A Study of The Georgia Early Intervention
Program Models and Their Effect on Students’
Reading Achievement
DR. VALERIE HARRISON
GCEL
FEBRUARY 24-26, 2014
Dr. Valerie Harrison, Educationally Yours, LLC
Outline













Introduction
Georgia Early Intervention Program
Problem Background
Problem Statement
Purpose of Study
Theoretical Framework
Research Questions
Significance of Study
Literature Review
Research Design
Results
Findings
Recommendations
Dr. Valerie Harrison, Educationally Yours, LLC
Introduction
 Millions of children in the United States have
difficulty reading; and have not acquired the skills
necessary to become proficient readers (Somers, 2006).
 Without intervention, most readers who are
deficient continue to lag behind and never catch up
(Reschly, 2010; Somers, 2006;Torgesen, 2004; Wanzek & Vaughn,
2007).
 According to Wanzek & Vaughn (2007), the
outcomes are favorable for children who participate
in extensive intervention.
Dr. Valerie Harrison, Educationally Yours, LLC
4/13/2015
3
Introduction
 The Georgia Early Intervention Program (EIP) is a
state funded early intervention initiative for K-5
grades. It was created to meet the requirements of
House Bill 1187 (GaDOE, 2004).
 EIP is designed to support students who are
performing below grade level in the area of reading
by providing additional resources to eligible
students to help them reach grade level
performance (GaDOE, 2010).
Dr. Valerie Harrison, Educationally Yours, LLC
One proven way to support low-level readers is to reduce the class size. Implementing
smaller class sizes not only improves student achievement, it also improves
student/teacher relations and decreases class disruptions, Torgesen, 2004
Dr. Valerie Harrison, Educationally Yours, LLC
Early Intervention Program (EIP)
The Georgia Early Intervention Program
meets the requirements of Official Code of
Georgia 20-2-153, which states, “The Early
Intervention Program shall serve students
who are at risk of not reaching or maintaining
academic grade level.”
Dr. Valerie Harrison, Educationally Yours, LLC
Early Intervention Program (EIP)
STAFF:
EIP must be staffed by certified teachers.
Full-time paraprofessionals may assist
Kindergarten EIP teachers for the purposes
of reducing the pupil-teacher ratio to meet
class size reduction rules.
Dr. Valerie Harrison, Educationally Yours, LLC
Early Intervention Program (EIP)
Student Student
Student Student
Student Student
Student
Student Student
Student
Student Student
Student Student
Teacher
Dr. Valerie Harrison, Educationally Yours, LLC
Augmented Model (AU)
Student
Student
Student
Student
Student
Student
Student
Student
Student
Student
Student
Student
Student
Student
14 EIP
Students
Teacher
Dr. Valerie Harrison, Educationally Yours, LLC
Student
Student
Student
Student
Student
Student
Student
Student
Student
Student
Student
Student
Student
Student
Teacher
Non-EIP
Students
Pullout Model (PO)
Student
Student
Student
Student
Student
Teacher
Dr. Valerie Harrison, Educationally Yours, LLC
Student
18 EIP Students
14 EIP Students
Self-Contained Model (SC)
Student
Student
14 EIP Students
Student
Student
18 EIP Students
Student
Student
Student
Student
Student
Student
Student
Student
Student
Student
Student
Student
Teacher
Dr. Valerie Harrison, Educationally Yours, LLC
Student
Student
Problem Background
 Most children who experience difficulty learning to
read during the primary grades will most likely
never learn to read adequately (Beswick, Stoat, & Willms,
2007).
 Studies revealed that children who have low
literacy skills at the end of third grade often need
long-term intervention (Reschly, 2010; Beswick, Stoat, &
Willms, 2007; Torgesen, Rashotte, & Alexander, 2001).
 In light of these statistics, intensive reading
intervention must be a priority for schools
particularly those that serve at-risks populations
(Menzies, Mahdavi, & Lewis, 2008).
Dr. Valerie Harrison, Educationally
Yours, LLC
4/13/2015
12
Problem Background
Each year, Georgia allots an average of 600 million dollars a year to serve students
who are functioning below grade level. The Georgia General Assembly has expended
nearly six billion dollars to serve at- risk learners in grades K-5.
Dr. Valerie Harrison, Educationally Yours, LLC
Problem Background
In the large urban school district in Georgia where the research was conducted,
nearly 300 million dollars have been expended on the Early Intervention Program
since 2002. An average of 31 million dollars a year has been allocated to the
program.
School District in Georgia Earning for the Early
Intervention Program Earnings
$50,000,000.00
$45,000,000.00
$40,000,000.00
$35,000,000.00
$30,000,000.00
$25,000,000.00
$20,000,000.00
$15,000,000.00
$10,000,000.00
$5,000,000.00
$-
Dr. Valerie Harrison, Educationally Yours, LLC
Total Earnings
Problem Statement
 The First Line of Defense: Georgia’s Early Intervention
Program study, administered by the Georgia Department
of Education (2004), revealed the need for more research
in all areas of the program, particularly in the area of
delivery models, “there has been no systematic data
collected on the use of the model types implemented
across the state” (p.3).
 In a large urban school district in Georgia, millions of
dollars have been expended with no systematic
assessment of the programs effectiveness.
Dr. Valerie Harrison, Educationally Yours, LLC
15
Problem Statement
 Additionally, the research conducted on reading
intervention using the CSR models is limited and leads to
no conclusive evidence on which model produced the
greatest gains in student achievement.
