What are some of your favorite movies and videos?

Who are some of your favorite people on TV or in movies?

What kinds of music do you like?

What are some of your favorite songs?

Who are some of your favorite singers?

Do you like sports?

If yes:

What is your favorite sport?

What is your favorite team?

Who is your favorite athlete?

What sports do you play?

Do you have any pets? What kinds?

430 Appendix A

Do you have any chores to do at home?

What is your favorite subject in school?

What are some subjects you don’t like?

Do you have reading groups at school, or does the whole class read together?

What are the names of some books you are reading in school?

What happens in your class during reading time?

Do you like learning to read?

If you could change one thing about your reading class, what would it be?

Do you have computers in your classroom or do you go to a computer lab at school?

If yes, when do get to use the computer at school?

Appendix A 431

What are your favorite things to do on the computer(s) at school?

What kind of homework do you have?

Who are your best friends?

Who are your friends in school?

What are some things you like to do with your friends?

Do you ever have trouble hearing things?

Do your eyes ever hurt?

Do you ever have trouble seeing the board at school?

Do you have a regular chalkboard at your school or a whiteboard?

Do you have a smartboard, connected to a computer, at your school?

Do you ever have trouble seeing the print in books?

432 Appendix A

What clubs do you belong to?

What are you interested in?

Do you take any special lessons outside of school?

What do you want to do when you grow up and finish school?

Why do people read?

What do you do when you come to something you don’t know while you are reading?

Who is the best reader you know?

What makes this person such a good reader?

Appendix A 433

PARENT/GUARDIAN INTERVIEW

Student’s Name: ______________ Age: _____ Grade: _____ Birth Date: ___________

Person Being Interviewed: ______________ Relationship to Student: ______________

Person Conducting Interview: ____________________ Date of Interview: __________

Can you tell me three positive things about your child?

1.

2.

3.

Environmental Information Home Environment

Members of Family Present in Home:

Name Relationship to Student Age Birthplace Occupation

Family Members Not Living in Home:

Name Relationship to Student Age Birthplace Occupation

434 Appendix A

Please describe any reading or learning problems experienced by family members.

What reading activities, including reading to or with your child, are done at home?

Please describe your child’s TV viewing.

What are your child’s responsibilities at home?

What are the attitudes of family members toward reading?

Does your family have a computer?

If yes, how often does your child use the computer?

If yes, what kinds of things does your child do on the computer?

School Environment Please describe your child’s preschool and kindergarten experiences.

At what age did your child enter first grade?

Appendix A 435

Please describe your child’s reading experiences in first grade.

Has your child repeated any grade?

If so, why?

Please describe your child’s current school and classes, including any special placements, such as special education or bilingual instruction.

What kind of homework does your child usually have?

How does your child do in other areas, such as math, spelling, handwriting, social studies, and science?

Does your child have access to computers at school?

If yes, are the computers in the classroom(s) or in a computer lab?

If yes, how often does your child get to use the computer at school?

If yes, what kinds of things does your child do on the computer at school?

436 Appendix A

Has your child’s school attendance been regular?

Please describe any extended absences from school.

Please describe your child’s reading instruction, including grouping within the class, if any.

Does your child receive any special help in school? If so, please describe.

Please describe any testing your child has experienced.

Please describe any help your child has received outside of school, such as summer school or tutoring.

When did you first become concerned about your child’s reading?

Can you think of anything that might have contributed to your child’s reading problem?

Social and Cultural Environment Please describe your child’s relationship with other family members.

Appendix A 437

What are your child’s interests and leisure activities?

Please describe your child’s friends and social group.

Information About the Individual Physical Information How would you compare your child’s physical development with that of other children of the same age?

Please describe the pregnancy, delivery, and early history of your child.

Please describe your child’s general health.

Please describe any specific illnesses, allergies, or accidents.

Is your child taking any medications? If so, please list and describe.

Has your child ever been unconscious? If so, please describe the circumstances.

438 Appendix A

Does your child seem to have any difficulty maintaining attention?

When is the last time your child’s hearing was tested?

Who tested your child’s hearing, and what were the recommendations?

Has your child ever experienced a hearing loss?

When is the last time your child’s vision was tested?

Who tested your child’s vision, and what were the results?

Emotional Information Does your child seem to be happy?

Does your child exhibit any signs of emotional tension or lack of self-confidence? If so, please describe.

What is your child’s attitude toward reading?

Appendix A 439

Language Development What languages are spoken in your home?

What languages does your child speak?

How did your child’s early language development compare to that of others?

Has your child received any bilingual or English as a second language (ESL) services?

Has your child received any speech or language therapy?

Comments and Suggestions Is there anything else we should know about in working with your child?

Does your child have any special needs that we should take into consideration?

440 Appendix A

STUDENT INTERVIEW FOR MIDDLE AND HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS

Name: ______________________ Age: _____ Grade in School: _____________________

Person Conducting Interview: _____________________ Date: ___________________

Home Life How many people are there in your family?

Names Relationship to You

Do you have jobs around the house? If yes, what are they?

What do you usually do after school?

Do you have a TV in your room?

How much time would you say you spend watching TV each day?

Do you have a certain time to go to bed during the week?

What time do you usually go to bed on a school night?

Do you belong to any clubs at school or outside of school?

Appendix A 441

If yes, what are they?

What are some things you like to do with your family?

Do you have a computer at home?

If yes, where is the computer?

If yes, what do you like to do on the computer?

If yes, how often do you use the computer?

Do you have electronic games at home?

If yes, what kinds of games do you like to play?

School Environment Do you like school?

What is your favorite class?

442 Appendix A

What classes do you not like?

How much homework do you usually have on a school night?

What kinds of homework do you usually have?

Do you have a special place to study at home?

Does anyone help you with your homework?

If yes, who?

Do you have computers in your classrooms?

Do you go to computer lab?

How often do you get to use the computer at school?

What kinds of things do you do on the computers at school?

Appendix A 443

What kind of reader do you consider yourself? [Good, not so good]

If good: What do you think has helped you most to become a good reader?

If not so good: What do you think causes someone to not be a good reader?

Is there anything you can think of that would help you get better at reading?

Do you like to write?

If yes, what kinds of writing do you like to do?

Do you do much writing at school?

What kinds of writing do you do at school?

What kinds of writing assignments do you like?

What kinds do you dislike?

444 Appendix A

If you went to a new school, what is one thing you would like the teachers to know about you?

If you were helping someone learn to read, what would be the most important thing you could do to help that person?

How does knowing how to read help people?

Social Life What do you like to do after school and on weekends?

Who are your best friends?

Do any of your best friends go to your school?

What do you like to do with your friends?

Do you like music?

If yes, what kinds?

Appendix A 445

If yes, who is your favorite singer/band?

What are your favorite TV shows?

Who are your favorite people on TV?

Do you like movies or videos?

If yes, what kinds of movies do you like?

If yes, who are your favorite people in the movies?

Do you like sports?

If yes, what kinds of sports do you play?

If yes, what kinds of sports do you like to watch?

If yes, what is your favorite team?

If yes, who are your favorite athletes?

446 Appendix A

If you could read a book about anything, what would you choose?

What is your favorite book?

Do you like to read print books or electronic books/tablets?

Do you have any favorite magazines?

Do you read the newspaper?

If yes, what parts do you usually read?

447

B A P P E N D I X

Accompanying teacher protocols and administration and analysis guide can be found on MyEducationLab in the Chapter Resources section of Chapter 5.

1. Word Lists A–J 448 2. Oral Reading Passages 450 3. Silent Reading Passages 456

448 Appendix B

Word List A

play run day she a this with and make yes pet is they jump in it he home like ride said good dog the to          

Word List B

his sat saw made green mother dad next duck fast frog got animals still swim why tree bed went then rock over house box lake          

Word List C

other family brother noise best hurt children clean baked sounded doctor leg stay chairs cake bark tiger soon grandma watch heard stuck zoo again coming          

Word List D

camp packed teeth seemed shirts world year clothes kitchen forever tent playground spend dressed eggs hundreds knew classroom whole brushed toast shorts teacher card week          

Word List E

miserable discovered underwater accident underneath bandage chosen unusual camera maple screeched reporters parents seaweed capture excitement rescue information study dusk film dangerous arrived passengers harbor          

Appendix B 449

Word List F

champion performance athlete permit mountainside skater junior confidence slopes challenger instruction competes countless convince gear ladybug article represent daybreak sunrise approval brilliant national icicles disappointment

Word List G

placid nightfall cramped destruction injured surroundings rainfall rampaging woodpile mechanic spectacular belongings roused restore frontier adventurous continuous thrashed ranger reassured refreshing tensions thunderbolts camper civilization

Word List H

sunup parallel acknowledged veterinarian observation perspiration effective midafternoon biology orangutan embarrassment downpour inspection recommended specialize frustration alternate enterprising zookeeper equipped drainage rainwater declined placement surgery

Word List I

algebra bolstered appreciative tolerated contempt comical mistrust perceived coordination gymnastics bifocals expectation confront acrobatic cartwheel desperation quizzical ample inseparable unison computation cartoonist alternative enthusiastically elegance

Word List J

excelled overpowering corrugated journalist devastated biological hysteria innermost correspondent phenomenal dissecting preserved administrator southeastern inclination agonizing contemplation disheartened eroded prestigious envision dismantled extensive seacoasts ambassadors

450 Appendix B

ORAL READING PASSAGES

Jill and Pat Make a Cake

Jill likes to play with Pat. They like to run and jump. They like to ride bikes, too. One day, they wanted to make a cake. Jill asked her mom if they could make a

cake in her house. Jill’s mom said “no.” She did not have time to help. Jill and Pat went to Pat’s house. Pat asked her mom if they could make a cake in

her house. Pat’s mom said “yes.” Jill and Pat made a cake. Pat’s mom helped. It was good.

Nick’s Trip to the Lake

Nick and his dad like animals. One day, Nick and his dad went to the lake. They went to see the animals. They sat next to the lake. They were very still.

Then Nick saw a big duck. He saw the duck swim to a big rock in the lake. Some- thing made the duck fly away fast.

Nick asked his dad, “Why did the duck fly away?” Nick’s dad said, “Look over there.” He showed Nick something in the lake. Nick

thought he would see something big. What a surprise to see a little green frog!

Ben Helps His Mom

Ben was sad. He wanted to go to the park with the other children. But his mom said he had to stay home.

Ben’s grandma was coming to see his family. He had to help clean the house. Ben had to put away his toys. He had to make his bed. He had to move the chairs.

Then Mom cleaned the floor. Then he had to watch his baby brother while Mom baked a cake. At last, Grandma’s car was coming down the road! She got out of the car. She

had a big box. Ben heard a noise. It came from the box. It sounded like a bark!

Appendix B 451

Danny Goes to Camp

Danny is very happy this morning! This is the first day of camp. Last year, Danny went to day camp. This year, he can spend nights at camp. He is going to stay a whole week, just like his brother.

Last night, Danny packed his clothes. This morning, he dressed himself and brushed his teeth. Then he went to the kitchen. Danny’s dad gave him some eggs and toast. But Danny was too happy to eat!

Danny’s dad drove him to camp. The trip seemed like it would take forever. Finally, they came to the camp. There were hundreds of boys and girls all dressed in blue shorts and yellow shirts. As soon as the car stopped, Danny saw his friend Joe. Joe told him they would be sleeping in the same tent. Danny knew this would be a great week!

