Reading Buddies LRA 12/1/14 AMWilson
Reading buddies: Utilizing a university-based tutoring model to inform
middle school instruction for struggling readers.
Dear future principal,
My name is Michael and I am in the 8th grade at Smith Middle School. If you knew me, you’d know I’m
good at basketball. I like to teach little kids stuff, and keep my grades up...When I am a student at your
school, you can expect me to work hard and do my best in all my classes.
Sincerely,
Michael
Introduction
Over the past decade, reading instruction in public schools has focused on accountability, testing,
and standardization. This focus is mostly due to the No Child Left Behind legislation passed in 2001. The
act called for rigorous statewide assessments, progress objectives, and for every student to be proficient in
reading by 2014 (No Child Left Behind Act [NCLB] 2002). Despite incentives put in place for school
districts, millions of students continue to struggle. “Overwhelming pressure on teachers and schools to
improve scores on high-stakes test may subvert any efforts to make long-term, foundational changes in
middle school reading programs” (Ivey & Broaddus, 2000). Over 25% of students are not making
significant progress, regardless of the type of research-based instruction they receive (NAEP, 2012;
Slavin & Morris, 2003). As struggling students move through the grades, the gap between their reading
achievement and that of their peers continues to widen (Morris & Slavin, 2003; Hernandez, 2011).
When students who are struggling readers reach middle school, they are unable to meet the
reading demands placed upon them. Typically, these students read well below grade level, functioning at
least two years below their current grade. Students who struggle have been defined by various names
(reluctant, alliterate, alienated, and marginalized) in attempts to more fully understand the reason that they
struggle (Lenters, 2006). Yet, a term in itself is not enough to capture the complexity of the middle school
struggling reader. According to Alverman (2001), “attempting to define the term struggling readers is like
trying to nail gelatin to a wall” (p. 679). For these purposes, this study uses the term struggling reader to
refer to any student reading below at least two years grade level.
1
Reading Buddies LRA 12/1/14 AMWilson
To complicate matters, a student may be diagnosed with a learning disability (LD), language
learning status (ELL), or behavior disability (EBD), and then this label dictates the type of support they
receive. In addition, many students who read below grade level develop coping strategies in order to hide
their poor reading skills. All of these factors – reading ability, diagnostic profile and inappropriate coping
strategies – may make middle school one of the most difficult times for students to make significant gains
in reading. Research has shown that students who do not show proficiency in reading by third grade are at
a higher risk for dropping out of school, and are rarely, if ever, able to catch up with their peers
(Hernandez, 2011; Lloyd, 1978).
Supporting struggling readers within a middle school setting is challenging for many reasons.
Scheduling and placement, instruction, and student motivation are all issues that factor into a student’s
progress. Intervention at the middle school level is variable depending on how the school system places
students into classes. Research has shown that struggling readers at the secondary level demonstrate
complex profiles (Ivey & Broaddus, 2000; Valencia & Buly, 2004). “Academic differences between
middle school students may be even more pronounced than in lower grades because of the amount of
instruction students have experienced at this time” (Ivey & Broaddus, 2000, p. 68). No singular schooladopted intervention program is successful at filling in students’ reading gaps (Blintz, 1997; Dennis,
2013; Ivey & Broaddus, 2000; Valencia & Buly, 2004).
Misplacement into interventions will lead students to reconfirm feelings of failure that they have
dealt with throughout their school careers. Specialized classes are meant to help teach students to read.
However, these students rarely get the opportunities to practice reading in books at their level (Ivey &
Broaddus, 2000). “Struggling readers, especially those in special programs, typically get low-level,
fragmented skill instruction rather than opportunities to actually read and write,” (Johnson & Allington,
2001). In addition, the material is often irrelevant and disconnected with students’ lives and this type of
instruction is often ineffective (Guthrie, 2008). When Michael (mentioned above) entered middle school,
he could read very quickly but had no comprehension of the stories he read. In elementary school, he had
received fluency practice only and did not get experience reading meaningful texts. He began eighth
2
Reading Buddies LRA 12/1/14 AMWilson
grade disengaged and reading at a fifth grade level. He had made no progress at all during his seventh
grade year. Creating responsive, meaningful reading experiences for many types of readers is no simple
feat. There are so many questions that go into organizing intervention instruction. With so many types of
reading needs within each class, how do teachers structure instruction to allow all students to learn? How
do teachers motivate their students to learn, especially those that have struggled for so long? How does
reading intervention factor into a student’s identity as a reader? This paper attempts to address these
issues by discussing how a highly-structured peer-tutoring model might aid student learning and
engagement for all types of struggling readers.
Literature Review
Effective reading intervention begins with a strong theoretical framework. This does not mean
that a single theoretical framework will meet all instructional needs (Schwab, 1969). This study is broadly
based on a social constructivist model. It draws upon theories of identity, engagement, and curriculum
and instruction to inform how struggling middle school students perceive their involvement in a peertutoring model.
Reading identity. Research has shown that context, curriculum, and relationships have a large
impact on the identity of struggling readers (Triplett, 2004). Most struggling readers do not like to read.
Because these students demonstrate ineffective reading behaviors, they feel like they are not good readers.
This negative sense of self as reader impacts their belief system. Rosenblatt’s (1978) transactional theory
states that reading occurs as an interaction between the text, the reader, and the context. Following this
model, struggling readers bring their own experiences of reading to every text. For these students, books
evoke feelings of frustration and failure. In addition, the context – the environment and purpose for
reading – can also contribute to how a student interprets a text. Students who read for purposes of
assessment often see the task as irrelevant and inauthentic, and this context colors the student’s reading
experience. In order to create a more positive experience for struggling middle school readers, the context
and texts must be relevant and engaging.
3
Reading Buddies LRA 12/1/14 AMWilson
Engagement. Middle school readers are social creatures. During adolescence, students make
meaning of the world by connecting and discussing with their peers (Ivey, 2014). Social engagement with
books can help increase a student’s motivation to read. When paired with choice, interesting texts, and
socialization, struggling readers can start to build positive experiences with text (Guthrie, 2008). This
shift in context, from reading as assessment to reading as social interaction, allows struggling readers to
engage in reading tasks that are relevant and purposeful. Social relationships are extremely important to
help students develop and maintain positive reading identities (Ivey, 2014). In addition to social
interaction, middle school students, need to see how reading relates to their lives. Guthrie and Davis’s
(2003) model of engagement called for teaching practices that support and deepen engagement. Students,
especially those who struggle, need real-world interactions, interesting books, choice, and collaboration.