 The State Department of Education, school districts, and
schools across Georgia want to know if the Georgia Early
Intervention Program is effective in improving reading
achievement in low performing students.
(GaDOE, 2004)
Dr. Valerie Harrison, Educationally Yours, LLC
16
4/13/2015
Purpose of Study
The purpose of this study was to examine the
Early Intervention Program models and student
reading achievement in one large urban school
district in Georgia, in order to determine the
effectiveness of the program in meeting its goal
of increasing the academic performance of
students in the elementary grades who are
reading below grade level.
Dr. Valerie Harrison, Educationally Yours, LLC
Theoretical Framework
Researcher
Year
Theoretical Understanding
Vygotsky
1978
Vygotsky’s Zone of Proximal Development:
Children learn in a social environment with a more capable
other (Vygotsky, 1978).
Piaget
1972
Agbenyega
2005
The Maturation Theory:
Children learn cognitive content when they are
developmentally ready or mature. Their maturity level serves
as a prerequisite for future learning.
Guillemette,
2005
Socialization Theory :
Promotes learning in a social environment through
assimilating students into the school and class culture.
Lazear
Mishel &
Rothsteing,
2002
2001
Theory of Class Size:
Students in smaller classes learning is increased due to a
decrease in the number of disruptions during class time.
2002
Dr. Valerie Harrison, Educationally Yours, LLC
Theoretical Framework
Variables in Study
The
Socialization
Theory
Augmented Model
Vygotsky’s Zone
of Proximal
Development
(ZPD)
Pullout Model
Reading
Achievement
Lazear’s
Theory of
Class Size
Piaget’s
Maturation
Theory
Self-Contained Model
Traditional Instruction
Independent Variables
Dr. Valerie Harrison, Educationally Yours, LLC
Dependent Variable
Research Questions
Research Question
One
Research Question
Two
Research Question
Three
Research Question
Four
Is there a
significant
difference in the
reading
achievement posttest score as
measured by the
benchmark reading
post-test between
first grade Early
Intervention
Program students
taught using the
pullout,
augmented, selfcontained models,
and traditional
instruction?
Is there a
significant
difference in the
reading
achievement posttest score as
measured by the
benchmark reading
post-test between
second grade Early
Intervention
Program students
taught using the
pullout,
augmented, selfcontained models,
and traditional
instruction?
Is there a
significant
difference in the
reading
achievement posttest score as
measured by the
benchmark reading
post-test between
Third grade Early
Intervention
Program students
taught using the
pullout,
augmented, selfcontained models,
and traditional
instruction?
What are the
teachers’
perceptions of the
Early Intervention
Programs models,
augmented,
pullout, and selfcontained in
improving reading
achievement in
below level readers?
Dr. Valerie Harrison, Educationally Yours, LLC
4/13/2015
20
Significance of Study
 This thorough examination of the Early Intervention Program could
help schools in Georgia make instructional decisions about the most
effective model to use to yield the greatest gain in student achievement.
 This study could help the school district in Georgia where the study
was conducted make important decisions on the effectiveness of the
augmented, pullout, and self-contained instructional models.
 Research on the effectiveness of EIP could possibly assist the Georgia
State Department of Education with program funding concerns.
 This study adds to the body of knowledge on effective reading
intervention models and improving achievement in at-risk readers.
Dr. Valerie Harrison, Educationally Yours, LLC
Review of Literature
The purpose of this literature review is to :
 Review literature on the Georgia Early Intervention
Program
 Examine research surrounding early intervention in reading
and its effect on improving reading achievement in low
performing students
 Investigate the research on using class size reduction as a
reading intervention to improve student achievement and
close the achievement gap
 Explore literature on intervention models and their effect
on reading achievement
Dr. Valerie Harrison, Educationally Yours, LLC
Summary of Literature Review
 When intervention is offered early in the student’s elementary career, they
eventually learn to read and achieve grade level status (Beswick, Stoat, &
Willms, 2007). Intervention is most effective when it occur before the
student enters fourth grade.
 One study conducted on the Georgia Early Intervention Program, reveals
very positive results for improving student achieve in at-risk readers
(Homes, 2009). While another conducted on EIP grouping techniques,
resulted in no significant improvement in reading for fifth graders (Davis,
2007).
 Reducing class size is a proven way to support below level reader. Class size
reduction produces the greatest gains when implemented early. Overall,
these studies have revealed that the effects from class size reduction increase
as the class size gets smaller.
 The success of class size reductions is influenced by the intervention models
employed to deliver the services. Literature on reading intervention models
reveals that no model is more effective than the other in improving student
achievement (Woodward & Talbert-Johnson , 2009).
Dr. Valerie Harrison, Educationally Yours, LLC
Sampling Population: Demographics
 This study is being conducted in a large urban school district in Georgia.
 The school system’s enrollment consists of 98,616 students:






