Running Head: RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN BALANCED LITERACY AND READING
LEVELS
1
Relationship Between Balanced Literacy Instruction and First Grade Reading Levels
by
Michele Walker, B.S.
A Proposal Presented in Partial Fulfillment
of the Requirements for the Degree
Master of Education
SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
EAST TEXAS BAPTIST UNIVERSITY
May 2012
2
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1.1 Response to Intervention Pyramid
Figure 1.2 First Grade Developmental Reading Assessment Level Percentages
Figure 1.3 Kindergarten Developmental Reading Assessment Level Percentages
Figure 1.4 Four Kinds of Reading
Figure 1.5 Running Record Form
Figure 1.6 Reading Level Conversion Chart
3
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
LIST OF FIGURES ..............................................................................................................2
TABLE OF CONTENTS ......................................................................................................3
CHAPTER
1. Introduction .......................................................................................................................5
Purpose of the Study ........................................................................................................7
Theory .............................................................................................................................10
Balanced literacy instruction......................................................................................10
A framework for literacy learning .............................................................................10
Developmental Reading Assessment 2 ......................................................................15
Response to intervention ............................................................................................16
Definition of Terms.........................................................................................................17
Balanced literacy instruction.....................................................................................17
Guided reading ..........................................................................................................17
Components of reading instruction ...........................................................................18
Running records .......................................................................................................18
Developmental Reading Assessment 2 .....................................................................18
Research Questions .........................................................................................................18
Hypothesis.......................................................................................................................19
Limitations of Study .......................................................................................................19
Conclusion ......................................................................................................................21
2. Literature Review.............................................................................................................22
Effective Reading Instruction .........................................................................................22
Balanced Literacy Defined .............................................................................................24
Guided Reading ..............................................................................................................25
Response to Intervention.................................................................................................26
Effective Professional Development...............................................................................29
Summary .........................................................................................................................31
3. Methodology ....................................................................................................................32
Research Design..............................................................................................................32
Sample.............................................................................................................................32
Instrumentation ...............................................................................................................33
Procedural Details ...........................................................................................................34
Validity and Reliability ...................................................................................................36
Data Analysis ..................................................................................................................38
4
Conclusion ......................................................................................................................38
REFERENCES ....................................................................................................................39
APPENDIXES .....................................................................................................................44
A: Appendix H as used by the school .............................................................................44
B: DRA2 continuum for level 16 ....................................................................................45
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN BALANCED LITERACY READING LEVELS
5
Relationship Between Balanced Literacy Instruction and First Grade Reading Levels
Chapter 1
Introduction
“Research now shows that a child who doesn’t learn the reading basics early is unlikely
to learn them at all. Any child who doesn’t learn to read early and well will not easily master
other skills and knowledge, and is unlikely to ever flourish in school or in life.” (Moats, 1999,
p.5) There are those children who will learn to read in almost any educational setting they are
placed in. However, there is a portion of the population that will only learn to read when they
are taught in an “organized, systematic, efficient way by a knowledgeable teacher using a welldesigned instructional approach.” (Moats, 1999) It is the responsibility of the teacher and school
to ensure that all children have the opportunity to learn to read. When a child struggles the
school intervenes.
The common goal of the U.S. Department of Education, the states, and the
local school districts is for all students to be reading at or above grade level by the
end of third grade. This goal was established because children who are not
proficient readers by the end of fourth grade are not likely ever to be proficient
readers. (Learning Point Associates, 2004, p.2)
The International Reading Association (2008) describes RtI as a multi-tiered process that
provides services or interventions to struggling learners at increasing levels of intensity.
Response to Intervention is a means for early identification of students experiencing academic
struggles in reading. This Response to Intervention (RtI) tiered approach offers more intensive
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN BALANCED LITERACY READING LEVELS
6
instruction or intervention with each tier. The Texas Education Agency describes Tier 1
instruction as high-quality classroom reading instruction available to all students. Tier 2
interventions are then provided for students who do not make adequate progress at tier 1. Tier 2
intervention is characterized by intensive, systematic instruction in a smaller group setting which
is supplemental to tier 1 instruction. Students who do not make progress with tier 2 intervention
plus tier 1 classroom instruction are then moved to tier 3 interventions. Tier 3 intervention is
characterized by even smaller group instruction possibly even 1 on 1. Subsequently, students
who do not make adequate progress at tier 3 are then evaluated for special education services
(Gersten, et. al., 2008 p.4).
The Texas Education Agency reports in the 2008-2009 Response to Intervention
Guidance document that tier 1 instruction is adequate for approximately 80% of students. Only
15% of students are expected to need tier 2 interventions while only 5% are expected to need tier
3 interventions. Larger percentages of students needing either tier 2 or tier 3 intervention
suggests a lack of high-quality classroom instruction at tier 1 (Texas Education Agency, 2008,
pp.1-2). See figure 1.1.
Figure1.1 Response to Intervention Pyramid
Tier 3
5%
of students
Tier 2
15%
of students
Tier 1
80%
of students
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN BALANCED LITERACY READING LEVELS
7
Purpose of the Study
Historically, student reading achievement in first grade at Emerald City Elementary has
been lacking. The school uses the Developmental Reading Assessment 2 published by Pearson
as the measure of student reading levels at the beginning, middle, and end of each school year for
students in kindergarten through third grade. During the 2008- 2009 academic year only 50% of
the first grade students ended the year on or above reading level as based upon the
Developmental Reading Assessment 2 (DRA2). In the 2009- 2010 academic year only 55% of
the first grade students ended the year on or above reading level as based upon the DRA2. Then
in 2010- 2011 only 49% of the first grade students ended the year reading on or above level as
measured by the DRA2. As per the campus RtI process, any student scoring below grade level
in reading as based upon the DRA2 is eligible for tier 2 reading intervention services. This
would mean that on average 48.6% of the first grade students are in need of tier 2 services in
reading. Refer to Figure 1.2.
The principal deemed these percentages of first grade students reading below grade level
at the end of the academic year as unacceptable. The principal of Emerald City Elementary knew
that making changes to the first grade reading program (tier 1 classroom instruction) was of
upmost importance.
The large number of students requiring tier 2 and 3 interventions in first
and then second grade put an undue stress upon the Response to Intervention (RtI) process and
reading interventionists. Changes had to be made in the tier 1 classroom instruction so that the
number of students requiring tier 2 and tier 3 interventions would hopefully decline.
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN BALANCED LITERACY READING LEVELS
8
During the 2011-2012 school year all of the kindergarten teachers at Emerald City
Elementary received training on balanced literacy instruction which included the four kinds of
reading as described by Fountas and Pinnell: shared reading, read alouds, guided reading, and
independent reading. The teachers implemented the model and attained a measure of success as
determined by the Diagnostic Reading Assessment (DRA2) which is used to assess student
reading levels. At the end of the 2011-2012 school year 87% of the kindergarten students were
reading on or above a level three independently. Because of the success in kindergarten the
principal of Emerald City Elementary has decided to continue this training and model with the
first grade teachers. Refer to figure 1.3.
Figure 1.2 First Grade Developmental Reading Assessment Level Percentages
First Grade End of Year DRA
60%
58%
56%
54%
52%
50%
48%
46%
44%
First Grade End of Year
DRA
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN BALANCED LITERACY READING LEVELS
9
Figure 1.3 Kindergarten Developmental Reading Assessment Level Percentages
Kindergarten End of Year DRA
88%
86%
84%
82%
80%
78%
76%
74%
72%
70%
68%
Kindergarten End of Year
Even though balanced literacy is considered to be an effective means of instruction there
are still first grade teachers on the campus who do not have buy-in.
They do not use all five
components of reading as suggested by the National Reading Panel: phonemic awareness,
phonics, fluency, vocabulary, and comprehension. They use a stand and deliver, heavy phonics
skill-based means of instruction. The use of continuous text and guided reading is limited.
Therefore, during the 2012-2013 school year the first grade teachers at Emerald City Elementary
will receive training on the components of an effective balanced literacy approach to reading
instruction specifically the effective use of the four kinds of reading and the five components of
effective reading instruction. The teachers will then implement this method of reading
instruction. This proposed project will be a causal-comparative research study to examine the
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN BALANCED LITERACY READING LEVELS
10
effect of balanced literacy instruction as implemented by the first grade teachers at Emerald City
Elementary in rural Northeast Texas on the end of year reading levels of the first grade students.
Data from the 2011-2012 school year (before the use of balanced literacy) will be compared to
data from the 2012-2013 school year (during/after implementation of balanced literacy).
Theory
Balanced literacy instruction
The National Reading Panel (2000) concluded that an effective reading program to teach
children to read includes phonemic awareness instruction, systematic phonics instruction,
fluency instruction, vocabulary instruction, and text comprehension. Based upon research the
National Reading Panel (2000) concluded that a balanced approach to literacy instruction was
preferred for teaching children to read. A balanced approach involves instruction in all areas of
an effective reading program as determined by the National Reading Panel as well as teaching
students reading and writing skills based upon their individual needs. “In balanced reading
instruction, students are taught—explicitly, systematically and consistently—how to understand
and use the structure of language and how to construct meaning from various texts. Students
read alone, are read to, and read with others daily.” (Zygouris-Coe, 2001)
A framework for literacy learning
Guided reading is only one component of a balanced literacy program. A
child might spend between ten to thirty minutes a day in a focused reading group
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN BALANCED LITERACY READING LEVELS
11
that is organized, structured, planned, and supported by the teacher. During the
rest of the day, that same student will participate in whole-group, small-group,
and individual activities related to wide range of reading and writing, almost all of
which involve children of varying experience and abilities (Fountas & Pinnell,
1996, p.21).
According to Fountas and Pinnell and the Ohio State University Literacy Collaborative
there are eight instructional components that comprise a literacy framework. These eight
components include: reading aloud, shared reading, guided reading, independent reading, shared
writing, interactive writing, guided writing or writing workshop, and independent writing
(Fountas & Pinnell,1996, p.22). Refer to figure 1.4.
Ongoing assessments in the form of running records are collected as a record of student
reading behaviors during guided reading instruction. “Running records are a powerful tool not
only for assessing reading levels and matching children with texts but for analyzing reading
behaviors for evidence of the development of independent reading strategies.” (Fountas &
Pinnell, 1996, p.39) These components and the use of running records will become the basis for
literacy instruction at Emerald City Elementary. The works of Marie Clay will be used as a
guideline for the use of and evaluation of running records. Refer to figure 1.5 for the sample
running record form which is an adaptation of the running record forms suggested by Fountas
and Pinnell.
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN BALANCED LITERACY READING LEVELS
12
Figure 1.4 Four Kinds of Reading
Four Kinds of Reading

