WHY START WITH TIER 1-
THE CORE?

1. WHY THINK ABOUT YOUR CORE PROGRAM
2. 5 BIG AREAS OF READING : KEY!
3. HOW THE 5 BIG AREAS INTER-RELATE AND WHEN
TO PUT EMPHASIS ON THEM.
4. SO, WHAT
’
S NEEDED IN A RESEARCH-BASED
CORE?
5. DESPITE THE FACT THAT WE KNOW ALL THIS,
WHY AREN
’
T WE DOING BETTER?
6. TOOLS AND WEBSITES TO HELP
7. SUPPLEMENTAL PROGRAMS AND
INSTRUCTIONAL ENHANCEMENTS

Dr. Ed Kame’enui
Dr. Mark Shinn
Dr. Deborah SimmonsDr. Janice Miller
Dr. Louisa Moats
Dr. Joseph Torgesen
Dr. Marcia Kosanovich
Dr. Madi Phillips
Dr. Corinne Harmon
Dr. Melissa Bergstrom
Dr. Amy Dahlstrom Dr. Sharon Vaughn
Dr. Reid Lyon
Dr. Joe Witt
Florida Center for Reading Research
National Reading Panel
Oregeon Reading First/University of Oregon
National Center on Student Progress Monitoring
WE WISH TO THANK THESE PANELS, INSTITUTIONS, AND
INDIVIDUALS FOR SHARING THEIR KNOWLEDGE AND
WISDOM.

School-wide Reading Model
Foundational Features:
Translating Research into Practice

• The goal of this schoolwide reading model is to help individual schools build the capacity to support the adoption and sustained use of research-validated practices while still acknowledging and honoring their unique and characteristic differences.
• The schoolwide beginning reading model will maximize your ability to ensure all your children will read at grade level or above by the end of Grade 3 and continue on to be successful readers at each grade..

Aligning what we know and what we do to maximize outcomes.
• Unprecedented research convergence on skills that children need to be successful readers
• Much classroom practice is shaped by reading programs
– Publishers have responded to the research and redesigned programs.
– A research-based program provides continuity across classrooms and grades in approach.
• KEY to RtI: Develop a comprehensive system of instruction with a research-based core curriculum and enhancement programs, designed for the fullrange of learners.

Increasing communication and learning
• Improving communication
– Teachers within and across grades using common language and objectives
• Improving learning
– Provides students a consistent method or approach to reading which is helpful for all students
– Provides teachers an instructional sequence of skill presentation and strategies to maximize student learning
– Provides more opportunity to differentiate instruction when necessary

Multi- Tiered Reading Instruction
If progress is inadequate, move to next level.
Level 1: Primary Intervention
Enhanced and effective general education classroom instruction.
Level 2: Secondary Intervention
Child receives more intense intervention in general education, presumably in small groups.
Level 3: Tertiary
Intervention increases in intensity and duration; remedial education

THE 5 BIG ARES OF READING
ARE THE BASIC CONTENT
ELEMENTS AND MUST BE PRESENT IN THE
CORE PROGRAM.
LET’S TAKE A LOOK AT THE 5 BIG AREAS-
DEFINITION PLUS RESEARCH AND
INSTRUCTION

•
PHONEMIC AWARENESS
•
PHONICS
•
FLUENCY
• VOCABULARY
• COMPREHENSION

Phonemic awareness is the ability to hear, identify, and manipulate individual sounds in spoken words
(Torgesen, 1998).

• PA improves access to phonics, word analysis and word reading, spelling, and comprehension
• Poor readers who enter first grade with weak PA are most likely to be the poor readers in fourth grade
• PA involved Auditory/listening Activities
• Needs to include the developmental hierarchy of phonological awareness

Five Levels of Phonological Awareness
Sentence
Segmenting
Rhyming &
Alliteration
Syllable
Blending &
Segmenting
Onset-Rime
Blending &
Segmenting
Phoneme
Blending &
Segmenting

An understanding of the alphabetic principle—the relationship between phonemes and graphemes
(sounds and letters.)