Curriculum and instruction. Programmatic instruction for many struggling readers, especially
special education students and ELL students, often focuses on a specific reading skill (Valencia & Buly,
2004). Often, struggling readers are placed into a “best-fit” model that focuses on one of the two major
components of reading according to the Simple View – print processing or comprehension (Hoover &
Gough, 1990). Yet, adolescent struggling readers demonstrate a wide variety of reading profiles and
placement into interventions that address a single component of reading, such as phonics, are unlikely to
be successful in helping students make progress in reading (Blintz, 1997; Dennis, 2013; Hock, Brasseur,
Deschler, Catts, Marquis, Mark, & Stribling, 2009;Valencia & Buly, 2004).
Tutoring
In a peer tutoring model, social context and relationships are of utmost importance. These
interactions are formative in shaping students’ identities as readers. Peer tutoring is a model in which
school-aged students work together on various reading and writing activities. In a cross-age tutoring
experience, such as this study, older students work with younger students, usually paired in a 1:1 model.
The amount of teacher guidance may vary from one peer tutoring model to another. In this study, a model
of gradual release of responsibility is utilized so that students take over more responsibility over time.
4
Reading Buddies LRA 12/1/14 AMWilson
Typically, these models have been used to increase engagement for both sets of students. However, this
study seeks to understand the broader benefits of a cross-age tutoring model for severely struggling eighth
graders.
Research on peer tutoring has shown that this model can increase academic achievement
(McMaster, Fuchs, & Fuchs, 2006; Morris, Ervin, & Conrad, 1996; Saenz, Fuchs, & Fuchs, 2005; SpearSwerling, 2009) as well as motivation and engagement (Davenport, Arnold & Lassman, 2004; Paterson &
Elliot, 2006), attitude towards reading (Davenport, Arnold & Lassman, 2004), and social standing (Fuchs,
Fuchs, Mathes, & Martinez, 2002). Studies examining cross-age peer tutoring have also shown that peertutoring can be effective to increase awareness of reading strategies (VanKeer & Vanderlinde, 2010).
Although there is a wealth of research on the benefits of peer-tutoring, there are three specific
gaps in the literature. The first is the notion of using adolescents as tutors. One study has described special
education students involved in peer-tutoring (Spear-Swerling, 2009), but only looked at academic
achievement across reading skills. The second gap relates to intervention with struggling readers
(including SPED, ELL, and “garden-variety” (Stanovich, 1988)). A few studies examine the different
needs of adolescent readers (Buly & Valencia, 2002; Dennis, 2013) and even more describe specific
programs that focus on decoding or comprehension (Slavin, Lake, Davis, & Madden, 2011), but there is
almost no literature about interventions that can be applied to teach all types of struggling readers. The
third gap in the literature is in using struggling adolescent readers as peer tutors. A careful search of the
literature reveals no studies that directly connect graduate level work with middle school peer-tutoring.
The present study attempts to address the gaps in the literature involving struggling adolescent
readers and motivating interventions that build reading skill and reinforce identity as readers. The
questions that guided this study were:
What happened with middle school students serving as tutors for younger reading buddies?
a. What were the perceptions and experiences of the middle school students?
5
Reading Buddies LRA 12/1/14 AMWilson
b. How does a nontraditional reading intervention influence the way that middle school students
think about themselves as readers?
Tutoring model. This study describes an intervention model conducted within a naturalistic
setting where I served as the reading and special education teacher. The intervention was based off of a
university-based tutoring model I had been facilitating for the previous two years. In the summers of
2011, 2012, and 2013, Dr. Dixie Massey and I partnered our school systems– a large university in the
Pacific Northwest and a low-income middle school– in order to have her graduate students seeking their
endorsement in reading tutor middle school students. Many of the students being tutored were students I
would eventually have in my classroom. Tutors and students were paired 1:1, and the graduate tutors
utilized high interest books, word study (either developmental spelling or vocabulary study), and Directed
Reading Activity (DRA) to boost students’ reading level. The DRA model provides instructional support
for students before, during, and after reading (Betts, 1964). Before reading, the tutors introduced key
vocabulary words that students would encounter in the text. They might also incorporate an activity (such
as showing an image) to get the students to think about the topic. During reading, tutors would ask
students comprehension questions to guide their thinking or clarify areas of confusion. After reading,
tutors would engage in a writing activity connected to the text.
Previous to beginning the tutoring model, interventions in my own 8th grade classroom revolved
around students’ individual needs; I often had multiple groups running simultaneously, with some
students involved in a word study activity, others reading independently, and then some students in a
teacher-directed guided reading group. Students’ individual needs were supported with this model;
however, I found that students were still not motivated to read outside of the classroom. Too many years
of failure had dominated their perceptions of themselves as readers, and I feared that when they left my
classroom, they would carry this notion with them. I decided to take action and adopt the engaging
tutoring model I had seen Dixie use with her graduate students and their middle school students, who
6
Reading Buddies LRA 12/1/14 AMWilson
were now my own students. I hoped that reviving this hands-on model would help students develop a lifelong love of reading.
Description of Study
The participants were seven eighth grade students who had been a part of the graduate tutoring
clinic two years earlier. Students were placed into reading intervention classes taught by the author in a
large school system in the Pacific Northwest. Only students with consistent attendance across field trips
were included as participants. Over 85% of the students attending the school qualified for free and
reduced lunch. Students were strategically scheduled into one of four classes. Two of the four classes
became peer tutors because of the time of day that would allow students to take field trips to the second
grade elementary class on a biweekly basis. The seven students chosen were a subset of the two classes
that participated. Student placement into reading intervention classes was determined by intensive scores
(more than 2 years below grade level) on three assessments: the Measures of Academic Progress test, a
computer-based assessment test that is aligned to Washington State Standards and used by over 131
districts in Washington State, a standardized assessment (MSP), and the Fountas and Pinnell Benchmark
Assessment of Students (BAS), an informal reading inventory. Students placed in a reading intervention
needed to have intensive scores on at least two out of three assessments. In addition, 43% (n = 3) students
also qualified for Special Education services because of a learning disability, behavior disability, or health
impairment disability (e.g., ADHD). In addition to intensive scores and special education status, another
compounding factor for many students was English Language Learning (ELL) status. 43% (n = 3) of the
students in the classes had not scored a Proficient on the Washington assessment (WELPA test) and were
classified as ELL (see Table 1).