Read Alouds




Shared Reading







Guided Reading


Reading
Independent





Levels of Support
The teacher reads aloud to the students;
but both the teacher and the students think
about, talk about, and respond to the text.
The teacher stops briefly to demonstrate
text talk or invite interaction. These pauses
are intentional and planned to invite
students to join in the thinking and talking
about the text.
The conversation is grounded in the shared
text.
Builds a shared repertoire of genres,
authors, and specific texts that can be
referred to in discussion.

Enlarged text- a large-print book, a chart,
a poem, or a projected text.
Students and teacher read the text
together.
When children are emergent readers, the
teacher leads the group, pointing to the
words or phrases to help children follow
the print.
Emphasis is on enjoyment and
experiencing a large number of texts
together.
Teacher actively supports phrasing,
fluency, and other strategic actions.
Students and teacher read the text
together.
Small group of children who are similar
enough in their reading development that
they can be taught together.
The teacher selects and introduces a new
text that is just right and offers a small bit
of challenge.
Children read the ENTIRE text to
themselves or aloud.
To sustain forward progress, children need
to take part in a guided reading group
between three and five days per week,
reading a new book EVERY time the
group meets.

The children read to themselves or to
partners.
The teacher sets a purpose for reading.
Students apply what they have learned.
Students think in new ways about their
reading.
Students take responsibility for their own
learning.



Teacher provides full
support for children to
access the text
Teacher selects text
from quality literature
that is above students
grade and/or reading
levels
Children may join in but
usually do not focus on
features of print
Skills or Strategies Taught or Reinforced









Teacher provides high
level of support
The teacher models
fluent and oral
processing of text.
The teacher makes
specific teaching points
related to the reading
processes; often specific
pages are revisited.

Some teacher support is
needed.
Reader processes a new
text in a way that is
mostly independent.

Little or no teacher
support is needed for the
practice portion of
independent reading.
The reader
independently solves
problems while reading
for meaning.

Focus is on thinking and comprehension strategies
rather than reading strategies, such as the “fix up”
strategies.
Thinking within the text- through discussion you
can help them identify important information to
remember in summary form. Listening
comprehension is built through daily experiences and
hearing texts read aloud.
Thinking beyond the text-provides opportunities to
make connections, determine author’s purpose, draw
from personal experiences (schema).
Thinking about the text- provide opportunities to
consider aspects of the writer’s craft and engage in
analytical and critical thinking.
Fluency- phrasing, rapid processing of text,
intonation, expression, and what to do at point of
difficulty.
Structure and organization of different genres (i.e.,
multiple lines of texts per page, poems, dialogue,
fiction and non-fiction).
Introduction of text- point out aspects that may be
new, involve them in a conversation about the text,
encourage interest in the book.