• Systematic and explicit phonics instruction
-improves word recognition, decoding, fluency, spelling, and comprehension.
– is more effective than non-systematic or no phonics instruction
– significantly improves children’s reading comprehension

• Systematic
• pre-specified sequence of letter – sound correspondences taught in a logical order (e.g., most common sounds taught first; progresses from simple to more complex; once a few letter sounds are learned, students are taught a decoding strategy; students apply recently learned phonics to reading connected text)
• Explicit
• taught directly (teacher modeling, providing guided practice, and independent practice); not left to chance or self discovery.

• The ability to read text
– quickly
– accurately
– with proper expression
• The effortless automatic ability to read words quickly and accurately in connected text.

• Repeated and monitored oral reading improves reading fluency and overall reading achievement.
• When readers are fluent, they want to read. Reading builds vocabulary.
• Fluent reading frees students to understand what they read. Fluency is a key predictor of comprehension.

• Articulate the importance of fluency & provide modeling
• Determine Reading Levels
• Oral reading with feedback
• Variety of research based strategies
– Repeated Readings, Timed, Partner
• Monitor fluency progress

• The knowledge of the meanings and pronunciation of words that are used in oral and written language.

• Can be developed
– Directly (teach important, difficult, and useful words)
– Indirectly
• Vocabulary knowledge is strongly related to overall reading comprehension. Vocabulary instruction improves reading comprehension.
• The relationship of vocabulary to reading comprehension gets stronger as reading material becomes more complex and the vocabulary becomes more extensive.
• Fluency is the key building block for vocabulary development.

• Selection of words to teach
– Unknown, critical to understanding the text, likely to encounter in the future
• Teach word learning strategies
– How to use word parts to determine meaning of words
• Provide multiple exposures to words
• Encourage independent wide reading
• Need for active building of rich word meanings, emphasizing connections, and lots of review.
• Vocabulary develops BOTH incidentally and intentionally.

• The complex cognitive process involving the intentional interaction between reader and text to convey meaning.
• The ability to make sense of text and to monitor for understanding .

Text comprehension improves when readers actively relate the ideas in print to their own knowledge.
Text comprehension can be improved by instruction that
– is explicit, or direct
– helps readers use specific comprehension strategies

• Monitoring comprehension (promoting metacognition)
• Using graphic and semantic organizers
– e.g., teaching the use of a Venn diagram to compare and contrast 2 characters from a story
• Main Idea
• Summarizing
• Text Structure
• Teaching a combination of reading comprehension techniques is the most effective.

• Life Experience
• Content Knowledge
• Activation of Prior
Knowledge
• Knowledge about
Texts
Knowledge
Language
• Oral Language Skills
• Knowledge of Language
Structures
• Vocabulary
• Cultural Influences
Reading
Comprehension
Fluency*
We Refer to It as
General Reading Skills
• Motivation &
Engagement
• Active Reading
Strategies
• Monitoring Strategies
• Fix-Up Strategies
Metacognition
• Prosody
• Automaticity/Rate
• Accuracy
• Decoding
• Phonemic Awareness
*modified slightly from presentations by Joe Torgesen,
Ph.D. Co-Director, Florida Center for Reading Research; www.fcrr.org

In Summary, “The 5 Big Ideas is what reading instruction and intervention planning is all about.”
(Dr. Joseph Torgesen, Florida Center for Reading Research)
Phonemic Awareness
Taught by methods that are…
Phonics
Fluency
Identifying words accurately and fluently
Vocabulary
Comprehension strategies
Constructing meaning once words are identified
Systematic and explicit!!

HOW DO THE 5 BIG AREAS
OF READING WEAVE AND
WORK TOGETHER?

The Many Strands that are Woven into Skilled Reading
(Scarborough, 2001)
LANGUAGE COMPREHENSION
BACKGROUND KNOWLEDGE
VOCABULARY KNOWLEDGE
LANGUAGE STRUCTURES
VERBAL REASONING
Skilled Readingfluent coordination of word reading and comprehension processes comprehension.
LITERACY KNOWLEDGE
WORD RECOGNITION
PHON. AWARENESS
DECODING (and SPELLING)
SIGHT RECOGNITION
Reading is a multifaceted skill, gradually acquired over years of instruction and practice.