The program was designed to allow these seven students to meet with their reading buddies once
every other week. Scheduling eighth graders to meet second graders was complicated, and eighth graders
missed one class during every trip. Some of these students had multiple referrals for school behavior
including: harassment, verbal and physical aggression, fighting, and disrespect. Despite the pushback
7
Reading Buddies LRA 12/1/14 AMWilson
from teachers and loss of class time, the administrator backed my request to try an innovative strategy to
help these students get more involved in their own learning.
Student background. Of the seven students who took part as peer tutors, the average reading
level was late 4th grade, which meant that these students were reading four years below grade level. Most
of the students were self-professed “reading-haters,” refusing to read during class or at home. Many
students had been in a some sort of remedial reading program since elementary school and had made little
or no progress by the time they got to middle school. During middle school, the coursework got harder so
that students could not read and comprehend most of their classroom material, and many of them gave up.
When this occurred, verbal and physical behavior increased. School became frustrating and tiresome for
these students. Although it was mandated, school supplied neither motivation nor engagement for many
of these students. It was my third year seeing students like this walk through my door, and before they
went to high school, I made a silent goal to help them realize their own potential as readers, and as leaders
within the school setting.
Table 1: Student Demographics
Student characteristic
Number of students (n = 7)
Students reading below grade level
Total = 100%
57% (4/7) = 4th grade level readers
43% (3/7) = 5th grade level readers
Students with IEPs
43% (3/7)
Students with ELL status
43% (3/7)
Students with one or more office referral
29% (2/7)
Student ethnicity
Total = 100%
Caucasian =14% (1/7)
Hispanic =29% (2/7)
Asian = 14% (1/7)
Pacific Islander = 14% (1/7)
African-American =29% (2/7)
Peer-tutoring overview. Eighth grade tutors met with second grade tutees eight times during the
spring for hourly sessions. Eighth and second graders were paired loosely on reading level and
8
Reading Buddies LRA 12/1/14 AMWilson
personality. Second grade reading levels varied from kindergarten to third grade. The tutoring format
mimicked the DRA model that many of the students had seen when they had been in the role of the tutees.
During each session, the lesson was comprised into different parts (following the structure the graduate
students had used) consisting of before reading activities (activating prior knowledge and
word/vocabulary study), during reading activities (questioning and clarifying, fluency-building
activities), and after reading activities (reading response, writing, and reflection). Over time students took
more control over the lesson planning in a gradual release of responsibility model. In addition, students
used videotapes to examine their own teaching and make changes. During each session, students reflected
on their roles as teachers in order to modify their instructional techniques for the following lessons.
Gradual Release of Responsibility. During the first field trip, all lesson plans were created and
modeled by the teacher. Throughout all sessions, students could choose books to read to their buddies.
Before the first trip, students reviewed the structured lesson plan and practiced their read-alouds. All of
the lesson planning was done within the intervention classroom. Over time, students took more
responsibility over planning the lessons based on their buddies’ interests and reading needs. During the
final two sessions, students were responsible for constructing hour-long thematic lesson plans which
included engaging hooks on the topic, word study activities, book readings with stopping points and
planned questions, and reflections (see Appendix A for a full overview of the gradual release of
responsibility model).
Self-reflections. All students were asked to self-reflect by written reflection after each session.
Eighth grade students filled out two reflections: a self-reflection that was filled out the day of tutoring and
a video-analysis reflection. The written self-reflection asked students to respond to the teaching objectives
and to debrief the day’s session. In addition, all eighth grade students involved in peer-tutoring were
video-recorded with permission during each session. Although the entire session could not be captured on
film, each student was filmed for 3-5 minutes. After each tutoring session, student watched the videos and
filled out an informal survey to help them analyze their own teaching behaviors. Students reported on the
quality of the questions they asked, the understanding of their second grade reading buddy, and qualities
9
Reading Buddies LRA 12/1/14 AMWilson
of their own teaching disposition (eye contact, voice level, student/teacher interaction). After analyzing
their own videos, they watched the videos of the other tutors to see what they could learn from their peers.
Students looked forward to the video reflection component of the tutoring program and were always
extremely engaged and attentive to their own teaching style. After watching the videos and filling out the
survey, students wrote down a few goals about what they would do during their next visit, based on their
own analysis of the videos as well as their student reflections.
Data Collection
In order to more fully understand students’ experiences during peer-tutoring, multiple sources of
data were identified and analyzed including student referral data, parent call logs, teacher observation
notes, video, student reflections, student work, student-created lesson plans, and student assessment data.
Using a variety of sources allowed triangulation of data. Because so many sources were collected,
analyzing the data of each student took an extraordinary amount of time. In order to truly understand the
experience of these students, it was necessary to examine each source closely.
Although this research is situated within a qualitative model, descriptive information about
students’ reading levels is also included in order to compare students’ academic achievement across two
years, first as part of a school-adopted intervention program and next within the peer-tutoring
intervention. Achievement information is limited and no causal factors can be drawn from this data alone.
Student assessment data was collected at three points during the year (beginning, middle, and end of
year). The assessment data used was an informal reading inventory called the Fountas and Pinnell
Benchmark Assessment System (BAS). The BAS measured fluency (accuracy and rate) and
comprehension scores to place a student at an instructional reading level. The seven eighth graders who
participated in the peer tutoring model were included in the data assessment. In addition, scores of all
students who consistently attended peer-tutoring field trips (n = 16) is also included to more fully
understand the big picture of this type of tutoring model.
10
Reading Buddies LRA 12/1/14 AMWilson
Data analysis
Qualitative data analysis was a multi-step process. First, all of the paper sources were sorted into
analytical files by student name and date (Glesne, 1999). Then, document analysis began. Each document
(including video) was examined at least three times, first labeled with organizational categories that
helped frame the data (Maxwell, 2005). For example, timelines of peer tutoring field trips were
highlighted and teacher to student transfer of responsibility was noted. This aspect of categorizing helped
to clarify where students were in entire process. Next, the data were then reread and open coding
occurred. These substantive categories (Maxwell, 2005 ) started to incorporate student beliefs and
processes (such as “agency” or “fear of failure”). These data were then entered into a basic word
processing system by code to be further analyzed. At this point, thematic analysis of data begin to
examine trends across participants. As patterns began to emerge, data were classified into theoretical
categories which combined the open codes with more abstract theory (Maxwell, 2005). The final themes
were developed by pairing the the categories with the researcher’s own understanding of the data and
turned into statements.
Validity of the data was achieved through triangulation and peer feedback. At multiple points in
the analysis process, peer researchers looked at subsets of the data in order to confirm categories and
codes. This process was valuable to identify alternate codes as well as confirming developing theories
about students’ perceptions and identities through a social-constructivist lens.