Kay’s Island Home

Kay lives on an island far out in the ocean. You may think that it would be fun to live on an island. But Kay is miserable. Kay hasn’t seen her friends in a year. There is no one to play with or talk to. There isn’t even a school!

Why has Kay’s family chosen such a lonely life? Kay’s parents study animals that only live in the harbor of this island. But Kay’s dad knows how unhappy Kay is. He wants to do something to make her happy.

Kay’s dad discovered a new kind of fish. It has bright orange fins and a blue tail. Dad named this unusual fish after Kay. He calls it the Kayfish. It hides in the seaweed. It only comes out in the morning and at dusk.

Kay’s dad takes his underwater camera to the harbor every day. He hopes to cap- ture the Kayfish on film. Maybe someday her dad will learn enough about the Kayfish. Then Kay can go back to her old school. Then she can see all her old friends again. Kay hopes that day will come soon.

Jessie, Champion Skater

More than anything, Jessie wants to be a champion skater! She can’t remember a time she didn’t want to skate or a time she didn’t want to be the best.

Jessie began skating instruction when she was three years old. In her first ice show, she played the part of a ladybug. She still remembers her red-and-black spotted costume. Most of all, Jessie remembers the audience clapping their approval of her first performance.

452 Appendix B

Jessie doesn’t have much time for ice shows anymore. Now she must practice jumps and turns. When Jessie was six, she started skating in contests for ages six to twelve. By the time she was eight, Jessie was the junior state champion. Now that she is thirteen, Jessie competes with adults. She is the state champion in ice skating.

Last week, a sports writer wrote an article about Jessie’s performance. It said she was a “brilliant young athlete.” It said her skating showed “confidence and grace.” Jessie thought about the countless falls she had taken to make each jump look perfect. She didn’t feel very graceful or confident!

Next week, Jessie will represent her state in a national meet. This will be the first time she has skated at this level. She hopes all her practice and hard work will pay off. Jessie hopes that her confidence and grace will help her win.

Ted’s Camping Trip

Ted’s family was taking one last camping trip before school started. They found the perfect campsite! It was just where a clear stream trickled into placid Green Lake. The surroundings were ideal. Ted and his brothers could swim to their hearts’ content. They could row into hidden coves along the shore. It was a perfect place to fish or relax.

The first two days were great, with spectacular sunrises and adventurous days. The nights were cool and refreshing. Just before nightfall on the third day, a rainfall began. Everyone joked and laughed as they packed their belongings. But, by the sec- ond day of continuous rain, tensions rose. The four boys grew tired of sharing their cramped tent. Late that night, Ted was awakened by a loud crash. He realized he was floating! Their quiet stream had become a rampaging river and their tent had been washed into it! Ted roused his brothers and they thrashed about in the darkness as they struggled to pull themselves onto the riverbank. Streaks of lightning flashed across the sky. Thunderbolts shook the earth. The storm raged through the night.

Near daybreak, the lightning and thunder ceased. The brothers could see the path of destruction left by the storm. The huge oak across the stream had been struck down. Now it was no more than a jumbled woodpile. Their canoes had been tossed about the shore like toys. They worked hard all morning to restore their campsite. During lunch, a park ranger came by to see if they were okay. He told them a camper had been injured when a tree was hit by lightning and fell on his tent. Ted and his brothers were lucky to have escaped with only scratches and bruises.

Appendix B 453

Mike’s New Bike

Mike squinted at the midday sky. He had been working since sunup and needed a break. Wiping the perspiration from his face, he continued his exhausting work.

Mike had been working all summer to earn enough money for a new bike. His ancient, beaten-up bike was a total embarrassment. But his mom said they couldn’t afford a new one. Even though Mike knew she was right, in his frustration, he shouted back at her, “You never give me anything!”

He only needed fifty more dollars. Mr. Painter had offered him forty dollars to dig a new drainage ditch. He wanted to stop the flooding in his rose garden. Mr. Painter wanted the new ditch to run parallel to the old one. Mike didn’t think that would be effective in a downpour. So he suggested an alternate plan to direct the rainwater away from the house.

Mike noticed Mr. Painter watching him from behind a curtain. Knowing the old grouch, he’d deduct that little brow-wiping break from his pay. As he returned to his work, Mike waved. Mr. Painter acknowledged the wave and disappeared.

Mike worked steadily until midafternoon. Then Mr. Painter came out for an inspection. “Why don’t you lay off for today and get a fresh start tomorrow?”

“I’d rather finish up,” replied Mike. “It’s supposed to rain tonight, and I’d like to have this operational before the next storm.”

About six-thirty, Mike laid the last pipe in place. As he was returning the tools to the shed, Mr. Painter walked up, “Mike, you’re an enterprising young man. You don’t see many young people these days who care about their work.” He handed Mike an envelope and went to inspect his roses.

When Mike opened the envelope, he counted three twenty-dollar bills. He ran to catch Mr. Painter and started to hand one back to him. Mr. Painter declined the offer, “Take it as thanks for keeping an old man from making the same mistake twice.”

In Trouble Again

I knew I shouldn’t be drawing in algebra class, but I just couldn’t resist. Mr. Galvin had such a comical look as he peered over his bifocals at Jamie’s futile attempt to solve the problem on the board. Maybe I could call this brilliant work of art “Galvin-eyes” or something equally insulting.

I suddenly realized Mr. Galvin was calling my name, “Peter, what is your solu- tion to this problem?” Oh no, Mr. Galvin was walking in my direction! If I got in trouble again, I could be suspended. In desperation, I tried to adjust my book to cover the drawing, but it was too late. “Peter, have you completed the computation for problem number seven?”

454 Appendix B

Even though I hadn’t even started the problem, I replied in my most respectful tone, “Not quite, sir.” When he stopped at the front of the row, it bolstered my con- fidence. “I’ll have it done in just a couple of minutes.” Why did I always have to open my big mouth, instead of leaving well enough alone? Now he was coming directly toward my desk.

Mr. Galvin, in a tone of total mistrust, suggested, “Why don’t you come to the board and show us how far you’ve gotten, and perhaps your classmates can help you complete the problem?”

As I fumbled for an answer, Mr. Galvin reached my desk. He lifted my book with the expectation of finding a partially solved algebra problem. Instead, he found a drawing of himself, bifocals and all, glaring at Jamie with a quizzical look on his face. At least I hadn’t had time to write the caption!

“Peter!” boomed Mr. Galvin, “just what do you expect to make of yourself with this kind of behavior?”

Without thinking how it might be taken, I replied, “A cartoonist.” Wrong answer! The class gave an appreciative round of applause. But Mr. Galvin

perceived this as yet another attempt on my part to confront him. Once again, I had tried to undermine his authority with the class.

I had ample opportunity to think of alternative replies while I waited in the assistant principal’s office.

Biology Woes

James had always excelled in science, winning every science fair and making straight As. But this year, he would be taking Biological Studies, and he knew that meant dissecting animals. He was agonizing over the thought of cutting up a creature that had been alive. He couldn’t even envision cutting into a cockroach—and he hated those! James started the summer with an overpowering fear of embarrassing himself. By July, he had worked himself into a state of near hysteria.

To solve his problem, James bought a dissecting kit to practice. Inside the kit, he found an address to order preserved animals. After some contemplation, James chose an earthworm, a crawfish, a frog, and a snake.

When the animals arrived, James carefully dismantled the corrugated box so he wouldn’t damage the contents. When he reached the innermost container, he was shocked beyond words! There must have been a mistake. Not only were these animals not preserved, they weren’t even dead! James looked at the order form and discovered his mistake. He had marked the wrong code!

Appendix B 455

Suddenly, James was the proud owner of four creatures who were very much alive. He had no idea what to feed any of these animals nor any desire to find out. Deciding to dispose of them as quickly as possible, he biked to the nearest pet shop to sell the animals. The manager told him they only bought from licensed dealers. He tried the administrator of the zoo, but she didn’t have room for any more animals just now. James was disheartened. He realized he would have to accept responsibility for the animals himself.

First, James went to the library. There he learned that the animals would have to be housed in separate containers. He went back to the pet store and bought four small aquariums. By the end of the summer, James had learned an extensive amount of information about his new pets. What had started as a dissection project had turned into a valuable study of live animals.

456 Appendix B

SILENT READING PASSAGES

Bill Wants a Pet

Bill wanted a pet. He asked his mom for a pet. She said he had to wait. One day, Bill saw a little dog. The dog was crying. Bill said, “This dog is lost.” Bill took the dog home. Bill’s mom saw the dog. Bill asked, “May I keep it?” Bill’s mom said he could keep the dog. Bill had a pet!

Jane and Meg’s House

Jane and Meg are friends. One day, Meg went to Jane’s house to play. They went outside. Jane showed Meg a big tree. Jane said, “I want to make a

house next to this tree.” Meg said, “I know! Come to my house! My mother just got a new bed. It came

in a very big box. Maybe we can have the box for our house.” Meg and Jane went to Meg’s house. They asked Meg’s mother if they could have

the box. Meg’s mother said “yes.” Jane and Meg took the box to make a house. They had fun.

Jan’s Favorite Book

Jan loves to read books! Most of all, Jan loves books about animals. She likes books about dogs that help

put out fires. She likes books about cats that get stuck in trees. The best book is about a doctor. The doctor in the book takes care of animals.

Jan loves to read about him. In the book, a tiger at the zoo was hurt. The doctor came to the zoo. He put

something on the tiger’s leg. Soon the tiger was well again. When Jan grows up, she wants to be a doctor. She will take care of animals, too.

Appendix B 457

Sarah’s New Teacher

Today is the first day of school. But Sarah doesn’t want to go. This year, Sarah was supposed to have Mrs. Black for her teacher. But last June, Mrs. Black told the class she wouldn’t be back this year. She told them their new teacher would be very nice.

Mrs. Black is the best teacher in the world! Last year, sometimes the big girls on the playground wouldn’t let Sarah and her friends jump rope. Then Mrs. Black would come out to turn the rope just for them. Sarah doesn’t think a new teacher will do that.

Sarah was surprised when she got to her classroom. The new teacher’s name was Mr. Black. He said, “Good morning, boys and girls. My name is Mr. Black. I am married to Mrs. Black. I will be your new teacher. Mrs. Black asked me to tell you that she had a baby on Friday. I brought a picture of Mrs. Black and the baby.” Sarah and her friends made a card for Mrs. Black and the baby. Maybe the new teacher wouldn’t be so bad after all.

The Accident

Yesterday, Bill’s dad ran into the kitchen, shouting, “There has been an acci- dent!” He told Bill to call the police. He said to tell them a bus had hit a car at the corner of Oak and Maple Streets.

Bill wanted to go back to the corner with his dad. He wanted to join the excite- ment. But his dad said it was too dangerous. Bill watched out the window as his dad ran back out to the street. He hoped his dad wouldn’t go on the bus. It was leaning against a wall. The car was underneath the bus and gas was all over the ground.

But his dad did go back on the bus. Bill watched as his dad carried people from the bus to the grass. Bill saw his dad carry a little girl from the bus. She was clinging to a teddy bear. He said, “Thank goodness, that’s the last one!” Just then, a truck screeched to a stop as the rescue workers arrived. The rescue workers rushed to care for the people who were hurt. They even put a bandage on the little girl’s bear! Then the news reporters arrived. They wanted information about Bill’s dad. This morning there was a picture of Bill’s dad in the paper. Under the picture, in big print, it said, “LOCAL HERO SAVES PASSENGERS.”