Fluent
Reflective
Readers/
Writers
S
I
O
N
H
E
N
P
R
E
C
O
M
• Background
Knowledge
• Predictions
• Clarification/
questioning
• Monitoring
for Meaning
• Summarizing
• Making
Pers onal
Connections
• Automaticity with
the code
• Structure of the
language
• Alphabetic principle
• Phonological awareness
Early Literacy Experiences and
Oral Language Development
Reading
Is
Rocket
Science
Louisa Cook Moats

PUTTING IT ALL TOGETHER
In primary grades
(Reid G. Lyon, Ph.D)
FLUENCY
PHONICS
PHONEMIC
AWARENESS
ORAL LANGUAGE
DEVELOPMENT
(Build Foundational Skills from the bottom up and then loop.)
Learning to Read
VOCABULARY
COMPREHENSION
At the same time,
CONSTANT
EXPOSURE)
So students can
Read to Learn.

2 3 K
Phonological
Awareness
Alphabetic
Principle
Automaticity and
Fluency with the
Code
Letter Sounds &
Combinations
Listening
Vocabulary
1
Multisyllables
Reading
Listening
Comprehension
Reading

Learning to Read Reading to Learn
• Phonemic Awareness
• Vocabulary
• Phonics/Automatic and fluent word recall
FLUENCY
Vocabulary and
Comprehension are not ignored in this phasedone through oral language activities, read alouds
Phonics is not ignored in this phase- still teaching students word analysis skills for reading multisyllabic words.

Learning to Read
Reading to Learn
Fluency is the skill that links these two phases.
Phonemic Awareness and Phonics are the
‘engines’ that drives automatic word recognition/fluency.
Fluency is the ‘engine’ that drives vocabulary and comprehension skills.

Fluent
Reflective
Readers/
Writers
Vocabulary
Comprehension
Reading
5 Big Areas:
Fluency
S
I
O
N
H
E
N
P
R
E
C
O
M
• Background
Knowledge
• Predictions
• Clarification/
questioning
• Monitoring
for Meaning
• Summarizing
• Making
Pers onal
Connections
Phonics
Phonemic
Awareness
Oral
Language
Development
• Automaticity with
the code
• Structure of the
language
• Alphabetic principle
• Phonological awareness
Early Literacy Experiences and
Oral Language Development
Is
Rocket
Science
Louisa Cook Moats
A simultaneous bottom up and top down approach is
Best Practice.

CHARACTERISTICS OF
SCIENTIFICALLY-BASED
READING PROGRAMS

What is a Core Reading Program (CRP)?
A core reading program is the primary instructional tool that teachers use to teach children to ‘learn to read’ and ensure they reach reading levels that meet or exceed grade-level standards. A core program should and must address the instructional needs of the majority of students in a district or school. The core reading program serves as the ‘base’ for reading instruction ….An effective program entails students to transition to ‘reading to learn’.
{From A Consumer’s Guide to Evaluating a Core
Reading Program Grades K3 (Simmons and Kame’eniu)}

“Teaching reading is far more complex than most professionals and layperson realize. The demands of the phonologic, alphabetic, semantic, and syntactic systems of written language require a careful schedule and sequence of prioritized objectives, explicit strategies, and scaffords that support students’ initial learning and transfer of knowledge and skills to other contexts. The requirements of curriculum construction and instructional design that effectively move children through the ‘learning to read’ stage to the ‘reading to learn’ stage are simply too important to leave to the judgement of individuals, even the best teachers.
The better the core program addresses the instructional priorities, the less teachers will need to supplement and modify instruction for the majority of learners.”
From: “Teaching Reading is Rocket Science,” Dr. Louisa
Moats (1999)

★
Instructional Content
★
Empirical Evidence
★
Instructional Design
So what are these priorites for a
Core program?