Results
In the following section, I explore the ways that eighth grade students’ involvement in a peertutoring model impacted their self-reflective behaviors, engagement, confidence, motivation, and
achievement. A narrative is used to describe how student identities shifted over time. In addition, four
prominent themes serve as a framework for discussion the findings. First, a gradual release of
responsibility allows students to engage in self-reflective behaviors. Second, students learn about
themselves through understanding and interpreting the actions of others. Third, peer tutoring increases
11
Reading Buddies LRA 12/1/14 AMWilson
confidence, pride, and self-efficacy. Finally, a peer tutoring structure allows students an engaging way to
read deeply in non-fiction text. These themes examine how students reconstruct their identities as learners
over time. I explore how visual literacies may aid students’ understanding of their own behaviors and how
such using tools may help students become more reflective. I discuss how Ivey’s (2014) social and
Guthrie and Wigfield (year) motivational theories of learning relate to this model of learning and how a
nontraditional intervention may benefit struggling readers.
Student/Self
Self and
Other
(Parent?)
Teacher
Leader
Identity shifts
All students experienced a shift in identity over the four months they engaged in tutoring. Each
month, students were given additional responsibilities for teaching. Students’ attitudes and perspectives
changed during this time, focusing on self, then understanding themselves through the perspective of their
reading buddy, then as a teacher, and finally, as a leader.
During the first trip, eighth grade students were shy and unconfident. A few of the students asked
the teachers what they needed to do next during the tutoring session. In March, students’ writing and
reflections were predominately about themselves. They made comments about what they were working
on and what they did.
During April, students became more self- aware of interactions with their buddies. Their
interactions became more natural and students sat closer to one each as they worked. When they arrived at
the school, the second graders would smile and wave at their tutors, often getting out of line to give them
hugs. Student reflections noted a perspectives shift as eighth graders started to become more self aware in
their role as tutor. Michael wrote, “When I’m teaching, I notice that when I’m reading, I don’t five the
students a lot of attention and don’t project my voice.” Ana had taught her buddy how to hold a book up
12
Reading Buddies LRA 12/1/14 AMWilson
so that everyone can see it. After this interaction, she described that she felt like she was a parent because
she was “learning to communicate with little kids.”
During May, student narratives focused on their own roles as teachers. Their work also indicated
that they altered instruction based on student feedback. Students embraced their new identities as teachers
and took full responsibility for lesson planning and hour-long teaching sessions. The lesson planning
preparation became a kind of writing workshop model, in which students would check in with me about
what part of the process they were working on (5 steps total) as they completed work independently.
Students needed very little help as they took on more responsibility. Michael wrote, “I think the lesson
went well because the buddies seemed like they were interested in what they were reading and learning.
The one thing I would change next time would be to not ask questions to the teacher during the lesson. I
learned that teaching takes a lot of responsibility.” In addition, students commented more on what other
eighth graders were doing with their buddies and how they would be better “teachers” if they mirrored the
instruction of their peers. Pat wrote about how tutoring was a transformative experience for him, “I taught
the second graders about reading and writing. I am learning about myself through the experience by
getting ready to my second grade buddies.” Students began to take more ownership of their lessons. They
would seek out interesting books that their buddies like and would cater instruction to their students’
abilities.
Finally, in June, students embodied leadership characteristics while at school and during field
trips. They began to call each other before school to remind them to come in for class, and they would
help each other prepare their “buddy bags” (materials used while tutoring). Student narratives exuded
confidence and defended strong reasons for why they made certain instructional decisions. They used
words such as “accomplished,” “proud,” “confident,” “patient,” “enjoyment,” and “knowledge” as they
spoke of this experience.
Theme 1: A gradual release of responsibility model for lesson planning allows students to engage in
reflective behaviors. The gradual release model was the prominent reason that students became
13
Reading Buddies LRA 12/1/14 AMWilson
successful in working with second graders and creating lesson plans on their own. Many of these students
were reluctant learners and would avoid hard work. At first, some students did not want to attend the trips
because they felt like it was “stupid” and did not care if it affected their grades. Although many felt this
way, all of them brought their permission slips back after I told them that they would miss part of their
other class and would provide a snack afterwards. At this first stage, many students needed extrinsic
rewards to motivate them to go.
The first task for students was simple: students chose two books and practiced reading them until
they were fluent. However, the tasks became more difficult over time, with students learning about text
features, word study, and lesson planning elements (creating a hook, guided reading, reflection). By May,
students used an outline to create and plan the hour-long lesson plans. Andre wrote that creating his own
lessons “makes it interesting and makes [students] read. [I] copied the teacher kind of and [created] my
own teacher experience in a way.” This student, who had formerly disengaged with any kind of work,
became one of the most motivated students during the experience.
One major part of the gradual release model that was motivating for students was watching
themselves and their peers on video after each session. This process was adopted from the graduate
clinical model, and was a way for students to self-reflect. By critiquing their own teaching, students relied
on themselves to become better teachers, instead of relying on teacher feedback. Michael wrote, “Using
videos people did a good job on teaching their buddies because they knew what to do and let me check
what to improve or not.” Sira wrote, “Videos help because you can see your mistakes and what you need
to work on.” Pat said, “I feel good using the videos because it shows me what I need to do next field
trip...the videos show me that the buddies are engaged in the subject.” These comments demonstrate how
videos gave students the opportunity to improve their own teaching behavior rather than learning it from
the teacher.
“I learned that you don’t put too much work on them or they will collapse of like fall apart” - Andre
14
Reading Buddies LRA 12/1/14 AMWilson
Theme 2: Students in a peer tutoring model learn about themselves through understanding and
interpreting the actions of others. The social relationship between tutor and tutee was a driving force
for learning. Eighth graders wanted to be good teachers so that their second graders could learn. This
student-centered model was highly social. Eighth grade students planned independently, but often talked
to each other and helped each other out during lesson planning. During the field trips, students sat in
groups of four, with two tutors and their buddies. For half of each lesson, students read books aloud.
Although they taught 1:1, the groups often interacted during the lesson. For example, second grader might
tell the other second grader how exciting the book was, or the students would share a picture from the
story. In many ways, peer tutoring provided both students (eighth and second graders) an opportunity that
they may not have had growing up: building experiences where literacy is shared, nurtured, and valued.
At first the students’ reflections and writings seemed to indicate a focus on self. Over time,
eighth graders’ reflections showed a deeper understanding of how their presence impacted their buddies.