458 Appendix B

Josh’s Ski Trip

At daybreak, Josh looked out the window of the cabin. He looked through the icicles to the snow-covered mountainside. He couldn’t wait to get out on the slopes! This year he would get to go on the Challenger Slope. He wanted to feel the wind rushing past his face as he raced down the hill.

When Josh’s family went to Bear Mountain last year, Josh was the best skier in his class. But he was too short, and the ski patrol wouldn’t permit him on the more difficult slopes. He tried to convince the captains of the ski patrol. He knew he was good enough to go on the tougher slopes, but they wouldn’t bend the rules for anyone.

But during the long summer months, Josh had grown to five feet, seven inches, and nobody could stop him now! It was the first ski trip of the new season. The moun- tain was just outside the window, but everyone else was still sleeping peacefully. Josh couldn’t stand it any longer! In silence, he picked up his boots and goggles and crept downstairs. He quietly lifted his gear down from the rack and slipped out the door.

The morning was perfect! The air was crisp, and the snow sparkled in the sunrise like silver as Josh made his way to the ski lift. He was anxious to feel the wind in his face. What a disappointment when he saw the new sign: “No children under fifteen without an adult!”

Grandpa’s Farm

Sometimes Beth hated towns and cities! They were taking over, and the farms and open land were disappearing. Beth wished she could live on a farm, but her dad was a mechanic. He repaired machinery for a mill in town.

Beth’s favorite times were spent with Grandpa on his farm. Beth spent almost all her weekends with Grandpa. On cool evenings, Grandpa would light a fire. Beth loved to read by the firelight, just like girls did when this was the frontier.

On Saturday mornings, Grandpa was always up early, ready for his long day of chores. First, the pigs had to be fed, and the chicken coop had to be cleaned. Then the stallion had to be brushed. When Beth was little, Grandpa let her help milk the cows, but now he used milking machines.

In the afternoon, Beth and Grandpa walked the horses. This was Beth’s favorite chore. Grandpa’s favorite place to walk the horses was Bear Mountain. It took most of the afternoon to ride all the way out to the mountain and back. Grandpa and Beth always packed a snack to eat on the mountaintop. As they shared their fruit and milk, they talked. Grandpa told her how much he liked to look out over the farms and towns for miles. These trips to the mountain reassured Beth. They showed her that there was still enough land and open spaces. They helped her to feel less closed in by civilization.

Appendix B 459

Pam’s New Job

More than anything, Pam wanted to be a veterinarian. She was great with ani- mals. For the last two years, Pam had volunteered at the zoo. But this summer, she was going to be paid. Pam’s biology teacher had recommended her to work in a special science program.

Pam was disappointed when she found out she was assigned to the zoo nursery. Pam didn’t want to feed a bunch of baby animals. She had hoped for something more exciting, like reptiles. Pam decided to talk to the zoo’s vet, Dr. Mack. Maybe she would understand how Pam felt, and Pam could ask her to convince the zookeeper to change her placement.

When Pam arrived at the zoo, Dr. Mack was in the nursery. There had been an emergency, and Dr. Mack had been called to help. The nurse asked Pam to wait for Dr. Mack in the observation room. She was surprised to find that the observation room overlooked a small operating room. There she saw Dr. Mack, working franti- cally to save a baby orangutan. After several minutes, the tiny ape started to breathe on its own, and Dr. Mack came out to greet Pam, “I thought we were going to lose her! Since we rescued her from a fire, we’ve been trying to bottle-feed her, but suddenly she stopped breathing. The nurse called me because I specialize in great apes. Now that I’m sure she’ll be all right, how can I help you?”

“I’m glad she’s going to be okay,” replied Pam. “I didn’t know you were equipped for surgery.”

“That’s why we need someone like you. We just added the hospital last winter. We had it built in the nursery because it had separate rooms to house sick or injured animals. We need someone who can handle frightened animals and comfort them while they wait for surgery and while they recover. Now, what was it you wanted to discuss?”

Pam replied, “I think you’ve answered all my questions. When can I start?”

Gym Class

Sometimes, Debbie wondered how she and Kim even tolerated each other, much less remained best friends. While Debbie was outgoing, Kim was quiet and shy. While Debbie was famous for her total lack of coordination, Kim was the most acrobatic person in the entire school. Yet the girls were inseparable, best friends since kindergarten. They were thrilled to find out they would be in gym class together. But as usual, they had opposite opinions about actually taking gym. Kim greeted the class enthusiastically, and Debbie had nothing but contempt for it.

460 Appendix B

Today, they began the gymnastics unit, and Debbie wished she could crawl into a deep hole and disappear. Down the hall came the new gymnastics teacher, Ms. Bain. She announced that today they would be tumbling. Then Ms. Bain described some of the moves the girls would be doing, the forward roll, the backward roll, and the cartwheel.

Ms. Bain asked if anyone could demonstrate any of the moves for the class. The whole class sang out in unison, “Kim!” Then Ms. Bain asked Kim if she had taken les- sons, and she nodded shyly. When Ms. Bain asked if Kim had gotten far enough along to demonstrate any of these moves, the class giggled. Debbie realized that Kim was too modest to tell Ms. Bain the truth, so she spoke up proudly, “Ms. Bain, Kim is the state champion in gymnastics. She’s a competitor at the national level.”

Ms. Bain smiled at Kim and said, “Maybe you could give us a demonstration of the routine you performed at the state meet.” With some encouragement from her classmates, Kim agreed to show the class part of her tumbling routine.

As Debbie watched in admiration, Kim stepped onto the floor mat. As soon as she started to perform, her whole personality changed. Usually, Kim was awkward in front of people, but when she stepped onto the gym floor, her body became elegance in motion. Kim’s normal shyness disappeared, and she seemed to be an actress playing the part of a gymnast. Even Ms. Bain was taken aback! She applauded approvingly and said she hoped Kim would invite her to the next meet.

Kate Becomes a Journalist

Kate’s greatest ambition is to be a journalist. Throughout her high school years, she has been a photographer for the school newspaper. Now she is the senior editor of the school paper, but her goal is to be a foreign correspondent. Kate is taking a class in photography and learning how to use pictures to tell a story. Kate would like to find a way to combine writing about international relations and pho- tography, perhaps writing for a news magazine or for a TV news show but using her own photographs.

Two years ago, Kate’s history class took a trip to the southeastern states. She took her camera and photographed the eroded seacoasts. When Kate’s pictures were published in the local newspaper, there were many letters to the editor prais- ing her work.

Last year, when Kate was a junior, her class went to Mexico. Kate took pictures of how the recent earthquake had devastated the entire region. When Kate showed her pictures to the editor of the town newspaper, he asked her to write an article to go with her pictures. He told Kate that she had a unique talent for capturing people’s

Appendix B 461

attention with a profound photograph. He said if she wrote an article go with the pictures, people would understand the message in the photographs better. This time, public reaction was phenomenal! Kate could finally see a way to combine her ability to write with her interest in photography.

Now in her senior year, Kate is deciding where to go to college. Kate’s inclina- tion is to go to a prestigious college in Washington, DC, or New York. She wants to be near the ambassadors and diplomats. Kate has never abandoned her goal to be a foreign correspondent. She keeps that in mind through all her decisions.

462

Test Index

C Comprehensive Test of

Phonological Processing (CTOPP), 79–80, 159

D Diagnostic Assessment of

Reading, Second Edition (DAR), 79

Dynamic Indicators of Basic Literacy Skills (DIBELS), Sixth Edition, 78

E Early Reading Screening

Instruments (ERSI), 150 Expressive Vocabulary Test,

Second Edition (EVT-2), 152, 231, 258, 415

G Gates–MacGinitie Reading

Tests, Fourth Edition (GMRT4), 69, 71, 80, 231, 267

Gray Oral Reading Test, Fourth Edition (GORT4), 75

Gray Oral Reading Test, Fifth Edition (GORT5), 75

Group Reading Assessment and Diagnostic Evaluation (GRADE), 69, 71–72

I Iowa Test of Basic Skills, 69, 267

K Kaufman Assessment Battery for

Children, Second Edition (KABC-II), 27, 73, 82, 84–85, 86, 88, 153, 160, 408

Kaufman Brief Intelligence Test, Second Edition (KBIT-2), 85–86, 153, 159

Kaufman Test of Educational Achievement Second Edition (KTEA-II), 72–73, 85, 153, 157

Keystone Telebinocular Vision Tests, 36

N Names Test, 179–180

O Orthorater, 36

P Peabody Individual

Achievement Test–Revised/ Normative Update (PIAT-R/NU), 72

Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test, Third Edition (PPVT-III), 232

Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test, Fourth Edition (PPVT-IV), 80, 152, 231, 258, 296, 415

Q Qualitative Reading Inventory-5,

116, 118, 180, 303

S Slosson Intelligence Test,

Revised, Third Edition (SIT-R3), 85, 86, 82, 159

Standardized Reading Inventory, Second Edition (SRI-II), 75–76

Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scale, Fifth Edition (SB5), 82, 83–84

Stanford Diagnostic Reading Test, Fourth Edition (SDRT4), 70–71

T Test of Reading

Comprehension, Fourth Edition (TORC-4), 79

Test of Reading Comprehension, Third Edition (TORC-3), 79

Texas Primary Reading Inventory (TPRI), 78

W Wechsler Adult Intelligence

Scale–Fourth Edition (WAIS-IV), 82

Wechsler Individual Achievement Test, Third Edition (WIAT-III), 72, 73

Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children, Fourth Edition (WISC-IV), 27, 28, 82, 83, 87, 88, 160

Wechsler Preschool and Primary Scale of Intelligence–Third Edition (WPPSI-III), 82

Wide Range Achievement Test, Fourth Edition (WRAT-4), 72, 73–74

Woodcock-Johnson Psychoeducational Battery III (WJ-III), 73, 74–75, 88, 160

Diagnostic Reading Battery (WJ-III DRB), 76, 77–78, 267, 268

Norming Update, 85

Test Index 463

Tests of Cognitive Development, 86–87

Woodcock-Johnson Psychoeducational Battery IV (WJ-IV), 82

Woodcock Reading Mastery Tests–Revised (WRMT-R), 77, 267

Woodcock Reading Mastery Tests, Third Edition

(WRMT-III), 76–77, 179, 193, 221

Write to Learn, 333–334

464

Name Index

A Action for Children, 25 Adams, C., 5 Adams, M. J., 176, 182 Afflerbach, P., 121, 315 Akhondi, M., 319 Alber-Morgan, S. R., 264 Alexander, D., 313 Allbritton, D., 265 Allen, E. A., 159, 163, 182, 184 Allington, R., 131, 138, 201, 218 Allington, R. L., 23, 47, 54, 188,

283, 401, 402 Allor, J. H., 159 Almasi, J. F., 141 Alvermann, E., 280 Amanti, C., 228 American Academy

of Pediatrics, 36 Anderson, K. L., 134, 138 Anderson, N. L., 330 Anderson, R., 232, 234 Anderson, R. C., 47, 232, 241 Anderson, S., 340 Anderson, T. H., 318 Anselmi, T., 343 Applegate, A. J., 119, 202, 302 Applegate, M. D., 119, 202, 302 Armbruster, B. B., 318, 319,