★
Instructional Content
★
Empirical Evidence
★
Instructional Design

•
PHONEMIC AWARENESS
•
PHONICS
•
FLUENCY
• VOCABULARY
• COMPREHENSION

• Core elements of scientifically based reading programs include explicit and systematic instruction in the 5 big ideas of reading:
– phonemic awareness
– phonics
– fluency
– vocabulary
– comprehension strategies

2 3 K
Phonological
Awareness
Alphabetic
Principle
Automaticity and
Fluency with the
Code
Letter Sounds &
Combinations
Listening
Vocabulary
1
Multisyllables
Reading
Listening
Comprehension
Reading

★
Instructional Content
★
Empirical Evidence
★
Instructional Design

• Features of welldesigned programs include:
– Explicit instructional strategies
– Systematic and coordinated instructional sequences
– Ample practice opportunities
– Cumulative Review
– Aligned student materials
Intergration of 5 Big Ideas

What do we mean by systematic and explicit?
Systematic
Guided by a scope and sequence that is comprehensive, that teaches all the appropriate knowledge and skills in a
“ programmatically scaffolded” manner
Explicit
“First graders who are at risk for failure in learning to read do not discover what teachers leave unsaid about the complexities of word learning. As a result, it is important to directly teach them procedures for learning words”
(Gaskins, et al., 1997)

Coordinated Instructional Sequences
Phonological Phonemic Awareness
Phonics
Fluency
Vocabulary
Comprehension Strategies

Example of Coordinated Instructional
Sequences linking 5 big areas
• Phonemic Awareness:
– Students practice orally segmenting and blending words with /m/
• Phonics:
– Students learn to connect /m/ with the letter m
• Fluency & Comprehension:
– reading word lists that include words that have /m/ and other previously learned letter sounds
– reading decodable passages (using repeated readings) that include many words with /m/
• Spelling
– spelling words that include /m/ and other letter sounds previously learned

1. Teacher Models and Explains
2. Teacher provides Guided Practice
• Students practice what the teacher modeled and the teacher provides prompts and feedback
3. Teacher provides Supported Application
• Students apply the skill as the teacher scaffolds instruction
4. Independent Practice

• Practice should follow in a logical relationship with what has just been taught in the program.
• Once skills are internalized, students are provided with opportunities to independently apply previously learned information (e.g., at student learning centers).
• Critical skills are reviewed, with opportunities for scaffolding

allows for generalization
• The content of student materials (texts, activities, homework, manipulatives, etc.) work coherently with classroom instruction to reinforce the acquisition and generalization of specific skills in reading.
Example: If students are taught specific vocabulary words, they should have the opportunity to read materials containing those words, or engage in writing activities that apply those words in sentences or paragraphs.

• We have evidence that curriculum matters.
– Instruction that’s guided by a systematic and explicit curriculum is more effective, particularly with at-risk learners, than instruction that does not have these features.
From: “Teaching Reading is Rocket Science,” Dr.
Louisa Moats (1999)

• Instructional Content
– Phonemic Awareness
– Phonics
– Fluency
– Vocabulary
– Comprehension
• Instructional Design
– Explicit Instructional
Strategies
– Coordinated Instructional
Sequences
– Ample Practice
Opportunities
– Cumulative Review
– Aligned Student Materials
Ingredients
Recipe

★
Instructional Content
★
Empirical, Scientific
Evidence
★
Instructional Design

SBR is “… research that involves the application of rigorous, systematic, and objective procedures to obtain reliable and valid knowledge relevant to education activities and programs.”
No Child Left Behind Act of 2001
Thanks to Sharon Vaughn for this image

• Systematic and objective empirical procedures that draw on observation or experiment;
• Involves rigorous data analyses that are adequate to test the stated hypotheses and justify the general conclusions drawn;
• Relies on measurements or observations that provide valid data across evaluators and observers and across multiple measurements and observations ; and
• Has been accepted by a peer-reviewed journal or approved by a panel of independent experts through a comparably rigorous, objective, and scientific review.