For example, Pat wrote, “I will work on trying to sit up and ask a lot of questions so I know more about
who I am reading to!” This particular student had a reputation for disruptive behavior in school. Since the
beginning of the school year, teachers had called his home nine times regarding his disruptive behavior,
attitude and focus. He had been given classroom and administrative consequences, but his behavior
remained unchanged. However, since tutoring commenced, Pat showed a change in behavior and no more
phone calls were made about his disruptive behavior.
Another student, Andre, who had 8 calls home and 13 referrals (disrespect, aggression, and
harassment), showed a similar commitment to school work after the tutoring program began. After late
April, Andre did not receive any referrals, and no longer received negative calls home. Andre thoroughly
enjoyed the trips to see his buddies, and he wanted his lesson plans to be “cool and interesting, so they
could be excited.” After one trip, he wrote, “My buddy learned how to read with expression and to color
good. I learned that you don’t put too much work on them or they will collapse or like fall apart.” In many
ways, this statement seemed to describe Andre, who had previously given up in his classes when he was
15
Reading Buddies LRA 12/1/14 AMWilson
asked to do difficult work. Through teaching his buddies, Andre had gained perspective of what it felt like
to be a teacher.
As students watched video reflections, they showed an increased awareness how they might
become a better tutor, either by emulating the behaviors of other eighth graders or catering the lesson to
the needs of their buddy. During one trip, Michael’s buddies moved closer and closer to him throughout
the section, until they were almost touching him. The eighth graders were able to interpret this behavior
as engagement. Although this was not the goal at first, eighth graders were able to pick up on physical
cues of engagement and confusion through watching themselves and their peers on video.
Over time, students’ changed the way they prepared instruction. They no longer cared about
choosing subjects that were only interesting to them; instead, they incorporated the feedback that second
graders gave on the reflections (for example, “next time let me read”) and the information they gathered
from watching others. On his final reflection, Jose, the student who had been hesitant to go on the first
trip, wrote “Eighth graders should go to meet new friends and might want to be a teacher someday.”
“When we tutored our buddies, out attitudes changed.” - Michael
Theme 3: Peer tutoring increases confidence, pride and self-efficacy. As described above, there is a
clear change in student perspective over time. At first, many students showed signs of boredom,
frustration, and nervousness, but after a few trips, students became more aware of their responsibilities as
tutors and started to embrace a new sense of self. Talula, wrote the following about her experience over
the course of the semester: “I felt nervous for being a teacher for 2nd graders because it was my first time
and thought that I would be boring to them. [Now] I [feel] normal because I did it so many times that I’m
used to teaching the 2nd graders. I feel like a teacher.” Michael wrote, “I [felt] kind of nervous teaching 2nd
graders because I didn’t know if I had their attention and I didn’t know if they were interested in what I
was teaching them. Now I feel confident.”
Video and self reflections both captured how students were navigating this new sense of self. On
his video reflection, Jose wrote: “I see eighth graders who look like role models or teachers that make
16
Reading Buddies LRA 12/1/14 AMWilson
little kids listen or learn new things that make them want to tell people about…We are kind, respect them
and they do the same thing to us as well. I learned that I can be a responsible person and if I want to be a
good teacher I can be one.”
Students also showed increased self-efficacy on their lesson plans. Ana wrote the following about
creating lesson plans: “I’m proud because for me it’s the first time I felt how it was to create lessons for
kids. It was pretty hard because we had to research things to create a lesson plan.” Talula had similar
feelings about the experience, “I felt scared for creating my own lesson for reading buddies because I
think [they’re] not going to like it or they will think its boring. I felt accomplished because I did it right
for my reading buddies.” Sira wrote, “I felt proud because that was my first time creating a lesson plan.
After the first lesson plan I felt that I could make any lesson plan. I feel proud that I taught [her]
something she loves. When I watch these videos, I feel that I can be a great teacher ‘cause when I teach
them something, I feel success! When I went on both trips, the second time I felt more confidence but the
first I was good too because I was excited when we first went.”
In addition to creating lessons plans and thinking like a teacher, students expressed how these
trips might affect their future. Michael wrote, “What makes me proud is when they laugh that makes me
know they enjoy me tutoring them. By watching the videos it makes me feel proud of myself. These field
trips could help me in the future with kids.”
On a final reflection, Talula wrote her feelings about creating lesson plans, “I think it is ok
because too much work had to be done but it was worth it. It was worth it because we saw our buddies
being happy, excited to do something.”
Theme 4: A peer tutoring structure allows students an engaging way to read deeply in non-fiction
text. The final theme worth noting is how engaged middle schoolers became with nonfiction text.
Although this was an unexpected benefit to tutoring, it is an appropriate to mention because of the recent
legislation about utilizing non-fiction text with older students. During the first two teacher-created lesson
plans, nonfiction texts were used. During the second trip, eighth graders taught their second grade buddies
17
Reading Buddies LRA 12/1/14 AMWilson
all about text features, including a word study with text features vocabulary and a graphic organizer that
second graders created. It is important to note that previous to this trip, many eighth grade students did
not know what text features were and how they were used to find information. From the third trip on,
students were responsible for choosing their own books. A thorough examination of student-created
lesson plans revealed that all students focused on nonfiction themes and used a variety of nonfiction texts
to plan lessons. Some example subjects covered include reptiles, monkeys, and space. During the creation
of their lessons, students had access to multiple sources (such as the classroom library, the school library,
and the internet) in order to create rich, meaningful lesson plans. Students could pick any topic that they
wanted, and all students chose nonfiction subjects. In order to create meaningful word study and helpful
read-alouds, students had to navigate to find meaningful information by using text features to find
relevant passages. Students often used multiple texts on the same subject to create their word sort. During
the field trips, and without direction, students taught their own buddies how to use text features within a
text. During one video, Jose points out the important vocabulary words at the beginning of the text, telling
his buddy that it is important to know key words in the text before you read. Eighth grade students also
used texts at different levels on the same topic to create high-level vocabulary word sorts. One of their
lessons even involved having their second grade buddies create a structured poem about crabs or sea
creatures. This theme suggests that students can be empowered to use nonfiction texts when they have a
choice of engaging, readable texts.
Academic achievement (Table 2). Although this was not an experimental study, it is worth
noting the difference between how the participants scored on a reading assessment during 7th and 8th
grade. The BAS reading assessment was given three times per year (fall, winter, spring) during 7th and 8th
grade. Following the Fountas and Pinnell suggested benchmarks, the scores of these students were then
organized into one of three categories: Exceeded Expected Growth, Met Expected Growth, Approaching
Expected Growth, and Did Not Meet Expected Growth. Students in the Exceeded Growth category
increased their reading performance (fall-spring) by over a year. In many cases, these students made over
18
Reading Buddies LRA 12/1/14 AMWilson
two years of growth. Students who Met Expected Growth made about a year of progress. Students
Approaching Expected Growth made almost one year of progress and students who Did Not Meet
Expected Growth made significantly less than one year of progress from fall-spring.