African-American (70.2%)
Asian (2.2%)
Hispanic (12.0%)
Multiracial (1.5%)
White (10.9%)
Other (.5).
Approximately
69.4% of the students are on free or reduced lunch
10.7% of the population is served in Special Education
8.51% of the students are served as English Language Learners
22.9% of the student population is served in the Early Intervention
Program
 70 % of the students are low-socio-economic status
 93% of the schools are Title I




(DCSS, 2010)
Dr. Valerie Harrison, Educationally Yours, LLC
Selection of Participants
 Purposeful Sampling Method
 The study was conducted using EIP eligible reading students in




9 Title I schools
Grades 1-3
70 teachers
534 students
 Reading teachers were selected based on their use of the EIP models




Pullout (PO)
Augmented (AU)
Self-contained (SC)
No EIP intervention or traditional instruction (NO)
Dr. Valerie Harrison, Educationally Yours, LLC
Quantitative Research Design
Research Question One
Research Question Two
Research Question
Three
Research
Design
Is there a significant
difference in the
reading achievement
post-test score as
measured by the
benchmark reading
post-test between
first grade Early
Intervention Program
students taught
using the pullout,
augmented, selfcontained models,
and traditional
instruction?
Is there a significant
difference in the
reading achievement
post-test score as
measured by the
benchmark reading
post-test between
second grade Early
Intervention Program
students taught
using the pullout,
augmented, selfcontained models,
and traditional
instruction?
Is there a significant
difference in the
reading achievement
post-test score as
measured by the
benchmark reading
post-test between
Third grade Early
Intervention Program
students taught
using the pullout,
augmented, selfcontained models,
and traditional
instruction?
Design - Quantitative
Ex-post facto design
with an alternative
treatment post-test only
Data Collection
Houghton Mifflin
Harcourt Benchmark
Reading Tests
Sampling
Purposeful Sampling
Statistical Test
One-way within-subject
ANOVA
with a Scheffe pairwise
comparison
A p value would was set
at the < .05 level
Dr. Valerie Harrison, Educationally Yours, LLC
Results
Research Question One
Is there a significant difference in the reading achievement post-test score as measured by the
benchmark reading post-test between first grade Early Intervention Program students
taught using the pullout, augmented, self-contained models, and traditional instruction?