373, 375 Arthur, S. V., 243 Artiles, A., 369 Asselin, M., 232 Atwell, N., 137 AuBuchon, C., 343 August, D., 34

B Baddely, A., 158 Baker, E., 348 Baker, K. S., 235

Bales, R. J., 280 Ball, E. W., 23, 156, 157 Banchero, S., 5 Barletta, L., 369 Baumann, J. F., 241, 314 Bean, R. M., 401, 402 Bear, D., 196, 218, 360 Beaver, J., 128, 131 Beck, I. L., 177, 182, 183, 232,

241, 246, 254 Becker, W., 396 Beers, K., 273 Bender, W., 9, 20, 393 Berglund, R. L., 209, 212, 214 Berra, Y., 82 Beweel, D., 287 Biehler, R., 376 Biemiller, A., 232, 235 Biggam, S. C., 128 Birdwell, J., 403 Birsh, J., 394 Bishop, A. G., 155, 156, 159 Blachman, B. A., 23, 156, 157 Blachowicz, C., 232, 233, 234,

241, 242, 243, 247, 248, 250, 343

Block, C. C., 141 Bloom, B., 302 Bolt, S., 69 Bonner, M., 73 Borman, G. D., 402, 404 Braden, J. P., 85, 85 Bradley, L. G., 350 Bransford, J. D., 129 Bridge, C. A., 268 Bridges, E. S., 347 Briggs, C., 330 Brimijoin, K., 9 Broaddus, K., 141 Brooks, T. E., 65 Brown, A. L., 129, 270, 337

Brown, K. J., 132 Brown, V. L., 79 Brozo, W. G., 128, 130 Bruner, E., 396 Brunsman, B. A., 78 Bryant, P., 75, 184 Bryk, A. S., 131 Burg, J., 348 Burke, C., 340 Burns, P., 377 Butler, F. A., 256 Button, K., 332 Byrne, B., 156

C Cahill, B., 348 Calderon, M., 369, 370, 373, 375 Caldwell, J. S., 97, 98, 105, 112,

114, 115, 116, 118, 119, 121, 122, 128, 130, 138, 142, 177, 178, 180, 182, 186, 188, 192, 196, 202, 205, 206, 209, 214, 245, 268, 270, 279, 282, 283, 284, 285, 299, 300, 302, 303, 307, 309, 311, 315, 317, 393

Calkins, L. M., 330, 332, 342 Cameto, R., 4 Campbell, T., 356 Cappelli, R., 330, 331, 342, 347,

350, 356 Carlson, J. F., 65 Carnine, D., 396 Carpenter, C. D., 73 Carr Edwards, E., 241 Carter, S., 352 Carver, R. B., 205, 227 Casey, K., 411 Castellon, M., 256 Catto, S. L., 128 Cawley, J. F., 332 Chall, J. S., 79, 228

Name Index 465

Chandler-Olcott, K., 135 Chard, D., 202 Chard, D. J., 235 Christensen, L., 229 Christian, D., 34 Chu, S., 339 Ciardiello, A. V., 119, 269, 302 Cizek, G. J., 75, 87 Clay, M. M., 131, 153, 154, 229,

256, 332 Cocking, R. R., 129 Colt, J. M., 128 Common Core State Standards

Initiative, 10, 14, 49, 56, 65, 120, 129, 130, 141, 151, 152, 153, 155, 156, 157, 162, 163, 177, 194, 203, 237, 238, 255, 256, 257, 283, 299, 301, 302, 313, 319, 324, 330, 331, 355

Cooley, W., 402 Cooter, R. B., 137 Coulter, W., 30 Council of Chief State School

Officers (CCSSO), 10, 14, 151, 152, 153, 155, 156, 157, 162, 163, 237, 238, 255, 256, 257, 283, 330, 331, 355

Coxhead, A., 256, 257 Coyne, M. D., 237 Crabtree, T., 264 Craig, S. H., 133, 144 Cramond, B., 136 Crawford, A., 269 Crawford, A. M., 49, 162 Cress, C., 176, 185 Critchley, M., 19 Crumpton, N. L., 75 Cruz, R., 247 Cullinan, B. E., 150 Cunningham, A., 128, 264 Cunningham, 264, 391, 392 Cunningham, J. W., 165,

188, 248 Cunningham, P., 201, 218 Cunningham, P. M., 54, 136, 165,

166, 167, 168, 169, 179, 185, 188, 190, 196, 237, 248, 361

Curtain, H., 373 Curtis, M. E., 79

D D’Agostino, J. V., 402 D’Amato, R. C., 84 Dahlberg, C., 373 Dahlene, K. F., 128, 212, 304 Dale, E., 234, 242 David, A. H., 227 Davidson, M., 205 de Jong, P., 34 Davis, F. B., 227 Defee, M., 128, 136 Deford, D. E., 131 Denner, P. R., 273, 275, 343 Deshler, D., 376, 377, 385 Dewitz, P., 119 Dewitz, P. K., 119 Dexter, D. D., 6 Díaz-Rico, L., 20, 370, 373 Division for Learning

Disabilities, 6, 385 Donnelly, K., 176, 185 Donovan, C. A., 350 Dooley, C. M., 153 Dorfman, L. R., 330, 331, 342,

347, 350, 356 Dorn, L. J., 323 Dougherty Stahl, K. A., 141 Downer, M., 184, 196 Dreyer, L. G., 128 Duffelmeyer, F. A., 179 Duffy, A.M., 47 Duffy, G., 47 Duke, N. K., 301, 350 Duncan, 403 Durkin, D., 271 Dwyer, J., 161 Dymock, S., 162, 264, 283 Dyson, A. H., 330

E Edmonds, M. S., 135 Educators Publishing Service, 396 Edwards, P. A., 133 Edwards Santoro, L., 235, 236 Egan, R., 373 Ehren, B. J., 130, 303 Ehri, L. C., 128, 132, 150, 160,

165, 175, 176, 177, 180, 357, 358

Eichelberger, R. T., 402 Elliott, L. N., 135 Ellis Weismer, S., 158 Emery, D. W., 286 Engelmann, S., 396 England, C., 78 Eppolito, A., 313

F Fairbanks, M., 232, 233, 234 Farr, R., 348 Farstrup, A. E., 47 Feazell, V. S., 212 Fielding, L., 232, 265, 275 Fielding-Barnsley, R., 156 Fields, M., 132 Figueredo, L., 133 Fisher, D., 276, 283 Fisher, P., 232, 234, 237, 241,

242, 243, 247, 248, 250, 343 Fitzgerald, J., 330 Fletcher, J., 30 Fletcher, J. S., 64 Fletcher, R., 330, 342, 347 Flugman, B., 128 Flynn, L, 376 Flynt, E. S., 137 Forbes, S., 131 Ford, M. P., 130, 304 Fountas, I. C., 360 Freebody, P., 241 Freeman, M. S., 332 Frey, N., 276 Froehlich, K. S., 413 Fry, E., 180, 182 Frye, B. J., 128 Fuchs, D., 5, 115, 205, 385 Fuchs, L. S., 5, 115, 205 Fugate, M. H., 72 Fuhrken, C., 287 Fuke, V., 347 Fyfe, S. A., 179

G Gajria, M., 314 Galda, L., 150 Gallagher, K., 342, 347, 350 Gambrell, L. B., 47, 266,

269, 280

466 Name Index

Ganske, K., 47, 336 Gardner, H., 27, 81, 393 Garza, N., 4 Gaskins, I. W., 176, 184, 185, 196 Gee, J. P., 228 Geiger, J. F., 282 Geisinger, K. F., 65 Gelzheiser, L. M., 130, 135,

144, 323 Genesee, F., 34 Gentry, J. R., 150, 154, 158, 159,

160, 330, 332, 357, 358, 359, 360, 361, 362

German, D., 34 Gernsbacher, M. A., 266, 280 Giacobbe, M. E., 351 Gillet, J. W., 49, 162, 357, 359,

360, 361, 362 Gillingham, M. G., 155, 394 Glasswell, K., 130, 304 Glenn, W. J., 331 Glick, L. C., 272 Goetze, S. K., 130, 139, 303,

304, 323 Golden, J., 266 Golding, J. M., 266 Goldman, S. R., 264, 267,

300, 301 González, N., 228 Good, R. H., 78, 205 Goodman, K. S., 112 Goswami, U., 184, 330 Goudvis, A., 141 Graesser, A., 266 Grant, M., 283 Grasser, A., 302 Graves, D. H., 336 Graves, M., 241, 242, 246 Gray, S., 158 Gredler, M. E., 153, 229 Greene, B. G., 330 Gross, A., 128 Gury, E. C., 128 Guthrie, J., 266

H Hall, D. P., 128, 136, 188, 196 Hall, L. A., 350 Hallgren-Flynn, L., 130, 323

Hamman, P., 203 Hammill, D. D., 79, 155, 156, 159 Hanner, S., 396 Hansen, J., 265 Harmon, J. M., 121 Harrison, S., 353 Harvey, S., 141 Hasbrouck, J., 115, 203, 205 Hasselhorn, M., 21 Havens, L., 352 Heathington, B. S., 269 Heckelman, R. G., 212 Henderson, E. H., 357 Henderson, S. C., 323 Herff Jones Achievement

Series, 11 Herman, P., 232, 234 Heubach, K., 136, 137 Heubach, K. M., 211 Hillocks, G., 354 Hiebert, E. H., 47, 128, 133, 202,

216, 256, 257 Hinchman, K. A., 135 Hibpshman, T. H., 86 Hirsch, E. D., 256 Ho, A., 339 Hoff, K. E., 74 Hoffner, H., 348 Hoien, T., 128, 131, 196 Holdaway, D., 163 Hollenbeck, A., 385 Holmes, V. M., 160 Holton, E. F., 406 Hoosain, R., 267 Horowitz, J., 264 Hosp, M. K., 115, 205 Hotz, R. L., 20 Houghton-Mifflin, 48 Howard, L., 235 Hudson, R., 213 Hughes, J. M., 347 Hughes, C. A., 6 Hurford, D. P., 79 Hurry, J., 183 Hutchison, A. C., 133

I Impara, J. C., 77 Inbeau, M. B., 8, 9

International Reading Association (IRA), 46, 150, 157, 404–405, 410

Invernizzi, M., 132, 142, 196, 218, 360

Ivey, G., 141

J Jacobs, V. A., 330, 332 Jahn, M. D., 46 Jamieson-Noel, D., 232 Jenkins, J. R., 30, 115, 205 Jennings, J. H., 245, 332 Jetton, T. L., 313 Jiao, H., 65 Jin, Z., 20 Jitendra, A. K., 314 Johns, B., 4, 20, 23, 25, 36, 54,

63, 82, 362, 369, 377, 387, 388, 393

Johns, J., 203 Johns, J. L., 209, 212, 214 Johnson, D., 347, 355 Johnson, G., 396 Johnson, J. A., 84 Johnson, J. C., 48, 58 Johnson, R. L., 153, 229 Johnston, F., 196, 218, 360 Johnston, F. P., 182 Johnston, P. H., 128, 144, 323,