The same seven students were compared across their seventh and eighth grade years. During 7th
grade, students received a school-adopted reading intervention (Read180). During 8th grade, students
were involved in peer-tutoring. Upon first examination, students seemed to score similarly across both
grades, with about half meeting expected growth and half not meeting expected growth (see Table 2).
Table 2: Overall reading achievement according to BAS
Exceeded/Met Growth
Approaching/Did Not
Meet Growth
7th grade Fall- Spring
3/7 = 42%
4/7 = 57%
8th grade Fall-Spring
4/7 = 57%
3/7 = 42%
However, upon further examination (Table 3), there is a considerable difference between the type
of progress that students made from 7th grade to 8th grade. A higher percentage (57%) of students
Exceeded Expected Growth during 8th grade than 7th grade (29%). In addition, those who did not meet
standard during 8th grade (n = 3) were both Approaching (14%) and Did Not Meet Expected Growth
(29%) as opposed to 7th grade where all students who did not meet growth (n = 4) were in the Did Not
Meet Expected Growth category. Also, students with IEP (n = 3) or ELL (n = 3) status were more likely
to make growth. In fact, 67% of students with IEPs Exceeded Expected Growth (n = 2) during 8th grade
when only 33% Met Expected Growth (n = 1) during 7th grade. The same trend was true for students
qualified for ELL status.
Table 3: Reading achievement according to BAS categories
19
Reading Buddies LRA 12/1/14 AMWilson
School
Year
Curriculum
Fall 2011Spring
2012
(7th
grade)
Schooladopted
program
(Read180)
Fall 2012Spring
2013
(8th
grade)
Small group
instruction
and peer
tutoring
7th to 8th
grade
Percent
change
during 8th
grade year
Exceeded
Expected
Growth
Met
Expected
Growth
Approaching
Expected
Growth
Did Not
Meet
Expected
Growth
Students with
IEP
(n = 3) who
Met/Exceeded
Expected
Growth
Students with
ELL status (n =
3) who
Met/Exceeded
Growth
14%
n=1
0%
n=0
57%
n=4
Total: 33%
Exceeded:0/3
Met:
1/3
Total: 33%
Exceeded: 0/3
Met:
1/3
57%
n=4
0%
n=0
14%
n=1
29%
n=2
Total: 67%
Exceeded:2/3
Met:
0/3
Total: 67%
Exceeded: 2/3
Met:
0/3
38%
increase
14%
decrease
14% increase
27%
decrease
34% increase
34% increase
29%
n=2
A broader look at all students who tutored (n = 16) helps contextualize the above tables. A similar
trend is seen in Table 4, which examines how all students performed on the BAS. Overall, students
increased their achievement (with dramatically higher scores on Exceeded Growth than Met Growth)
during 8th grade compared to 7th grade. In addition, students who Did Not Meet Growth decreased from
7th to 8th grade (32% decrease).
Table 4: Reading achievement according to BAS categories across all students who tutored
School
Year
Curriculum
Students who
Exceeded/Met
Expected Growth
(according to BAS)
Students who Did Not
Meet Expected
Growth (according to
BAS)
Students with IEP
(n = 6) who
Met/Exceeded
Expected Growth
(according to BAS)
Students with ELL
status (n = 5) who
Met/Exceeded
Growth (according
to BAS)
Fall 2011Spring
2012
(7th
grade)
Schooladopted
program
(Read180)
Total: 50%
Exceeded: 4/16 =
25%
Met:
4/16 =
25%
Total: 50%
Approaching: 0/16 =
0%
Did not meet: 8/16 =
44%
Total: 33%
Exceeded:0/6 = 0%
Met:
2/6 = 33%
Total: 40%
Exceeded: 0/5 = 0%
Met:
2/5 =
40%
Fall 2012Spring
2013
(8th
grade)
Small group
instruction
and peer
tutoring
Total: 82%
Exceeded: 11/16 =
69%
Met:
2/16 =
13%
Total: 18%
Approaching: 1/16 =
6%
Did not meet: 2/16 =
12%
Total: 84%
Exceeded:4/6 =67%
Met:
1/6 = 17%
Total: 80%
Exceeded: 4/5 =
80%
Met:
0/5 = 0%
20
Reading Buddies LRA 12/1/14 AMWilson
7th to 8th
grade
Percent
change
during 8th
grade year
32% increase
32% decrease
49% increase
40% increase
Discussion. The results from this study illustrate how a student-centered, nontraditional
intervention can improve both academic achievement and engagement for severely struggling readers.
The four themes discussed support the wealth of research that examine how influential engagement and
social learning can be for adolescents (Guthrie & Wigfield, 1997; Ivey, 2014). Guthrie describes how
achievement and engagement are related: "Higher achievers read more, and the more engaged these
students become, the higher they achieve. Likewise, slower achievers read less, and the less engaged
decline in achievement. The spiral goes downward as well as upward." (Guthrie, 2008, p. 3). As
struggling readers spent time reading interesting and developmentally appropriate texts, they begin to
build confidence in their abilities as readers.
A peer-tutoring model allows students to build self-efficacy as they gain confidence in their
skills. At first, the teacher gave the students controlled choice: students could choose the books they could
read but had to follow the assigned lesson plan. Over time, a gradual release of responsibility model was
utilized to give students more control. With each peer tutoring session, students learned a new skill that
they were responsible for teaching. By the last month, students had to create a five-step lesson plan based
on a theme of their choice. These concepts, shared control and self-directed learning, helped to build
student motivation and self-efficacy over time (Guthrie, 2008). Students believed that they were capable
of learning and making progress. Schunk (2003) wrote about how self-efficacy can be a driving force:
“Compared with students who doubt their learning capacities, those who feel efficacious for learning or
performing a task participate more readily, work harder, persist longer when they encounter difficulties,
and achieve at a higher level “ p.161. Another component of the gradual release model that students
benefit from was the video reflection component. By using what Guthrie (2008) calls a “blueprint,”
21
Reading Buddies LRA 12/1/14 AMWilson
students were able to see how their roles as tutors differed from their peers, allowing students to make
changes to instruction by learning from others.
