Transcript Targeted Reading Intervention - National Research Center

The Targeted Reading Intervention:
A classroom teacher professional development
program to promote effective teaching for
struggling readers in kindergarten and first grade
Lynne Vernon-Feagans
Kirsten Kainz
Amy Hedrick
Marnie Ginsberg
Steve Amendum
• Thanks to our partner schools and
teachers in Nebraska, New Mexico
North Carolina and Texas without
whose support this project would never
have been successful…and Thanks to
the children who made it all worthwhile.
2
The Targeted Reading Intervention
• The Changing Rural Context and risk
for early reading problems
• Struggling Readers and Effective
Intervention
• The TRI Reading Framework
• The TRI Professional Development and
Content
• The TRI Implementation via Technology
• Results from RCT
The Changing Rural Conttext
and Risk for Early Reading
Problems
Child Poverty in Rural and Urban Areas:
1990 - 2007
O’Hare (2009)
5
Children Living in Rural Poverty
(compared to Urban)
• Deeper Poverty
• Longer periods of Poverty
• African Americans 50%
poorer
Of the 701 counties in the
US that have experienced
persistent poverty since
1970, 601 (82%) were
located in rural America
• Fewer married Parents
6
• Of those families in poverty, only 28% of
their children could read at this minimum
level of proficiency in fourth grade (Lyon, 2001;
Vaughn, Wanzek, Linen-Thompson, & Murray, 2007).
• These low levels of reading proficiency
are especially true for rural children from
low-wealth communities who come to
school with lower readiness skills than
other children (Lee & Burkam, 2003).
7
Struggling Readers and
Effective Interventions
• Children’s early success in reading is critical
for their later schooling success (Juel, 1988; Foorman
et al., 1998)
• Research shows that for children at risk
academic trajectories are fairly stable by the
end of first grade, predicting their entire
school career (Alexander & Entwisle, 1988)
9
Elements of Successful Interventions
(Foorman & Torgesen, 2001; Snow et al, 1998, Connor et al., 2007; 2008)
• 1. Explicit Instruction
• 2. Early Intervention in first few grades
• 3. One on one and small group
instruction
• 4. Effective teacher/child relationships
10
5. Diagnostic or instructional match
between the teacher’s instruction and
the child’s skill (Connor et. al., 2007;2009; Scanlon et al.,
2004, 2008)
11
The TRI Reading Framework
The National Reading Panel
Reading First
Word Identification
Decoding
Understanding of Alphabetic Principle
Phonemic Awareness Skills
Phonics Knowledge
Sight Word Knowledge
Strategies for Using Context
13
Vocabulary
14
Fluency
15
Comprehension
16
17
The TRI Professional
Development Content
The RTI Approach to Intervention
(Fuchs et al., 2008)
• Tier 2 Intervention: Specific intervention for
children who are not profiting from good
classroom instruction, using the classroom
teacher to implement specialized reading
strategies
19
TRI: Classroom Teacher Tier 2 Intervention
 One on one 15 minute instructional
match sessions between teacher and
struggling readers in the regular
classroom
 Intervention until the child makes rapid
progress
 The use of technology that allows live
coaching by literacy consultants of
teachers working a struggling reader in
the regular classroom
The TRI Classroom Processes that
Promote Rapid Progress in Reading
Coaching in instructional match
between the teacher and child
in one on one 15 minutes sessions
Focus on child’s most
pressing need always
in the context of the
word and text
Create a motivational
Context for each interaction
Teachers learn best
through Teaching practice
not through Knowledge
enhancement
21
TRI Transactional Model: Learning by
Teaching (Sameroff & Fiese, 2001; Rutter, 1979; Vellutino et al., 2006)
22
The TRI Content
TRI Diagnostic 15 minutes sessions
Re-Reading for Fluency
(~2+ minutes)
Word Work
(~8+ minutes)
Guided Oral Reading
(~5+ minutes)
TRI Extensions
24
TRI: Primary Word Work Strategies
in the Context of word and Text
Word Work
(~8+ minutes)
– Segmenting
Words
– Change One
Sound
– Read, Write, &
Say
– Pocket Phrases
25
TRI components
• Re-Reading for Fluency
• Word Work
– Segmenting Words
– Change One Sound
– Read, Write, & Say
– Pocket Phrases
• Guided Oral Reading
• TRI Extensions
Using the
TRI Diagnostic Map
Change One Sound
Able to manipulate
phonemes in
3-sound
words
4-sound
words
Frequent phonics
errors
Repeat
changing with 3sound words
Begin/Repeat changing with
4-sound words
Repeat sound(s) ___________
Move to next sound ________
Change one sound
29
Integrating
Word Work with Guided Oral
Reading
30
TRI Implementation via
Technology
Web cam consultation in Remote Locations
• Teachers were given laptops with webcams to use
in their classroom.
