READING COMPREHENSION STRATEGIES FOR
STRUGGLING, ADOLESCENT READERS
ACTION RESEARCH PROJECT
C&I 600: GRADUATE SEMINAR
WESTERN ILLINOIS UNIVERSITY
SPRING 2011
2
Table of Contents
Abstract …………………………………………………………………………….
4
Chapter 1: Introduction
Contextual Factors…………………………………………………………..
6
Atypical Student One………………………………………………………..
8
Atypical Student Two……………………………………………………….
9
Atypical Student Three……………………………………………………...
10
Impact of Teaching Skills on Student Learning…………………………….
11
Statement of the Problem……………………………………………………
12
Chapter 2: Review of Literature
Reading Comprehension Strategies for Struggling, Adolescent Readers….
13
Chapter 3: Implementation of the Unit and Analysis of Data
Introduction of Chapter………………………………………………………
25
Description of Unit…………………………………………………………..
25
Accommodations for Atypical Students……………………………………..
26
Measuring the Impact of New Technique……………………………………
27
Analysis of Pre-Assessment Data……………………………………………
27
Analysis of Formative Data………………………………………………….
36
Day One ……………………………………………………………..
36
Day Two……………………………………………………………..
38
Day Three…………………………………………………………....
40
Day Four……………………………………………………………..
43
Day Five……………………………………………………………..
46
3
Day Six………………………………………………………………
49
Day Seven……………………………………………………………
52
Day Eight……………………………………………………………
55
Day Nine…………………………………………………………….
58
Day Ten……………………………………………………………...
60
Formative Assessment Tables……………………………………….
62
Analysis of Post-Assessment Data…………………………………………..
68
Chapter 4: Summary of Results
Reflection on Unit and Teaching…………………………………………….
82
Examination of Research Hypothesis………………………………………..
86
References…………………………………………………………………………..
89
Appendices
Appendix A: Journal Entries………………………………………………..
92
Appendix B: Copy of Pre-Assessment………………………………………
103
Appendix C: Answer Key for Pre-Assessment……………………………..
134
Appendix D: Copies of Atypical Students’ Pre-Assessments………………
141
Appendix E: Copies of Atypical Students’ Unit Formative Assessments….
166
Appendix F: Copy of Post-Assessment…………………………………….
229
Appendix G: Answer Key for Post-Assessment……………………………
244
Appendix H: Copies of Atypical Students’ Post-Assessments……………..
253
Chapter 2: Reading Comprehension Strategies
4
Abstract
Research dealing with the reading comprehension of struggling, adolescent students is limited.
Research that studies the effects of various teaching methods such as the direct, explicit
instruction of reading strategies, the use of different types of technology to supplement reading
instruction, the use of classroom talk moves to facilitate discussion, and the importance of
fluency instruction and its influence on comprehension. There is statistical data to support these
specific strategies and techniques to help struggling students in the upper elementary and middle
school classroom. This action research project studies the effects of using direct fluency
instruction on a group of 22 lower performing sixth-grade students in order to increase their
reading comprehension.
5
6
Chapter 1: Introduction
In order to understand any action research project, it is important to understand the students,
classroom, and school involved. Each school has its individual characteristics that make it its
own, therefore it is necessary to understand the unique characteristics of Mrs. Kelly Celania’s
sixth-grade reading class and Hamilton Elementary School.
Contextual Factors
I currently teach at Hamilton Elementary School in the Hamilton Community
Consolidated School District #328. Hamilton, Illinois is located on the Mississippi River where
Illinois, Iowa, and Missouri meet. Hamilton is considered a small, rural, bedroom community.
Our district is made up of 654 total students, 363 of which attend Hamilton Elementary.
Hamilton Elementary is a pre-K through sixth-grade building. The rest of the students
attend Hamilton Jr./Sr. High School which is located in a separate building across town.
I currently teach in a departmentalized sixth-grade classroom. I have taught in the
Hamilton Community Consolidated School District for 19 years. I have taught sixth-grade
students for 13 of those years. Our sixth-grade is made up of two sections. I currently teach one
section of reading, two sections of language arts, and two sections of social studies. I service a
total of 41 students.
This project will focus upon my reading class. This class is a homogeneous mixture of
lower achieving reading students. Students were placed in this classroom based upon AIMSweb
results and ISAT testing scores. It is made up of 22 students, 13 males and 9 females. Twenty
of the students are Caucasian. I also have two students of mixed ethnicity. One student is a mix
of Caucasian and Polynesian. Another student is a mix of Caucasian and African-American. I
do not service any second language learners. Three students in my reading class do have IEPs.
7
One student is learning disabled and receives tutorial services only. The other two students
receive speech therapy services only. None of these students receive any special education
instruction within my classroom.
Because of the lower levels of reading achievement, I do have one paraprofessional in my
reading classroom. According to our latest AIMSweb results, 10 of my 22 students are below
standards. Six of the 22 students are diagnosed with ADHD. I also service five Title I students.
These students receive Tier II instruction through the RtI model with the Title I instructor for an
extra 20 minutes each day, five days a week. Eleven, 50% of my students, receive free or
reduced lunch and 14 of the students live in a single-parent home due to divorce and other
causes. Currently, Hamilton is suffering a high unemployment rate due to the local economy, as
well as the current lockout at Roquette America, a factory located in Keokuk, Iowa. I am also
servicing two students who are at risk of being retained based upon their first semester grades.
Based on this information, I do have several behaviorally challenged students. Because of these
challenges, we often do small group work and try to keep activities differentiated based on
learner interest, style, and readiness.
This year we have begun RtI at Hamilton Elementary. We currently have a 90 minute
reading period, five days a week. To coordinate with the RtI model, we have also implemented
PBIS this year. These two systems are both serving to meet the needs of my students. The 90
minute reading period is a change for the students. Up until this year they have only ever had a
50 minute reading block. It has taken some adjustments. We are also encouraging the Cardinal
Way, our PBIS model, within the classroom to reward positive behaviors. This is very important
due to the behavior challenges within my classroom. We also use AIMSweb at Hamilton
Elementary to test and collect data on fluency. Not only do I benchmark my students three times
8
a year, I also progress monitor them every other week. By doing this I am able to monitor their
growth and discern which students need more strategic interventions.
Overall my reading class is very needy. I have students who have moved around, seen
their parents in jail, suffer from ADHD, and come from homes where education is not high on
their priority list. Out of 22 students, I would say that only a handful have homes where school
comes first. Developmentally, 10 of my students fall below and well below average based on
our winter AIMSweb benchmarking. The other 12 are in the bottom half of the average range.
The class has its challenges but the students are making progress. Most are at or above their
AIMSweb goals and continue to improve. My challenge is to find ways to continue to make
those improvements happen.
Throughout this project I will study not only my entire reading class, but I will also focus
specifically on three atypical students in my classroom. They each have unique characteristics
that make them ideal candidates to study in depth. By studying these three students along with
my entire class, I hope to better understand what my class needs in order to become better
readers.
Atypical Student One
Student 1 is an 11 year old male. This student is my student with an IEP. His IEP is for a
specific learning disability in reading. He also qualifies for free/reduced lunch and lives in a
single parent home with his biological mother and a younger sister. Student 1 is a good kid who
struggles in school. In fifth grade he was doing well enough that they decided to put him back
into the regular reading classroom with just tutorial assistance from the special education
resource teacher. This year though his grades are suffering. He is at risk of retention right now
9
because of failing grades for first semester. He is a kid that is also easily drawn in by the trouble
makers. His mother is also concerned that he has begun making poor choices. He really is at a
crucial time where the decisions he makes now will determine his future.
Student 1 is a really nice boy. He is extremely polite to adults and you can tell his mother
has taught him good manners. Although he is currently struggling and does have an IEP for
reading, he has been scoring very well on AIMSweb. At the winter benchmark he read 164
words correctly in one minute. He falls into the average range. He likes to read and has
consistently made is Accelerated Reader goal each quarter.
Student 1’s challenges are higher level thinking skills. He has good, basic
comprehension but has difficulty when it comes to applying his knowledge and finding the
inferences needed when reading more difficult text. His current reading level is 5.8, but his
written expression level is only a 3.1. I believe that Student 1 needs extra reinforcement of
reading skills after group instructions. Another modification is sitting near the teacher to keep
him on task as well as to quickly repeat and reiterate instructions. Small group, explicit
instruction also seems necessary when available.
Atypical Student Two
Student 2 is a 12 year old male. This young man is capable of being the highest
achieving student in my classroom. He is just not motivated to do well. He also qualifies for
free/reduced lunch and lives in a single parent home with his biological mother and two siblings.
He is the middle child. He also has a mother who was imprisoned for using methamphetamines.
She is currently out of prison and has custody of her children. Their father has little to nothing to
do with them. Their grandparents are the stable force in their lives. He could do so much better
10
in school if he was not so distracted by the rest of his life. He even exceeded on his 2010 ISATs.
He just does not have a good work ethic and is missing several assignments. He is also
beginning to become more defiant at home. He will leave for hours at a time with no contact. I
worry that he could follow in his mother’s footsteps and so does she.
Student 2 is a well-liked student in the sixth grade. He is a wonderful reader who has
great insight. His current reading level is 6.5. He oftentimes is my “go-to” guy in reading class
when we are struggling to find the answer. He has great higher level thinking skills, when he
chooses to apply himself. The knowledge and ability are there.
Student 2’s greatest weakness or challenge is himself. He has little intrinsic motivation.
At Hamilton Elementary we have flexible grouping for reading. He is capable enough to do the
higher level work, but does not succeed when in that setting. Therefore he is in my reading
class.
As far as modifications go for Student 2, I need to find more challenging work for him
while also keeping him motivated. My goal is to move him to the other group. I also need to
keep him seated near the front, close to me so I can keep him involved.
Atypical Student Three
Student 3 is an 11 year old, biracial female. She lives with both her parents and one
younger brother. She currently receives Title I services for dyslexia. She qualifies for
free/reduced lunch. Student 3 is very immature and is often tardy to school. Cognitively, she is
below grade level. Currently for AIMSweb testing, she is testing at the early fifth grade level
11
and is still at risk. She scored in the below average range. She read 123 words in one minute at
the winter benchmark testing.
Student 3 is very eager to please and thrives on positive reinforcement. She has finally
begun to understand the rewards of hard work. She has had times this school year when Fs were
the majority of her grades. She has found out that being responsible has great benefits. She
reminds me each day how proud her mother is of her current grades.
She does have some significant weaknesses. Student 3 qualifies for Tier 2 assistance
according to the RtI model. She receives Title I services for 20 minutes each day in addition to
our 90 minute reading period. She has a very difficult time reading in general because of her
dyslexia. Higher level skills are even more difficult. She struggles with most aspects of reading
comprehension. In order to modify instruction, I give activity suggestions to the Title I
instructor for extra practice that match up with what we are doing in the classroom. Student 3
also responds very well to our PBIS model and positive reinforcement for the completion of
work. When doing group work, she often is in the lower level group for the more intensive
instruction. Guided activities and modeling are extremely helpful.
Impact of Teaching Skills on Student Learning:
I believe that my knowledge of the area of reading is an asset to my students. Through
my graduate work and years of experience, I believe that I am able to help my students. I am
also really finding the implementation of differentiated instruction strategies to be very
beneficial. The students respond well to this type of instruction, and I am able to better meet
everyone’s needs. Another strength I see in my teaching is compassion. I really try to get to
12
know my students beyond this building. By understanding their lives, I can better educate each
person in my classroom.
I would have to say that my greatest weakness would be assessment. I feel as though I
understand what my kids need based on observation and questioning, but I do not always do well
with formalized assessment. I have to admit that taking the time to analyze data and track it is
always at the bottom of my to do list. With this project I know I will be using it much more. I
am actually looking forward to it because now I can not just put it at the bottom of the list and
not get around to it.
Statement of the Problem:
After studying my reading class over the last several days and keeping closer track of
their progress, I would have to say that my problem is deciding what my students need to
become proficient readers. My students are 11 and 12 years old. If they are struggling now, they
are at risk of struggling forever. The assessments I have done over this past week show me that
their weaknesses lie in the areas of higher level reading comprehension skills. Half of my class
struggled to get one out of three generalizations right. More recently, they also were weak in
sequencing the events of our story. Without these skills, these kids will not become better
readers. Unfortunately they are reaching an age when teachers do not teach reading skills
anymore. The students are expected to know them and use them in all areas of reading,
especially the content areas. I am hoping that by researching specific strategies for older readers,
I will be able to increase their learning and better prepare them for the future of junior high
school and beyond.
13
Chapter 2:
Reading Comprehension Strategies
for Struggling, Adolescent Reader
Chapter 2: Reading Comprehension Strategies
14
As students get older, reading becomes an integral part of their learning. If these older
students struggle with reading, it becomes an obstacle that oftentimes they never overcome.
“What is known is that if a student cannot read by the 8th grade, the likelihood of dropping out of
school is almost a given” (Papalewis, 2004, p. 24). Another fact known throughout the
educational world is that the earlier the interventions take place, the more likely it is to eliminate
low performing readers. Torgesen & Burgess support evidence that only one child in eight who
experiences serious reading difficulties at the end of first grade ever attains reading skills within
the average range (as cited in Papalewis, 2004, p. 24). The problem educators then face is how
to teach the necessary skills to the struggling, adolescent readers. Reading teachers have many
resources at their disposal when teaching their students. They incorporate the K-W-L, graphic
organizers, and technology to help their students. Teachers know that students need to receive
instruction in the areas of decoding, fluency, and comprehension. What they often do not have at
their disposal is the empirical research needed to provide them with scientifically-based
strategies that are being required by No Child Left Behind (NCLB).
Research is being done to determine what strategies will help these students. MansetWilliamson & Nelson (2005) compared a balanced, strategic approach to reading with explicit
reading comprehension. There are also studies that incorporate technology such as the READ
180 program and computer-assisted collaborative strategic reading (CACSR). Both of these
studies show significant gains in student comprehension though the use of student-directed
software. The problem of comprehension, though, encompasses more than just what a student is
reading. When older students cannot read at grade level, their problems are also seen in their
oral reading fluency.