• It means that programs have evidence of efficacy established through carefully designed experimental studies.
• It means that programs has been shown to work with students of similar demographics and needs.
• It also means that programs reflect current and confirmed research in reading (ingredients and recipe required!)
• It means these studies have been described in detail in order for other researchers to replicate and described so readers are not left with relevant questions

Phonemic
Phonemic Awareness
Awareness
Phonics
Alphabetic
Weaves all these ingredients together with effective design.
Comprehension
Comprehension

HOW DO WE KNOW WHICH
PROGRAMS/INTERVENTIONS
ARE SCIENTICALLY BASED?
WEBSITES AND TOOLS

“If there is NOT a scientific basis for what you are doing with your students, you should not be doing it.”
“You must be able to articulate the research that demonstrates that your methods have the greatest likelihood of producing positive student outcomes.”
Dr. Chris Koch, State Superintendent
(Directors’ Conference, 2005)

How do we know what to use? Websites for
Scientifically Based
Reading Interventions
Florida Center for Reading Research: www.fcrr.org
Oregon Reading First Center: reading.uoregon.edu
Texas Center for Reading and Language Arts: www.texasreading.org
Fcrr reports

www.fcrr.org

http://www.fcrr.org/FCRRReports
Florida Center for Reading Research

Key: Summary Table for FCRR Reports
•
Type of Program
1 = Core Reading Program
2 = Supplemental or Intervention Program
3 = Technology-Based Program
4 = Program that may be implemented by a tutor or mentor
5 = Intervention or Remedial Program for students above third grade
•
Reading Component (PA = Phonemic Awareness, P = Phonics, F = Fluency, V = Vocabulary, C =
Comprehension)
+ = some aspects of this component taught and/or practiced
++ = most aspects of this component taught and/or practiced
+++ = all aspects of this component taught and/or practiced n/a = Not Addressed in this program. In other words, this element of reading is not a goal of this program.
•
Special Considerations a. explicit b. systematic c. student materials aligned d. ample practice opportunities provided e. practice only f. oral language only g. phonemic awareness and phonics program h. phonics program i. fluency program j. vocabulary program k. comprehension program l. extensive professional development required m. expertise required to make informed curriculum decisions n. extensive organization of materials required o. school-wide implementation required

– To be a reliable resource for school districts as they make decisions about instructional materials
– To report the alignment of instructional materials to current reading research

http://oregonreadingfirst.uoregon.edu/

Supplemental and Intervention Reading Programs
Grades K-3: A Critical Elements Analysis
Deborah C. Simmons, Ph. D., Edward J. Kam
Edward J. Kame’enui, Ph.D.
e’e nui, Ph. D.,
Carrie Thomas Beck, Ph.D., Nicole Sherman Brewer, and Hank Fien
Oregon Reading First Center, College of Education, University of Oregon
• Designed to assist states, districts, and schools in selecting research-based instructional tools
• Documents and quantifies the content, design and delivery features of core reading programs

• Why Developed : To assist states, districts and schools in their selection of scientifically-based core tools
• When Developed: As part of National Center to
Improve the Tools of Educators agenda (1990-2000)
• Purpose : To provide a means to qualify and quantify the strengths and areas of improvement.

The “ Consumers Guide ” provides a common metric for evaluating:
Criteria & Outcomes Used to Evaluate
• High Priority Items Within Grade by Big Idea/
Content
• Discretionary Items
• Overarching Design Items
• Report Evaluates % of Items by Big Idea By
Grade

1.
Does it teach all the relevant essential content (ingredients)?
2.
Are the design and delivery (recipe) adequate for the majority of learners?

(ingredients)
• Essential elements of scientifically based programs include:
– phonemic awareness instruction
– systematic, explicit phonics instruction
– fluency instruction
– vocabulary instruction
– comprehension instruction

• Features of well-designed programs include:
– Explicitness of instruction for teacher and student
• Making it obvious for the student
– Systematic & coordinated instruction
• Building and developing skills
– Opportunities for practice with Cumulative review
• Modeling and practicing the skill
• Revisiting and practicing skills to increase strength
– Aligned Student materials/Integration of Big Ideas
• Linking essential skills

• Programs Evaluated by Grade
• Within Grade by Big Idea (high priority /Content items and discretionary/design items)
• Criteria Drawn from Scientific Base in Effective
Interventions and Science of Reading and Learning
Theory (Content and
Design
)
• Following criteria for each critical element:
= Element consistently meets/exceeds criterion
= Element partially meets/exceeds criterion
= Element does not satisfy the criterion