Reading the text- readers will independently process
the entire text or a unified part of it. Students in
Kindergarten or Grade 1 will usually read out loud.

Discussing and revisiting the text- teacher and
students participate in a brief, meaningful
conversation about the text. Students may also revisit
the text to clarify or locate information or to provide
evidence for their thinking.

Teaching for processing strategies- teacher
provides a brief, explicit teaching point focused on
any aspect of the reading process.

Working with words (optional)- 1-2 minutes of word
work that may focus a pre-planned exploration of the
features of letters or how words are taken apart.

Extending the understanding of the text (optional)extend the students’ understanding of the text by
talking, drawing, or writing about what they have
read.
Students are expected to apply all of the skills and strategies listed
above.
Adapted from p.27 Guided Reading by Irene Fountas and Gay Su Pinnell and p. 217, 309, 373,
329 Teaching for Comprehending and Fluency, Fountas and Pinnell
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN BALANCED LITERACY READING LEVELS
Figure 1.5 Running Record Form front and back
13
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN BALANCED LITERACY READING LEVELS
Adapted from Fountas & Pinnell
14
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN BALANCED LITERACY READING LEVELS
15
Developmental Reading Assessment 2
“Development of the DRA2, K-3, and DRA2, 4-8, was based on what educators and
extant research literature identified as being key characteristics and behaviors of good readers.”
(Pearson, 2009) The theoretical framework for the DRA2 is based upon 12 premises.
Premise 1 states good readers choose reading materials to fulfill different
purposes and to reflect their interests. Good readers read well-targeted text with a
high level of success and accuracy. Premise 2 states good readers read for
extended periods of time that are consistent with the purpose for reading. Premise
3 states good readers preview a book before reading in order to predict events,
identify topics or themes, or make real-world connections by relating the content
to their own experiences. Premise 4 states good readers read aloud with fluency
for longer periods of time. Premise 5 states good readers are aware of and use a
variety of strategies to decode words and comprehend reading materials,
including previewing text, self-questioning, paraphrasing, and note-taking.
Premise 6 states good readers read for meaning and understanding and are able to
summarize text in their own words. Older readers should also be able to
summarize what they read in writing. Premise 7 states good readers read and
communicate with others using both oral and written discourse. Premise 8 states
good readers can monitor and develop their reading skills. Premise 9 states good
readers can read, comprehend, and interpret text on a literal level. Premise 10
states good readers can read, interpret text by making use of inferences, and make
connections to personal experiences and existing knowledge. Premise 11 states
good readers validate their inferences, generalizations, connection, and judgments
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN BALANCED LITERACY READING LEVELS
16
with information from the text, information from other sources, or personal
experiences. Premise 12 states good readers reflect on what they read to
determine its significance to validate its authenticity, and to understand the
author’s intent (Pearson, 2009, p.7-13 )
The DRA2 system continuum for evaluating student reading behaviors aligns with the
suggestions of the National Reading Panel. The student reading continuum is divided into three
sections. The first section measures student reading engagement. It is used for further
instruction but not as a measurement of the student’s reading level. The next section is a
measure of oral reading. It measures reading miscues and fluency. To be successful in this
portion the student must have an adequate reading rate as well as phrased and fluent reading.
The student must also apply phonics skills and detect miscues and then make corrections. The
final section of the continuum measures reading comprehension. According to the DRA2
Teacher Guide, for the student to score “independent” at a given level they must have specific
scores in the oral reading and reading comprehension sections. An example of the DRA2 student
reading continuum can be found in the appendix section of the final research study.
Response to intervention.
Language related to Response to Intervention (RTI) was written into U.S.
law with the 2004 reauthorization of the Individuals with Disabilities Education
Act (IDEA). This law indicates that school districts are no longer required to take
into consideration whether a severe discrepancy exists between a student’s
achievement and his or her intellectual ability in determining eligibility for
learning-disability services (International Reading Association, 2009).
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN BALANCED LITERACY READING LEVELS
17
School districts may choose to use scientifically research-based classroom instruction.
Then if students do not respond to the classroom instruction they move to “more tailored and
intensive instruction” in the form of interventions. Students who then do not make adequate
progress in the hierarchal tiers of intervention are considered for evaluation for a specific
learning disability (International Reading Association, 2009). According to the International
Reading Association (2009) the guiding principles for Response to Intervention are: prevent
problems by “optimizing language and literacy instruction”, differentiated instruction and
intervention, assessment is used to drive instruction, collaboration amongst professionals, parents
and students, instruction and assessment must have a systematic approach, and “all students have
the right to receive instruction from well-prepared teachers.”
Definition of Terms
Balanced Literacy Instruction
Fountas and Pinnell describe balanced literacy instruction as instruction that involves the
use of four kinds of reading (read alouds, shared reading, guided reading and independent
reading) as well as four kinds of writing (shared writing, interactive writing, guided writing and
independent writing).
Guided Reading
“Guided reading is a context in which a teacher supports each reader’s development of
effective reading strategies for processing novel texts at increasingly challenging levels of
difficulty.” (Fountas and Pinnell, 1996, p.2)
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN BALANCED LITERACY READING LEVELS
18
Components of Reading Instruction
The National Reading Panel has determined that phonemic awareness, systematic
phonics instruction, fluency instruction, vocabulary instruction, and text comprehension
instruction as the five components of effective reading instruction.
Running Records
“A running record is a tool for coding, scoring, and analyzing a child’s precise reading
behaviors.” (Fountas and Pinnell, 1996, p.89)
Developmental Reading Assessment 2
DRA2 is a reading assessment created by Pearson in which a child’s accuracy, fluency,
and comprehension are monitored using leveled text. An independent reading level is found for
the student. (Pearson, 2006)
Research Question
This study will attempt to research this topic and answer the question: Does the use of a
balanced literacy model increase first grade student end of year reading achievement as
measured by the Developmental Reading Assessment 2 at a rural Northeast Texas Public
School?
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN BALANCED LITERACY READING LEVELS
19
Hypothesis
It is hypothesized that the use of the balanced literacy approach to reading instruction will
have a positive impact on the end of year reading levels of the first grade students. The null
hypothesis used for this study will be: The use of the balanced literacy approach to reading
instruction will not have a positive impact on the end of year reading levels of the first grade
students.
Limitations of the Study
There are many limitations to this study that must be considered. The first limitation is
the quality of instruction the classroom teachers receive on balanced literacy. If the teacher
receives poor instruction on how to implement balanced literacy she cannot be expected to