Older students must do more than just use fast and accurate decoding
skills. They must comprehend as well. Adolescent students need fluency skills as well if they
15
are going to increase their comprehension. The way a teacher guides and facilitates a discussion,
known as “classroom talk moves”, is also an area of research. Wolf, Crosson, & Resnick (2005)
analyzed the “coordination of classroom talk moves” with the academic rigor of reading
instruction. They found that effective discussion increases student understanding of text.
The purpose of this literature review is to examine the research available to determine
what methods teachers can use to increase the abilities of older elementary and middle school
students to comprehend text. Whether it is fiction or nonfiction, reading class or content area
classes, what do students need to do to become proficient readers? Specifically the research
question being investigated is: Which teaching/learning techniques improve the reading
comprehension of struggling upper elementary and middle school students?
Direct Strategic Instruction
When teaching struggling, adolescent students the basic reading skills, teachers often
wonder what the best method is because they are considered to be past the age when these skills
are most easily gained. Older readers have different developmental needs than younger readers
(Cantrell, Almasi, Carter, Rintamaa, & Madden, 2010). Therefore, instruction that focuses on
the deliberate teaching of reading strategies is crucial because continual failure with reading
comprehension can create apathy (Cantrell et al., 2010). Teachers need to instruct readers to
become strategic which involves teaching students to respond to the changing context and
continually monitor their progress toward meaning from the text (Cantrell et al., 2010).
Struggling students do not pick up on subtle instructional techniques, therefore overt, explicit
instruction is necessary (Manset-Williamson & Nelson, 2005). Some studies have focused upon
balanced and direct strategic instruction. Educators consider this to be direct instruction on the
16
specific strategies such as questioning, self-monitoring, summarizing, and generalizing, and how
they work. Teachers use explicit procedures and explanations to teach students each specific
strategy.
Manset-Williamson & Nelson (2005) studied the effects of balanced and strategic
approaches to reading instruction. They also asked the question whether explicitness leads to
greater comprehension. Their sample consisted of 20 students between the ages of nine and
fourteen who qualified with a reading disability. Although it was very labor intensive, they
found that both types of instruction improved students’ skills, but a guided reading approach lead
to higher gains in word attack (decoding). The students who focused on explicitness showed
greater gains in oral retell and main idea identification. Schorzman & Cheek (2004) also studied
structured strategy instruction with a much larger sample of 103 sixth-grade students. Although
they found little difference on the post-tests of each group, they did note an effect on the cloze
procedures. The experimental group scored significantly higher. This method of testing requires
students to use contextual clues, another basic comprehension strategy. It showed they were able
to reason and select appropriate vocabulary based on their reading abilities. Cantrell et al. (2010)
also studied sixth-grade students and found that not only did strategy-based instruction increase
comprehension skills, it also increased problem solving. It is necessary, though, that students
learn how to use and determine which specific strategy to use in order to apply their knowledge
(Cantrell et al., 2010; Manset-Williamson & Nelson, 2005). This type of instruction allows
students flexibility to use the different strategies to understand text (Cantrell et al., 2010).
The effects of improved decoding, fluency, and comprehension show that using direct
instruction of reading strategies will improve reading comprehension. It also shows that a
17
balance of all the strategies being taught using explicit means is necessary for adolescent
students to see gains in reading comprehension.
Technology
Another avenue being studied by researchers is the effect of various computer programs
on the reading comprehension levels of older students. These types of programs offer a
motivational aspect to the instruction that traditional lessons do not always offer. Older students
feel very comfortable in front of a computer. That added sense of stability makes the area of
reading, an area where they know they do not do as well as well many of their peers, not as
daunting. The students come into it with a confidence they may not have with the traditional
lesson. Computer-assisted instruction (CAI) offers many tools for teaching (Kim, Vaughn,
Klinger, Woodruff, Reutebuch, & Kouzekanani, 2006; Macaruso & Rodman, 2009). These
various tools cover targeted text-level skills (Macaruso & Rodman, 2009). Papalewis (2004)
studied the effects of using the READ 180 software by Scholastic, Inc. with eighth-grade
students that were failing English class. This particular program is designed to support teachers
and supplement their material. It provides individualized instruction for each student. READ
180 focuses on the same components studied with the strategic instruction: decoding, fluency,
and comprehension. Kim et al. (2006) studied the effects of computer-assisted collaborative
strategic reading (CACSR) on the comprehension of middle school students. This program also
offered students an interactive learning environment that was self-paced. Once again the explicit
teaching of comprehension strategies was integral. Kim et al. (2006) did stress that this software
was meant to supplement an explicit instructional program. Another type of software teachers
see as a possibility to use with their struggling students is text-reader software. There are many
18
kinds available on the market today. Manset-Williamson, Dunn, Hinshaw, & Nelson (2008)
examined the use of text-reader software in conjunction with comprehension using the FIST selfquestioning strategy with eight middle school students. Manset-Williamson et al. (2008)
wondered to what degree older, struggling readers comprehend computer-read text. Does text
read by someone else (the computer in this instance) affect the level of comprehension? They
used the Kurzweil3000 text-reader software.
These various technology tools have shown that they can be used successfully in the
reading classroom as a supplement to the regular instruction. Students who participated in the
READ 180 program showed significant growth in reading and language arts whereas the
comparison group lost ground on their SAT-9 scores (Papalewis, 2004). Kim et al. (2006) also
found students who participated in the CACSR outperformed the comparison group in
comprehension; the CACSR scores were statistically more significant. The students in the
CACSR group also improved in the area of generating questions (Kim et al., 2006). Questioning
is a vital comprehension strategy for older learners. Throughout the study 12 of the 16
participants also perceived their self-efficacy in a positive way. When students have a positive
self-efficacy, you will see improvement. Eleven of the students even expressed a desire to
continue with the CACSR program. Macaruso (2009) found that CAI instruction showed a boost
in word attack skills and decoding and that when decoding improved, so did the students’
reading comprehension. The one area that did not show large gains was the text-reader software.
It was helpful, but averages were still less than 50% on the baseline (Manset-Williamson et al.,
2008).
Technology offers older students alternative methods to learning and using reading skills.
Kim et al. (2006) and Papalewis (2004) show us that technology, in conjunction with direct skill
19
instruction in the classroom, can and will improve reading comprehension. Macaruso (2009) and
Manset-Williamson et al. (2008) also support that same theory. The technology alone will not
do the job of increasing a student’s ability to read and comprehend. All the research stresses that
any of these programs should be supplemental and carefully integrated into the curriculum.
Classroom Discussion
Classroom talk is considered to be the discussion that is carried on within a classroom.
Classroom talk moves are the methods, questions, and probes that a teacher uses to actually keep
the discussion moving. Wolf, Crosson, & Resnick (2005) asked the question, Can discussion
type influence rigorous reading instruction? The majority of classroom time consists of
classroom discussion. Unfortunately, there has been little research done in this area, specifically
on the effects of classroom discussion on student comprehension (Murphy, Wilkinson, Soter,
Hennessey, & Alexander, 2009).
One study found that good accountable talk moves had a positive and strong relationship
with the level of rigor in the lessons (Wolf et al., 2005). This supports the idea that restating
other’s ideas is an important means for promoting effective learning.
Listening to others,
questioning others’ knowledge, and exploring one’s own thoughts is positively correlated to
reading comprehension (Wolf et al., 2005). Another area of this study was the fact that there is
very little research on employing a tool that formally measures the quality of classroom talk.
Researchers found that teachers need to increase the use of a pressing strategy and must
incorporate effective talk moves in order to see the full effects of classroom talk moves in regards
to reading comprehension. Murphy et al. (2009) has also found support that classroom
discussion is highly effective at promoting literal and inferential comprehension. It is the kind of
20
accountable talk that increases comprehension (Murphy et al., 2009; Wolf et al., 2005). In fact
various classroom discussion approaches appear to be more potent for below-average readers
(Murphy et al., 2009). Overall, classroom discussion is a means, not an end, and student
engagement is necessary in order for it to be a valuable comprehension tool (Murphy et al.,
2009).
Fluency
Oral reading fluency and its relationship with reading comprehension has been shown
through many studies. According to the National Reading Panel (2000), fluency is the ability to
group words into meaningful units and to read quickly, effortlessly, and with expression. Oral
reading fluency is commonly measured as the number of words read correctly in one minute.
Although there are many mixed opinions on the relationship between fluency and
comprehension, it is a skill that readers need as they get older (Tilstra, McMaster, Van den
Broek, Kendeou, & Rapp, 2009). Many researchers feel that as readers become more advanced,
the relation between decoding and comprehension changes (Tilstra et al., 2009). Fluency may
relate more strongly to word knowledge and reflects different skills for readers in higher grades
than younger (Tilstra et al., 2009). The need for fluent reading increases in middle school with
increased content area reading when the readability of content area textbooks are often above
grade level which presents a greater challenge for struggling students (Paige, 2006). It has also
been shown that when you can read more fluently, you can then link the text to prior knowledge,
therefore increasing comprehension (Neddenriep, Fritz, & Carrier, 2011; Tilstra et al., 2009).
Fluency is definitely a necessary component of reading comprehension, but it is not sufficient
21
(Neddenriep et al., 2011). As is true with any strategy or technique, it is a balanced approach
that is most successful.
The studies each have findings that support the practice of teaching fluency in order to
increase student reading comprehension. Paige (2006) used the practice of repeated readings of
passages at or above grade level in his study. The study showed a large effect size growth, an
average of 28.7 words per minute from pre-test to post-test, in the subjects (Paige, 2006).
Neddenriep et al. (2011) also showed an increase with repeated practice. The participants
demonstrated an average increase of 25% over their baseline levels (Neddenriep et al., 2011).
Tilstra et al. (2009) showed an increased of 13% . Fluency requires different sets of skills.
When students are young, they need to be able to quickly and accurately decode, whereas older
students focus on decoding and comprehension (Tilstra et al., 2009). Therefore, reading fluency
interventions such as, repeated readings, have been shown to be an effective and efficient method
to achieve gains in both oral reading fluency and comprehension (Neddenriep et al., 2011; Paige,
2006; Tilstra et al., 2009).
Conclusions
Based on the research, teaching students to read is one of the most important things we
do as educators. It is also one of the most difficult things to do as students get older. Students
entering the late elementary school and middle school years that struggle with reading, present
problems that extend beyond the reading classroom. Research has shown many different ways to
overcome these problems. Direct, strategic instruction is supported by many studies. I also
found a lot of research on incorporating technology, fluency, and classroom discussion into
reading instruction. I truly believe that a combination of all of these are necessary to create well-
22
rounded readers who can not only be fluent, but also use their cognitive strategies to understand
what they are reading.
Because my students are older and have a greater risk of never performing at grade level,
the stakes are much higher. I believe that in order teach them the skills that they have missed
somewhere along the way in their educational careers, explicit instruction of strategies is
necessary to fill in the gaps. It is a very labor-intensive type of instruction, but there is evidence
to show that explicitness is instrumental in helping older students with reading comprehension. I
have also found that the use of technology can go a long way to increasing comprehension
because it can be flexible, easily integrated, and self-paced. Technology also offered a source of
motivation for many students. Discussion was also shown to influence the rigor of classroom
discussion and seemed to be more potent for below-average readers. In order for it to be
meaningful, engagement is necessary. Finally, fluency plays a role in reading comprehension.
There is strong evidence to support that they are related. Older students have different needs
than younger readers and therefore show that fluency is crucial to their understanding of
material. If students cannot fluently read, then they struggle with the comprehension necessary
to understand the higher level text required.
In conclusion, research supports the use of explicit reading instruction, the inclusion of
different types of technology within reading instructions, the use of strong and effective
classroom discussion, and incorporating fluency into instruction. Using these types of teaching
and learning methods, adolescent, struggling learners increased their reading comprehension.
Based on the research and make-up of my current sixth-grade reading class, I am going to
implement fluency instruction and monitoring. I believe that this is a technique I can incorporate
into my classroom with success based on the brief length of the unit I will be using. After
23
reviewing my classwide AIMSweb scores from our fall and winter benchmarking as well as the
progress monitoring done in class, I see a need to try to increase fluency. By incorporating
repeated readings and other fluency activities, I believe I will see improvement in my students.
Currently we just test. We do not work to specifically improve fluency scores. By increasing
fluency, I hope to, in turn, increase comprehension.
Chapter 3:
Implementation of the Unit and Analysis of Data
Based on the research and make-up of my current sixth-grade reading class, I am going to
implement fluency instruction and monitoring. I believe that this is a technique I can incorporate
into my classroom with success based on the brief length of the unit I will be using. After
reviewing my class wide AIMSweb scores from our fall and winter benchmarking as well as the
progress monitoring done in class, I see a need to try to increase fluency. By incorporating
repeated readings and other fluency activities, I believe I will see improvement in my students.
Description of Instructional Unit
Content and Skills
This unit will focus on the novel Holes by Louis Sachar. Within this unit
I will be teaching a variety of skills. Students will learn fluency strategies, such as phrasing and
repeated readings. They will also learn vocabulary strategies to help increase their fluency. The
students will use decoding skills, context clues, and word structure to determine meanings of
24
unfamiliar words. My hope is that by directly teaching these specific fluency strategies, students
will have increased comprehension.
Strategy
Throughout the unit, I will be directly teaching fluency skills to increase reading
comprehension. I plan to use repeated readings of passages from the novel. Students will have a
cold read of a passage on Mondays along with a MAZE of the passage to assess their
comprehension. Throughout the week, I will model the reading of the passage, students will
practice reading with partners, and we will do choral readings of the passage. I will also be
teaching the students how to use appropriate phrasing with their passages in order to create better
fluency. Vocabulary will also be an important part of the lessons. Students will learn different
vocabulary strategies, such as word structure and context clues. By having a better
understanding of the vocabulary, they will increase their fluency and comprehension, as well.
Then on Fridays, I will assess their oral fluency of the passage again as well as have the students
take an AR test over the covered material to show comprehension growth. Different fluency
techniques will be used daily in each lesson.
Instructional Technology
I will be incorporating the website www.interventioncentral.org to create the passages
and MAZE assessments. Students will also be using our web-base Accelerated Reader program
to take comprehension quizzes.