• UNC Consultants (using free interface) can see
and hear the teacher working with target children
in real time so teachers get feedback immediately.
Teachers can also see and hear the consultant in
real time.
• Consultants can attend grade level meetings via
web cams. Teachers can see the consultant and
the consultant can see the teachers.
• Teachers can download information and training
videos from our website
targetedreadingintervention.org
32
33
34
Word Work at Green Level
35
TRI Website:
targetedreadingintervention.org
36
Randomized Clinical Trial of the
TRI
Research Design
• Pair matched schools within district on free and
reduced lunch, % minority, school size, and
Reading First. (15 schools…one withdrew)
• Randomly assigned one school to the
intervention condition and the other to the
business as usual condition.
• All kindergarten and first grade classrooms were
involved (75 classrooms)
38
Selection of Children in the Experimental
and Control Schools
• After 6 weeks into the school year each
kindergarten and first grade teacher
used assessment data and consultation
from our reading consultant to rate each
child in the class as to whether they
were below, on, or above grade level in
early reading.
39
Kindergarten and 1st Grade Classrooms
(648 children)
Focal Children
• From those children rated
as below grade level 5
children were randomly
selected as focal children
(struggling readers)
Non-Focal Children
• From those children rated
as on or above grade
level, 5 children were
randomly selected as
non-focal children (nonstruggling readers)
40
Total Sample: pre/post test data
WJ (four subtests)
Focal
Non-Focal
E
194
206
C
116
132
41
Child Demographics (N = 648)
Race
N
%
153
23.6
5
.8
White/European American
321
49.5
Other
169
26.1
Female
299
46.1
Male
349
53.9
Kindergarten
306
47.2
1st Grade
342
52.8
Less than high school
80
12.3
High school and some college
400
64.8
Bachelors degree and beyond
148
22.9
Black/African American
American Indian
Gender
Grade
Mother’s Education
T eacher Demographics (N = 75)
Variable
N
Race (1 missing)
Black/African American
10
White/European American
60
Other
4
Gender
Female (1 missing)
74
20-29
14
30-39
19
40-49
20
50-59
18
60+
4
Age
Certification Level
Elementary Ed. Certified
68
Master’s Degree or Higher
32
Experience
Total years teaching
M
SD
15.47
10.45
43
Fidelity (80%)
• Teacher report of weekly use of the TRI
by child (now done on the web)
• Literacy consultant biweekly rating of
fidelity quality from watching videos
• teacher/children working together
(fidelity checklist)
44
Intent to Treat Analysis
ANCOVA
race
gender
mother’s education
grade
PPVT Standard Score
Growth in PPVT
Time Point
46
Growth in Word Attack
480
470
.38
Word Attack W-Score
460
Focal Experimental
450
Focal Control
440
430
Non-Focal Experimental
420
Non-Focal Control
410
400
Fall
Spring
Time Point
47
Growth in Letter Word ID
460
Letter Word ID W-Score
440
420
.61
Focal Experimental
Focal Control
400
Non-Focal Experimental
380
Non-Focal Control
360
340
Fall
Spring
Time Point
48
Growth in Passage Comprehension
Passage Comprehension W-Score
470
460
450
Focal Experimental
.58
440
430
Focal Control
Non-Focal Experimental
420
Non-Focal Control
410
400
390
Fall
Spring
Time Point
49
Growth in Spelling of Sounds
500
Spelling of Sounds W-Score
495
490
.42
485
Focal Experimental
480
Focal Control
475
470
Non-Focal Experimental
465
Non-Focal Control
460
455
450
445
Fall
Spring
Time Point
50
Future Directions
• There was evidence that
• This year we are
the TRI children were
intervening with the
gaining more than the
children for a second year
control children and some
to see if we can accelerate
evidence that they were
the growth of struggling
catching up with their nonreaders to make them
struggling peers but there
indistinguishable from
were some children who
their non-struggling
were less responsive to the
peers.
intervention
51
Thank You
Targeting instructional match in every interaction…