Throughout the four-month intervention, students learned from their fellow eighth graders as well
as their second grade buddies. Eighth graders provided social support and alternate ideas about lesson
planning. Eighth graders learned about their second graders interests and created responsive lessons that
addressed these interests. They also relied on their buddies’ reflections to change their instruction, such as
altering the topic or letting their buddy read more often. Eighth graders were confident enough to receive
this type of feedback because they felt ownership of the task and in their ability to teach. However, this
ability to reflect on feedback only came with time. Had students receive any time of negative feedback
during the first week, they would have been likely to revert back to resistance and avoidance behaviors
(Guthrie, 2008).
The results from this study suggest that a highly-scaffolded, nontraditional intervention can be
effective for severely struggling middle school students. Although this model is not technology or Direct
Instruction based, students made academic progress. This type of thinking is in contrast to studies that
argue for the necessity of programmatic models to serve students with reading disabilities.
In addition, students’ self-perceptions and reading identities began to shift. Students began selfdirected learning resulting in increased self-efficacy, confidence, and pride. These attributes are
precursors to agency. This idea is important because if students such as the ones seen in this study can
develop behaviors that change the way they think and advocate for themselves, they may be able to
overcome barriers that stand in the way of their success. Guthrie (2008), wrote, "As struggling secondary
students move into adulthood, their reading deficits are often associated with a lack of employment,
incarceration, lack of civic awareness, poor health maintenance, and poverty" (p.12). Could struggling
readers who were involved in an agency-building intervention avoid this stigma? If so, an intervention
such as this one could possibly alter their life course.
The participants in this study are students that could be found in any school setting. In many
schools, interventions for these students focus on phonics skills or comprehension strategies. No single
22
Reading Buddies LRA 12/1/14 AMWilson
program is prepared to serve the emotional, social, and academic needs of such students. Too few studies
examine what happens for these students during the school day and more research needs to be conducted
to find out how students in this type of intervention fare long-term. This study is a call to arms for current
interventions that serve severely struggling adolescent readers. Although imperfect, this study aims to
provide a new way of looking at struggling readers: by examining their potential. Michael wrote the letter
that begins this paper to his future high school principal during the last week of eighth grade. The letter
clearly conveys his confidence and belief in his ability to do well. There is not enough evidence to prove
that peer tutoring is the sole reason for his tone; but if struggling readers like Michael feel that kind of
self-efficacy and agency at the end of middle school, it is worth continuing to explore what nontraditional
interventions can do.
Limitations. Although this study suggests that peer tutoring increases motivation, self-efficacy,
and reading achievement, future studies that examine long-term benefits of tutoring are needed.
Limitations of this study included number of participants and restricted time frame. Although students
were engaged with planning lessons and tutoring for half of their eighth-grade year, it is unknown
whether the students will continue to benefit from this experience in high school. In other words, will this
peer-tutoring model allow these readers to continue thinking about reading in a positive way as they go on
to high school or will they illicit earlier behaviors seen (avoidance, resistance) after the model ends? In
addition, more information needs to be collected about student reading level. This qualitative study
examined reading level during two points of the year but did not cover any in-depth analysis of these
scores. A quantitative or mixed-methods study focusing on peer tutoring and academic achievement
would be beneficial to understand more about how this model affects reading levels. This study suggests
that a peer tutoring model may increase academic achievement, but research that includes more detailed
information about word knowledge, fluency, and comprehension should be conducted in order to see how
peer tutoring effects reading level. Research that focuses on long-term effects of peer tutoring with
struggling middle school readers, both social and academic, is still needed.
23
Reading Buddies LRA 12/1/14 AMWilson
Appendix A: Gradual release of responsibility model
Date
Role of teacher
Role of tutor (8th grader)
Trip 1:
3/15/13
Reminder:
1. Introductions
2. Reading Survey*
3. Read books and ask questions
4. Event Map*
5. Reading Response*
6. Inference Game
During trip:
1. Use sentence stem for introductions
2. Ask survey questions and record
responses
3. Choose books to read
4. Write event map
All
TeacherCreated
All
TeacherCreated
Before trip:
Lesson planning to teach
what a reading buddy is and
go over lesson.
*Taught students how to do
word words in lesson
*Provided a “reminder sheet”
including the following
During trip:
1. Introductions
2. Nonfiction texts
3. Read books and ask
questions
4. Word Sort- fiction/nonfiction*
5. What I learned today*
6. Inference Game
During trip:
1. Answer
survey questions
2.Listen to books
and answer
questions
.
*All Teacher created- Prepared a packet
including 2,4,5
Trip 2:
3/29/14
Role of tutee
(2nd grader)
Before trip:
*find 2 nonfiction books and review how
to tutor
During trip:
1. Use sentence stem for introductions
2. Choose 2 nonfiction to read
3. Facilitate word sort
4. Help with What I Learned today
questions
5. Fill out Reflection sheet
During trip:
1. Listen to book
2. Sort words
3. Draw and
answer questions
on What I
Learned today
sheet
*Prepared a packet including 4,5
24
Reading Buddies LRA 12/1/14 AMWilson
Trip 3:
5/3/13
Before trip:
Taught a week before trip with lesson
plans:
Mostly
TeacherCreated
1. Reviewed Introductions
2. Background knowledge about crabs
3. Reviewed Word sorts- Crab
information
4. Crab poem intro- how to read the
lesson format to students like we did for
poetry
4. Poem about crabs
***Students had just completed a
poetry unit using the same format
Before trip:
1. Find books- online or in library that had
to do with crabs or underwater sea creatures
2. Find a few poems that feel special (using
the resources in the classroom)- mark pages
of poems liked
3. Write example crab poem
4. Create crab word sort- independently
During trip:
1. Carry all resources in their bags
2. Ask about knowledge of crabs
3. Do word sort
4. Read crab books
5. Resort word sort
6. Read poems
7. Help teach S to write poem
8. Help with What I Learned Today sheet
During trip:
1. Talk about crabs
2. Listen to book
3. Sort/resort words
based on new
knowledge
4.Write crab poem
5. Fill out What I
Learned Sheet
After:
1. 8-10 sentence reflection
2. Reflect on why we go on trips
Trip 4:
5/24/13
All
Student
Created
Before trip:
Before trip:
Teacher says that tutors becoming teachers. And
1.Write
that proposal with all props
its time for S to plan and create own
2. Go through 5 Steps to create lesson
lessons.
After trip:
1. Video reflection
Rules:
1.You can teach about anything you want
2.You need to: pick topic that is interesting
to you and buddy, choose 2 books on
topic, prop (image) , create word sort once
proposal is accepted, they can get to work
During trip:
1. Listen to
books
2. Sort words
3. Draw and
answer
questions on
student-made
reflection
Walked through steps with class:
Step 1: Think about own learning and pick
topic
Step 2: Find “prop”- practiced different
types of props- images, items, etc.