maximize the effectiveness of the model. Another limitation is that there is not a way to
compare the quality and components of the guided reading lessons used during the 2011-2012
school year. We will only be able to look at the quantity of the instruction provided as opposed
to the quality of instruction. During guided reading it is important to focus on the specific needs
of the group you are working with. This requires an expectation of quality instruction.
Improved student reading achievement is the goal of this switch to balanced literacy instruction.
However, for this change to happen the teachers must implement the program with fidelity. The
teachers cannot merely listen to the professional development training. They must transfer their
new learning to classroom practice. Another limitation to consider is that we will be looking at
data from two different sets of students. One set of data will come from the first grade students
during the 2011-2012 year and the second set of data will come from the first grade students
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN BALANCED LITERACY READING LEVELS
20
during the 2012-2013 year. There are truly more variables between the two groups than we can
completely control.
Another limitation for the study to consider is the use of running records to record student
reading behavior. The first grade teachers will have varying degrees of experience using running
records and the miscue analysis system suggested by Fountas and Pinnell. Teachers will have to
receive training and have opportunities to practice administering running records. Standardized
guidelines will have to be established for the correct use of the running records. Teachers will
needs to record all miscues, self-corrects, words per minute, notes of phrasing and fluency,
miscue analysis, and teach point.
The final limitation to consider is the spreadsheet that the teachers use to report the
reading levels of their students throughout the year. Historically, the teachers at Emerald City
Elementary only reported reading levels on the Appendix H. They were not required to turn in
the running records along with the Appendix H. Therefore, some of the teachers inflated the
scores that they reported. Then when the mid-year and end of year DRA2 was administered
there was a discrepancy between the levels the students had been working at and the level they
tested.. For this research study the teachers will be required to turn in the running records for
their class along with the Appendix H. The reading interventionists will then verify the running
records in much the same manner they verify the DRA scores at beginning, middle, and end of
year.
Conclusion
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN BALANCED LITERACY READING LEVELS
21
The Response to Intervention process used at Emerald City Elementary indicates that
there is a problem with the tier 1 reading instruction in first grade. With this study I will attempt
to show that balanced literacy instruction is the answer to the reading instruction problems that
Emerald City Elementary faces. The theory behind balanced literacy and guided reading support
the shift in tier 1 instruction that the school has planned.
Once the end of year Developmental Reading Assessment 2 is administered and the data
is evaluated, the school will be able to make further decisions for more instructional changes.
This will be an interesting year to monitor these instructional changes.
Chapter 2
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN BALANCED LITERACY READING LEVELS
22
Literature Review
After searching the professional literature, I have decided to divide the information in the
literature review into five sections. I felt that it was important to provide theory and background
for effective reading instruction, balanced literacy instruction, and guided reading since that is
the cornerstone of the changes to come for Emerald City Elementary. I also included the
information that I found in the professional literature about Response to Intervention. Response
to Intervention has shown the administration that changes must occur at Emerald City
Elementary. The final section of the literature review discusses the characteristics of effective
professional development. This section is important because for teachers to gain the new
knowledge and then transfer it to classroom instruction they must have quality training.
Effective Reading Instruction
“The most fundamental responsibility of schools is teaching students to read.” (Moats,
1999) How then do we effectively teach students to read? It takes much more than having a
classroom with a teacher and books. It requires an excellent reading teacher to teach children
how to read. The International Reading Association issued a position statement that describes
the research-based qualities of an excellent reading teacher. Excellent reading teachers believe
that all students can learn to read and write and they understand how reading and writing
develop. Excellent reading teachers assess individual student progress, have a variety of
methods for teaching reading since they understand that no one way will work for all students,
and provide students with text to read. They use flexible groups and provide strategic help as
needed (International Reading Association, 2000). Effective reading teachers ground their
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN BALANCED LITERACY READING LEVELS
23
instruction in research-based practices. They remain current on the best ways to provide literacy
instruction. Effective teachers know when they need continued professional development and
training to continue to improve.
Effective reading teachers follow the research that shows there are four “pillars” of an
effective reading program. These pillars include: valid and reliable assessments, instructional
programs and aligned materials, aligned professional development, and dynamic instructional
leadership (Learning Point Associates, 2004). The second pillar, instructional programs and
aligned materials, can then be further sub-divided into the five components of effective reading
instruction. As stated before, these five components are: phonemic awareness, phonics, fluency,
vocabulary, and comprehension.
“There is a strong agreement that schools will succeed only when teachers have the
expertise and competence needed to teach reading effectively.” (International Reading
Association [The role of reading specialist: A position statement], 2000) What happens when
the teachers on a campus lack the expertise or competence or the reading instruction is less than
stellar? As instructional leaders of the school, the principal and other administrators play a
crucial role in the implementation of an effective reading program. They provide the teachers
with the professional development that they need while at the same time utilizing the reading
specialist or coaches on their campus. The use of reading specialist or coaches is supported by
the International Reading Association as well as the work by Lyons and Pinnell.
What are the characteristics of effective reading instruction? In 2000 the National
Reading Panel issued a report based upon years of scientific research that attempted to answer
that question. They discovered that for reading instruction to be effective it has to include:
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN BALANCED LITERACY READING LEVELS
24
phonemic awareness instruction, direct systematic phonics instruction, fluency instruction and
practice, vocabulary instruction, and direct instruction in the use of comprehension strategies.
Since the report in 2000 other researchers have taken the information from the National Reading
Panel and have elaborated upon the findings (Learning Point Associates, 2004; Zygouris-Coe,
et.al., 2001; Shanahan, et. al., 2010; Pressley, et. al., 2002). “These five areas were incorporated
into the No Child Left Behind Act and the Reading First initiative as essential components of
effective reading instruction.” (Learning Point Associates, 2004)
Balanced Literacy Defined
Balanced literacy is described as a balance between reading to children, reading with
children, and reading by children (Zygouris-Coe, 2001). This definition aligns with the
definition provided by Fountas and Pinnell that states a balanced literacy program provides for