• The reading program’s scope and sequence should provide evidence of breadth and depth of coverage on essential skills.
High Priority Items in Kindergarten
High Priority Items
Phonemic Awareness Instruction (5)
____ ____ ____
Letter-Sound Association Instruction (3)
____ ____ ____
Decoding Instruction (5)
____ ____ ____
Irregular Words Instruction (1)
____ ____ ____
Vocabulary Instruction (3)
____ ____ ____
Listening Comprehension Instruction (4)
____ ____ ____

High Priority Items: Grade 1 Content
X Design /Phonics Instruction
Rating
High Priority Items — Phonics Instruction
Crit erion Initial
Instruction
Evidence
Week
______
1. Progresses systematically from simple word types (e.g., consonant-vowel-consonant) and word lengths (e.g., number of phonemes) and word complexity (e.g., phonemes in the word, position of blends, stop sounds) to more complex words. (ss) [NRP, pg. 2-132]
2. Models instruction at each of the fundamental stages (e.g., letter-sound correspondences, blending, reading whole words). (w) and (ss)
3. Provides teacher-guid ed practice in controlled word list s and connected text in which students can apply their newly learned skill s successfully. (w)
4. Includ es repeated opportunities to read words in contexts in which students can apply their knowledge of letter-sound correspondences. (w) and (ss) [NRP, pg. 3-28]
5. Uses decodable text based on specific phonics lessons in the early part of the fir st grade as an int ervening step between explicit skill acquisition and the students' ability to read quality trade books. Decodable texts should contain th e phonics elements and sight words that students have been taught. (w) and (ss)
Week
______

– Automaticity and Fluency with the Code :
The effortless, automatic ability to read words in connected text.

Type of Review
1.
(w) = Within a sequence of lessons . A specified element is best analyzed by reviewing a particular lesson or a series of 2-3 successive lessons.
2.
(ss) = Scope and sequence . A specified element is best analyzed by reviewing the program’s scope and sequence.
3.
(st) = Skills trace.
A specified element is best analyzed by completing a skills trace.

• Prior to students reading the passage below, lead them through a group practice to review words (e.g., said, and, see) and repeat instruction on the new words (Nick, had, mint, drink).
High Priority Items — Fluency Instruction
Rating Criterion
2. Contains regular words comprised of letter-sounds and words types that have been taught. (w) and (ss)
3. Contains only high-frequency irregular words that have been previously taught. (ss)
4. Uses initial stories/passages composed of a high percentage of regular words (minimum of 75-80% decodable words). (w)

Rating
High Priority Items — Fluency Instruction
Criterion
1. Contains regular words comprised of phonic elements and word types that have been introduced. (ss)
2. Selects majority of high frequency irregular words from list of commonly used words in English. (ss)
3. Builds toward a 90 word-per-minute fluency goal by end of grade 2. Assesses fluency regularly. (ss) [NRP, pg.
3-4]

• Coordinates and integrates PA and phonics instruction and student materials.
• Coordinates words used in word recognition and fluency building activities.
• Provides ample practice on high priority skills.
• Provides explicit and systematic instruction.
• Includes systematic and cumulative review of high priority skills.
• Builds relationships between fundamental skills.

SO KNOWING ALL THIS,
WHAT CURRICULUM SHOULD WE
USE?

 Trophies published by Harcourt (Beck et al., 2003)
 A Legacy of Literacy published by Houghton Mifflin (Cooper et al., 2003)
 Open Court published by SRA (Bereiter, et al., 2002)
 Reading Mastery Plus published by SRA (Englemenn &
Brunder, 2002)
 Scott Foresman Reading (Afflerbach, et al., 2002)
 McMillan/McGraw Hill
 Al Otaiba S., Kosanovich, M.L., Torgesen J.K., Hassler, L. &
Wahl, M. (2005). Reviewing core kindergarten and first-grade reading programs in light of no child left behind: an exploratory study. Reading and Writing Quarterly, 21, 377-400.