Accommodations for Atypical Students
25
Student 1: (IEP, male)
This student’s accommodations will include varied phrasing passages as well as
comprehension questions. I will also spend one-on-one time with him during specific activities
that he may struggle with. I will also have different, possibly lower, goals for the oral fluency
measures taken. If necessary, I may decrease the reading level of the repeated reading passages
in order for him to see success and improvement.
Student 2: (High functioning, male)
To accommodate this student I will set higher fluency goals as we go to challenge him. I
will also create higher-level thinking comprehension questions. If necessary I may also increase
the reading level of his repeated reading passages.
Student 3: (Dyslexic, female)
This student’s accommodations will include varied phrasing passages as well as
comprehension questions. I will also spend one-on-one time with her during specific activities
that she may struggle with. I will also have different, possibly lower, goals for the oral fluency
measures taken. If necessary, I may decrease the reading level of the repeated reading passages
in order for her to see success and improvement.
Measuring the Impact of New Technique
My goal is to see an increase in the fluency and comprehension scores of my students. I
will be assessing the students using repeated reading running records, MAZE assessments for
comprehension, AR quizzes for comprehension, vocabulary activities, fluency phrasing
26
activities, and various other comprehension activities. If I see an increase in oral fluency and
comprehension scores, then I believe the technique will have worked.
Analysis of Pre-Assessment Data
My pre-assessment for this unit is made-up of four parts. First, the students will
complete three different oral reading fluency assessments, one each at the fifth-grade level, sixthgrade level, and seventh-grade level. The students will read each passage for one minute and be
scored on their number of words correct. Next they will complete a MAZE comprehension
activity about the passage they just read. This too will be timed. They will have three minutes to
complete this activity. This will be scored on the number of words correct. They will receive
the sixth-grade passage again and take a multiple-choice test made up of eight questions that
cover various vocabulary questions. Finally, they will receive a portion of the sixth-grade
passage to mark the meaningful phrase units.
The pre-assessment covers the five different objectives I have throughout my unit so
therefore I believe it is an accurate, consistent, and fair evaluation of their fluency and
comprehension learning. The passages have been taken from district AIMSweb resources in
order to make sure they are accurately leveled. The oral reading fluency and MAZE testing
procedures have scientifically-based research backing their validity.
Table 1: Pre-Assessment Analysis Instrument
Pre-
Objective 1:
Objective 2:
Objective 3:
Objective 4:
Objective 5:
Assessment
Oral Fluency
Comprehension Context Clues Word Parts
Phrasing
P = 25%
P=25%
P=25%
Analysis
Instruments
P=18.75%
P=6.25%
27
Part 1: Oral
Fluency in
X
1 minute
(3 passages)
Part 2:
MAZE in
3 minutes
X
(3 passages)
Part 3:
Vocabulary
1, 3, 4, 7, 8
2, 5, 6
(8 items)
Part 4:
Phrasing
X
(17 marks)
Objective 1: Students will perform oral fluency activities at or above 135 words correct per
minute (WCPM) in a given passage.
Objective 2: Students will comprehend the given text.
Objective 3: Students will determine the connotations of words using word, sentence, and
cross-sentence clues.
Objective 4: Students will determine meanings of unknown words or content-area vocabulary
using knowledge of prefixes, suffixes, or root words.
Objective 5: Students will determine the appropriate phrasing to create fluency in a passage.
Adaptations
I will not make any adaptations for the pre-assessment at this time. I will be using this
information to gain information about my students which I will then use to create accommodated
lessons throughout the unit.
28
Pre-Assessment Findings:
Atypical Student 1
Student 1 was a fluent reader and met my standards, but his fluency did not carry over to
his comprehension. He is just reading the words and not understanding what he is reading. He
also showed a significant weakness in reading meaningful phrase units. This may be linked to
his comprehension scores on the MAZE portion of the assessment where he did not meet
expectations. Student 1’s vocabulary and decoding skills were a definite strength.
I will start the unit with at and slightly below level passages to use with our repeated
readings. Hopefully he will see some success and improvement. We will also spend time on
reading with meaning by practicing the appropriate phrase units. His vocabulary was a strength
so I will introduce more challenging vocabulary practice for him. Overall Student 1’s scores
were pretty average when compared to the class so most of his modifications will be true of most
of the students in my reading class.
Table 2: Pre-Assessment Data
Atypical Student #1 (IEP, male)
Phase: PreAssessment
Part 1: Oral
Fluency
Passage 5
Passage 6
Passage 7
Part 2: MAZE
Passage 5
Passage 6
Passage 7
Part 3:
Vocabulary
Part 4:
Phrasing
Objective 1:
Oral Fluency
Mean: 146
Meets
153
148
138
Objective 2:
Comprehension
Objective 3:
Context Clues
Objective 4:
Word Parts
4/5
Meets
3/3
Exceeds
Objective 5:
Phrasing
Mean: 21
Did Not Meet
16
27
21
9/17
Significant
29
Weakness
Criteria:
Assignments/Tests
Oral Fluency
MAZE
Exceeds Expectations:
90% and higher
(165 WCPM or higher)
33 or higher
Meets Expectations:
70% to 89%
(135 – 164 WCPM)
26 - 32
Did Not Meet Expectations: 60% to 69%
(100 – 134 WCPM)
20 - 25
Significant Weakness:
(99 WCPM or lower)
19 or below
59% and below
Atypical Student 2
Student 2’s only major weakness was with his reading in meaningful phrase units. I plan
to spend time practicing and teaching this new skill. He did very well in all the other areas.
Although he did meet or exceed in four of the five areas, I do believe that he can do
better. I will start him off with the same passage as the other students in the class but then
gradually increase his level. I also feel that he does not receive much positive support at home.
By offering and focusing on positive reinforcement through our PBIS program, The Cardinal
Way, I hope to show him his strengths and see him meet the challenges I will be giving him.
Table 3: Pre-Assessment Data
Atypical Student #2 (High functioning, male)
Phase: PreAssessment
Part 1: Oral
Fluency
Passage 5
Passage 6
Passage 7
Part 2: MAZE
Passage 5
Passage 6
Passage 7
Part 3:
Objective 1:
Oral Fluency
Mean: 149
Meets
167
143
137
Objective 2:
Comprehension
Objective 3:
Context Clues
Objective 4:
Word Parts
4/5
3/3
Mean: 26
Meets
29
22
26
Objective 5:
Phrasing
30
Vocabulary
Part 4:
Phrasing
Meets
Exceeds
6/17
Significant
Weakness
Atypical Student 3
Student 3 was very strong with her vocabulary skills and phrasing. She exceeded in all
three of these areas. I believe that part of this success was the fact that she was not timed on
these three portions of the pre-assessment. Student 3 did perform below standards on her fluency
and MAZE assessments. Student 3’s dyslexia plays a big part in this. I was pleased to see that
she performed much better on the lower level passage with her fluency. Her MAZE score was
three points lower on this passage but that may have had to do with it being our first passage
read.
I will also start Student 3 off with the same class wide passage on our repeated readings.
I really believe that this skill will increase her fluency and self-confidence. I hope to pull from
her vocabulary strengths and help her increase her comprehension. Her dyslexia will probably
always slow her down, but if we can increase the meaning of her fluency then her
comprehension will follow.
Table 4: Pre-Assessment Data
Atypical Student #3 (Dyslexic, female)
Phase: PreAssessment
Part 1: Oral
Fluency
Passage 5
Passage 6
Passage 7
Part 2: MAZE
Objective 1:
Oral Fluency
Mean: 83
Significant
Weakness
87
89
72
Objective 2:
Comprehension
Mean: 21
Did Not Meet
Objective 3:
Context Clues
Objective 4:
Word Parts
Objective 5:
Phrasing
31
Passage 5
Passage 6
Passage 7
Part 3:
Vocabulary
Part 4:
Phrasing
Whole Class
19
22
22
5/5
Exceeds
3/3
Exceeds
16/17
Exceeds
The pre-assessment provided me with a lot of information about my class. Some I
already knew, and some I was surprised to see. My reading class is the lower of the two sixthgrade groups we have at Hamilton Elementary. For this reason, I was not surprised to see that
about one-third of my class did not meet standards in the areas of fluency and comprehension.
Many studies seem to point to the relationship of oral fluency and comprehension. I could
definitely see this relationship as I analyzed my class wide scores. For most students, the better
the fluency, the better the comprehension scores. This makes me see the importance of directly
teaching my students fluency skills. I will also be able to directly see the students that will need
to be challenged by more difficult passages and those that will need to slow down a bit.
Vocabulary was an overall strength. Although I do believe that we will need to
concentrate more on decoding words using their word parts, I am going to continue to work on
the context clues aspect as well.
Phrasing was also quite low. This could be due to the fact that this is a completely new
skill. I will start off slow with a lot of guided teaching and class practice. I was amazed and the
number of students that did not show a break at commas. I thought they should all know that
commas meant to pause. But there were a large number of them that did not consider them. I
believe that this skill will also increase student oral fluency and in turn, comprehension.
Table 5: Pre-Assessment Data
Whole Class
32
Phase of
Assessment
PreAssessment
Objective 1:
Oral Fluency
Exceeds
2/22 (9%)
Meets
12/22 (55%)
Did Not Meet
7/22 (32%)
Sig Weakness
1/22 (5%)
Objective 2:
Comprehension
Exceeds
4/22 (18 %)
Meets
10/22 (45%)
Did Not Meet
7/22 (32%)
Sig Weakness
1/22 (5%)
Objective 3:
Context Clues
Exceeds
6/22 (27%)
Meets
13/22 (59%)
Did Not Meet
3/22 (14%)
Sig Weakness
0/22 (0%)
Objective 4:
Word Parts
Exceeds
15/22 (68%)
Meets
0/22 (0%)
Did Not Meet
7/22 (32%)
Sig Weakness
0/22 (0%)
Objective 5:
Phrasing
Exceeds
7/22 (32%)
Meets
8/22 (36%)
Did Not Meet
1/22 (5%)
Sig Weakness
6/22 (27%)
Analysis of Formative Data
Day 1: March 14, 2011 (90 minutes)
Lesson Objectives:
Students will perform an oral fluency activity at or above 135 words correct per
minute (WCPM) in a given passage.
Students will comprehend the given text at 70% accuracy or higher
Instructional Procedures:
I will begin class by motivating the students with some thought provoking questions
about kids in trouble and choices they can make to change their lives. I will then introduce to
them the novel, Holes, by Louis Sachar.
Next, we will begin testing their oral fluency using Chapter 1 from the book as our
passage. They will also take a MAZE assessment over this reading.
When all 22 students have finished both assessments, I will then model an appropriate
reading of the passage and share with the students that we will be using repeated readings each
day to improve our fluency and comprehension skills. We will also be charting our progress
throughout the week.
33
Technology:
The technology used in today’s lesson was the use of www.interventioncentral.org to
create the oral fluency and MAZE passages.
Modifications:
Today there will be no modifications for the three atypical students.
Atypical Student 1:
Today’s assessments already show improvement over the pre-assessment scores even
though there were no modifications to today’s lesson. It is still very early, but perhaps this
student does well with routine and these assessments are becoming just that. He even improved
on the MAZE assessment today. (See Table 6.)
Atypical Student 2:
Student 2’s scores stayed about the same today when compared to the pre-assessment
scores. Although there were no modifications for this student today, he remained pretty steady
which is what I would have expected due to his higher skills. (See Table 7.)
Atypical Student 3:
Student 3 was not as successful today as I would have liked. Her scores have dropped
some compared to the pre-assessment data. I did not make any modifications today, but if she
does not show improvement with our repeated readings each day, I will need to lower the level
of her passage so that she can see some success. (See Table 8.)
Whole Class: Overall, today’s assessments were about the same as the pre-assessment averages.
Since today was really just a pre-cursor to the rest of the week, it is hard to comment on changes.
(See Table 9.)
34
Today’s Technique:
I really do not have much reflection on today’s activities due to the fact that it is just Day
1 of the unit. I will not really see growth on these particular activities until later in the week
when we are practicing our repeated readings and other skills.
Day 2: March 15, 2011 (45 minutes)
Lesson Objectives:
Students will determine connotation of words using word, sentence, and crosssentence clues.
Instructional Procedures:
We will begin class by partnering up to practice our repeated reading of our passage.
Each partner will read for one minute and then mark the final word read. The students will then
chart their progress on a fluency chart that already has their Day 1 score recorded.
Finally we will work on vocabulary, specifically context clues. I will model how to use
context clues to determine word meaning. For this, as well, I will use the whiteboard. Students
will then also be given an assessment using a new chapter of our book to determine word
meaning using context clues.
Technology:
Interactive whiteboard
Modifications:
Each atypical student scored very well on the pre-assessment, so they will each receive
the same level of vocabulary assessment.
Atypical Student 1:
35
He met standards on this context clue assessment. Student 1 loves to read and has a good
grasp on vocabulary. His difficulties lie in the written expression of concepts. For the next
context clue assessment, I will use words that are more difficult and add to the length of the
assessment in order to get a broader picture of his skills. (See Table 6.)
Atypical Student 2:
Student 2 met standards on this assessment. As my higher performing student, I expected
him to do well. As with Student 1, I will increase the difficulty and length of the next context
clues assessment. (See Table 7.)
Atypical Student 3:
I am very impressed with how well Student 3 did. Normally she performs well below
grade level. I believe that the extremely specific classroom activity of finding the word in the
text, examining it together, and using a think-aloud process with the context clues lesson was
very beneficial for her. I will continue this type of direct instruction and also add to the
difficulty in her next context clues assessment. (See Table 8.)
Whole Class:
Overall, almost two-thirds of the class did not meet standards. When we were working
on the lesson itself in class, everyone seemed to have a good understanding. But when it came
time for the assessment, they did not do well. The results were also surprising because students I
thought would do well did not and students I expected to struggle a bit, like Student 3, did well.
I believe that I will need to use more direct instruction with the lesson and incorporate more
student involvement in the next context clues assessment. (See Table 9.)
Today’s Technique:
36
Today’s lesson did not go as well as planned. I did a few examples with the students,
but, as a group, they did not perform well. I believe that I need to be more specific about how
you can tell if context clues are being used. Next time I will incorporate a think-aloud strategy to
show the students another way to find the correct answer.