330, 332, 333 Josel, C. A., 249, 279 Joshi, R. M., 227 Juel, C., 132

K Kame’nui, E. J., 115, 205,

237, 396 Kaminski, R. A., 78 Kamphaus, R. W., 86 Kane, M., 47 Kantrowitz, B., 389 Kapinus, B. A., 269 Kaplan, D., 82 Kaufman, A. S., 72, 82, 82, 83, 85 Kaufman, N. L., 72, 82, 83, 85 Kearns, G., 79, 232 Keillor, G., 66 Kesler, T., 237, 250

Name Index 467

Kieffer, M., 64 Kieffer, M. J., 257 Kindle, K. J., 237 King, A., 347 Kingston, N. M., 65 Kintsch, W., 130 Kirby, M. W., 128 Klenk, L., 128 Kline, F., 362 Klingner, J., 369 Klinger, J. K., 313 Knight, J., 128 Knokey, A., 4 Knowles, M. S., 406 Konrad, M., 164 Koskinen, P. S., 269 Krathwohl, D., 302 Krawiec, N., 21 Kremer, K. E., 264, 270 Kruse, A. E., 179 Kucan, L., 232 Kuhn, M. R., 128, 136, 137,

202, 209 Kush, J., 84 Kutiper, K., 255

L LaBerge, D., 96, 202 Land, R., 343 Lane, H. B., 139 Lansdown, S., 245 Lapp, D., 276, 283 Laster, B., 130, 303 Lavoie, R., 24 Lawrence, S. A., 355 Lazar, M., 402 League, M. B., 155, 156, 159 Ledbetter, M. F., 74 LeFevre, J. A., 418 Lehr, F., 373 Lerner, J. W., 4, 20, 23, 25, 36,

54, 63, 82, 85, 245, 362, 369, 373, 377, 387, 388, 393

Lesaux, N. K., 257 Leslie, L., 97, 98, 105, 112, 114,

115, 116, 118, 119, 121, 122, 128, 130, 138, 142, 178, 180, 182, 186, 188, 192, 196, 202, 209, 214, 268, 270, 282, 283,

284, 285, 299, 300, 302, 303, 307, 309, 311, 315, 317,

Lester, N. B., 332 Levine, P., 4 Li, X., 339 Lindamood, P., 396 Lindamood, R., 396 Lindamood-Bell Learning

Process, 396 Lindholm-Leary, K., 34 Linen-Thompson, S. R., 202 Lipson, M. Y., 144, 193, 264, 323 Long, D. L., 266 Lowenthal, B., 373 Lubliner, S., 257 Lucido, P., 264 Lyon, G., 4 Lyons, C. A., 128, 131

M MacDonald, C., 133 Mackenzie, K. K., 140 Macmillan/McGraw-Hill, 8 Macon, J., 287 Madle, R. A., 86 Maehler, C., 21 Maller, S. J., 83 Malone, A. M., 160 Marcell, B., 203 Margolis, H., 77 Markwardt, F. C., 72 Marshall, N., 264 Martin, B., 345 Martin, L. A., 47 Martinez, M., 287 Marzano, 256 Maslin, P., 47 Mather, N., 72, 159 Mathes, P. G., 131 Matthews, M. W., 153 Malayeri, F. A., 319 Mayer, R. E., 129 Mayher, J. S., 332 McCormack, R. L., 128, 130,

134, 212, 304 McCown, R., 376 McDill, E. L., 402, 404 McDonald, K., 287 McGee, L. M., 330

McGill-Franzen, A., 402 McGinley, W. J., 273, 275, 343 McGrew, K. S., 72, 73 McKeown, M. G., 232, 246, 264 McNeal, K., 355 McTighe, J., 9 Mead, F., 184 Medo, M. A., 128 Meisels, S. J., 205 Meisinger, E. B., 202 Mellard, D., 141 Mercuri, S. P., 213 Merkeley, D. J., 179 Merzenich, M., 30 Mesmer, H. A. E., 47 Miller, M. D., 73 Miller, S., 30 Miller-Whitehead, M., 75 Millis, K. K., 282 Moats, L., 2 Modla, V. B., 202 Moffett, J., 254 Mokhtari, K., 133 Moll, L. C., 228 Monroe, E. E., 352 Monroe, J. K., 47, 336 Montague, M., 21 Montgomery, J. W., 158 Moore, D., 243 Moore, D. W., 165, 248, 256 Moore, S. A., 165, 248 Moran, S., 81 Morgan, W. P., 19 Morris, D., 132, 150, 165 Morris, R., 20, 21, 27 Morrison, A., 313 Morrow, L. M., 47, 153, 157,

158, 161, 163, 209, 229, 269, 357

Morsy, L., 64 Moss, B., 299, 301, 320 Moxley, D. E., 410, 421 Munk, D. D., 421 Murray, B. A., 156 Myhre, O., 205

N Nagy, W., 232, 234 Nasland, J. C., 158

468 Name Index

National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 4

National Association for the Education of Young Children, 46, 150

National Clearinghouse of English Language Acquisition and Language Instruction Educational Programs (NCELA), 369

National Early Literacy Panel, 161

National Endowment for the Arts, 4

National Governors Association Center for Best Practices, 10, 14, 55, 151, 152, 153, 155, 156, 157, 162, 163, 237, 238, 255, 256, 257, 283, 330, 331, 355

National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, 37, 232

National Reading Panel (NRP), 4, 5, 7, 14, 37, 96, 155, 177, 201, 232, 270, 391, 411

Natriello, G., 402, 404 Navaez, L., 9 Nesheim, D. W., 137 Neuman, S. B., 161 Newcomer, P. L., 75 Newman, A. P., 4 Nicholson, C. L., 86 Niu, Z., 20 Nunes, S. R., 180

O O’Connell, T., 355 O’Conner, R., 20 O’Hara, C., 176, 185 Office of Special Education

Programs (OSEP), 7 Ogle, D., 232, 302 Olness, R., 339 Olson, A. M., 74 Olson, C. B., 343 Olson, J., 65

Omanson, R., 232, 264 Ortiz, A., 25 Orton, S., 19, 394 Osborn, J., 373 Oster, L., 140 Ouzts, S. M., 85 Ozuru, Y., 302

P Pace, A. J., 264 Padak, N. D., 48 Paige, D. D., 209 Palincsar, A., 270, 337 Palladino, P., 266 Paratore, J. R., 128, 212, 304 Paris, A. H., 153, 158, 229 Paris, S. G., 153, 156, 229, 265 Parker, M., 283 Parmar, R. S., 332 Parr, M., 356 Paterson, P. O., 135 Pearson, P. D., 141, 265, 275,

301, 330 Pearson Education Inc., 71 Peeling, T., 47, Pelekis, K., 272, 339, 355 Perfetti, C. A., 20, 142, 176, 246 Perkins, P., 347 Person, T., 131 Peterson, B., 141 Pfeiffer, W., 269 Phillips, C., 272, 339, 355 Phillips, G., 131 Piker, R. A., 205 Pinnell, G. S., 131, 360 Plake, B. S., 77 Podzielinski, M., 355 Portalupi, J., 330, 342 Pradl, G. M., 332 Prater, K., 213 Pressley, M., 121, 141, 264,

280, 315 Prevette, C., 128, 196 Price, C., 155 Puig, E. A., 413 Puma, M. J., 402 Purcell-Gates, V., 233, 350 Purves, A. C., 289

Q Quinn, K. B., 119, 302, 348

R Race to the Top, 404 Rakestraw, J. A., Jr., 264, 267,

300, 301 Raphael, T. E., 120 Rashotte, C. A., 79 Rasinski, T., 48, 202, 203,

209, 213 Rea, D. M., 213 Read, C., 357 Redenbach, H., 160 Reed, J., 131 Reschly, D., 30 Reutzel, D. R., 202, 209 Richards, H. C., 132, 201 Richek, M. A., 238, 239, 245,

248, 250, 252, 272, 275, 279, 289

Richgels, D. J., 330, 332 Richmond-Welty, E. D., 155 Risko, V. J., 347 Riverside Publishing

Company, 68 Roberts, R., 159 Robertson, R. R. W., 266 Rodgers, A., 413 Rodgers, E. M., 413 Rodriguez, M. C., 141 Roe, B., 377 Rogers, R., 289, 332, 333 Roid, G. H., 74, 82, 83 Rolfhus, E. L., 82 Rosemary, C. A., 132 Roser, N. L., 213 287 Roswell, F. G., 79 Rubadue, M., 339

S Sabers, D. L., 74 Sadowski, S., 280 Salvia, J., 69, 81 Samad, A. A., 319 Samuels, S. J., 47, 96, 202, 212 Sanchez, M., 370, 373, 375 Sandoval, J., 75, 83, 87

Name Index 469

Sanford, C., 4 Santa, C. M., 128, 131, 196,

352, 353 Saunders, W., 34 Savage, R. S., 159 Scanlon, D. M., 130, 133, 134,

138, 144, 323 Schafer, W. D., 74 Schickedanz, J. A., ‘156, 164 Schmar-Dobler, E., 301 Schneider, W., 158 Schrank, F. A., 72 Schuchardt, K., 21 Schwanenflugel, P. J., 202 Scott Foresman, 48 Scott, J. A., 47, 232, 234, 247 Sebesta, S., 289 Seltzer, M., 131 Semel, E. M., 32 Sénéchal, M., 418 Serra, K. K., 314 Shanahan, S., , 163, 266, 286 Shanahan, T., 34, 78, 150, 161,

163, 227, 266, 270, 271, 286, 330, 337

Shapiro, S., 255, 256 Shaw, S. R., 86 Shaywitz, B., 20, 21, 27 Shaywitz, S., 20, 21, 27, 37, 389 Shearer, B., 128 Short, R. A., 47, 128 Silbert, J., 396 Silver, A., 25 Silverstein, S., 356 Simmons, D., 115, 205 Simmons, D. C., 237 Siok, W. T., 20 Skobel, B., 247 Slavin, R., 369, 370 Slosson, R. L., 86 Smith, P., 131 Snider, V. E., 264 Snow, C., 64 Snowman, J., 376 Solan, H., 36 Solomon, A., 76 Soter, A. O., 289 Sousa, D., 389, 393

Southwest Educational Development Laboratory, 205

Spache, G. D., 94, 111 Spear-Swerling, L., 175, 176 Spence, L. K., 336 Spies, R. A., 67, 79 Spinelli, C., 372, 374, 375 Stahl, S., 136, 137, 156 Stahl, S. A., 180, 181, 182, 194,

201, 202, 209, 211, 216, 232, 233, 234

Stallings, J. A., 128 Stanovich, K. E., 23, 101, 156,

176, 202, 228, 233, 264 Stauffer, R. G., 162, 238, 276 Sternberg, R. J., 81–82, 175, 176 Stevens, B. A., 76 Stevens, R., 256 Stillman, B., 394 Stoodt-Hill, B., 377 Stoolmiller, M., 237 Strait, J., 128 Strassman, B. K., 355 Strickland, D. S., 47, 58, 150,

156, 161, 162, 164, 227, 336, 339, 351

Strickland, J., 153, 227 Strickland, K., 153, 227 Sullins, J., 302 Sullivan, A., 34 Sundbye, N., 265 Swanson, H. L., 20 Swanson, R. A., 406 Sweeney, J. M., 133, 144 Sweeney, S. M., 355 Swanson, H.L., 376 Swenson, B., 131 Swerdlik, M. E., 74