several kinds of reading and writing: reading aloud (to children), shared reading (with children),
guided reading (with children), and independent reading (by children). Balanced literacy takes
the four pillars of reading instruction combines it with the five components of effective reading
instruction and places them in the hands of competent teachers who are aware of the needs of
their students. All of the various pieces are woven together in a systematic manner to teach
children to read. “In balanced reading instruction, students are taught—explicitly,
systematically, and consistently—how to understand and use the structure of language and how
to construct meaning from various texts.” (Zygouris-Coe, 2001) Once again this aligns with the
works of Clay, Fountas, and Pinnell. Balanced literacy is not a haphazard approach to reading
where students learn new skills as they come upon them naturally in text. Teachers have a plan
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN BALANCED LITERACY READING LEVELS
25
for the skills the students need to acquire. These skills are taught and then practiced in
continuous text for real reading. Balanced literacy takes the best of the two warring camps of
skill-based instruction and the whole language approach. Effective teachers realize that skills
must be taught but not at the expense of rich literature that provides students with an opportunity
to apply the phonemic awareness, phonics, fluency, vocabulary, and comprehension skills that
they have learned (Pressley, et. al, 2002).
Guided Reading
Guided reading is good first teaching for all students whether they are struggling or
independent. The goal of guided reading is to develop independent readers we use selfextending systems to gain meaning from the text they read (Fountas & Pinnell, 1996; Iaquinta,
2006). During the small-group guided reading lesson the teacher alters the instruction to meet
the needs of the students. There is not a one-size-fits-all approach to reading instruction.
Fountas and Pinnell divide the guided reading lesson framework into three sections:
before reading, during reading, and after reading. Before reading the teacher selects a text that
will provide opportunities for students to practice the strategies they have learned. A just-right
text is one that the student can read with 90% or greater accuracy. “A hard text for a reader does
not provide an opportunity for smooth problem solving, and for meaning to guide the process.”
(Fountas and Pinnell, 1996, p.8) The teacher begins the lesson by introducing the text. This
introduction provides an opportunity for the teacher to explain key vocabulary and concepts that
are important for the understanding of the story. During this introduction the students take a
picture-walk as they look at and discuss the illustrations. The introduction of new text must be
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN BALANCED LITERACY READING LEVELS
26
well planned prior to the actual guided reading lesson. For the during reading portion of the
lesson the teacher monitors and assesses the students’ reading behaviors as the students read the
text. Each child reads the entire text softly to themselves as the teacher listens in and takes notes.
After reading the text the teacher and students discuss the text. “The teacher selects one or two
teaching points that will help the reader process more effectively.” (Fountas and Pinnell, 1996, p.
9)
Fountas and Pinnell emphasize that guided reading is only a portion of a balanced literacy
program. As professional development providers it is important that we communicate this idea
with the first grade teachers. All four kinds of reading and writing have an important place in the
balanced literacy classroom. Guided reading is critical, but it is only a part of the reading
instruction. While a group is reading with the teacher at the guided reading table the other
students must be “engaged in meaningful literacy.” (Fountas and Pinnell, 1996, p.53)
Response to Intervention
In the wake of No Child Left Behind it is imperative that we distinguish between the
students who are struggling due to poor instruction and those that have a learning disability
(Lyon, 2003). How do we do that? We provide students with effective early literacy instruction
from qualified teachers using research-based practices. This is high-quality classroom
instruction, tier 1 instruction, that all students have the right to. Teachers then observe those
students as they move through the early stages of literacy development.
Students likely to have reading difficulties “approach reading of words
and text in a laborious manner, demonstrating difficulties linking sounds
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN BALANCED LITERACY READING LEVELS
(phonemes) to letters and letter patterns. Their reading is hesitant and
characterized by frequent starts, stops, and mispronunciations. Comprehension of
material being read is usually extremely poor.” (Lyons, 2003)
Teachers use a cycle of: teach, practice, assess, teach, practice, and assess. It is
during the assessment or progress monitoring phase that they observe the students to
determine if any instructional changes are needed (Fuchs & Fuchs, 2006). “Progress
monitoring also generates diagnostic information that helps practitioners make
classification and program placement decisions (e.g. moving a student from tier 1 to tier
2).” (Fuchs & Fuchs, 2006)
Response to Intervention is not a program rather it is a framework to help schools
identify and support students with difficulties. It is not assumed that these students have
permanent learning disabilities. RtI is a means for helping students when they need it for
as long as they need it (International Reading Association, 2009). “Educators should
therefore realize that the concept of RtI is broader than just an alternative for special
education eligibility and should instead consider it an opportunity to improve overall
instructional quality for all students in a coordinated special delivery system.” (Mercier
Smith, et. al, 2009) The principal at Emerald City Elementary is using Response to
Intervention in just that way. She is using it as an opportunity to improve the overall
reading instruction for the campus.
It is interesting to note that the three-tiered and four-tiered models for RtI that is
commonly used (Little, 2012; Grimaldi & Robertson, 2011; Davis Bianco, 2010; Mercier
Smith, et. al, 2009; Fuchs & Fuchs, 2006; Texas Education Agency, 2008) is not
27
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN BALANCED LITERACY READING LEVELS
28
specified in the language of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA)
(International Reading Association, 2009). Although, many articles published on the
topic (Little, 2012; Grimaldi & Robertson, 2011; Davis Bianco, 2010; Mercier Smith, et.
al, 2009; Fuchs & Fuchs, 2006; Texas Education Agency, 2008) use common criteria in
the range of: tier 1 supporting the needs for 80% of the student population, tier 2 supports
15 to 20% or less, and tier 3 meets the needs of 1 to 5% of the population. These
percentages vary slightly from one source to another. Emerald City Elementary uses the
suggested model of tier 1 for 80%, tier 2 for 15%, and tier 3 for 5% of the students.
Response to Intervention requires a change in philosophy in regards to literacy
instruction and intervention. The first grade teachers at Emerald City Elementary will
follow in the footsteps of the schools profiled by Grimaldi and Robertson as well as
Davis Bianco as they navigate through Response to Intervention. The changes in tier 1
instruction that started during the 2011-2012 school year in kindergarten will now move
on to first grade for the 2012-2013 year. This is similar to the changes Sharon Davis
Bianco describes for the southern New Jersey district in her paper. The teachers will be
provided with professional development of best practices (balanced literacy), progress
monitoring (running records), and a problem-solving approach to RtI.
Effective Professional Development
“We cannot validly hold teachers accountable for the inability to teach all students to read
if we have not provided them with the knowledge necessary to do so.” (Pacsoe, 2010) Much has
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN BALANCED LITERACY READING LEVELS
29
been written about the training that should be offered in teacher preparation programs (Pimentel,