Day 3: March 16, 2011 (90 minutes)
Lesson Objectives:
Students will determine the meaning of unknown words or content-area vocabulary
using knowledge of prefixes, suffixes, or root words.
Students will determine the appropriate phrasing to create fluency in a passage.
Instructional Procedures:
Today we will begin with our repeated readings. I will also stress to the students the
importance of good reading, not fast reading. The students will also chart their progress so they
can see their improvements.
Next, we will work on meaningful phrase units. I will put a portion of the passage on the
interactive whiteboard. I will model the appropriate reading of the passage and let students
volunteer to place the pause marks in the appropriate places. We will then discuss how pausing
in different places can change the meaning of what is being read. As an assessment, I will then
give the students a different piece of the passage where they will place the pause marks on their
own.
Finally I will assign Chapter 4 for the students to read on their own.
Technology:
37
Interactive whiteboard
Modifications:
Students 1 and 2 had significant weaknesses in this area, so they will receive ten minutes
of extra small group instruction prior to completing their assessment. I will also conduct an
interview with Student 3 in order to understand her thinking behind the activity to make sure she
continues on the right track.
Atypical Student 1:
Student 1 met standards today. I believe the modeled readings and extra small group
practice was essential. I specifically pulled seven students who struggled on this during the preassessment aside to practice this skill. We worked for about ten extra minutes. Student 1
responded well to the extra attention and was able to meet standards. (See Table 6.)
Atypical Student 2:
Student 2 also met standards today. He was also pulled aside into the small group setting
based on his poor pre-assessment scores. He caught on very quickly today and was even
assisting one other student in our small group. After speaking with him, I honestly think that he
may not have understood all the instructions on this portion of the pre-assessment. (See Table
7.)
Atypical Student 3:
This student continues to amaze me. I did not pull her aside today to work in the small
group because she did so well on the pre-assessment. Although today she did not do quite as
well, she still met standards. I pulled her aside after the assessment and asked her to show me
how she completes this task. Because of her dyslexia, she must reread things so many times.
She told me she does this until it sounds “right.” She naturally finds the pauses. She may work
38
more slowly, but she does not give up until she hears it correctly. That is when she knows that
she is doing it correctly because, according to her, it finally makes sense. (See Table 8.)
Whole Class:
As a whole, the students did well with this assessment. Only one student had a
significant weakness compared to six on the pre-assessment. I could even hear the difference in
class when the students were doing their partner reads. We will continue to work on this skill
because the creation of meaningful phrase units is crucial to fluency and comprehension. (See
Table 9.)
Today’s Technique:
Based on yesterday’s lesson, I decided to be more direct with my instruction today. I
incorporated a think-aloud approach. This was very effective. The students were able to model
my think-alouds when they were asked to come to the interactive whiteboard. The students in
the audience also responded well. They even commented on how that was exactly what they
were thinking, too. I will continue this type of approach as I work throughout each lesson in the
unit.
Day 4: March 17, 2011 (90 minutes)
Lesson Objectives:
Students will comprehend the given text at 80% accuracy or higher.
Instructional Procedures:
Today we will practice our passage for the last time before tomorrow’s final read. The
students will chart their numbers.
39
I will then read Chapter 4 to the students, modeling the appropriate fluency and pointing
out as we go along the different things we have covered this week such as phrasing, context
clues, and word parts. We will practice these skills on the interactive whiteboard. I will then
assess the students’ comprehension of the chapter with a worksheet.
Finally, I will assign Chapter 5 to the students to read on their own.
Technology:
The students will take turns at the interactive whiteboard practicing various skills from
the week, such as phrasing, context clues, and word parts.
Modifications:
During class today, I will call specifically upon the atypical students during our practice
session at the interactive whiteboard, so that they may work on the skills that they specifically
need practice on.
Atypical Student 1:
Student 1 has been doing well this week. Phrasing is a bit of a struggle, so during today’s
lesson, I pulled him to the interactive whiteboard to work on this skill. I modeled how I was
thinking the passage through and asked him to do the same. He then went through the passage
with much better phrasing accuracy. (See Table 6.)
Atypical Student 2:
During today’s review session, I specifically called upon Student 2 to work on word
parts. He met standards this week, but I believe he could do better with this skill based on his
higher levels of achievement throughout the school year. When working with him specifically
on this skill today, I discovered that he has been confused about how root words do not really
40
change. He has been using prefixes to determine the meaning more than the root word. Now
that he and I have worked through this, I believe he will be more successful. (See Table 7.)
Atypical Student 3:
I chose to work with Student 3 today in the area of context clues. Because of her
dyslexia, she naturally struggles with oral fluency. The area of context clues is one where she
can build an understanding of her vocabulary which will, in turn, help with her fluency. She was
doing really well with this today in class. (See Table 8.)
Whole Class:
I am seeing a lot of progress with my class in just a few days. Although my assessments
may not show a marked improvement, I can see the improvement in self-confidence and attitude.
The students did really well on the short assessment today. The rereading of each chapter is
really showing progress. Most importantly, the students are expressing to me how they actually
get the concept of what fluency is. (See Table 9.)
Today’s Technique:
Today we reviewed our skills and then took a short assessment over one chapter. The
constant review of skills each day is important for my specific group of reading students. They
all struggle in one way or another, so finding “tricks” to help improve our fluency and
comprehension is crucial. I am also really seeing a growth in the repeated readings. Even when
the students read a chapter to themselves as well as listening to me model the appropriate
fluency, they are doing much better. Today’s key word was repetition!
41
Day 5: March 18, 2011 (90 minutes)
Lesson Objectives:
Students will perform an oral fluency activity at or above 165 words correct per
minute (WCPM) in a given passage.
Students will comprehend the given text at 95% accuracy or higher.
Instructional Procedures:
With today being the end of Week 1, I will be retesting the students’ oral fluency. We
have been using repeated reading all week long, so the goal is to see a marked improvement in
their fluency scores as compared to Monday. I will also be reinforcing the repeated readings by
modeling the reading of Chapter 5 which the students have read previously on their own. We
will also discuss the first five chapters we have read as well as the effects of the repeated
readings in class. I will share the scores of the students from Day 1 to Day 5 and discuss how
they have improved.
Finally, the students will use Accelerated Reader to test their comprehension over
Chapters 1-5 in Holes. I should see high scores based on the time spent in class this week on
fluency skills.
Technology:
Today we will be using Accelerated Reader in order for the students to take their
comprehension assessment today on the classroom computers.
Modifications:
I will not be making any real modifications in today’s lesson. Each student has seen their
fluency scores throughout the week and has set their own individual goals for today’s final read
of Chapter 1. These goals are individualized based on their progress. Overall, each student is
42
striving to move up at least 40 words per minute. This should move them up one level in the
assessment criteria.
Atypical Student 1:
Student 1 did extremely well this week. Both of his fluency and comprehension scores
moved into the “exceeds” category. He was thrilled to see his fluency score in the 200s.
Although today there were no specific modifications, the week’s modifications were extremely
effective. Not only did he increase his scores in all areas, his self-confidence has really
increased. He is finally feeling some pride that is associated with his school work. This is a
feeling that IEP students do not often get to experience. (See Table 6.)
Atypical Student 2:
Student 2 has also done really well this week. His scores are also in the “exceeds”
category. I would have liked to have seen him do a little better in his fluency. Although he did
move from “meets” to “exceeds,” I would have thought that his oral fluency score today would
have been into the 200s range. I will need to find a way to motivate him to do better because he
has the ability. (See Table 7.)
Atypical Student 3:
Student 3 is really the most amazing of the students. She moved from “significant
weakness” scores to a “meets” score in oral fluency and an “exceeds” score in comprehension.
She and I have spoken a few times throughout the week and she is really feeling much more
confident about her reading. She knows she struggles and is slower than the rest of the group,
but she can also see her own self-improvement. She has learned not to compare herself to the
rest of the group, just to her own self and she is proud. I, too, am proud of her. (See Table 8.)
43
Whole Class:
Everyone has done really well this week. All 22 students were in the “exceeds” or
“meets” category in oral fluency, and 20 of the 22 students did the same in comprehension. I am
very excited to see the work in teaching direct fluency skills and how it affects student
achievement. I have also stressed a lot this week about the importance of strong reading and the
need to read some things repeatedly. These are the skills that my class of struggling readers will
need to embrace in order to continue to see success in the area of reading. (See Table 9.)
Today’s Technique:
Again, today I did not really teach a new skill, but we did review the week’s skills and
assess our growth over the week. I cannot stress enough about how proud I am of my students
and hope to see their continued growth through the direct instruction of fluency skills.
Day 6: March 21, 2011 (90 minutes)
Lesson Objectives:
Students will perform an oral fluency activity at or above 135 words correct per
minute (WCPM) in a given passage.
Students will comprehend the given text at 70% accuracy or higher.
Instructional Procedures:
This week’s procedures will be very similar to last week. I plan to follow the same basic
format. I will be using Chapters 6-9 in the novel Holes by Louis Sachar as the basis of this
week’s lessons.
I will begin testing their oral fluency using Chapter 6 from the book as our passage. They
will also take a MAZE assessment over this reading.
44
When all 22 students have finished both assessments, I will then model an appropriate
reading of the passage and share with the students that we will be using repeated readings each
day to improve our fluency and comprehension skills. We will also be charting our progress
throughout the week.
Technology:
Today’s lesson will incorporate the website interventioncentral.org in order to create the
oral fluency passages and the MAZE passage.
Modifications:
The students did really well last week with the passage, so I have added to the length of
the passage and have chosen a passage that is more difficult to read aloud fluently.
Atypical Student 1:
Student 1 did well today on both assessments meeting standards. Today’s passage was
longer and more difficult, so I was happy to see him do well. I am anxious to see how last
week’s interventions will affect this week’s assessments. (See Table 6.)
Atypical Student 2:
Student 2 did not meet standards today on either assessment. He was having a very off
day. He has been having some personal issues outside of school that I believe affected today’s
performance. He also shared with me that the weekend was difficult. I do not want to violate his
privacy by being more specific. (See Table 7.)
Atypical Student 3:
Student 3 showed significant weaknesses in today’s assessments. She and I both
expected this. We discussed her progress today, and she understands that she will not do well on
45
this type of assessment the first time around. She is looking forward to her increased
performance as the week goes on. This is where she will shine. She is really beginning to
understand her dyslexia, and how she can manage it. (See Table 8.)
Whole Class:
Overall, I feel that we are beginning at a better place this week. The students are buying
into this strategy and are really trying to do their best work. Some were disappointed in their
scores today. We discussed, at length, that it is normal to see a drop from last Friday. It was a
fresh read today and I told them that they should not compare it to Friday. This week is a new,
more difficult passage. The results will come at the end of the week. (See Table 9.)
Today’s Technique:
Today we did not practice anything new, but we really focused on discussing the growth
the students will see as we go. I also stressed that we have only been working for a week, and it
takes time to really see change.
Day 7: March 22, 2011 (45 minutes)
Lesson Objectives:
Students will determine the appropriate phrasing to create fluency in a passage.
Instruction Procedures:
Today we will start with our repeated readings. I will begin with a modeled reading of
the passage. The students will then partner up to practice their passage. Each partner will read
for one minute and then record their scores on a chart. I will then have each student look at last
week’s numbers as well as this week’s. Each student will then set a personal goal to work
46
towards for Friday. I am hoping this will keep them interested and motivated to continue to
improve their fluency.
We will then work on today’s fluency skill, creating meaningful phrase units. We will
review what we worked on last week and build upon it. We will start with the middle of our
passage that we had read for our oral fluency. Students will then come to the interactive
whiteboard in order to practice their phrasing. I will also have a few students purposely make
incorrect pause marks. I will call upon others to read the passage as it was marked. This activity
should really show the students why we need meaningful chunks or phrases when we read.
Finally, I will have the students perform their assessment. They will receive the
beginning portion of this week’s oral fluency passage to mark the pauses needed to create
meaningful phrase units.
Technology:
Today’s lesson incorporated the interactive whiteboard. The students were involved in a
hands-on activity that supplemented our lesson on phrasing today.
Modifications:
Based on last week’s assessments, I had chosen to use a slightly more difficult passage
this week for all students. I also decided that although most students did well last week, I would
reteach the skill to all students because it is a new skill to them.
Atypical Student 1:
Student 1 did very well this week. He not only met standards again this week, but scored
higher than last week. Student 1 may struggle, but he has a love of reading which, I believe, has
really helped him achieve this objective throughout the unit. (See Table 6.)
47
Atypical Student 2:
Student 2 also did very well this week. He too improved over last week’s assessment
scores in the area of phrasing. If I were to continue this unit, I would probably exempt him from
future phrasing activities due his mastery of this skill. (See Table 7.)
Atypical Student 3:
Student 3 also met standards again this week. She is really working hard. If the unit
continued, I would keep working on this skill with her. Her fractured reading due to her dyslexia
really requires her to have a strong base in this area. By continuing to work at this, she will
hopefully be able to overcome some of the disadvantages she has in this area. (See Table 8.)
Whole Class:
As a whole, the class has a majority of the students in the “exceeds” or “meets” category.
Therefore, I would stop directly teaching this skill in the future. I would simply review it from
time to time, as well as model the appropriate phrasing techniques within other various lessons.
(See Table 9.)
Today’s Technique:
With a combination of the review and hands-on approaches today, I believe that the
students have found mastery with this skill. They really respond well to this type of direct
instruction that lets them be involved. Although I would not directly teach this skill any further,
I would definitely continue to use this type of approach in my instruction.
48
Day 8: March 23, 2011 (90 minutes)
Lesson Objectives:
Students will determine the meaning of unknown words or content-area vocabulary
using knowledge of prefixes, suffixes, or root words.
Students will determine connotations of words using word, sentence, and crosssentence clues.
Instructional Procedures:
As with each day in the lesson, I will begin with our repeated readings with a partner.
The students will read for one minute and track their scores, always striving to reach their
personal goal for the week. I will remind them that it is not a race and only clear, fluent reading
is acceptable.
Today, I am going to combine the vocabulary skills into one lesson, whereas last week I
taught them separately on two different days. Fluency studies show the importance of
vocabulary strategies. I will use last week’s lessons to introduce and review the skills. We will
then use vocabulary from this week’s passage to practice both context clues and word parts.