The ANOVA revealed that there was a statistically significant difference in the reading
benchmark post-test scores of first grade students receiving EIP instruction using the AU,
PO, SC, and NO (traditional instruction) instructional model groups
The ANOVA indicates a significant difference in the instructional model groups, (F (3, 182)
= 7.222, p < .05), η2 = 0.106.
 Null hypothesis was rejected (F=7.222, p<.05)

Analysis of Variance of Instructional Models of 1st Students Benchmark Post-Test Reading
Scores
Source
Between Groups
Within Groups
Total
Dƒ
SS
MS
F
Sig.
η2
8536.78
3
2845.59
7.222
.000
0.106
182
394.02
71712.2
8
80249.
06
*p< .05
Dr. Valerie Harrison, Educationally Yours, LLC
185
Findings
Research Question One - Grade 1
 In order to isolate where the differences within the means lie, a post hoc
Scheffe pairwise comparison test was conducted
 In first grade, below level readers who received instruction using the
augmented model or traditional instruction scored significantly higher
than students taught using the self-contained or pullout models.
 In first grade, the post hoc Scheffe pairwise comparison, indicated that
there was a significant difference between



(AU-SC, sig = 0.05 < 0.05)
(NO-PO, sig = 0.04< 0.05)
(NO-SC, sig = 0.00 < 0.05)
 The null hypothesis was rejected and the alternate hypothesis was
accepted.
Dr. Valerie Harrison, Educationally Yours, LLC
Conclusions
Research Question One – Grade 1
 In First Grade:
 The augmented model proved to be significantly more effective when
addressing the needs of below level first grade readers.

EIP students taught using the pullout and the self-contained models
post-test scores were not statistically significant and would not be
the most effective model when addressing the needs of below level
reader.

Below level readers who received traditional or no intervention,
reading benchmark post-test scores were more statistically
significant than students taught using the pullout and self-contained
models.
Dr. Valerie Harrison, Educationally Yours, LLC
4/13/2015
29
Conclusions
Research Question One – Grade 1
First
Grade
First
Grade
Dr. Valerie Harrison, Educationally Yours, LLC
First
Grade
AU
PO
SC
NO
First
Grade
4/13/2015
30
Results
Research Question Two – Grade 2
Is there a significant difference in the reading achievement post-test score as measured by the
benchmark reading post-test between second grade Early Intervention Program students
taught using the pullout, augmented, self-contained models, and traditional instruction?
The ANOVA revealed that there was a statistically significant difference in the reading
benchmark post-test scores of second grade students receiving EIP instruction using the AU,
PO, SC, and NO (traditional instruction) instructional model groups.
 The ANOVA indicates a significant difference in the instructional model groups, (F (3, 133) =
8.06, p < .05), η2 = 0.15
 Null hypothesis was rejected (F=8.06, p<.05)

Analysis of Variance of Instructional Models of 2nd Students Benchmark
Reading Post-Test Scores
Source
Between Groups
Within Groups
Total
DF
7996.50
43989.63
51986.13
*p< .05
Dr. Valerie Harrison, Educationally Yours, LLC
SS
3
133
136
MS
2665.50
330.75
F
8.06
Sig.
η2
.00 0.15
Research Question Two
Findings
 In order to isolate where the differences within the means lie, a post hoc
Scheffe pairwise comparison test was conducted.
 In second grade, below level readers who received instruction using the
augmented and the self-contained models reading achievement was
significantly higher than students who received pullout or traditional
(no EIP) instruction.
 In second grade, the post hoc Scheffe pairwise comparison indicated
that there was a significant difference between




(AU-PO, sig = 0.01 < 0.05)
(AU-NO, sig = 0.00< 0.05)
(SC-PO, sig = 0.03 < 0.05)
(SC-NO, sig = 0.03 < 0.05)
 The null hypothesis was rejected and the alternate hypothesis was
accepted.
Dr. Valerie Harrison, Educationally Yours, LLC
Conclusions
Research Question Two – Second Grade
In Second Grade
 Below average second grade readers who received EIP
instruction using the augmented or self-contained models
perform better than below average second grade readers
who received EIP instruction using the pullout model or
traditional instruction.
 Pullout and traditional models of instruction proved to be
an ineffective way to address the needs of below averages
readers in second grade.
Dr. Valerie Harrison, Educationally Yours, LLC
4/13/2015
33
Conclusions
Research Question Two– Grade 2
Second
Grade
Second
Grade
Dr. Valerie Harrison, Educationally Yours, LLC
Second
Grade
AU
PO
SC
NO
Second
Grade
4/13/2015
34
Research Question Three
Results
Is there a significant difference in the reading achievement post-test score as measured
by the benchmark reading post-test between third grade Early Intervention Program
students taught using the pullout, augmented, self-contained models, and traditional
instruction?
 The ANOVA revealed that there was a statistically significant difference in the reading
benchmark post-test scores of third grade students receiving EIP instruction using the
AU, PO, SC, and NO (traditional instruction) instructional model groups.
 The ANOVA indicates a significant difference in the instructional model groups, (F (3,
207) = 3.03, p < .05), η2 = 0.04
 Null hypothesis was rejected (F=3.03, p<.05)
Analysis of Variance of Instructional Models of 3rd Students Benchmark Reading PostTest Scores
Source
Between Groups
Within Groups
Total
DF
SS
MS
F
2558.86
3
852.95
3.03
58254.22
207
281.42
60813.08
210
*p< .05
Dr. Valerie Harrison, Educationally Yours, LLC
Sig.
.03
η2
0.04
Findings
Research Question Three
 In order to isolate where the differences within the means lie, a post hoc
Scheffe pairwise comparison test was conducted.
 In third grade, below level readers who received EIP instruction using
the augmented model reading achievement was significantly higher
than students who received instruction using the other models and no
EIP instruction.
 In third grade, the post hoc Scheffe pairwise comparison, indicated that
there was a significant difference between