For a ppt/review of each of these Core programs, you can access at:
• http://oregonreadingfirst.uoregon.edu/pr ofdev.php
• Scroll about half way down and you’ll see a section, “Selecting a Core
Program”.

Which Program Should We
Choose?

Evaluating Core Programs:
Identifying Gaps
We may need to supplement or modify, but we must do it judiciously.

Evaluating Core Programs:
Identifying Gaps

Tier 3
%
Tier 2
____%
Tier 3
Intensive
Interventions:
Tier 2
Targeted
Interventions:

Reading Mastery

Corrective
Reading (4-12)
 Language! (3-12)

Read Well (1-3)

Horizons
Tier 1
%
Tier 1
Universal
Interventions:

Four Block
Guiding Reading

Houghton Mifflin

Harcourt

Tier 3
%
Tier 2
____%
Tier 1
%
Tier 3
Intensive
Interventions:
Tier 2
Targeted
Interventions:

Corrective

Reading (4-12)
Language! (3-12)

Horizons

Reading Mastery

Language! (3-12)
Tier 1
Universal
Interventions:

Harcourt

Houghton Mifflin

Open Court

Read Well (1-3)

Tier 3
%
Tier 2
____%
Tier 1
_____%
Tier 3
Intensive
Interventions:
Tier 2
Targeted
Interventions:
Tier 1
Universal
Interventions:
 Language! (3-12)

Corrective
Reading (4-12)

Reading Mastery
 Corrective
Reading (4-12)
 Language! (3-12)

Reading Mastery

Horizons

Read Well (1-3)

Open Court

Differentiate High SES communities from Low SES communities??
Educationally, the main criteria are background knowledge and language development.
The lower the
SES, the MORE systematic and explicit interventions need to be in all 5 big areas of reading.

OK, BUT WE HAVE A GOOD CORE
CURRICULUM AND/OR MY
DISTRICT ISN’T AT AN ADOPTION
YEAR….BUT WE STILL NEED
SOMETHING…

Programs are tools that are implemented by teachers to ensure that children learn enough on time.
Core
Classifying Reading Programs:
What is the purpose of the program?
1. Core
2. Supplemental
3. Intervention
Intervention
Supplemental
Core
Reading Program
Meeting the needs for most
Supplemental
Reading Program
Supporting the Core
Intervention
Reading Program
Meeting the needs for each
(Vaughn et al. 2001)

• If the present reading program in a district is not successful with the majority of students, consider:
• 1. Providing additional professional development for teachers
– Not a “dump-truck” approach, but on-going professional development
– Assessing the degree of treatment integrity
• 2. Selecting a new program
– Use the “Consumer’s Guide” as a tool
• 3. Gathering Supplemental Materials
– Modify/supplement the existing program
– Fill identified gaps with supplemental programs

• Support and extend the critical elements of a core reading program.
• Provide additional instruction in critical areas (e.g., phonological awareness, fluency) and
• Provide more instruction or practice in particular area(s) of need.

1. Address a weakness in the core program with all students.
2. Provide more practice in particular areas for those students who need it.

DESPITE THE FACT THAT WE KNOW
THE IMPORTANCE OF AND THE
CRITICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF A
CORE READING PROGRAM,
WHY DO WE STILL HAVE SO MANY
STRUGGLING READERS?

Dr. Joseph Torgesen, Florida Center for Reading Research

DESPITE THAT WE
‘KNOW’
THIS…..
Academic
5% need intensive supports
Approx. 40% of population has reading problems severe enough to hinder their enjoyment of reading.
20% is an (arbitrary) cutoff point for the purpose of intervening with children deficit in basic reading skills.
15% of student populations need
‘boost’ of some sort
80%
Of student populations do fine with nothing extra

2 broad categories of developmental language disorders:
1. General oral language weaknesses
2. Phonological core deficit (this is the largest category!)
Dr. Sally Shaywitz, Overcoming Dyslexia, 2003, p. 52

Reading Language Systems
Discourse
Syntax
Semantics
Comprehension
Decoding
Phonology
Dr. Sally Shaywitz, Overcoming Dyslexia, 2003, p. 52