2007; Moats, 1999; Walsh, et al., 2006). But in the case of Emerald City Elementary, the first
grade teachers on staff are certified teachers well past their pre-service training days. The
challenge then becomes the best way to provide ongoing professional development so that it is
effective and translates to improved student achievement.
Since one of the limitations for this causal-comparative research study is the quality of
training that the teachers receive for the implementation of balanced literacy, the first step is to
determine what makes professional development effective. To effectively implement
instructional practices teachers must receive training whether that is during their pre-service
training or during ongoing staff development. However, not all professional development is
created equally. Instructional leaders should focus on providing professional development that is
effective so that there is an improvement in teacher instruction and student achievement (Pacsoe,
2010). “Researchers have made it quite clear that the whole school professional development
inservice, also known as the one-shot model of professional development is not effective in
improving teacher instruction or student achievement. (Lowden, 2005; McCutchen, et al., 2002;
Taylor, et al., 2004)” as cited by Pascoe. Effective professional development is characterized by
the following: it is linked to district goals and school improvement, aligned with teacher
evaluation processes, offered during the normal school day, allows for guided practice,
reflection, and mentoring; it is long term with in-class support; and the content is decided upon
by the stakeholders not just teachers (Pacsoe, 2010).
The professional development that will be provided for the first grade teachers of
Emerald City Elementary does meet the criteria for effective professional development. It will
be linked to the school goal of increased end of year reading achievement among the first grade
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN BALANCED LITERACY READING LEVELS
30
students. It will be aligned with the teacher evaluation processes. The series of professional
development trainings will be offered during the course of the regular school day over the entire
academic year. The literacy coaching model as described by Lyons and Pinnell will be used so
that teachers have time for guided practice, reflection, and mentoring. The reading
interventionists will serve as reading coaches for the purpose of this study. They will offer inclass support for the teachers. The content for the professional development will be decided
upon by the principal, reading interventionists, and the teachers involved.
Teacher knowledge and efficacy impacts the transfer of knowledge from professional
development training session to actual use in the classroom. If a teacher is not confident in their
acquisition of new skills they are not likely to take it back to the classroom. Then the
professional development is both a waste of time and money since the desired outcome is
improved student achievement.
“Your responsibility as a staff developer is to help teachers improve their practice so that
students learn.” (Lyons & Pinnell, 2001) The following topics will be the focus of instruction on
the professional development days to help teachers improve their practice: introduction to
balanced literacy; four kinds of reading and writing; implementation of guided reading; using
and analyzing running records to drive instruction; the five components of effective reading
instruction; and how to administer the Developmental Reading Assessment 2. A copy of the
agenda for each training session as well as documentation of in-class support will be included in
the appendix section of the final research study.
The reading interventionists will use the constructivist principles of teaching as outlined
in Lyons & Pinnell. Principles: 1) encourage active participation 2) organize small-group
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN BALANCED LITERACY READING LEVELS
31
discussions around common concerns 3) introduce new concepts in context 4) create a safe
environment 5) develop participants’ conceptual knowledge through conversation around shared
experiences 6) provide opportunities for participants to use what they know to construct new
knowledge 7) look for shifts in teachers’ understanding over time 8) provide additional
experiences for participants who have not yet developed the needed conceptual understanding.
Summary
In summation the literature reviewed makes a strong case for the use of balanced literacy
instruction as the means for teaching children to gain meaning from text. The teachers
implementing these instructional changes at Emerald City Elementary will need to have a
working knowledge of the five components of effective reading instruction and how they work
with guided reading to meet the different needs of the students in the class. The reading
interventionists on the campus will use the coaching model and other steps for effective
professional development as they teach the first grade teachers about balanced literacy.
If my hypothesis is correct, then the positive effect of these instructional changes will be
seen in the percentages of first grade students in need of tier 2 and 3 reading intervention next
year.
Chapter 3
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN BALANCED LITERACY READING LEVELS
32
Methodology
Research design
This causal-comparative research study will attempt to determine if the implementation
of balanced literacy model which includes guided reading will have a positive effect on the end
of year reading level of first grade students. The variable to be manipulated in the two
comparison groups in the study will be the use of balanced literacy instruction in the first grade
classrooms. The DRA2 end of year reading levels for the first grade students for the 2011-2012
school year will be compared to the end of year reading levels for the first grade students for the
2012-2013 school year. This study will attempt to identify a cause and effect relationship
between balanced literacy and reading achievement scores. Because of the number of variables
that exist (gender, economic status, previous reading instruction, different teachers, different
classrooms) that could influence the results of the study; the statistical technique of analysis of
covariance will be used (Gay, et.al, p.233).
Sample
All of the first grade teachers on the Emerald City Elementary campus will implement
balanced literacy specifically guided reading in their classroom during the 2012-2013 academic
year. Therefore, the participants for this study will be all first grade teachers for the 2012-2013
school year at Emerald City Elementary. The exact roster of first grade teachers has not been set
at the time of this proposal. The principal is in the process of finalizing teaching assignments for
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN BALANCED LITERACY READING LEVELS
33
the 2012-2013 year. Based on current student enrollment projections for the 2012-2013
academic year, there will be 9 or 10 self-contained first grade teachers on the campus.
The entire population of first grade students will be used and data will be collected on the
approximately 22 students in each class. Based on enrollment projections for the 2012-2013
academic year there will be 198 to 220 first grade students on the campus. The exact number of
students in each class as well as the demographics attributed to them (gender, race, economic
status) will be determined once the class rosters are set by the school. Student placement within
the classes will not be manipulated for this study. Typically the students at this campus are
placed in classrooms heterogeneously with the same number of boys, girls, economically
disadvantaged, high, low, and average students within each class.
Instrumentation
Fountas and Pinnell stated that the use of running records is an integral piece of reading
instruction. Running records are used to document and analyze student reading behaviors for
later instruction. Because of the importance attributed to the use of using running records (Clay,
1993, 2000; Fountas and Pinnell, 1996) to facilitate guided reading instruction and thus an
integral piece of balanced literacy I have decided to use running records as one measurement