(AU-NO, sig = 0.04< 0.05)
 The null hypothesis was rejected and the alternate hypothesis was
accepted.
Dr. Valerie Harrison, Educationally Yours, LLC
Conclusions
Research Question Three -Third Grade
In Third Grade
 The results of the analysis revealed the most significant
difference in reading achievement in third grade students
occurred in the students that receive EIP instruction using
the augmented model.
 Below average third grade readers who received EIP
instruction using the augmented model performed
significantly better than below average third grade readers
who received traditional instruction.
Dr. Valerie Harrison, Educationally Yours, LLC
4/13/2015
37
Conclusions
Research Question Two– Grade 3
Third
Grade
Third
Grade
Dr. Valerie Harrison, Educationally Yours, LLC
Third
Grade
AU
PO
SC
NO
Third
Grade
4/13/2015
38
Quantitative Research Design
Research Question
R4: What are the teachers’
perceptions of the Early Intervention
Programs models, augmented,
pullout, and self-contained in
improving reading achievement in
below level readers?
Research Design
Design - Quantitative
Reading Intervention Survey
Data Collection
Open-ended items on survey, 8, 9, 10, 18,
and 19
Sampling
Purposeful Sampling
Analysis
Coding for reoccurring patterns and themes
of teachers’ positive and negative
perceptions to the EIP models. Counting was
utilized to calculate the number of times each
theme occurred. Percentages were calculated
based on the frequency of each theme. Data
was summarized and presented in individual
excel tables.
Dr. Valerie Harrison, Educationally Yours, LLC
Findings
Research Question Four
Pullout Model
Positive Aspects
Pullout Positive Themes
Number of
Responses
Negative Aspects
Percent
Small group
instruction
24
24%
Individualized or
differentiated
instruction
Focused, intense,
specialized instruction
24
24%
18
Dr. Valerie Harrison, Educationally Yours, LLC
18%
Pullout Negative Themes
Students miss classroom
instruction or limited
opportunity to work with
classroom teachers
Decreased interaction
with peers
Time lost in transition
Number of
Responses
Percent
%
17
18.2%
16
17.2%
12
12.9%
Findings
Research Question Four
Students who are pulled out of the classroom
miss instruction and/or time to work on
assignments.
Dr. Valerie Harrison, Educationally Yours, LLC
Findings
Research Question Four
Reading lessons taught in intervention should
match the ones that are taught in the classroom.
Dr. Valerie Harrison, Educationally Yours, LLC
Findings
Research Question Four
Augmented Model
Positive Aspects
Augmented Positive Themes
Lower pupil-teacher ratio
benefits, team teaching, and
smaller class size
Instructional consistency
and increased time on task
Heterogeneous grouping,
peer modeling, and support
Negative Aspects
Number of
Responses
Percent
%
Augmented Negative Themes
36
40.9%
17
19.3%
11
12.5%
Increased distractions and
discipline problems
Classroom teacher and
EIP/reading teacher
diversities (such as
instructional techniques,
classroom management,
pedagogy, personality, space
and resources)
Class size too large
Dr. Valerie Harrison, Educationally Yours, LLC
Number of
Responses
Percent
%
20
24%
12
14.6%
9
10.9%
Findings
Research Question Four
Reading Specialists and classroom teachers
communicate effectively regarding the readers they
work with.
Dr. Valerie Harrison, Educationally Yours, LLC
Findings
Research Question Four
Self-contained Model
Positive Aspect
Self-Contained Positive Themes
Instruction is tailored to meet the
individual needs of the students,
students are taught on their
instructional level
Increased time on task and one-on-one
instruction
Teachers controls class environment
and increased teacher-student relations
Negative Aspects
Number of
Responses
21
12
Dr. Valerie Harrison, Educationally Yours, LLC
11
Percent
%
30.8%
17.6%
16.1%
Self-Contained Negative Themes
Teachers and students feel
isolated and have limited
collaboration with other
students and teachers
Homogeneous grouping, all
students are low
Inadequate or interior
instruction or instruction at
slower pace
Number of
Responses
16
Percent
%
23%
11
15.4%
11
15.4%
Findings
Research Question Four
The same students qualify for reading services every
year after year.
Dr. Valerie Harrison, Educationally Yours, LLC
Findings
Research Question Four
More state and federal funding of intervention
programs will help at-risk readers.
Dr. Valerie Harrison, Educationally Yours, LLC
Findings
Research Question Four
 A quantitative analysis was conducted to uncover the themes and
patterns revealed from the teachers’ perceptions of the Early
Intervention Programs models in improving reading achievement in
below average readers.