Finally, I will give the students their assessments that cover words from Chapter 7, a chapter we
have not yet read, in order to introduce them to the vocabulary.
To finish class today, I will model the reading of Chapter 7, after the students have had
the opportunity to read it silently on their own.
Technology:
Today I will incorporate the interactive whiteboard with our vocabulary skills.
49
Modifications:
Based on last week’s assessments, I will review both skills with all students. Last week
there were some students who were in either the “does not meet” or “significant weakness”
categories. I chose words this week that were slightly easier. I will also choose volunteers today
based on those assessment scores. I will give those students more practice and personal attention
today, trying to evaluate where they are struggling.
Atypical Student 1:
Student 1 “exceeded” today in both areas. He continues to surprise me. I look at his IEP,
and then I see his performance in my reading class. This unit has really helped me to see his
strengths in the area of reading. If the unit were to continue, I would also put him on a monitoronly basis in the areas of context clues and word parts. (See Table 6.)
Atypical Student 2:
Student 2 did very well with the vocabulary assessments today. I expected him to do
well on this objective. I would still like to see him try harder. I struggle with how to motivate
him to meet the challenges he is capable of. I would also put Student 2 on a monitor-only basis.
(See Table 7.)
Atypical Student 3:
Student 3 was also successful with the vocabulary. I honestly expected her to struggle
more this week with the difficulty of the words, but she came through. She seems to have a good
grasp on this skill. She, too, would be on a monitor-only basis. (See Table 8.)
Whole Class:
In the area of word parts, all the students either “met” or “exceeded.” This is an area
where I would scale back on the lessons and review only. Context clues were strong, but there
50
were still one-third of the class in the “does not meet” category. This is an area that I will
continue to work on with the students. This skill is extremely important as they get older and
will be incorporating their reading skills into the content areas. (See Table 9.)
Today’s Technique:
I believe that today’s technique of combining the vocabulary skills was quite successful.
In fact, I would no longer continue the direct instruction of word parts. Once again the hands-on
activities were very helpful. It was also very useful to be able to pull the students up as
volunteers based on their previous work from last week.
Day 9: March 24, 2011 (90 minutes)
Lesson Objectives:
Students will comprehend the given text at 80% accuracy or higher.
Instructional Procedures:
We will begin class today with our repeated readings. Many of the students are close to
or at their personal goals they established on Monday. They are even excited to read each week.
Many of the students have even asked if we can continue this particular skill after the unit is
over.
For today’s lesson, I was curious as to how the students would perform on the MAZE
assessment after they had done several readings of the passage. Because of this, I will model the
passage one more time after the timed readings. We will then complete the MAZE assessment as
second time. When we finish, I will display the MAZE passage on the interactive whiteboard so
we can discuss it and the correct answers.
Finally, I will assign Chapter 8 and 9 for the students to read silently.
51
Technology:
I will use the interactive whiteboard for the students to check their work on the MAZE
assessment.
Modifications:
There are no real modifications in today’s lesson. Each student will be completing the
same assessment, hopefully increasing their personal scores from earlier in the week.
Atypical Student 1:
Student 1 did an amazing job today. His score increased from 26 to 40. This really
shows me that the repeated reading technique does influence their comprehension scores. (See
Table 6.)
Atypical Student 2:
Student 2 also did really well. He went from a “does not meet” score of 24 to an
“exceeds” score of 36. Although I believe he could have done even better, this is very
acceptable due his personal issues earlier in the week. (See Table 7.)
Atypical Student 3:
Student 3 showed the greatest improvement among all the students in my reading class.
She went from 10 on Monday to an “exceeds” score of 34 today. Wow! Her greatest
achievement though is her increased self-confidence as a reader. (See Table 8.)
Whole Class:
As mentioned earlier, my reasoning behind this assessment today was my curiosity. The
entire class did an amazing job. I had 19 out of 22 students “exceed” in today’s assessment. The
other three students “met.” (See Table 9.)
52
Today’s Technique:
This was an extremely successful measure of the work we have been doing over the past
two weeks. This did a lot to motivate my students if nothing else.
Day 10: March 25, 2011 (90 minutes)
Lesson Objectives:
Students will perform an oral fluency activity at or above 165 words correct
per minute (WCPM) in a given passage.
Students will comprehend the given text at 95% accuracy or higher.
Instructional Procedures:
To begin today, we will do our final one minute oral fluency read. When each student is
finished with this I will model the reading of Chapters 8 and 9 which the students were to have
read yesterday. Finally we will take an Accelerated Reader test over this week’s readings,
Chapters 6-9.
Technology:
Today we will incorporate the computer based Accelerated Reader program. The
students will take a ten question test that I created over Chapters 6-9 to assess their
comprehension.
Modifications:
One of today’s modifications is the modeled reading of the chapters in order that the
students have heard a fluent reading of the information. I have also created a slightly more
difficult assessment based on the success of all the students with this week’s activities.
Atypical Student 1:
53
Student 1 met standards on today’s assessment. I did think he would do better than a 7
out of 10 on the AR test. It was more difficult than last week and did require closer attention to
detail. (See Table 6.)
Atypical Student 2:
Student 2 did really well on today’s assessment. In fact, he exceeded standards.
Hopefully today’s success will continue to motivate him as we continue with this novel. (See
Table 7.)
Atypical Student 3:
Student 3 did not meet standards today. I spoke with her after the test and she told me
that she just did not understand all the details. I believe that her dyslexia played a part in this. I
also told her not to get discouraged. She has come a long way and I do not want her to slip into
old habits. (See Table 8.)
Whole Class:
As a whole, 74% of the class either “met” or “exceeded” today. While they were taking
the AR tests, I was observing them. When they all finished, I brought the test up on the
interactive whiteboard, and we went through it question by question. By doing this, I felt like
they better understood the story’s details. They are also better prepared as we continue to read
the story. I believe I will continue to create these AR tests for each week. They tell me a lot
about how the students are understanding what they read, in a quick and easy assessment. (See
Table 9.)
Today’s Technique:
Today’s most useful information came after the assessment. The last minute decision to
go over the AR test with the group as a whole gave me a lot of insight. Many of the students
54
shared that they did not expect so many detailed questions. They also shared that once they saw
the correct answer and its location in the book, they felt like they should have known it.
Table 6: Formative Data
Atypical Student #1 (IEP, male)
Phase of
Assessment
Holes Chpt 1
Oral Fluency 1
Holes Chpt 1
MAZE
Holes Chpt 3
Context Clues
Holes Chpt 3
Word Parts
Holes Chpt 1
Phrasing
Holes Chpt 4
Comprehension
Questions Wkt
Holes Chpts 15: AR Test
Holes Chpt 1
Oral Fluency 2
Holes Chpt 6
Oral Fluency 1
Holes Chpt 6
MAZE 1
Holes Chpt 6
Phrasing
Holes Chpt 7
Context Clues
Holes Chpt 7
Word Parts
Holes Chpt 6
MAZE 2
Holes Chpt 6-8
AR
Holes Chpt 6
Oral Fluency 2
Objective 1:
Oral Fluency
161
(met)
Objective 2:
Objective 3:
Comprehension Context Clues
Objective 4:
Word Parts
Objective 5:
Phrasing
25
(did not meet)
6/8 (met)
12/12
(exceeded)
14/18
(met)
4/4
(exceeded)
10/10
(exceeded)
202
(exceeded)
189
(exceeded)
26
(met)
21/25
(met)
9/10
(exceeds)
19/19
(exceeds)
40
(exceeds)
7/10
(met)
189
(exceeds)
55
Criteria:
Assignments/Tests
Oral Fluency
MAZE
Exceeds Expectations:
90% and higher
(165 WCPM or higher)
33 or higher
Meets Expectations:
70% to 89%
(135 – 164 WCPM)
26 - 32
Did Not Meet Expectations: 60% to 69%
(100 – 134 WCPM)
20 - 25
Significant Weakness:
(99 WCPM or lower)
19 or below
59% and below
Table 7: Formative Data
Atypical Student #2 (High functioning, male)
Phase of
Assessment
Holes Chpt 1
Oral Fluency
Holes Chpt 1
MAZE
Holes Chpt 3
Context Clues
Holes Chpt 3
Word Parts
Holes Chpt 1
Phrasing
Holes Chpt 4
Comprehension
Questions Wkt
Holes Chpts 15: AR Test
Holes Chpt 1
Oral Fluency 2
Holes Chpt 6
Oral Fluency 1
Holes Chpt 6
MAZE 1
Holes Chpt 6
Phrasing
Holes Chpt 7
Context Clues
Holes Chpt 7
Word Parts
Holes Chpt 6
MAZE 2
Holes Chpt 6-8
AR
Holes Chpt 6
Objective 1:
Oral Fluency
149
(met)
Objective 2:
Objective 3:
Comprehension Context Clues
Objective 4:
Word Parts
Objective 5:
Phrasing
29
(exceeded)
7/8
(met)
10/12
(met)
13/18
(met)
4/4
(exceeded)
9/10
(exceeded)
179
(exceeded)
126
(did not
meet)
24
(did not meet)
22/25
(met)
7/10
(met)
18/19
(exceeds)
36
(exceeds)
9/10
(exceeds)
178
56
Oral Fluency 2
(exceeds)
Table 8: Formative Data
Atypical Student #3 (Dyslexic, female)
Phase of
Assessment
Holes Chpt 1
Oral Fluency
Objective 1:
Oral Fluency
76
(significant
weakness)
Holes Chpt 1
MAZE
Holes Chpt 3
Context Clues
Holes Chpt 3
Word Parts
Holes Chpt 1
Phrasing
Holes Chpt 4
Comprehension
Questions Wkt
Holes Chpts 15: AR Test
Holes Chpt 1
Oral Fluency 2
Holes Chpt 6
Oral Fluency
Holes Chpt 6
MAZE
Holes Chpt 6
Phrasing
Holes Chpt 7
Context Clues
Holes Chpt 7
Word Parts
Holes Chpt 6
MAZE 2
Holes Chpt 6-8
Objective 2:
Objective 3:
Comprehension Context Clues
Objective 4:
Word Parts
Objective 5:
Phrasing
16
(significant
weakness)
6/8
(met)
11/12
(exceeded)
13/18
(met)
3/4
(met)
9/10
(exceeded)
136
(met)
66
(significant
weakness)
10
(significant
weakness)
19/25
(met)
7/10
(met)
18/19
(exceeds)
34
(exceeds)
6/10
57
AR
Holes Chpt 6
Oral Fluency 2
(did not meet)
150
(met)
Table 9: Formative Data
Whole Class
Phase of
Assessment
Holes Chpt 1
Oral Fluency 1
Holes Chpt 1
MAZE
Holes Chpt 3
Context Clues
Holes Chpt 3
Word Parts
Objective 1:
Oral Fluency
3/22 or 14%
exceeded
13/22 or 59%
met
4/22 or 18%
did not meet
2/22 or 9%
showed
significant
weakness
Objective 2:
Comprehension
Objective 3:
Context Clues
Objective 4:
Word Parts
0/22 or 0%
exceeded
7/22 or 32% met
10/22 or 45% did
not meet
5/22 or 23%
showed
significant
weakness
0/22 or 0%
exceeded
8/22 or 36%
met
5/22 or 23%
did not meet
9/22 or 41%
showed
significant
weakness
9/22 or 41%
exceeded
9/22 or 41%
met
2/22 or 9%
Objective 5:
Phrasing
58
did not meet
2/22 or 9%
showed sig.
weakness
Holes Chpt 1
Phrasing
5/22 or 23%
exceeded
10/22 or 45%
met
6/22 or 27%
did not meet
1/22 or 5%
showed
significant
weakness
Holes Chpt 4
Comprehension
Questions Wkt
17/22 or 77%
exceeded
4/22 or 18% met
0/22 or 0%
did not meet
1/22 or 5%
showed
significant
weakness
17/22 or 77%
exceeded
3/22 or 14% met
1/22 or 5%
did not meet
1/22 or 5%
showed
significant
weakness
Holes Chpts 1-5:
AR Test
Holes Chpt 1
Oral Fluency 2
Holes Chpt 6
Oral Fluency 1
19/22 or 86%
exceeded
3/22 or 14%
met
2/22 or 9%
exceeded
10/22 or 45%
met
59
5/22 or 23%
did not meet
5/22 or 23%
showed
significant
weakness
Holes Chpt 6
MAZE 1
5/22 or 23%
exceeded
6/22 or 27% met
8/22 or 36%
did not meet
3/22 or 14%
showed
significant
weakness
Holes Chpt 6
Phrasing
19/22 or 64%
exceeded
7/22 or 31%
met
1/22 or 5%
showed
significant
weakness
Holes Chpt 7
Context Clues
5/22 or 23%
exceeded
10/22 or 46%
met
7/22 or 31%
showed
significant
weakness
Holes Chpt 7
Word Parts
Holes Chpt 6
MAZE 2
Holes Chpt 6-8
AR
15/22 or 68%
exceeded
7/22 or 32%
met
19/22 or 86%
exceeded
3/22 or 14% met
2/22 or 9%
exceeded
14/22 or 64%
met
2/22 or 9%
did not meet
4/22 or 18%
60
showed
significant
weakness
Holes Chpt 6
Oral Fluency 2
18/22 or 82%
exceeded
4/22 or 18%
met
Analysis of Post-Assessment Data
The post-assessment consists of four different sections and will be given over three days.
The format is very similar to the pre-assessment. There are three oral reading fluency passages.
They are the fifth-, sixth-, and seventh-grade levels. The MAZE passages correlate to the oral
reading fluency passages. For the vocabulary section, I chose terms that were in the sixth-grade
level passage, and they were similar to the types of vocabulary activities we had performed
throughout the unit. The phrasing section was also similar. I chose a portion of the sixth-grade
with a similar number of pauses as the pre-assessment.
I chose passages from AIMSweb to ensure that the reading levels were accurate and fair
for the students. We use AIMSweb to assess student fluency throughout our entire elementary
building. By doing this, I feel that the post-assessment is an accurate, consistent, and fair
evaluation of student learning.