Step 3: Collect books (I put them into
themed groups)
Step 4: Create your Word Sort (known
and novel words)
Step 5: Create a reflection
I gave them proposal and then lesson plan
sheet with Steps on it and questions for
prompting each area
Trip 6
Before trip:
1. Teach students how to fold book and
S created book with pictures and reflections
to give to buddy
During trip:
1. Engage with
25
Reading Buddies LRA 12/1/14 AMWilson
provide with pictures of students
buddy
All
StudentCreated
Pick and sign books to present to buddy
Trip 7
References
Alverman, D. E. (2001). Reading adolescents’ reading identities: Looking back to see ahead. Journal of
Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 44, 676-690.
Betts, E. A. (1946). Foundations of reading instruction. New York: American Book.
Bintz, W.P. (1997). Exploring reading nightmares of middle and secondary school teachers. Journal of
Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 41 (1).
Buly, M. R. & Valencia, S. W. (2002). Below the bar: Profiles of students who fail state
reading assessments. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 24, 219. doi:
10.3102/01623737024003219.
Davenport, S. V., Arnold, M., & Lassmann, M. (2004). The Impact of cross-age tutoring on reading
attitudes and reading achievement. Reading improvement, 41(1), 3.
Dennis, D.V. (2013). Heterogeneity or homogeneity: What do assessment data reveal about struggling
adolescent readers? Journal of Literacy Research, 45Fountas & pinnell BAS year
26
Reading Buddies LRA 12/1/14 AMWilson
Fuchs, D., Fuchs, L. S., Mathes, P. G., & Martinez, E. (2002a). Preliminary evidence
on the social standing of students with learning disabilities in PALS and
No-PALS classrooms. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 17(4), 205–215.
Glesne, C. (1999). Becoming qualitative researchers: An introduction. Longman
Publishers, New York.
Guthrie, J. T. (2008). Engaging adolescents in reading. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Guthrie, J. T. & Davis, M. H. (2003). Motivating struggling readers in middle school through an
engagement model of classroom practice. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 19 (1), 59-85. doi:
10.1080/10573560308203
Guthrie, J.T. & Wigfield, A. (Eds.). (1997). Reading engagement: Motivating readers through
integrated instruction. Neward, DE: International Reading Association.
Hernandez, D. (2011) Double jeopardy: How third-grade reading skills and poverty
influence high-school graduation. Anne E. Casey Foundation.
Hock, M. F., Brasseur, I. F., Deschler, D. D., Catts, H. W., Marquis, J. G., Mark, C. A.,
Stribling, J. W. (2009). What is the reading component skill profile of
adolescent struggling readers in urban schools? Learning Disability Quarterly, 32, 21-38.
Hoover, W. and Gough, P. (1990). The simple view of reading. Reading and Writing: An
Interdisciplinary Journal, 2, 127–160.
Ivey, G. (2014). The social side of engaged reading for young adolescents. The Reading Teacher, 68(3),
165-171. doi:10.1002/trtr.1268
Ivey, G. & Broaddus, K. (2000). Tailoring the fit: Reading instruction and middle school readers. The
Reading Teacher, 54(1).
Johnson, P., & Allington, R. L. (1991). Remediation. In R. Barr, M. L. Kamil, P.
Mosenthal, & P. D. Pearson (Eds.) Handbook of reading research, vol. 2 (pp. 984- 1012). New
York: Longman.
27
Reading Buddies LRA 12/1/14 AMWilson
Lenters, K. (2006). Resistance, struggle, and the adolescent reader. Journal of Adolescent & Adult
Literacy, 50(2), 136-146.
Lloyd, D.N. (1978). Prediction of school failure from third-grade data. Educational and Psychological
Measurement, 38, 1193-2000.
Maxwell, J. A. (2005). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach (2nd Ed.). London: Sage
Publications.
McMaster, K. L, Fuchs, D., & Fuchs, L. S. (2006). Research on peer-assisted learning strategies: The
promise and limitations of peer-mediated instruction. Reading & Writing Quarterly:
Overcoming Learning Difficulties, 22:1, 5-25, DOI: 10.1080/10573560500203491
Morris, D., Ervin, C., & Conrad, K. (1996). A case study of middle school reading disability. The
Reading Teacher, 49, 368-377.
NAEP Reading 2013 District Snapshot Reports NCES Number: 2014467 Release Date:
December 18, 2013.
No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act of 2001, Pub. L. No. 107-110, § 115,Stat. 1425
(2002).
Paterson, P.O. & Elliot, L.N. (2006). Struggling reader to struggling reader: High school
students’ responses to a cross-age tutoring program. Journal of Adolescent and
Adult Literacy, 49 (5), 378-389.
Rosenblatt, L.M. (1978). The reader, the text, the poem: The transactional theory of the
literary work. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.
Saenz, L. M., Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D. (2005). Peer-assisted learning strategies for English Language
Learners with learning disabilities. Council for Exceptional Children, 71 (3) 231-247.
Schunk, D. H. (2003). Self-efficacy for reading and writing:Influence of modeling, goal setting, and self
evaluation. Reading and Writing Quarterly: Overcoming Learning Difficulties, 19, 159- 172.
Schwab, J. (1969) The practical: A language for curriculum. The School Review, 78 (1).
doi:10.1086/442881.
28
Reading Buddies LRA 12/1/14 AMWilson
Slavin, R.E. & Morris, D. (2003). Every child reading. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Slavin, R. E., Lake, C., Davis, S., & Madden, N. A. (2011). Effective programs for struggling readers: A
best-evidence synthesis. Educational Research Review, 6, 1-26.
Spear-Swerling, L. (2009). A literacy tutoring experience for prospective Special
Educators and struggling second graders. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 42 (5),
431-443.
Stanovich, K. E. (1998). Explaining the differences between the dyslexic and the garden-variety poor
reader: The phonological-core variable-difference model. Journal of Learning Disabilities,
21(10). doi: 10.1177/002221948802101003.
Triplett, C. F. (2004). Looking for a struggle: Exploring the emotions of a middle school reader. Journal
of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 48(3), 214-222. doi:1O.1598/JAAL.48.3.3
Valencia, S., & Buly, M. R. (2004). Behind test scores: What struggling readers really
need. The Reading Teacher, 57(6), 520-531.
Vankeer, H. K. & Vanderline, R. (2010). The Impact of cross-age peer tutoring on third and sixth graders’
strategy awareness, reading use, and reading comprehension. Middle Grades Research Journal, 5
(1), 33-45.
29