Positive Themes:
◦ reduced class size and its
benefits
◦ individualized tailored
instruction
◦ intense focused instruction
Dr. Valerie Harrison, Educationally Yours, LLC

Negative Themes:
◦
◦
◦
◦
◦
missed instruction
increased distractions
teacher/student isolation
large student attrition rate
inadequate funding
Conclusions
Research Question Four
 The augmented model was utilized by 191 students.
More students where served by the augmented model
than any other model in this study.
 Teachers’ perceptions reveals the most positive
aspect of the augmented model is, two teachers are in
the class environment and the pupil/teacher ratio is
reduced.
 The negative aspect of the augmented models is
teachers seldom have the opportunity to
communicate, collaborate, or plan together, making it
difficult to adequately prepare for the students.
Dr. Valerie Harrison, Educationally Yours, LLC
Discussions
 The results of this analysis was consistent with early intervention
reading research that states, early intervention is considered a viable
solution for reducing reading difficulties in students who have not
experienced success with reading in the elementary grades (Beswick, Stoat,
& Willms, 2007; Vaughn & Wanzek, 2007; Vaughn, Wanzek, Murray, Scammacca, Linan-Thompson,
& Woodruff, 2009).
 The results are consistent with the STAR Project (1985) and SAGE
Project (1995), all students in the reduced class environment using the
augmented intervention instructional model experienced academic
benefits in all primary grades (Chapman, Iversen, & Tunmer, 2005; Finn, 2002; Graue,
Hatch, Rao, & Oen, 2007; Konstantopulos, 2008; Januszka & Dixon-Krauss, 2008; Molnar, Smith,
Zahorik, & et al. 1999; Whitmore-Schanzenbach, 2007; U.S. Department of Education, 2004).
Dr. Valerie Harrison, Educationally Yours, LLC
4/13/2015
50
Discussions
 Contrary to the STAR and SAGE studies, the first grade students in this
EIP study who received regular classroom instruction performed better
than the students who received instruction in a reduced class
environment through the pullout and self-contained models.
 In the school district where this study was conducted, the EIP class size
for the pullout and the self-contained models were increased from 14 to
18. The EIP class size for the augmented model remained constant at
14. This change may have contributed to the success of the augmented
and traditional models of instruction in this study. It may have also
accounted for the lack of significant gains in the students using the
pullout and self-contained models at the first grade level.
Dr. Valerie Harrison, Educationally Yours, LLC
4/13/2015
51
Discussions
 Teachers in this study indicated that the pullout model was
the most favorable model of EIP instruction for their below
level readers
 The results of this study were contrary to the research on
class size that revealed the pullout model is an effective way
to address the needs of low performing students in the
primary grades (Chapman, Iversen , & Tunmer, 2005; Finn, 2002;
Konstantopulos, 2008; Januszka & Dixon-Krauss, 2008; Whitmore-Schanzenbach,
2007).
 Contrary to teachers perceptions and the research, in this
study the pullout model was the least effective model at the
second grade level.
Dr. Valerie Harrison, Educationally Yours, LLC
4/13/2015
52
Discussions
 The research is clear regarding the positive effects of class
size reduction. When implemented early in a student’s
academic career the gains in reading achievement can be
significant (Finn, 2002; Finn et al., 2001; Graue, Hatch, Rao, & Oen, 2007;
Graue & Rauscher, 2009; Hedges, Konstantopoulos, & Nye, 2004).
 The results of a reduced class environment are not only
beneficial for students; studies reveal positive effect on
teacher performance as well. These studies indicate that
reducing class size resulted in increased teacher
collaboration, improved job satisfaction, and reduced
teacher stress (Finn, 2002; U.S. Department of Education, 2004).
Dr. Valerie Harrison, Educationally Yours, LLC
4/13/2015
53
Summary of Findings