T Tallal, P., 30 Tan, L. H., 20 Tangel, D., 23 Tarver, S. G., 264, 396 Taylor, B. M., 133, 141 Taylor, R. T., 128, 410, 421 Taylor, S. V., 137

Teale, W. H., 46 Teitelbaum, N., 128 Temple, C. A., 49, 162 Temple, C. N., 49, 162 Templeton, D., 196, 218 Templeton, S., 360 Thompson, B., 83 Thomson, N., 266 Thordardottir, E., 158 Thorndike, R. L., 227 Tierney, R. J., 268, 330, 332 Tincoff, R., 155 Tindal, G., 115, 203, 205 Tomlinson, C., 393 Tomlinson, C.. A., 8, 9 Tomlison, C., 20 Topping, K., 211 Torgesen, J., 54 Torgeson, J. K., 79 Tower, C., 350 Trieman, R., 155, 157 Turner, J. C., 265

U U.S. Census Bureau, 22, 369 U.S. Department of Education,

5, 63, 64, 377, 3832, 402 Uhry, J. K., 165 Underwood, A., 389 Unrau, N., 332, 351

V Valencia, S. W., 193, 220 Van Der Brock, P., 264, 270 Vanderburg, R. M., 338 Vaughn, S., 30 Vellutino, F. R., 55 Venn, E. C., 46 Venn, J. J., 74 Viorst, J., 247 Vogt, M., 287 Vrielink, L., 34

W Wagner, B. J., 254 Wagner, M., 4 Wagner, R. K., 79 Walker, B. J., 153, 229

470 Name Index

Walker-Dalhouse, D., 347 Walmsley, S., 128, 131, 138, Walp, T. P., 128 Walsh, D. J., 155 Wang, S., 65 Ware, D., 241 Wasik, B. A., 265 Waterman, B. B., 72 Watson, T. S., 86 Watts-Taffe, S., 232 Wechsler, D., 72, 73 Weech, J., 344 Weiss, L. G., 82 Well, J., 248 Wells, M. C., 332, 349 Welton, D., 332 Werner, N. K., 266 White, B. F., 344 Wiederholt, J. L., 75, 79 Wiig, E. A., 32

Wilcox, B., 352 Wilhelm, J. D., 315 Wilkinson, G. S., 72 Wilkinson, I. A. G., 47 Willey, J., 128 Williams, J. P., 264 Williams, M., 71, 137 Williams, P. E., 82 Willows, D. M., 180 Wilse, J. T., 73 Wilson, A., 347 Wilson, P., 232, 255, 269 Windsor, J., 158 Winfield, L. F., 128 Wittrock, M. C., 129, 332 Wixson, K. K., 144, 193, 220,

265, 323 Wolf, M., 175 Wolf, S. A., 289 Woo, M., 339

Woodcock, R. W., 72, 74, 77, 86, 179, 221

Worthy, J., 141, 213 Wright, C. R., 80 Wright, T. L., 139

Y Yildiz, M. N., 355 Yokota, J., 46 Yopp, H. K., 167 Yopp, R. H., 167 Young, C., 213 Young, M. J., 65 Ysseldyke, J. E., 69

Z Zhang, H., 267 Zheng, X., 376 Zigmond, N., 402

471

Subject Index

A absences from school, 47 ACT scores, 5 academic language/vocabulary,

163, 256–257, 283 Academic Word List, 256–257 accommodations, reasonable, 378 accuracy, fluency and, 201 achievement gap, 403, 404–405 achievement tests, 27–28 achievement versus intellectual

ability, 388–389. See also discrepancy formula

acting out stories, 289 active learners, 383 active process, comprehension as,

263–264 adapting methods for special

needs students, 390–392 ADHD (attention deficit

hyperactivity disorder), 54, 60, 383, 384, 397

administrators, liaisons between teachers and, 413, 422

adolescents reading problems of, 376–378 special considerations for, 377 tutoring for, 135–136

adults with reading problems, 378–379, 389

advocacy for literacy, 410, 421 alphabet books, 167 alphabet recognition, 155, 156,

167–170 American Recovery and

Reinvestment Act, 404 analogic phonics, 392 analogies, 184–185, 190–191, 222 analytic phonics, 392

An Observation Survey of Early Literacy Achievement (Clay), 153–154

answering questions, 307–309, 317–318

arguments, writing, 353–355 assessment measures. See also

separate index of tests; formal assessment measures; informal assessment measures; scores/scoring tests

alphabet knowledge, 155 benchmark progress

monitoring, 193–194, 220 bias in testing, 66 cognitive abilities, 73, 74, 75,

77, 81–82 comprehension, 72–74, 79 concepts about print, 153–154 criterion-referenced tests,

65–66 curriculum-based

measurement, 205 decoding ability, 72–73 diagnostic, 76–80 , 88,

193–194, 220, 408–409 early reading vocabulary,

154–155 ethical considerations, 66 formal and informal measures,

63–65 fluency, 78, 220, 221 form for presentation of,

414–415 general comprehension ability,

72–74, 267–268 general reading skills/ability,

70–72, 79, 88

groups survey tests, 69–72 informal compared to formal,

63–65, 87–88, 96–97 informal reading inventories.

See informal reading inventories (IRIs)

informational text abilities, 303–304, 324

intellectual abilities, 74–75 intelligence measures,

80–87, 88 language abilities, 78, 79, 80,

228–232, 256 language/vocabulary

development, 80, 152, 238–232, 258

letter–sound correspondence, 157–158

listening comprehension,153 literacy skills, 78, 88 narrative comprehension,

267–270 normed oral reading tests,

75–76, 88 norm-referenced tests, 65,

66–69 ongoing, 141 oral language development, 152 oral reading, 75–76, 88 phonemic awareness, 156–157 phonics strategies, 179–180 phonological processing,

79–80 phonological short-term

memory, 159 print concepts, 153–154 progress monitoring, 71, 73,

74, 77, 88, 153, 157, 159, 161, 193–194, 220, 407

472 Subject Index

assessment measures (continued ) questions for, 124 rapid naming ability, 160 reading assessment, 69–80,

81–82, 303–304. See also informal reading inventories (IRIs)

reading specialists’ roles in, 406–409

RTI and, 70, 73, 75, 77, 78, 88, 153, 157, 159, 161, 193–194, 220, 407

simultaneous reading, 210–211 spelling ability, 357–358, 359 structural analysis,

191–192, 194 survey tests, group, 69–72 survey tests, individual, 72–75 timed administration of word

lists, 206 word recognition, 193–194 visual memory, 160 visual perception skills, 161 vocabulary, 80, 152 writing, 332–334

assessment planning, 416–418 assisted oral reading,

209–212, 221 assistive technology, 253–254 astigmatism, 36 attendance, 47, 59 attention deficit hyperactivity

disorder (ADHD), 54, 60, 383, 384, 397

attention problems, 377 attitude of readers, toward

reading, 14 auditory discrimination, 32 auditory learners, 393 auditory screening, 35 authentic assessments, 97 autism/autism spectrum

disorder, 383 Authoring With Video

website, 355 autobiographical prereading, 344 automaticity, 246 automatic word recognition, 176,

206, 246

B background information, student.

See environment; students background knowledge, 264–265,

271–272, 279–280, 302–303, 309–311

basal reading series, 392 batteries. See assessment

measures beginning sounds, identifying,

167–168, 169 behavior

assessing, 25–26 indications of vision

problems, 53 observing, 82 of students with learning

disabilities, 388 being the words activity,166 benchmark progress monitoring,

193–194, 220 Benchmark School, 184 Benchmark Word Identification/

Vocabulary Development Program, 184–185

bias in testing, 27, 66 bilingual instruction, 370, 372 binocular vision problems, 36 blending text, 169 Book Buddies, 132, 142 Boulder Project, 133, 140 brain injuries, 383 brain research, 20, 389

C cause–effect maps, 320, 323 character perspective charting,

163, 286 character webs, 289, 290 cheat sheets, 411 choral reading, 140, 213, 221 classification of words

strategy, 242 classroom interventions,

136–138, 421 classroom teachers, 407–408,

409, 410–411 cloze procedures, 185, 229–230,

249–250 185

coaches, 413 coding, text, 309–311 cognates, 257 cognitive abilities, tests for

analyzing, 73, 74, 75, 77, 81–82

cognitive factors in reading disabilities, 19–20, 38

cognitive processing, 21, 393 cognitive strategy instruction

(CSI), 21 collecting expressions, 248 collecting words, 190, 218, 247 college literacy programs,

378–379 color perception problems, 36 Common Core State Standards

Initiative academic language/vocabulary

and, 163, 256–257, 283 alphabet knowledge and,

155, 156 assessment measures and, 64 fluency and, 203, 220, 237 grade-level competence and,

129–130, 144, 301 informational text and,

301–303, 313, 319, 324 IRIs and, 120 letter–sound correspondence

and, 157 oral language development

and, 151–152, 162, 255 overview, 10, 14 print knowledge and, 153 reading programs and

alignment with, 48 reading–writing connection

in, 55 strategies of good readers and,

141, 144 vocabulary development

and, 238 word recognition and,

177, 194 communication

hearing impairment and, 35 process of, 30, 31 with writing, 339–341

Subject Index 473

community advocacy for literacy, 421

compare–contrast maps, 320, 322 competence, grade-level,

128–130, 138–139 compound words, 191–192 comprehension. See also listening

comprehension as active process, 263–264 aspects of effective,

263–265, 293 assessing with think-alouds,

121–124 assessment measures, 72–74, 79 background knowledge and,

264–265 as component of reading,

7–8, 142 determining nature of,

115–116 higher-level thinking and,

12, 265 informational, 12 of informational text, 116–117,

304–318 levels of, 12–13 listening, 153 literal, 12 measuring, 64 Memphis Comprehension

Framework, 137–138 monitoring, 186–187, 307–309 narrative. See narrative

comprehension of narrative text, 13, 265–267 overview of, 12–13, 263 process of, 263–265 proxies for, 205 reasons for poor, 96 scoring, 106–108 sentence, 239, 240 strategies for improving, after

reading, 285–290, 293 strategies for improving, before

reading, 270–276, 293 strategies for improving, during

reading, 276–285, 293 writing for helping with,

330–332

concept development, books for, 371

conceptually constructed instruction, 290–292

connected instruction, 290–292 consolidated alphabetic reading

stage, 176 consonants, 182–184 construction of meaning, 30, 96 content-free questions, 139,

282–283, 307–309, 323, 324 content literacy, 289 content validity, 68 context

clues to, 248–250 reading out of, 216 transfer of skills and, 129–130 word recognition strategies,

191, 209 contextual fluency, 206 contractions, 201–202 conversations, written, 340–341 coordination of programs,

138–139, 144 Core Academic Word List,

256–257 correct words per minute

(CWPM), 115, 204–205 counting sounds, 168 counting words activity, 166 criterion-referenced tests,