Criteria for Unit:
Assignments/Tests
Oral Fluency
MAZE
Exceeds Expectations:
90% and higher
(165 WCPM or higher)
33 or higher
Meets Expectations:
70% to 89%
(135 – 164 WCPM)
26 - 32
Did Not Meet Expectations: 60% to 69%
(100 – 134 WCPM)
20 - 25
Significant Weakness:
(99 WCPM or lower)
19 or below
59% and below
61
Table 10: Post-Assessment Analysis Instrument:
Objective 1: Students will perform oral fluency activities at or above 135 words correct per
minute (WCPM) in a given passage.
Objective 2: Students will comprehend the given text.
Objective 3: Students will determine the connotations of words using word, sentence, and
cross-sentence clues.
Objective 4: Students will determine meanings of unknown words or content-area vocabulary
using knowledge of prefixes, suffixes, or root words.
Objective 5: Students will determine the appropriate phrasing to create fluency in a passage.
Post-
Objective 1:
Objective 2:
Objective 3:
Objective 4:
Objective 5:
Assessment
Oral Fluency
Comprehension Context Clues Word Parts
Phrasing
P = 25%
P=25%
P=25%
Analysis
Instruments
P=18.75%
P=6.25%
1, 2, 3, 9, 10
4, 5, 6, 7, 8
Part 1: Oral
Fluency in
X
1 minute
(3 passages)
Part 2:
MAZE in
3 minutes
X
(3 passages)
Part 3:
Vocabulary
(10 items)
Part 4:
Phrasing
(21 marks)
X
62
Post-Assessment Adaptations
There are three oral reading fluency passages. They are the fifth-, sixth-, and seventhgrade levels. I chose to make this adaptation so that each student would see success. I could
also see how students did when they met the challenges of a higher reading level, especially
considering that most of my students read at the fourth grade level. I made no other
modifications to the post-assessment so that I could get an accurate representation of their
growth, since the assessments during the unit were also not modified.
Most Successful Post-Assessment Objectives for Atypical Students
Each student was successful on the post-assessment. Student 1 showed his greatest
improvement on Objective 2: Comprehension. He increased his words correct by nine. He went
from a “did not meet” to a “meets” score. He also showed great improvement on Objective 5:
Phrasing of the post-assessment. (See Table 11.) Student 2 showed the greatest growth on
Objective 2 and Objective 5 as well. (See Table 12.) Student 3’s area of improvement was on
Objective 1: Oral Fluency. (See Table 13.)
Least Successful Post-Assessment Objectives for Atypical Students
Each of the three atypical students had areas where they dropped from their preassessment scores. Student 1 dropped 20% on the post-assessment on Objective 4: Word Parts.
(See Table 11.) Student 2 also showed the greatest drop on Objective 4. (See Table 12.) His
scores dropped 60%. Student 3 showed a 20% drop on Objective 3: Context Clues. (See Table
13.)
63
Post-Assessment Findings for Atypical Student One
Student 1 is a male with an IEP. Throughout the unit he performed better than I had
expected. I was pleased with his pre-assessment scores, so I was anxious to see how he would
improve over the ten day unit. Student 1 had a slight drop on his oral reading fluency scores of
one words correct per minute (WCPM). This did not surprise me. He basically stayed the same
in his fluency scores. It was his comprehension scores that I was truly impressed by. He
increased his scores by nine words correct (WC) on the MAZE tests. This shows me that there
are positive links between direct fluency teaching strategies and increases in comprehension. His
vocabulary scores stayed pretty steady. Although the Table 11 shows a drop of 20% on his
understand of word parts, he only dropped by one word correct. He went from a 3/3 to a 4/5 on
the assessments. This is still a positive score in my opinion. Student 1 also showed a 23%
increase on the meaningful phrase unit’s portion of the post-assessment. When we started the
unit, he was at a “significant weakness” in this area. During the post-assessment, he has shown
strong improvements into the “meets” category. This shows me that he understands that pausing
appropriately in his reading, reading in a more fluent way, is also a strong indicator to his
increase in comprehension. I would say that he showed definite gains from pre-assessment to
post-assessment.
Throughout the unit I also implemented some modifications for Student 1. I often pulled
him into small group settings to cover in detail the skills he seemed to be struggling with during
our unit. I believe this one-on-one attention was crucial to his success. Most of the time students
just need a little extra help, and you can see the light bulb come on. These types of
modifications were successful interventions for him.
64
Table 11: Post-Assessment and Growth Data
Atypical Student #1 (IEP, male)
Phase: PreAssessment
Part 1: Oral
Fluency
Passage 5
Passage 6
Passage 7
Part 2: MAZE
Objective 1:
Oral Fluency
Mean: 146
Meets
153
148
138
Passage 5
Passage 6
Passage 7
Part 3:
Vocabulary
Part 4:
Phrasing
Growth
Objective 3:
Context Clues
Objective 4:
Word Parts
4/5
Meets
3/3
Exceeds
Objective 5:
Phrasing
Mean: 21
Did Not Meet
16
27
21
Passage 5
Passage 6
Passage 7
Part 3:
Vocabulary
Part 4:
Phrasing
Phase: Post
Assessment
Part 1: Oral
Fluency
Passage 5
Passage 6
Passage 7
Part 2: MAZE
Objective 2:
Comprehension
9/17
Significant
Weakness
Mean: 145
Meets
149
136
149
Mean: 29
Meets
30
21
35
4/5
Meets
-1 WCPM
+9 WC
0%
4/5
Meets
-20%
16/21
Meets
+23%
Total Test Growth is not applicable due to the significant differences in each of the assessment
sections.
65
Post-Assessment Findings for Atypical Student Two
Student 2 is my high-functioning student. I originally chose him because I felt as though
I could challenge him to do more. On Objective 1 his oral fluency scores dropped by three
WCPM. Although this is a very little change from pre-assessment to post-assessment, I would
have liked to have seen a greater increase in his oral reading fluency. I would have to say that
my greatest challenge with Student 2 is finding a way to motivate him to reach his greatest
potential. A 10-day unit is not much time, but I am continuing many of the unit practices weekly
in my reading class lessons. I hope to tap into more of that potential before the end of the school
year. On Objective 2 I did see an increase of six WC on the MAZE passages. He went from the
bottom of the “meets” category to the top of it. Table 12 shows this increase. Again, I am
pleased to see that with the direct fluency instruction, I saw a marked increase in comprehension
scores. Context clues, Objective 3, were strength for Student 2. He showed a 20% increase. As
with Student 1, he did only change by one word correct. I feel this is strength though because he
scored so well on both the pre-assessment and the post-assessment. Student 2 did show a
significant decrease on Objective 4, word parts. He “exceeded” on his pre-assessment with a 3/3
score. His post-assessment showed a decrease of 60% to show a “significant weakness.” I am
not clear as to the drop in this objective. It may be simply that the vocabulary on the postassessment posed a greater challenge to the students. Student 3 did show a significant gain on
the Objective 5, phrasing. He increased his score by 46%. Once again, I feel that by specifically
teaching my students this skill, fluency and comprehension increased. Phrasing allows the
students to hear a passage in a more meaningful way, therefore comprehending it more fully.
Student 2 did not receive many modifications throughout the unit in the way of my
teaching. On a few occasions he was a part of the small group learning sessions I held, but most
66
of the modifications I used with him dealt with motivation. I really used our PBIS (Positive
Behavior Intervention System), The Cardinal Way, with him to positively reinforce the behaviors
I was looking for. He responded well to them during the lessons, but they did not always carry
over to his effort outside of class. Overall, I believe he did well throughout the unit and on his
post-assessment, I was just personally hoping for a little more because I know he is capable of it.
Table 12: Post-Assessment and Growth Data
Atypical Student #2 (High functioning, male)
Phase: PreAssessment
Part 1: Oral
Fluency
Passage 5
Passage 6
Passage 7
Part 2: MAZE
Objective 1:
Oral Fluency
Mean: 149
Meets
167
143
137
Objective 3:
Context Clues
Objective 4:
Word Parts
4/5
Meets
3/3
Exceeds
Objective 5:
Phrasing
Mean: 26
Meets
29
22
26
Passage 5
Passage 6
Passage 7
Part 3:
Vocabulary
Part 4:
Phrasing
Phase: Post
Assessment
Part 1: Oral
Fluency
Passage 5
Passage 6
Passage 7
Part 2:
MAZE
Passage 5
Passage 6
Passage 7
Part 3:
Vocabulary
Objective 2:
Comprehension
6/17
Significant
Weakness
Mean: 146
Meets
136
143
159
Mean: 32
Meets
35
26
35
5/5
Exceeds
2/5
Significant
67
Weakness
Part 4:
Phrasing
Growth
-3 WCPM
+ 6 WC
+20%
- 60%
17/21
Meets
+46%
Total Test Growth is not applicable due to the significant differences in each of the assessment
sections.
Post-Assessment Findings for Atypical Student Three
Student 3 is my dyslexic female. She was the student that I was most anxious to try these
direct fluency strategies with. She struggles so much with reading that I just want to help her
find some ways to help her succeed. Her oral reading fluency is a “significant weakness.” Her
score did increase from 83 WCPM to 92 WCPM. Although she is still in the “significant
weakness” category, she showed a nine word increase. This is a strong score considering her
dyslexia. I believe that continued work with repeated readings and phrasing will help her to keep
showing improvement in this area. She also showed a small increase in her comprehension.
Table 13 shows that she is still in the “does not meet” category, but I am seeing better work in
her daily classroom activities. She is at such a disadvantage in her oral reading fluency that the
comprehension will take time. I plan to use the repeated readings with her. She showed a 20%
decrease in her context clues, but like the others, it was a one word change. I do not see this as a
disadvantage at all. Her Objective 4, word parts, score remained very strong throughout the unit.
She also showed a strong score in Objective 5, phrasing. She “exceeded” on both the preassessment and the post-assessment. This particular skill has really been beneficial for her
during the repeated readings because she rereads until she finds the meaningful phrase units,
which in turn will help her with her comprehension.
68
Student 3 responds very well to one-on-one attention. I also implemented the small
group sessions with Student 3 during many of the lessons. This I believe was the most helpful
for her. It gave her a chance to explore the skill in a less threatening situation. She did not have
to perform in front of 20 other students. Reading aloud is not something she likes to do, so she
does it very little. The small group sessions gave her the chance to read aloud. This practice is
necessary to increase oral fluency. Her results were really positive and left me feeling like these
skills will be helpful for everyone.
Table 13: Post-Assessment and Growth Data
Atypical Student #3 (Dyslexic, female)
Phase: PreAssessment
Part 1: Oral
Fluency
Passage 5
Passage 6
Passage 7
Part 2: MAZE
Passage 5
Passage 6
Passage 7
Part 3:
Vocabulary
Part 4:
Phrasing
Phase: Post
Assessment
Part 1: Oral
Fluency
Passage 5
Passage 6
Passage 7
Part 2:
MAZE
Passage 5
Passage 6
Objective 1:
Oral Fluency
Mean: 83
Significant
Weakness
87
89
72
Objective 2:
Comprehension
Objective 3:
Context Clues
Objective 4:
Word Parts
5/5
Exceeds
3/3
Exceeds
Objective 5:
Phrasing
Mean: 21
Did Not Meet
19
22
22
16/17
Exceeds
Mean: 92
Significant
Weakness
100
81
94
Mean: 22
Did Not Meet
22
19
69
Passage 7
Part 3:
Vocabulary
Part 4:
Phrasing
Growth
25
4/5
Meets
+9 WCPM
+1 WC
- 20 %
5/5
Exceeds
0%
20/21
Exceeds
+1%
Total Test Growth is not applicable due to the significant differences in each of the assessment
sections.
Most Successful Post-Assessment Objectives for Whole Class
As a whole, the greatest increase was on Objective 5: Phrasing. (See Table 14.) This
was a very new skill for the students. They had had very little experience with this prior to the
unit. The other objective that showed a significant increase was Objective 2: Comprehension.
Least Successful Post-Assessment Objectives for Whole Class
The other areas of the post-assessment did not show any real decrease from the preassessment, but they did not show much change. For the most part, students seemed to move
from one category to the next. The area where there was a small amount of change was
Objective 4: Word Parts. (See Table 14.)
Post-Assessment Findings for Whole Class
The post-assessment for the unit does show growth over the pre-assessment, I believe.
Objective 1, oral fluency, seemed to stay steady from pre- to post-assessment. Many of the
students did show improvements, but they did not move from one criterion to the next. I also
spent a lot of class time stressing that fluency is not fast, it is accuracy. Because of that, I do
believe I saw some drop in scores, when in reality, they were becoming more fluent. Table 14
shows that in Objective 2, comprehension, there was the greatest growth. On the pre-assessment
70
I had 14/22 students either “meet” or “exceed.” On the post-assessment I had 19 students either
“meet” or “exceed.” This is a 23% increase. I believe this is truly significant since the unit was
only ten days in length. Objectives 3 and 4 remained steady. Vocabulary skills are something
the students see often, but I focused specifically on context clues and word parts. There was
little change. We will continue to work on these skills. I believe that there is not the increase
because more time could have been spent on these skills. More of our time over the ten days was
spent on repeated readings and phrasing. Objective 5, phrasing, showed a significant gain as
well. On the pre-assessment I had 15 students “meet” or “exceed.” On the post-assessment I
had 21/22 students “meet” or “exceed.” The students showed tremendous growth. This was a
new skill for the kids. I spent a lot of time going over this skill and providing practice for them.
They responded really well to the classroom activities and seemed to really understand how to
create meaningful phrase units. I also provided a lot of modeling. I would often hear the
students mimicking my reading style. I also would hear them using those appropriate pauses
during their oral fluency assessments. They are using this skill in all areas.