instrument for this study. The running records will provide evidence of systematic guided
reading instruction for each first grade student. The guidelines from Clay, Fountas and Pinnell
for administering and using running records will be used. An example of the coding system and
running record form will be included in the appendix section of this proposal.
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN BALANCED LITERACY READING LEVELS
34
Development Reading Assessment 2 created by Pearson will be used at the beginning,
middle, and end of the year data collection. The guidelines set forth in DRA2 Teacher Guide
will be strictly adhered to. This measurement system is currently in use at Emerald City
Elementary as part of their standard data collection protocol for all students kindergarten through
third grade.
DRA K-3 assesses student performance in the following areas of reading
proficiency: reading engagement, oral reading fluency, and comprehension. The
selections of these target skill areas and the methods used to assess them are based
on current research in reading from sources such as the National Reading Panel
Report (2000) and Reading for Understanding (Rand Education, 2002). (Beaver,
2006)
For DRA2 students read a book at their anticipated independent reading level as
determined by running records during classroom guided reading instruction. The assessment
measures the characteristics and behaviors of good readers. The DRA2 “scaffolds primary
students as they move through the various stages of learning to read.” (Beaver, 2006) The
student’s reading engagement, oral reading fluency, and reading comprehension are then
measured using the DRA2 Continuum.
Procedural details
Student instructional and independent reading levels will be measured using Running
Records (Clay, 1993,2000; Fountas and Pinnell,1996) at regular intervals (to be determined)
throughout the academic year. These running records will include the title and level of the text
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN BALANCED LITERACY READING LEVELS
35
read, percent accuracy, MSV coding for errors, number of errors, number of self-corrects, teach
point, and praise point. I have chosen to use the district created timeline for reading level
measurements. This timeline will be distributed to the teachers prior to the first day of school.
This first method of data collection will be completed by the classroom teachers. Each teacher
will collect student instructional reading levels via running records for the students in their class
during guided reading groups. This student data will be turned in to the campus principal and the
two reading interventionists on the Appendix H data collection sheet (Fountas and Pinnell,
1996). For this research study I will serve as both a reading interventionist and researcher.
Reading levels will be reported in both the lettering system as used by Fountas and Pinnell as
well as the numbering system as used by DRA2. Refer to figure 1.6 .
Figure 1.6 Reading Level Conversion Chart
Fountas and Pinnell to DRA Reading Level Conversion Chart
Exit Levels
End of
kindergarten
End of 1st Grade
End of 2nd Grade
End of 3rd Grade
Fountas and Pinnell
A
B
C
Developmental Reading Assessment
1
2
3 AND 4
D
E
F
G
H
I
6
8
10
12
14
16
J
K
L
M
N
O
P
Q
18
20
24
28
30
34
38
40
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN BALANCED LITERACY READING LEVELS
36
The second method of data collection will be the Developmental Reading Assessment 2
(Beaver, 2006) which will be administered to each first grade student by the teachers and verified
by the reading interventionists at the beginning, middle, and end of the year. The numbered
system for reading levels as assigned by the Developmental Reading Assessment 2 system will
be used. The DRA2 system recommends an end of year reading level for first grade students of
independent 16. This information will then be logged into a Reading Level spreadsheet that is
used for the Response to Intervention process.
The teacher will be required to turn in lesson plans documenting the use of balanced
literacy. The teacher will also be required to submit guided reading lesson plans for each of the
reading groups she sees. These guided reading plans should indicate the number of minutes each
day that the students spend in small group instruction, the focus of the lesson, the reading level
of the group, as well as the students in the group.
Validity and reliability
“Validity refers to the degree to which a test measures what it is supposed to measure
and, consequently, permits appropriate interpretation of scores.” (Gay, et al., 2012) The
information in the DRA2 Technical Manual indicates that the DRA2 was measured for contentrelated validity, criterion-related validity, and construct validity. “Content validity was built into
the DRA and DRA2 assessments during the development process. Texts are authentic, and the
student is asked to respond to the text in ways that are appropriate for the genre.” (Pearson,
2009) The DRA2 Technical Manual reports correlational coefficients using Spearman’s Rho
ranging from .60 to .76 for student reading performance on DRA2 and GORT-4, DORF, and
Gates MacGinitie Reading tests. In summation of the technical report provided by DRA2, the
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN BALANCED LITERACY READING LEVELS
37
data shows “the results presented indicate that the DRA2 is a valid measure that can accurately
measure students’ oral reading fluency and comprehension level.” (Pearson, 2009)
“Reliability is the degree to which a test consistently measures whatever it is measuring.
The more reliable a test is, the more confidence we can have that the scores obtained from the
test are essentially the same scores that would be obtained if the test were readministered to the
same test takers at another time or by a different person.” (Gay, et al., 2012) Four methods were
used to determine the reliability of the DRA2. These include internal consistency, parallel
equivalency reliability, test-retest reliability, and inter-rater reliability (Pearson, 2009).
Triangulation of the multiple forms of reliability analyses that were
conducted shows that the DRA2 is a reliable measure in that it produces stable,
consistent results over time, different raters, and different samples of work or
content. Specifically, it demonstrates moderate to high internal consistency
reliability, parallel-equivalency reliability, test-retest reliability, and inter-rater
reliability. (Pearson, 2009, p.34)
The technical manual notes that it is imperative that raters follow the administration and
scoring guidelines provided in the DRA2 teacher guides and kits (Pearson, 2009).
Because of the validity and reliability attributed to the DRA2, it is expected that the data
collected at the beginning, middle, and end of year using the assessment will also be valid and
reliable. The teachers administering the assessments will follow the guidelines established in the
teacher manual. Likewise the reading interventionists will verifier the assessments using the
same criteria. This process of teachers testing and interventionists verifying will provide a
checks and balances system which will add the reliability of the scores.
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN BALANCED LITERACY READING LEVELS
38
Data analysis
The data in this study will be analyzed using inferential statistics. “Inferential statistics
help researchers to know whether they can generalize to a population of individuals based on
information obtained from a limited number of research participants.” (Gay, et. al, p.341)
Because of the number of variables that cannot be manipulated analysis of covariance
(ANCOVA) will be used. “Analysis of covariance is a statistical technique used to adjust initial
group differences on variables used in causal-comparative and experimental studies (Gay, et. al,
p.233). The end of year reading levels as determined by the DRA2 for students in first grade for
the 2011-2012 school year will be compared to the end of year reading levels as determined by
the DRA2 for the first grade students for the 2012-2013 school year.
Conclusion
As public schools in Texas implement Response to Intervention procedures, they will
have to use the data to evaluate the quality of instruction or intervention they are providing at
each tier. It will become necessary to make changes in tier 1 classroom instruction to reduce the