65–66, 87 criterion validity, 68–69 critical (evaluative) thinking, 12, 64 cross-age tutoring, 135 cross-checking, 185, 186 cultural environment, 24–25 cultural issues/diversity

adolescents with reading problems, 376–378, 379

adults with reading problems, 378–379

cultural bias, 27 cultural pluralism, 372 cultural views on reading,

372–374 English language learners

(ELLs). See English language learners (ELLS)

family/parental role in literacy, 375–376, 379

impact of diverse language environments, 228, 379

multicultural children’s books, 374

multicultural views on reading, 372–374

curriculum-based measurement, 205

CWPM (correct words per minute), 115, 204–205

D data gathering

collection methods, 56–59 information about the

environment, 43–50 information about the

individual, 51–56 overview, 42–43, 59–60

decoding assessment measures, 72–73 as component of reading, 142 correcting attempts at, 215 development of, 176 fluency and, 202 multisyllabic words, 188–191 strategies for, 134, 142 through analogy, 177,

184–185, 222 unfamiliar words, 202

delayed language, 227–228 description idea-maps, 320 developmental and intellectual

disabilities, terminology change, 383. See also learning disabilities; reading disabilities; special education services; special needs students

diagnostic assessment, 9, 58–59, 76–80, 88, 193–194, 220 406–409. See also assessment measures

diagnostic word learning tasks, 391

dialogue journals, 348–349 dictionary use, 254–255

474 Subject Index

differentiated instruction considerations for, 9 ELLs and, 9 learning disabilities and, 9 learning styles and, 393 overview of, 8–9, 14, 20, 38 reading programs and, 48 reading specialists and, 409 special needs students and,

392–393 spelling instruction and, 360

digital media, new literacies and, 355

digraphs, 182 diphthongs, 182 Directed Listening-Thinking

Activity (DL-TA), 162, 238–239, 276–279

Direct Instruction Reading Program, 396, 397

discrepancy formula, 28, 63, 81, 388–389

discussion cards, 283–285 311–313

display cards, 244–245 DISTAR, 396 diversity. See cultural issues/

diversity D’Nealian handwriting

method, 362 drafts, writing, 335 drama, 289 dyslexia, 20, 389, 397

E Early Intervention in Reading

(EIR), 133–134 early intervention programs

Book Buddies, 132 Boulder Project, 133 cross-age tutoring, 135 Early Intervention in Reading

(EIR), 133–134 Early Steps, 131–132 first-grade group

intervention, 133 Howard Street Tutoring

Model, 132

individual interventions, 131–133

Interactive Strategies Approach (ISA), 134

KELT Program, 133 kindergarten group

intervention, 133 in reading, 133–134 Reading Recovery, 131 Reading Rescue, 132 third-grade group

intervention, 134 summer school tutoring, 133 total school/classroom

interventions, 136–138 early literacy. See also literacy

alphabet knowledge, 155, 156, 167–170, 170

areas of, 150–151 beginning reading

vocabulary, 170 correlates with success in,

150–151 cultural differences in,

372–374 letter–sound

correspondence, 171 listening comprehension, 153 oral language development,

151–152, 161–165, 170 overview of, 11–12, 150 phases of reading

proficiency, 151 phonemic awareness, 155–158,

167–170, 170–171 print knowledge, 153–154,

165–166, 170 rapid naming, 159–160 short-term phonological

memory, 158–159 spelling stages, 357–358, 359 visual memory, 160 visual perception skills,

160–161 vocabulary, 170, 171 writing in, 333

Early Steps, 131–132, 140 easy text, fluency and, 208

echo reading, 132, 135, 136, 165, 211, 221

editing, 336 educational funding, 404 educational history, 46–47 educational settings, students

with disabilities and classroom settings, 386–387 least restrictive environment,

388–389 pullout model, 128

Education of All Handicapped Children Act, 384

education reform, 404 Eighteenth Mental Measurements

Yearbook, 65 EIR (Early Intervention in

Reading), 133–134 emergent literacy skills, 95 emotional disturbance, as

disabilities category, 384 emotional problems, 25–26,

51–52, 60 English as a second language

(ESL), 370 English language learners

(ELLs), 241 cultural environment and,

24–25 differentiated instruction

and, 9 instructional strategies for, 56,

157, 370, 379 language development and,

20, 55 learning disabilities and, 34 legislation affecting, 369, 379 neurological factors and, 20 overview of, 34, 369, 379 phonology and, 32 Reading Rescue program, 132 reading strategies for,

370–372, 379 statistics on, 369

environment assessing, 25–26 background information,

42–43, 59

Subject Index 475

cultural, 24–25, 50–51, 60 diversity and, 228 educational, students with

disabilities and, 386–387, 388–389

home, 22–23, 43–46, 59 lack of language-rich, 228 reading, 44 relating words to, 248 rich language, 233 rich literature, 247–248 school, 23, 46–49, 59 social, 24, 49–50, 59

environmental print, 154–155 errors. See miscues/miscue analysis ESL (English as a second

language), 370 ethical considerations, in

assessment testing, 66 evaluation of writing, 336–337 evaluative (critical) thinking, 12 evidence-based instruction,

7–8, 385 expectation grids, 302 expectations for students,

high, 139 expository text. See informational

text expressions, collecting, 248 expressive language, 31, 239–240 expressiveness (prosody), 201 eye problems, 53

F Facebook, 11 family role in literacy, 375–376,

379, 418–421, 422. See also parents

farsightedness, 36 Fernald method, 395 first-grade group intervention, 133 first language use, ELLs, 371 flashcards, 218 fluency

accuracy, 201 assessing, 78, 203–206, 220, 221 assessing nature of, 114–115 assisted reading for, 221

Common Core Standards and, 203, 220, 237

as component of reading, 7–8, 201–203

components of, 201–202 contextual, 206, 208–215 determining reading rate,

204–206 developing sight words in

isolation, 216–219 development of, 220–221 elements needed for, 202 for ELLs, 370–371 expressiveness (prosody), 201 interventions for, 136–137 IRI assessment of, 114–115 overview of, 12, 201 problems with, 95–96 RTI and, 219–220 speed, 201

Fluency-Oriented Reading Program (FORI), 136–137

focusing on words, 217–219 formal assessment measures,

63–69, 87–88, 96–97, 231–232, 258

Four Blocks Literacy Model, 136, 140, 143

Fourteenth Mental Measurements Yearbook, 76

frequently-used words, 216–217 frustration reading level

defined, 99 determining with IRI, 108–110 grade-level competence and,

129–130 full alphabetic reading stage, 176 functional magnetic resonance

imaging (fMRI), 19–20, 389 function words, 215, 216, 217 funding, educational, 404

G GE (grade equivalent) scores,

67, 88 gender issues, 37 genres of narrative text, 267,

291–292

Google Lit Trips, 348 grade equivalent (GE) scores,

67, 88 grade-level competence,

128–130, 138–139, 301 grade-level texts, read-alouds

with, 304–306 grammar, 32, 33, 266–267, 285 group intervention programs

Boulder Project, 1334 early intervention in reading,

133–134 first-grade group

intervention, 133 vs. individual, 143 Interactive Strategies

Approach (ISA), 134 kindergarten interventions, 133 size of group, 143, 145 third-grade intervention, 134 total-school and classroom

interventions, 136–138 group survey tests, 69–72 growth measures, IRIs for, 119 guided reading, 133, 136 guided writing, 339

H handwriting, 337–338, 362 health problems, 34–37 hearing impairment, 34–35, 38,

52–53 higher-level thinking,

comprehension and, 12, 265 high-frequency words, 216–217 high-incidence disabilities, 383 home environment, 21–23,

418–421 home reading, 133, 418–420 home–school collaboration, 372 Howard Street Tutoring Model,

132, 142 hyperopia, 36

I IDEA. See Individuals with

Disabilities Education Act (IDEA)

476 Subject Index

idea construction, 313–315 idea-mapping strategy, 319–323 identification of words. See word

recognition IEPs (individualized

education programs). See individualized education programs (IEPs)

illiteracy scope of problem, 3–4 statistics on, 4

imagery, 280–281 immersion instruction (English

language), 370 independent reading by students,

140. See also silent reading independent reading level

defined, 99 determining with IRI, 108–110 grade-level competence and,

129–130 independent writing, 339 individualized education

programs (IEPs), 369, content of, 385 information gathering

from, 59 meeting participants, 386 procedural safeguards, 386 transition services and, 386

individual intervention programs Book Buddies, 132 Early Steps, 131–132 Howard Street Tutoring

Model, 132 Reading Rescue, 132 Reading Recovery, 131 summer school tutoring, 133 vs. group, 143

individual survey tests, 72–75 Individuals with Disabilities

Education Act of 1990 (IDEA), 384

Individuals with Disabilities Education Act of 1997 (IDEA-1997), 384

Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004 (IDEA-2004).

See also individualized education programs (IEPs)

assessment measures and, 73 categories of disabilities, 383,

384, 387, 397 cognitive processing, 20 educational settings and,

387–388, 397 eligibility for special education

services, 30, 54, 63–64 81, 388–389

ELLs and, 369, 379 history of, 384 LRE and, 388–389 percentage of students with

disabilities, 385, 387, 397 programs through, 5–6, 14 procedural safeguards, 386, 397 regulations and, 5 RTI and, 5–6, 385, 389. See

also response-to-intervention (RTI)

transition services, 386, 397 inferences, 12 informal assessment measures

compared to formal, 63–65, 87–88, 96–97 , 258

determining existence/severity of problem, 94–95

general areas of problems, 95–96

general assessment questions, 94, 98

informational text abilities, 303–304

language abilities, 229–231 language development,

238–231 uses of, 63–65

informal conversations, information gathering, 58, 60

informal reading inventories (IRIs)

as achievement measure, 153 administration of, 98–117,

117–120 coding in, 104–106 combining assessment with

think-alouds with, 121–124

components of, 97 fluency assessment, 203 general assessment questions

and, 98 growth measures, 119 informational text abilities,

303–304, 324 interpreting scores,

100–117, 118 issues and options for using,

117–120 language development

assessment, 229 miscue analysis during, 178 overview of, 97–98, 124 pronouncing words, 117–118 question levels of, 119–120 reading levels, 100–118, 124 response-to-intervention and,

120–121 scores, 100–117, 118 unclear results in, 118 uses of, 153 word lists and, 206 word recognition and, 179

informational comprehension, 12 informational text

assessing abilities with, 303–304, 324

combining prior knowledge with, 309–311

Common Core standards and, 301–303, 313, 319, 324

comprehension of, 12, 116–117, 304–318

difficulties presented by, 300 grade-level competence

and, 301 importance of, 300–301 monitoring comprehension

of, 307–309 nature/types of, 299–300 organization of, 299–301, 324 overview of, 299, 324 prior knowledge and,

302–303, 324 question answer relationships,

317–318, 324 RTI and, 323

Subject Index 477

strategies for, 304–318, 324, 349–355

transforming, 318–323, 324 writing and reading strategies,

349–354 information forms, 57–58 information processing, 9 inspirational nature, of

narratives, 265–266 Institute for Applied

Psychometrics, 73 instructional intervention teams,

416–418, 421 instructional planning form,

416–417 instructional reading level

defined, 99 determining with IRI, 108–110 grade-level competence and,

129–130 instructional strategies. See also

tutoring for adults, 378–379 for alphabetic knowledge,

167–170 application of elements of,

144–145 adapting for students with

special needs, 390–392 balance in, 142 cognitive strategy instruction

(CSI), 21 connecting the literacy

experience, 290–292 consistency of structure,

142–143 coordination with classroom instruction, 138–139, 144 differentiated instruction. See

differentiated instruction for early literacy, 161–170 for ELLs, 56, 257, 370–372 guidelines for, 138–144 for informational text,

304–318, 324, 349–355 intervention programs. See

intervention programs involvement of families, 44 key elements of, 11–14

for literacy, vocabulary and, 231–232, 258

for meaning vocabulary, 256–257, 258

morphology in, 257 multicultural issues of, 372–374 for narrative comprehension

after reading, 285–290, 293 for narrative comprehension

before reading, 270–276, 293 for narrative comprehension

during reading, 276–285, 293 for narrative text, integrated

writing and reading strategies, 343–349

multisensory, 393–396, 397 observation during, 59 for oral language development,

161–165 phonics/phonemic awareness,

167–170,180–191, 194 for print knowledge, 165–166 for reading, multisensory

methods, 393–396, 397 for reading, teaching, 140–141 for reading comprehension,

269–270, 270–290 reading specialists’ roles in,

409–421 for reading vocabulary, 170 recent influences on, 5–11 research-based, 7–8 RTI and, 144 at secondary level, 377–378 for sight words, 216–219 as social experience, 49–50 for social skills, 24, for special needs students,

390–396, 397 for spelling, 360–362 structure of instruction,

142–143, 144–145 students’ experiences with,

46–47 for transforming informational

text, 318–323 for vocabulary, 231–232, 258 word families in, 257 for writing, 334–339

intellectual ability assessment measures, 74–75 versus achievement, 388–389.