71
Table 14: Post-Assessment and Growth Data
Whole Class
Phase of
Assessment
PreAssessment
Objective 1:
Oral Fluency
Exceeds
2/22 (9%)
Meets
12/22 (55%)
Did Not Meet
7/22 (32%)
Sig Weakness
1/22 (5%)
Objective 2:
Comprehension
Exceeds
4/22 (18 %)
Meets
10/22 (45%)
Did Not Meet
7/22 (32%)
Sig Weakness
1/22 (5%)
Objective 3:
Context Clues
Exceeds
6/22 (27%)
Meets
13/22 (59%)
Did Not Meet
3/22 (14%)
Sig Weakness
0/22 (0%)
Objective 4:
Word Parts
Exceeds
15/22 (68%)
Meets
0/22 (0%)
Did Not Meet
7/22 (32%)
Sig Weakness
0/22 (0%)
Objective 5:
Phrasing
Exceeds
7/22 (32%)
Meets
8/22 (36%)
Did Not Meet
1/22 (5%)
Sig Weakness
6/22 (27%)
PostAssessment
Exceeds
1/22 (5%)
Meets
13/22 (59%)
Did Not Meet
8/22 (36%)
Sig Weakness
0/22 (0%)
Exceeds
5/22 (23%)
Meets
14/22 (64%)
Did Not Meet
2/22 (9%)
Sig Weakness
1/22 (4%)
Exceeds
9/22 (41%)
Meets
9/22 (41%)
Did Not Meet
3/22 (14%)
Sig Weakness
1/22 (4%)
Exceeds
8/22 (36%)
Meets
7/22 (32%)
Did Not Meet
4/22 (18%)
Sig Weakness
3/22 (14%)
Exceeds
7/22 (32%)
Meets
14/22 (64%)
Did Not Meet
1/22 (4%)
Sig Weakness
0/22 (0%)
Growth
Exceeds
1/22 (5%)
decrease
Meets
1/22 (5%)
increase
Did Not Meet
1/22 (5%)
Increase
Sig Weakness
0/22 (0%)
Exceeds
1/22 (5%)
increase
Meets
4/22 (18%)
Increase
Did Not Meet
5/22 (23%)
Decrease
Sig Weakness
0/22 (0%)
Exceeds
3/22 (14%)
increase
Meets
4/22 (18%)
Decrease
Did Not Meet
0/22 (0%)
Exceeds
7/22 (32%)
decrease
Meets
7/22 (32%)
Increase
Did Not Meet
3/22 (14%)
Decrease
Sig Weakness
3/22 (14%)
Increase
Exceeds
0/22 (0%)
Sig Weakness
1/22 (5%)
Increase
Meets
6/22 (27%)
Increase
Did Not Meet
0/22 (0%)
Sig Weakness
6/22 (27%)
decrease
Total Test Growth is not applicable due to the significant differences in each of the assessment
sections.
72
Chapter 4:
Summary of Results
These results are the culmination of a ten day study of a homogeneously grouped class of
lower performing sixth-grade students. Overall, the students performed quite well during this
unit that incorporated direct fluency instruction with the hopes of increasing comprehension.
Reflection on Unit and Teaching
The unit was a definite learning experience for my students and myself. My goal was to
use the direct teaching of fluency strategies to increase comprehension. I used several different
techniques over the ten days to achieve this. I used direct, strategic instruction throughout many
of the lessons. Students need to know how to think through the processes. Oftentimes, they do
not know how to do this. By modeling my thoughts aloud, they were better able to grasp the
concepts. I would then have them model their thinking process when volunteering in class. This
really helped the lessons, especially those on creating meaningful phrase units, click for the
students. I also used repeated readings. Students would do a cold read on Mondays and then
practice daily with a classmate. They were reading for fluency and to reach personal goals they
had set for themselves. By the time Friday came, they were much more fluent and did reach
those personal goals. Classroom morale and self-esteem really soared on Fridays. They could
see hard evidence of how they were improving. I would also use modeled readings for the
students. Studies show that modeling how to read is very beneficial to students who struggle
with oral reading fluency. Finally, I incorporated vocabulary strategies. As students get older,
73
vocabulary changes. They are not simply decoding words anymore. They are reading more
difficult content area material and need to know how to use context clues and the parts of words
in order to determine meaning. We worked on these skills as well throughout the unit.
I believe that my students really were able to connect with these strategies. I used oral
reading fluency passages that came directly from our novel. This was beneficial because they
not only received the practice reading fluently, but it also was meaningful to our classroom work.
Because my students are the lower of the two sixth-grade reading groups at our school, most of
them are reading at least one year below grade level. I had students share with me throughout
the unit that it does really help to read things more than once. My unit was based on the novel,
Holes, by Louis Sachar. This was also very helpful because my students can relate easily to the
characters in the novel. While reading the story, I had some students actually get into some legal
trouble and were threatened with a juvenile detention facility. I was afraid that we might need to
switch our novel, but they seemed to embrace the story even more. They even openly
volunteered some insight into the legal system involving juveniles. This is just one instance
where I could see that when students can relate to what they are reading, teachers will see more
involvement from the students. I even saw this type of connection with our passages during the
pre- and post-assessments. Passages that the students could relate to were much better than ones
they could not. Reading level did not always matter. The passage in the post-assessment about
breakfast was one of the best performing passages for the students, even though it was at least
two years above many of their reading levels.
Throughout the unit, I was able to incorporate a few different types of technology in my
lessons. Personally, I used the website www.interventioncentral.org to create the oral reading
fluency passages and MAZE passages. The students used my interactive whiteboard daily in our
74
lessons. They were able to practice and participate using a very useful technology tool. I have
found its use in all my classes to very motivating. Activities I used to have students do on the
blackboard are so much more inviting on the whiteboard. I was able to get twice as many
volunteers when I told them they were going to come to the board to show us. I also used
Accelerated Reader during our unit. The students are familiar with the program and take
comprehension tests on the computer. I could have created the same tests on paper, but this type
of tests offers motivation for the students. After they take the tests, they receive points. Our
school librarian opens an AR Store each quarter where they can “spend” their points on trinkets.
Every point they can earn is more “money” in their pockets.
The pre-assessment data was very helpful to me. I was able to see just where my students
are. I was able to determine that my students struggled more with the more difficult grade level
passages. This confirmed my choice of using Holes as the basis of my unit because it has a
lower reading level of 4.6. I believe that the students need to feel confidence in their reading
before moving onto something more challenging. I was also able to use the daily formative
assessments to see where the students were struggling and then pull them into small groups. I
found the small group instruction very helpful. The students were then able to perform the tasks.
I was able to use the paraprofessional in my classroom, so that I could pull students into these
groups. I also used the formative assessment data to create the vocabulary activities. When we
would read, I was able to see which types of words the students were struggling with. I would
then choose those types of words to use in our vocabulary activities. I also then chose those
same types of words to place on the post-assessment. The use of the interactive whiteboard also
influenced my instruction. When I saw how the students responded to the various activities they
75
were able to participate in, I would then plan the next day’s lesson to incorporate more student
involvement.
I had definite areas of strength and weakness during the unit. I believe my greatest
strength was getting to know more about my students and their learning styles. I was then able
to use that information to plan lessons with activities that met everyone’s needs. I also feel that I
have become an “expert” on fluency instruction. This was an area that I knew very little about
prior to this. I now find myself inserting fluency instruction everywhere. Even my social studies
class gets little fluency-type lessons. Another strength I saw in myself throughout the unit was
staying organized. There was a lot of information to sort and calculate daily. I was able to do
this well and then use it to create successful lessons for my students. An area of weakness I
found was that I believe I may have set the bar too high when I established my criteria. I used
AIMSweb as a basis for my oral reading fluency and MAZE standards. I used what they set as
the benchmark for students as my bottom meets scores. I did not consider that that was the
benchmark for all students. My students tend to fall below that benchmark on a daily basis. I
saw great improvement daily among my students, but my scores do not accurately represent the
growth I saw.
I learned so many things during this unit. First of all, was the use of repeated readings
with older, struggling students. I had always thought of this technique as one to be used only
with the younger elementary students. It was so beneficial for my sixth-grade students. They are
even asking when they can do it again. I plan to incorporate them soon. I also found that the
think-aloud method of teaching is really helpful. As teachers we often assume that kids think
like we do. They do not. By modeling how I would think about a problem and show them how I
worked it through, they could then see what they needed to do. I also reinforced what I already
76
knew. Prior knowledge and the ability to relate to what we read are crucial. We need to
challenge our students, but they are not going to stay with us if they cannot find something in it
they can relate to. We need to find the hook that brings them in and then the possibilities are
endless.
Examination of Research Hypothesis
As a result of increased direct fluency instruction, such as repeated readings, vocabulary
strategies, and meaningful phrase units, my sixth-grade reading class will increase their oral
fluency which will, in turn, increase their reading comprehension.
I believe that I was able to support my hypothesis that increased fluency instruction will
increase student comprehension. There were several instances when this was supported
throughout my unit. Repeated readings are a proven method of increasing fluency. After
practicing this for a week, my students were able to increase their MAZE scores on Day 9 of the
unit. The first time the students took the MAZE assessment, 50% of the students “met” or
“exceeded.” After using repeated readings, that number increased to 100%, with 86% of them
“exceeding.” I also saw a marked increase in fluency scores from Mondays to Fridays. Many of
the students increased their fluency scores by at least 50 WCPM. Some of them even doubled
their fluency scores. I also saw support that teaching the students how to read with meaningful
phrase units, increased their fluency and comprehension. I would hear students reading with
appropriate pauses, even during their one minute fluency assessments. They were consciously
reading for meaning. I have one student that particularly grew in this area. She is a good reader
and can read quite quickly. Her personal scores increased dramatically in the area of
comprehension. She actually slowed down at first and found that by doing that, she was able to
77
understand what she read. She learned that reading for speed is not the purpose. Reading for
meaning is.
I believe that this has also affected my instruction. I am using the various techniques I
incorporated throughout the unit in all areas of my instruction, not just in my reading class.
Today’s students are a challenge, to say the least. We encounter so much more than just the
student. We encounter everything that is happening in their lives. Students that struggle must
learn ways to adapt to the curriculum they face. I feel that this unit has given me more tools that
I can use to reach them. School must be a place they want to come to each day. By
incorporating strategies that they can take with them and apply in other areas, I am truly reaching
them. I am a better teacher because of this.
I believe that I confirmed my Action Research Hypothesis. Although I was only able to
specifically teach these specific strategies to my students for ten days, I saw tremendous growth.
Their oral fluency did not change much from the pre- to post-assessment, but their
comprehension did grow. I had 87% of my students either “meet” or “exceed” their
comprehension objective on the post-assessment compared to 63% on the pre-assessment. (See
Table 14.) I also saw a significant increase in their phrasing. Only 68% of the students “met” or
“exceeded” on the pre-assessment whereas 96% of the class “met” or “exceeded” on the postassessment. I believe that these data support my hypothesis. I did not see the growth in their
oral reading fluency, but I feel part of that was due to the fact that I may have set criteria that was
too challenging. Since the unit, I have progress monitored my class using AIMSweb. Those
scores were on average 17 WCPM higher than their previous monitoring prior to the unit. I
believe that all this information combined shows support that by increasing direct fluency
instruction strategies in a reading classroom, you will see an increase in student comprehension.
78
In the future, I plan to continue to use these techniques in my daily teaching. I will
continue to use repeated readings using the material we are currently reading. This activity truly
helped my students. I would also like to continue to develop the vocabulary activities. As
students get older, they will read more content area passages. They need to be able to use these
vocabulary skills to decode words in social studies, science, and other text-based readings. The
reading level of those passages will oftentimes be above their reading level and they will need
these strategies in order to find success in these areas. I will continue to use the interactive
whiteboard and small group sessions to reinforce student learning. These activities provided
students with significant growth throughout the unit. In the end, direct, strategic fluency
instruction is crucial to student comprehension.
References
79
References
Cantrell, S. C., Almasi, J. F., Carter, J. C., Rintamaa, M., & Madden, A. (2010). The impact of a
strategy-based intervention on the comprehension and strategy use of struggling
adolescent readers. Journal of Educational Psychology, 102(2), 257-280.
Kim, A., Vaughn, S., Klinger, J. K., Woodruff, A. L., Reutebuch, C. K., & Kouzekanani, K.
(2006, July/August). Improving the reading comprehension of middle school students
with disabilities through computer-assisted collaborative strategic reading. Remedial and
Special Education, 27(4), 235-249.
Macaruso, P., & Rodman, A. (2009, February). Benefits of computer-assisted instruction for
struggling readers in middle school. European Journal of Special Needs Education,
24(1), 103-113.
Manset-Williamson, G., Dunn, M., Hinshaw, R., & Nelson, J. (2008). The impact of selfquestioning strategy use on the text-reader assisted comprehension of students with
reading disabilities. International Journal of Special Education, 23(1), 123-135.
Manset-Williamson, G., & Nelson, J. (2005, Winter). Balanced, strategic reading instruction for
upper-elementary and middle school students with reading disabilities: A comparative
study of two approaches. Learning Disability Quarterly, 28(1), 59-74.
Murphy, K. P., Wilkinson, I. A. G., Soter, A. O., Hennessey, M. N., & Alexander, J. F. (2009).
Examining the effects of classroom discussion on students’ comprehension of text: A
meta-analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 101(3), 740-764.
National Reading Panel (NRP) (2000). Teaching students to read: An evidence-based
assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for
Appendices
91
reading instruction. Bethesda, MD: National Institutes of Health, National Institute of Child
Health and Human Development.
Neddenriep, C. E., Fritz, A. M., & Carrier, M. E. (2011). Assessing for generalized
improvements in reading comprehension by intervening to improve reading fluency.
Psychology in the Schools, 48(1), 14-27.
Paige, D. (2006, January/February). Increasing fluency in disabled middle school readers:
Repeated reading utilizing above grade level reading passages. Reading Horizons, 46(3),
167-181.
Papalewis, R. (2004, Spring). Struggling middle school readers: Successful, accelerating
intervention. Reading Improvement, 41(1), 24-37.
Schorzman, E. M., & Cheek, E. H. (2004). Structured strategy instruction: Investigating an
intervention for improving sixth-graders’ reading comprehension. Reading Psychology,
25, 37-60.
Tilstra, J., McMaster, K., Van den Broek, P., Kendeou, P., & Rapp, D. (2009). Simple but
complex: Components of the simple view of reading across grade levels. Journal of
Research in Reading, 32(4), 383-401.
Torgesen, J.K. & Burgess, S.R. (1998). Consistency of reading-related phonological processes
throughout early childhood: Evidence from longitudinal-correlational and instructional
studies. In J. Metsala & L.Ehri (Eds.). Word Recognition in Beginning Reading, 161-188.