2
Reading Language Systems
Discourse
Syntax
Semantics
Comprehension
Decoding
Phonology
Dr. Sally Shaywitz, Overcoming Dyslexia, 2003, p. 52

• Phonological core deficit: (aka ‘Cracking the Code’)- Inability to process accurately and efficiently the phonological building blocks of language and the units of print that represent them. This type of struggling reader makes up the majority.
Phonology Decoding
Dr.Sally Shaywitz, Overcoming Dyslexia, 2003, p. 52

• Are primarily characterized by difficulties with accurate and/or fluent word recognition and by poor decoding and spelling abilities. These difficulties typically result from a deficit in the phonological component of language that is often unexpected in relation to other cognitive abilities and the provision of effective classroom instruction.
(International Dyslexia Association, 2002)

Why aren’t we teaching more students to be better readers? The article by Dr. Louisa Moats addresses this question. You will be particularly interested if your district uses Four Blocks and
Guided Reading as your core reading program.
Her article clearly articulates why this approach is
NOT best practice.
“Whole-Language High Jinks: How to Tell
When ‘Scientifically-Based Reading
Instruction’ Isn’t” http://www.ilispa.org/modules/smartsection/item.php?ite
mid=82

Highlights from “Whole-Language High
Jinks: How to Tell When ‘Scientifically-
Based Reading Instruction’ Isn’t”
• Despite the National Reading Panel’s landmark report..”discredited and ineffectual practices continue in many schools. Although the term ‘whole language’ is rarely used today, programs based on its premises, such as Reading Recovery, Four Blocks, Guided
Reading, and especially, ‘balanced literacy’ are as popular as ever. These approaches may pay lip service to reading science, but they fail to incorporate the content and instructional design proven to work best with students learning to read”. (p.
4)

• “For more than three decades, advocates of ‘wholelanguage’ instruction (and its derivatives) have argued- to the delight of many teachers and administrators- that learning to read is a ‘natural’ process for children. Create reading centers in classrooms; put good, fun books in children’s hands and allow them to explore then encourage them to
‘read’, even if they can’t make heads or tails of the words on the page.”
• Scientists have established that about 60% of students will learn to read adequately (though not necessarily well) regardless of the instructional method. “ 40% are less fortunate. For them, explicit instruction in the 5 big areas of reading
(including phonics) is necessary if they are ever to become capable readers”. (p. 6)

suggests ways of separating the wheat from the chaff ….
and explains that good (SBRR) reading programs--:
(p. 5)

• Incorporate phonemic awareness into all reading instruction, rather than treating it as an isolated element;
• Go beyond the notion of phonics as the simple relationship between letters and sounds to include lessons on word structure and origins;
• Build fluency in both underlying reading skills and text reading, using direct methods such as repeated readings of the same text;
• Build vocabulary by exposing students to a broad, rich curriculum;
• Support reading comprehension by focusing on deep understanding of topic and theme rather than just a set of strategies and gimmicks. (p. 5)

Claim to adhere to SBRR guidelines. She identifies tell-tale signs of whole-language programs masquerading as SBRR programs.
Among the most common: a stress on ‘cueing systems’,
‘teacher modeling’ rather than direction instruction, and an overemphasis on ‘authentic literature’ and ‘process writing’. (p. 9) “Four blocks is particularly insidious because it appears to be a ‘balanced’ framework, but does not require a teacher to know very much about language or reading”. (p. 20)
“ For English-language learners, SBRR programs are critical, yet this fact is ignored and whole-language spin-offs remain the dominant approach to teaching ELL students”. (p. 22)

“A good reading program, well implemented, teaches each of the five components thoroughly, explicitly, and with planned connections to the others..” (p. 16)
“No program is perfect, and some are stronger than others, but several are reasonably faithful to SBRR and are far more apt to succeed with children . For example,
SRA/McGrawHill’s Open Court, Harcourt’s
Trophies, and Scott Foresman’s Reading
Street have all five components and good instructional design.” ReadWell and
Reading Mastery are also effective programs. “(p. 14)

• Whatever Core program you use, your data will tell you whether it’s effective for the majority (80% or better) of your readers…
• We will problem solve the effectiveness of your reading program after lunch.