The results consistently indicated that students taught using the
augmented model scored significantly higher on the reading
benchmark post-test than students taught using the other models of
instruction.
Dr. Valerie Harrison, Educationally Yours, LLC
Implications for Practice
 School administrators should investigate the use of the
augmented model to address the needs of their at-risk
readers.
 Schools using the augmented model should receive
training on how to effective work in the augmented or
team teaching environment.
 Teachers of EIP students should receive yearly
professional development on appropriate instructional
strategies for below level readers that address students’
individual learning styles and preferences.
Dr. Valerie Harrison, Educationally Yours, LLC
Implications for Practice
 School administrators and teachers should receive
training on how to effectively implement EIP in
accordance with the guidance set by the Georgia
Department of Education. Doing so will help schools
maximize funding opportunities, generating more funds
for EIP teachers.
 District administrators should consider reducing the EIP
class size for pullout and self-contained to the accepted
state number of 14 students.
Dr. Valerie Harrison, Educationally Yours, LLC
4/13/2015
56
Implications for Research
 This study examined only EIP students in grade
1-3. Further research should be conducted as a follow-up
study to examine the effects of the intervention models on
students in grades Kindergarten, four, and five.
 This study explored the use of three of the five possible
models used to deliver EIP instruction. Further research
should be conducted to determine the effects of the
reduced-class and Reading Recovery models of EIP
instruction in improving reading achievement.
Dr. Valerie Harrison, Educationally Yours, LLC
Implications for Research
 EIP is a program that addresses the need of student who
are performing below grade level in reading and math.
Further research should be conduct to examine the
success of the program with at-risk math students.
 Further research should be conducted regarding the
most effecting reading strategies currently being used in
the schools in this study that demonstrated success with
the augmented model.
Dr. Valerie Harrison, Educationally Yours, LLC
4/13/2015
58
Recommendations
 The effectiveness of the program can improve with appropriate teacher
training on the use of the augmented model (team teaching).
 In addition to teachers receiving training on the effective use of team
teaching, school administration must also provide the time within the
school day for the augmented teachers to plan and collaborate.
 It is evident from the research that intervention for at-risk readers is
most effective when it occurs during the early primary grades. Schools
should considers putting the instructional support for EIP in the
primary grades.
 State and local governments should consider reinstating the funding to
support reducing class sizes for at-risk readers (Chapman, Iversen & Tunmer,
2005; Januszka & Dixon-Krauss, 2008; Konstantopulos, 2008).
Dr. Valerie Harrison, Educationally Yours, LLC
Recommendations
 According to research, instruction presented to at-risk readers
should be:


Delivered in a small group setting
Prescribed curriculum focused on all areas of reading taught through
appropriate grade level text





Phonemic awareness
Phonics
Comprehension
Vocabulary
Fluency

Targeted towards specific deficiencies
Intense to accelerate students to grade level performance within an
academic year
Tailored to meets the individual learning characteristics of the students

Include reading instructional level text daily


Dr. Valerie Harrison, Educationally Yours, LLC
Ansalone & Chen, 2008; Bird, Romanelli, Ryan, 2009; Kolb & Kolb, 2009;
Torgesen, 2004; Vaughn & Wanzek, 2007;Woodward &Talbert-Johnson,
2009; U.S. Department of Education, 2006
Q&A
Dr. Valerie Harrison
Educationally Yours, LLC
770-845-8564
educationallyyoursllc@gmail.com
educationallyyoursllc.com
Dr. Valerie Harrison, Educationally Yours, LLC