Hillsdale, NJ:Lawrence Erlbaum Assoc.
Wolf, M. K., Crosson, A. C., & Resnick, L.B. (2005). Classroom talk for rigorous reading
comprehension instruction. Reading Psychology, 26, 27-53.
Appendices
Appendix A
92
Appendix A: Journal Entries
Journal Entry 1
In today’s lesson we read an excerpt from the biography, When Marian Sang, from our
textbook. My objectives for the lesson included understanding and indentifying generalizations,
identifying areas of prejudice in Marian Anderson’s life and why they occurred, identifying the
author’s purpose as well as the theme of the story, defining vocabulary terms, and drawing
conclusions from provided text. During class we read the story for the first time while listening
to it on CD. I would stop the story periodically to cover and discuss the various objectives
throughout the story as well as provide the students time to discuss what they were thinking,
asking questions, and making predictions about what would happen next. We also watched a
slide show of pictures of Marian Anderson while listening to her sing on the interactive
whiteboard. I used an informal assessment today that covered drawing conclusions and making
generalizations.
I did make some changes as I taught today’s lesson. Originally I had planned to cover
just the tested vocabulary words, but as we got into the story, I also added two terms: contralto
and tuition. These terms were important in the story. I chose to do this because when I asked the
students if they knew what they meant, no one could give me an answer. I encouraged the
students to use context clues to find their meanings. We then compared their ideas to the
dictionary. I also chose to add more information about Jim Crow laws to today’s lesson. The
students understood the concept of segregation, but they did not understand who Jim Crow was.
We stopped the story and I showed them a basic site from the Internet, again using my
interactive whiteboard.
Abstract
93
It was interesting to watch my lesson from the students’ point of view. I know my
students pretty well at this point in the school year, but I definitely know who to include more in
my lessons. Most of my students were very interested in the story today and showed me this by
paying close attention and participating. There were four students though who offered very little
and spent most of their time playing with their pencils or looking out the window. One student
chose to write a note under his textbook. Developmentally, I noticed that background
information really impacted student learning. We have been working for the past week on
different aspects of building background. Many of the students relied solely on what we had
discussed in class and brought little else to the discussion. I did have two girls really surprise me
by offering outside information. As far as my teaching skills are concerned, I did most of the
“right” things. I was calling on a variety of students, asking different levels of questions, and
monitored behavior by moving around the classroom. At one point in the story, Marian
Anderson sings an encore at the Lincoln Memorial. When I “sang” a portion of the song, the
kids really perked up and became more involved. When one of my students could then tell me
that the song’s origin was slavery, I was ecstatic. It launched us into a discussion about why
Marian Anderson may have chosen that particular song for her encore. The students seemed to
really understand.
For today’s lesson I performed an informal assessment. We did an activity that
covered generalizations. We did several together and then I had the students work on one by
themselves. We then discussed them. Eighteen of the 22 had a good grasp of the concept. I
also had the students give me a show of hands if they felt like they understood what
generalizations were. Again, a majority of the students, 19 out of 22,
Appendix A
94
said yes. The students who had trouble with today’s skill were the ones who were choosing
not to participate. Two of the students have discipline issues on a regular basis. The third
student has been absent for part of our unit. I feel like he is still trying to catch up.
The students who were successful were my ready-to-volunteer kids. I even had three
out of my six ADHD students become very involved in the lesson. In order to make the lesson
more challenging for some of the students, I could have asked some higher level questions to
them directly.
Overall, today’s lesson was a really good one. My paraprofessional, Mrs. Brown, and I
discussed the lesson and we were both impressed. The kids really seemed interested, which
made it much more successful. Although today’s lesson was pretty teacher-driven, I used a lot of
questioning techniques to keep the students focused. I also varied the lesson from time to time
based on their questions, like the addition of the Jim Crow information from the Internet. Most
students had a good grasp of the major skill today which was making generalizations. I did also
reward 14 of the 22 students using our PBIS system. They received tokens for good questions,
answers, and participation.
Journal Entry 2
In today’s lesson we continued our discussion of the famous African American contralto,
Marian Anderson by rereading the story, When Marian Sang, from our textbook. My objectives
for the lesson included understanding and identifying generalizations in a piece of text and using
context clues to define the vocabulary words from our story. During class we reviewed our
vocabulary words and discussed their definitions. I also had a number of students use the words
in sentences correctly. The students were very successful with this. We then reviewed
Appendix A
95
generalizations. I had the students make their own generalizations about the story as well as just
things in general. Then we read the story again, all the way through this time without me
stopping to cover and discuss various items. Today I used a formal assessment to assess
vocabulary and generalizations, the two major objectives of our lesson.
I did not make any major changes in today’s lesson. The students seemed to understand
today’s concepts. They were participating and volunteering readily in class. The students were
able to use our terms in their own sentences correctly and were able to make generalizations
using the clue words we had been discussing all week. As far as my own teaching skills, today’s
lesson was teacher-driven. I would have to say that although the students were with me, it was
not the most exciting lesson ever. I think that next time I may break the students up into
readiness level groups in order to create generalizations from a new piece of text.
For today’s lesson I assessed the students in two areas, vocabulary and generalizations.
(See attached chart.) The vocabulary assessment was quite successful. My objective was for the
students to identify the meaning of vocabulary words using context clues. Twenty of the 21
students either met or exceeded expectations by getting at least five of the nine words correct.
(One student has been absent all week and therefore has not been included at this time.) The
only student who showed a significant weakness was my IEP student. By taking a closer look at
the assessment, he scored well on the questions that seemed to correlate better with our
classroom discussions. They were like the ones in class. The ones he missed were “new” to
him. We had not discussed those terms in exactly the same way. He was not using the context
clues to determine the answer. The other students were able to take the skills from class and
apply them to the questions. The assessment over generalizations did not go as well. My
objective was for the students to identify the generalization in given text. Ten of the 21 students
Appendix A
96
that were assessed on generalizations today had significant weaknesses. Although this is a
higher level thinking skill than using context clues to determine meaning, I still thought they
would have done better. We worked hard on this skill all week. The 11 students who exceeded
or met expectations were my better students. The students who had the weaknesses in this area
were my IEP student, my six ADHD students, and my students who tend to have discipline
issues. I intend to continue covering generalizations and assess it again next week. To challenge
the students who were successful, I will probably break the class into two groups. The more
successful students will work on generalizations with slightly more difficult text whereas the
students with weaknesses will have less difficult text and more review. I will use my
paraprofessional to help with the management of this task.
Overall, I was pleased with the vocabulary portion of class. We have made great strides
since the beginning of the year. I have to be honest that I was disappointed with the
generalizations. We will continue to work on them next week with the readiness level group
activity I discussed earlier.
When Marian Sang – Assessment Data
Objective 1 – To identify the meaning of vocabulary words using context clues.
Exceeds Expectations
Meets Expectations
Significant Weaknesses
(7/7 correct)
(5or 6/7 correct)
(0-4/7 correct)
13
7
1
Objective 2 – To identify the generalizations in given text.
Exceeds Expectations
Meets Expectations
Significant Weaknesses
(3/3 correct)
(2/3 correct)
(0 or 1/3 correct)
Appendix A
5
6
97
10
* One student did not participate due his week long absence.
Journal Entry 3
In today’s lesson we began a new unit in our reading textbook. I introduced our skill,
sequencing; covered swimming safety as background information; introduced the vocabulary for
this unit; and reviewed context clues as a means to determine word meaning. My objectives for
today were to establish a clear understanding of our topic, swimming safety; to review
sequencing; and introduce our vocabulary.
Class started with the students clearing off their desks. I read to them a short passage
entitled Dragon Slayers. The passage was about a group of teenagers in Alaska that are trained
firefighters. The passage spurred on a great discussion about how people can help other people
as well as the training required to become a firefighter. From there we moved on to reviewing
sequencing. We have covered this skill before in earlier units. We discussed the clue words to
look for when sequencing such as now, then, while, finally, etc. I then informally assessed the
students using a student workpage that I had scanned and then projected onto my interactive
whiteboard. We read the passage together, and then student volunteers filled out the information
on the whiteboard. I would say that all the students had a clear understanding of sequencing
today. Later in the unit I plan to formally assess this skill.
We switched gears again. I asked the students a question, Where can you go swimming?
The students came up with answers such as pools, rivers, lakes, and the ocean. We then
Appendix A
98
completed a Venn diagram on the whiteboard comparing and contrasting pools and oceans. The
students seemed very involved in this. They enjoy being able to work on the whiteboard. They
also know that only quiet students who are paying attention will get called upon. From here we
moved to another passage in the textbook about swimming safety. I used this passage to
introduce our vocabulary. We also covered context clues. In order to establish a better
understanding of the vocabulary, we also completed a chart on the board that included the term,
an antonym, a synonym, and a sentence using the word. The most difficult part of this activity
was coming up with the antonyms. The higher achieving students in my class were my
volunteers for this portion. I also challenged them to keep thinking. They came up with the
greatest terms. The lower achieving students then used this as a springboard to find synonyms
and sentences. I had not intended to meet the different levels of the class this way, but it worked
really well. When we finished with the vocabulary, I assigned a quiz covering the terms. I used
this as my formal assessment today. (See attached chart.) The results of this assessment showed
18 of 21 students meeting or exceeding standards. (One student has been absent and therefore is
not included at this time.) These students were able to correctly define the vocabulary terms as
well as use them appropriately in sentences. The three students who showed weaknesses on this
assessment had more difficulty matching terms to their definitions. Two of those three used all
the words correctly in their own sentences and the third student only missed one of the sentences.
Although they did not score as high as the rest of their peers, they were able to perform the
higher level thinking skill with success. Because of such a high success rate with this activity, I
will spend more time in class with word usage versus simple definitions for the majority of the
students. For those three that struggled, I will keep the vocabulary chart up in the classroom and
encourage them to refer to it daily as a type of review.
Appendix A
99
I continue to try different strategies in the classroom with my students. There are days
when our 90 minute period gets pretty long for some of them. I have been using different
strategies to encourage student participation. I have also been trying to encourage our PBIS
system within the classroom. The kids really respond well to the positive reinforcement. When
choosing my three atypical students, I thought about all the different levels of my reading class.
I decided to pick students from these different levels. Student 1 has an IEP and struggles the
most in my class. Student 2 is my most capable student although he often does not perform due
to lack of initiative. Student 3 is dyslexic and seems to really struggle with all our skills. She is
also a Title I student.
Learning to Swim – Vocabulary Assessment
Objective -- To define and use given terms correctly in a sentence.
Exceeds Expectation
Meets Expectations
Significant Weakness
(14-15/15 correct)
(11-13/15 correct)
(0-10/15 correct)
7
11
3 (All scored a 10)
* One student was absent during this assessment.
Journal Entry 4
Today’s lesson was a hit with the kids. I started off with covering our skills up to this
point in the story, our vocabulary and sequencing. My objectives for this lesson were to review
our skills and to introduce a differentiated activity based on student interest. We then broke into
two groups based on the results of my generalizations assessment earlier in the week. Mrs.
Appendix A
100
Brown, my paraprofessional, took the higher achieving group to one area of the classroom to
read a leveled reader that goes along with our unit. She and I had discussed the areas to focus
upon for those students. Along with their reading, they practiced sequencing, making
generalizations, and reviewing vocabulary. I took the second group of ten students which
included two of the three students I have chosen as my atypical students. We also read a leveled
reader. With my group we focused on the same skills. We spent a lot of time making
generalizations as we read. I really focused on the use of specific words like most, all, some, and
none. I also used a lot of modeling and thinking out loud. I showed them how I would think
about it. By working with this small group, the kids did much better. To assess what all the
students learned, I assigned a worksheet with sequencing and vocabulary activities. Although
the readers were at different levels, the activities were the same. (See attached chart.)
The vocabulary part of the assessment was very successful. All of the students either
exceeded or met my expectations. The one area of weakness that I noticed on the vocabulary
was antonyms. The students used the vocabulary in their own sentences but also had to match up
the terms to an antonym. This is where many struggled. I believe that part of this is due to the
lack of background and word knowledge. After they know a word, they can use it. Applying it
is a way that forces them to find opposite words is much more difficult because they just do not
have the vocabulary background.
The second part of the assessment was sequencing. My students are proficient at putting
specific events in order. This particular assessment asked them to look at two specific events in
the story and then sequence what happened before, during, and after. They had a difficult time
because they were looking for just one thing. They could not summarize the events that caused
or led up to the main event. They then had difficulty stating the after events. Nine of the 17
Appendix A
101
students assessed were weak with this. We definitely have some work to do. Even the seven
students who met expectations need extra practice. Their answers were correct but could have
been better. I plan on going over this particular activity on the whiteboard and showing them
specifically how to find and apply this knowledge. Then I will give them a second assessment
where they have to do the same thing with a new passage.
To end class I introduced a differentiated activity to the students. The purpose of the
activity is to enrich. Although all students are participating, this activity gives my higher
achieving students a challenge. The students were given a choice of writing a diary entry about a
challenge or fear they have overcome, designing a safety poster about swimming tips at the
beach, or creating a PowerPoint presentation about swimming tips. The students loved that they
had choice. I introduced the activity on the interactive whiteboard. After explaining each
activity and how it will be graded, I asked the students to go home and think about which activity
best suits their individual strengths. Some are good at art, some love to do anything that includes
a computer, and others yearn to write. I will be anxious to see who picks what. They always
surprise me. By integrating this enrichment activity into class, I think that it will break up the
monotony of the lesson and therefore improve student performance and behavior.
Learning to Swim – Vocabulary and Sequencing Assessment
Objective 1 – To use vocabulary correctly in a sentence and match vocabulary to given
antonyms.
Exceeds Expectations
Meets Expectations
Significant Weaknesses
(7-8/8 correct)
(5-6/8 correct)
(0-4/8 correct)
12
5
0
Appendix A
Objective 2 – To sequence items around a specific event in the story.
Exceeds Expectations
Meets Expectations
Significant Weaknesses
(6/6 correct)
(4-5/6 correct)
(0-3/6 correct)
1
7
9
* Five students were absent.
102
Appendix A
103