number of students in need of interventions at tiers 2 and 3. It is hypothesized that this causalcomparative study will show that the use of research-based best practices such as balanced
literacy and guided reading in regular classroom instruction will have a positive impact on the
end of year reading levels for first grade students.
Hopefully the data that is collected for this study will help to show teachers that the
quality of the instruction you provide has a direct impact on student achievement.
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN BALANCED LITERACY READING LEVELS
References
Beaver, Joetta M. (2006). Developmental Reading Assessment 2 K-3 Teacher Guide. Saddle
River, New Jersey: Heinemann.
Beaver, Joetta M. (2006). Developmental Reading Assessment 2. [Benchmark Reading
Assessment System]. Saddle River, New Jersey: Pearson.
Clay, M.M. (1993). An observation survey of early literacy achievement. Portsmouth, NH:
Heinemann.
Clay. M.M. (2000). Running records for classrooms teachers. Rosedale, North Shore, New
Zealand: Heinemann Education.
Davis Bianco, S. (2010). Improving student outcomes: Data-driven instruction and fidelity of
implementation in a response to intervention (RTI) model. TEACHING Exceptional
Children Plus, 6(5) Article 1. Retrieved from
http://escholarship.bc.edu/education/tecplus/vol6/iss5/art1.
Elsea, B. (2001). Increasing students’ reading readiness skills through the use of balanced
literacy program. (Master’s thesis). Retrieved from Educational Resources Information
Center. CS 104 426.
Fitzgerald, J. and Cunningham, J. W. (2002). Balance in teaching reading: An instructional
approach based on a particular epistemological outlook. Reading & Writing Quarterly.
18, 353-364, doi:10.1080/07487630290061881.
Fountas, I.C., & Pinnell, G.S. (1996). Guided reading: Good first teaching for all children.
Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
39
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN BALANCED LITERACY READING LEVELS
40
Fountas, I.C., & Pinnell,G.S. (2006). Teaching for comprehending and fluency. Portsmouth, NH:
Heinemann.
Fuchs, D. and Fuchs, L.S. (2006). Introduction to response to intervention: What, why, and how
valid is it? Reading Research Quarterly, 41(1), 93-99. doi:10.1598/RRQ.41.14
Gay, L.R., Mills, G.E., and Airasian, P. (2012) Educational research competencies for analysis
and applications. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Pearson.
Gersten, R., Compton, D., Connor, C.M., Dimino, J., Santoro, L., Linan-Thompson,
S., and Tilly, W.D. (2008). Assisting students struggling with reading: Response
to Intervention and multi-tier intervention for reading in the primary grades.
A practice guide. (NCEE 2009-4045). Washington, DC: National Center for Education
Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Institute of Education Sciences,
U.S. Department of Education. Retrieved from http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/
publications/practiceguides/.
Grimaldi, S. and Robertson, D.A. (2011). One district’s RTI model and IRA’s guiding
principles: The roads converge. New England Reading Association Journal, 47(1), 18-26.
Iaquinta, A. (2006, June). Guided reading: A research-based response to the challenges
of early reading instruction. Early Childhood Education Journal. 33 (6), 413-418, doi:
10.1007/s10643-006-0074-2.
International Reading Association. (2000). Excellent reading teachers: A position statement of
the International Reading Association. Newark, DE: Author. Retrieved from
http://www.reading.org/Libraries/Position_Statements_and_Resolutions/ps1041_excellen
t_1.pdf
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN BALANCED LITERACY READING LEVELS
41
International Reading Association. (2009). Response to intervention: Guiding principles for
educators from the International Reading Association. Newark, DE:Author
International Reading Association. (2000). Teaching all children to read: The roles of the
reading specialist a position statement of the International Reading Association. Newark.
DE: Author. Retrieved from
http://www.reading.org/Libraries/Position_Statements_and_Resolutions/ps1040_specialis
t.sflb.ashx
International Reading Association. (2002). What is evidence-based reading instruction?
(Position Statement). Newark, DE: Author. Retrieved from
http://reading.org/Libraries/Position_Statements_and_Resolutions/ps1055_evidence_base
d.sflb.ashx
Learning Point Associates. (2004). A closer look at the five essential components of effective reading
instruction: A review of scientifically based reading research for teachers. Naperville, IL: Author
Little, Mary E. (2012). Action research and response to intervention: Bridging the discourse
divide. The Educational Forum, 76, 69-80. doi:10.1080/00131725.2012.629286
Lowden, C. (2005). Evaluating the impact of professional development. The Journal of Research
in Professional Learning.
Lyon, G. Reid. (2003). Reading disabilities: Why do some children have difficulty learning to
read? What can be done about it? Perspectives, 29(2)
Lyons, Carol A. and Pinnell, Gay Su. (2001). Systems for change in literacy education.
Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Mercier Smith, J.L., Fien, H., Basaraba, D., and Travers, P. (2009). Planning, evaluating, and
improving tiers of support in beginning reading. TEACHING Exceptional Children,
41(5), 16-22.
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN BALANCED LITERACY READING LEVELS
42
Moats, L.C. (1999). Teaching reading is rocket science: What expert teachers of reading should
know and be able to do. Washington, D.C.: American Federation of Teachers
National Reading Panel. (2000). Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the
scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruciton.
Washington, DC: National Institute of Child Health and Human Development.
No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, Pub. L. No. 1070110, 115 Stat. 1425 (2002).
Pascoe, S. E. (2010, July). Best practices of effective professional development training for K-3
reading teachers. (unpublished master’s thesis). Northern Michigan University.
Michigan.
Pearson. (2009). K-8 Technical manual developmental reading assessment. Upper Saddle River,
New Jersey: Pearson. Retrieved from
http://s7ondemand7.scene7.com/s7ondemand/brochure/flash_brochure.jsp?company=Pea
rsonEducation&sku=DRA2_TechMan&vc=instanceName=Pearson&config=DRA2_Tec
hMan&zoomwidth=975&zoomheight=750
Pimentel, S. (2007). Teaching reading well: A synthesis of the International Reading
Association’s research on teacher preparation for reading instruction. Newark, DE:
International Reading Association.
Pressley, M., Mohan, M., Raphael, L.M., and Fingeret, L. (2007). How does Bennett Woods
Elementary School produce such high reading and writing achievement?. Journal of
Educational Psychology. 99 (2), 221–240, doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.99.2.221.
Pressley, M., Roehrig, A., Bogner, K., Raphael, L.M., and Dolezal, S. (2002, January). Balanced
literacy instruction. Focus on Exceptional Children. 34 (5), 1-15. WN: 0200103212001
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN BALANCED LITERACY READING LEVELS
43
Shanahan, T., Callison,K., Carriere, C., Duke, N.K., Pearson, P.D., Schatschneider, C., &
Torgensen, J. (2010). Improving reading comprehension kindergarten through 3rd grade:
A practice guide (NCEE 2010-4038). Washington, DC: National Center for Education
Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of
Education. Retrieved from whatworks.ed.gov/publications/practiceguides.
Texas Education Agency. (2008). 2008-2009 Response to intervention guidance. Austin, TX:
Author. Retrieved from http://www.tea.state.tx.us/index2.aspx?id=5817
Walsh, K., Glaser, D., & Wilcox, D.D. (2006). What education schools aren’t teaching about
reading and what elementary teachers aren’t learning. Washington. DC: National
Council on Teacher Quality.
Zygouris-Coe, V. (2001). Balanced reading instruction in K-3 classrooms.
Florida Literacy and Reading Excellence (FLaRE) Center, University of Central Florida
College of Education. Retrieved from http://flare.ucf.edu.
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN BALANCED LITERACY READING LEVELS
Appendix A
44
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN BALANCED LITERACY READING LEVELS
Appendix B
45