See also discrepancy formula intelligence, 26–30, 38

definitions of, 27 potential for learning and, 52, 60

intelligence quotient (IQ), 27, 28, 29, 81, 87

intelligence tests. See also separate tests index

administration of, by psychologists, 82–85

administration of, by reading specialists, 85–87

bias in, 27 controversies about, 80–81 current theories about, 27 determining reading

disabilities using, 27–30. See also discrepancy formula

interpreting scores, 87 for reading assessment,

81–82, 88 scores on, 87

interaction with text, 122 Interactive Strategies Approach

(ISA), 134 Interactive Strategies Approach–

Extended (ISA-X), 135 interactive writing, 338–339 internal consistency reliability, 69 International Dyslexia

Society, 394 International Reading

Association, Standards for Reading Specialists, 355, 404–406

interpretation of test scores. See scores/scoring

intervention programs. See also instructional strategies

balanced framework for, 142 classroom interventions,

136–138, 421 coordinating with classroom

instruction, 138–139 design of, 144–145 early intervention, 131–134

478 Subject Index

intervention programs (continued ) grade-level competence,

128–130 group programs, 133–134 individual programs, 131–133 literacy programs, 144–145,

401–402 for older students, 135–136 overview, 128, 144–145 pullout model, 128 reading/literacy programs,

138–135 RTI and, 144 successful, 131–138

interviews, parent and student, 56–58, 60

IQ (intelligence quotient), 27, 28, 29, 81, 87

IQ-discrepancy formula, 28, 63, 81, 388–389

IRIs. See informal reading inventories (IRIs)

ISA (Interactive Strategies Approach), 134

ISA-X (Interactive Strategies Approach–Extended), 135

isolation of sight words, 216–219, 221

J journals

dialog, 348–349 learning, 350–352 personal, 341 reader response, 348–349

jumbled sentences activity, 166 justification, DL-TA without, 279

K KELT Program, 133 knowledge, background,

264–265, 271–272, 279–280, 302–303, 309–311

knowledge rating strategy, 242 KWL charts, 9, 302–303

L language development, 35,

151–152, 255–257, 258.

See also language skills; oral language

direct observation and, 59 early skills, 12–13. See also

early literacy ELL students and, 20, 55 exposure to rich language and,

233, 258 gathering information about,

43, 55–56, 60 hearing loss and, 32, 52 home environment and, 44,

233, 258 measuring, 80 oral language, 30, 31–33,

151–152, 161–165, 370 language disorders, 33–34 language experience approach

(LEA), 163–164, 332–334, 338

language of origin, 371 language skills

acquisition of, 12–13 assessing abilities,

228–232, 258 assessment measures, 78, 79 causes of problems with,

227–228, 257 collecting information about,

55–56, 60 communication process, 30, 31 conditions for fostering

learning, 232–235, 258 development. See language

development exposure to, 233, 258 hearing problems and, 35, 52 importance to reading of,

55–56, 227–228 meaning vocabulary, 241–242 oral, 30, 31–33, 151–152,

161–165, 370 problems related to

understanding, 96 receptive and expressive, 31 speech disorders and, 33–34 strategies for listening

comprehension, 235–240 written, 30

language impairment, as disabilities category, 385

LEA (language experience approach), 163–164, 332–334, 338

learned helplessness, 377, 393 learning disabilities. See also

reading disabilities; special education services; special needs students

characteristics of students with, 387, 388

differentiated instruction and, 9 as disabilities category, 383, 384 dyslexia, 389 educational settings for,

387–388, 397 eligibility for special education

services and, 388–389 ELL students and, 34 IDEA definition of, 20, 383,

387, 397 identifying students with,

IDEA and, 54, 63–64, 81 instructional strategies and,

390–396, 397 interventions and, 131 neurological problems and,

54, 60 overview, 387, 397 poverty and, 25 statistics on, 385 working memory and, 20

learning experiences, relationship to reading of, 158–159

learning journals, 350–352 learning styles

differentiated instruction and, 393

identifying, 9 least-restrictive environment

(LRE), 388–389 legislation

affecting ELLs, 369, 379 American Recovery and

Reinvestment Act, 404 Education of All Handicapped

Children Act, 384 IDEA reauthorizations, 384

Subject Index 479

Individuals with Disabilities Education Act of 1990 (IDEA), 384

Individuals with Disabilities Education Act of 1997 (IDEA-1997), 384

Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004 (IDEA-2004). See Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004 (IDEA-2004)

No Child Left Behind (NCLB), 5, 6, 369, 379, 403

Omnibus Appropriations Act of 2002, 404

Race to the Top, 404 Section 504 of the

Rehabilitation Act, 378 Title I, 401–402

letter identification ability, 155, 156, 159

letter manipulation, 170 letter matching, 177 letter–sound correspondence,

155–158, 166, 181–182, 357, 358, 359

letter–sound patterns, 182–184 levels, reading. See reading levels Lindamood Phoneme

Sequencing Program (LIPS), 396

lip moving, 214–215 listening comprehension. See also

comprehension assessment for, 152, 231–232 Directed Listening-Thinking

Activity (DL-TA), 238–239 reading aloud to students,

139–140, 162, 235–236 strategies for, 235–240

listening levels determining, 117 reading levels and, 230–231

literacy. See also early literacy assessment measures,

78, 79, 88 national reading levels, 4 new literacies, 355

programs for, 5–6, 7, 14, 144–145, 401–402

instruction, vocabulary and, 231–232

reading specialists as leaders in, 410, 421–422

skills, transfer of, 129–130 stages of, 357–358, 359 statistics on illiteracy, 3–4 tutoring, for adolescents,

135–136 literacy diagnosis, 407–409 literacy profiles, data

gathering for collection methods, 56–59 information about the

environment, 43–50 information about the

individual, 51–56 overview, 42–43, 59–60

literal comprehension, 12 literature

difficult word learning with, 246–247

exposure to, 233, 247–248 logographic stage of word

recognition, 175 long words, 188–191 look-backs, scoring IRIs using,

118–119 look-cover-write-check strategy,

361 low-incidence disabilities, 383 LRE (least-restrictive

environment), 388–389

M MAGpie software, 355 main idea grid, 318–319 mainstream classes, 370 making words activity, 188 making words grow activity,

192–193 materials, differences in types of, 13 maze cloze procedure, 250 meaning

associating sight words with, 217 combining phonics and,

185–187

construction of, 30, 96 linking fluency instruction

to, 207 making connections in,

234, 235 monitoring for, 186–187

meaning vocabulary, 117, 241–242, 244–246, 258

memorization versus reading, 209

memory identifying words from, 176 phonological short-term,

158–159 visual, 160, 361 working, 20–21

memory game, 167 Memphis Comprehension

Framework, 137–138 mental images strategy, 280–281 mentor texts, 347–348, 349–350 mental retardation, change in

terminology, 383 metacognition, 264 metalinguistic awareness of

vocabulary, 234 miscues/miscue analysis, 124, 178

coding, 104–106 corrections, 114, 118 in IRIs, 99, 111–114, 118 meaning and, 113 oral reading, 99 questions about, 113–114 scoring word recognition by,

100–101, 111–114, 118 self-correction of, 114 text words, 112–113 word recognition and,

100–101, 111–114, 118 worksheet, 113

misreading, 281 modeled writing, 338 modeling skills

best practices, 413 comprehension strategies, 316 correct spelling/grammar, 340 difficult words, 246–247 fluent reading, 206–207 higher-level thinking, 265

480 Subject Index

modeling skills (continued ) mentor text and, 349–350 text coding, 309–310 think-aloud process, 315–316 use of analogies, 190–191 morphology, 32, 257 motivation for reading of adolescents, 377–378 engagement of interest, 14 fostering/emphasizing reading,

138–139, 155, 206, 207, 208, 256–257, 375–376

keeping progress records, 217 multicultural literacy. See cultural

issues/diversity multiple intelligences, 27, 393 multiple-sentence game,

245–246 multisensory instruction

methods, 393–396, 397 multisyllabic words, 188–191 myopia, 36

N NAEP (National Assessment

of Education Progress), 4, 128, 402

names, for testing phonics patterns, 179–180

naming problems, 34 narrative comprehension. See also

comprehension; listening comprehension

assessing abilities with, 267–270

definition, 13 general ability, 267–268 integrated writing and reading

strategies for, 343–349 of specific materials, 268–270 strategies for improving after

reading, 285–290, 293 strategies for improving before

reading, 270–276, 293 strategies for improving during

reading, 276–285, 293 narrative discussion cards,

283–285 narrative structure, 282

narrative text comprehension of. See

narrative comprehension genres of, 267 inspiration of personal

responses and, 265–266 integrated writing and reading

strategies for, 343–349 organization of, 266–267 overview, 265 story grammar, 266–267. See also

story grammar; story structure National Longitudinal

Transitional Study, 4 National Assessment of

Education Progress (NAEP), 4, 128, 402

national reading levels, 4 National Reading Panel,

components of reading, 7–8, 14

NCE (normal curve equivalent) scores, 67, 68, 88

nearsightedness, 36 neurological factors in reading

disabilities, 19–20, 54–55, 60 neurological impress method

(NIM), 212, 221 new literacies, 355 No Child Left Behind (NCLB)

Act, 403 ELLs and, 369, 379 RTI and, 5–6

nonsense words, 179 normal curve equivalent (NCE)

scores, 67, 68, 88 normed oral reading tests,

75–76, 88 norm-referenced tests, 88, 152

bias in, 67 defined, 66 ethical considerations, 67 of language development,

231–232 scores on, 66–67, 68, 88 validity and reliability, 68–69

norm sample, 68 nursery rhymes, 167 nutrition, 37

O Obama administration,

educational reforms, 404 observation

for assessing intervention effectiveness, 144

behavioral, 82 for information gathering, 55,

56, 59 during reading instruction, 59

Omnibus Appropriations Act of 2002, 404