Transcript Targeted Reading Intervention

Targeted Reading
Intervention
Classroom intervention for rural
kindergarten and first grade teachers
Targeting instructional match in every interaction…
Pledger Fedora
Kelley Mayer
Steve Amendum
Who are we?
• Research project
• Part of the National Research Center on
Rural Education Support
– www.nrcres.org
• Funded by the Institute of Education
Sciences (IES)
Purpose
The purpose of this study is to improve
the teaching strategies of rural
kindergarten and first grade teachers in
literacy, with a specific focus on
strategies that are effective with
struggling readers who do not make
reading gains using traditional reading
instruction.
Why focus on rural kindergarten and
first grade teachers?
• The first few years of school are critical for children’s later
school success
– (Alexander& Entwisle, 1992; Juel, 1988; Vernon-Feagans, Odom,
Pancsofar & Kainz, in press; Vernon-Feagans, Gallagher & Kainz, in
press;)
• On average, teachers in rural areas have more teaching
experience and knowledge of their students, but teachers
have less access to professional development opportunities
– (GAO report, 2004; Lee & Burkham, 2003)
• Teachers and parents are more satisfied with their schools
in rural areas, but children come to school with less formal
and high quality preschool experiences
– (Israel, 2004; Vernon-Feagans et al., in press).
Why focus on struggling learners?
• Struggling learners are usually the ones that do
not make expected progress
– (Pianta, 2001; Meisels, 2001)
• This emphasis on struggling learners has been
highlighted through disaggregated data
mandated by NCLB
• Teachers report struggling learners are the
children who have the least success in learning
and behavior.
Why focus on literacy?
• Reading becomes the foundation for
subsequent academic learning
– (Lyon et al., Snow, Burns & Griffin; 1998; VernonFeagans, 1996)
• Children’s ability to decode words at the end
of first grade accounts for 40% of their
reading comprehension during secondary
school
– (Foorman et al., 1997)
Principles of The Targeted Reading
Intervention (TRI)
• Based on research evidence about how young
children learn to read
• Based on the 5 early reading constructs
identified as most important the National
Reading Panel and Reading First
• Can be used to complement any reading
curricula as well as the Reading First Initiative.
• Can be adopted by any school system, no matter
how few resources they have.
Principles of The Targeted Reading
Intervention (TRI), continued
• Teaching literacy that is always geared to the
context of the word and text.
• Based on research that emphasizes
individualized diagnostic/assessment based
teaching
• Targeted for children who struggling with
beginning reading
• Teaching conducted in one-on-one teacher/
child learning sessions at least 4 times a week
Targeted Reading Intervention
• For struggling K-1 students
• Intensive, diagnostic reading
instruction
• Daily
• Given by the classroom teacher
• One-on-one  small groups
• Rapidly accelerate students’ reading
achievement
What Makes The TRI Unique?
• Intensive collaborative consultation
• Individual diagnostic teaching model
– Responding to the response
• Classroom teacher tutors
• Teacher-student relationships
What Makes The TRI Unique?
• Real reading from
the start
– Always in the context
of words
– Letter-sound
knowledge
– Mapping sounds to
print
• Low
cost/adaptability
The
Targeted
Reading
Intervention
Model
The Interaction of Decoding &
Sight Words
TRI Framework
Re-Reading for Fluency
(~2+ minutes)
Word Work
(~8+ minutes)
Guided Oral Reading
(~5+ minutes)
TRI Extensions
TRI Framework
Re-Reading for Fluency
(~2+ minutes)
TRI Extensions
TRI Framework
Word Work
(~8+ Minutes)
TRI Extensions
The Interaction of Decoding &
Sight Words
TRI: Primary Word Work Strategies
for Pink and Blue Levels
Word Work
(~8+ minutes)
– Segmenting
Words
– Change One
Sound
– Read, Write, &
Say
– Pocket Phrases
Word Work Example: Change One
Sound
Primary Word Work Strategies for
Green Level
Word Work
(~8+ minutes)
– Segmenting
Words –
Variation
– Sort, Write, and
Say
– Word Division
– Search for the
Sound
– Try One
strategy
Word Work Example: Sort, Write
and Say
TRI Framework
Guided Oral Reading
(~5+ minutes)
TRI Extensions
Guided Oral Reading Examples
Our vision for a teacher’s year
• At the beginning of the year,
teachers selected five struggling
readers.
• TRI instruction
– For one struggling reader
– 15 minutes
– 4 times per week
Hypothetical TRI Schedule
How 5 struggling readers might get the TRI
Sept.
Oct.
Nov.
Ezekial
Ezekial
Maria (with occasional Change 1 Sound & Guided Oral
Reading with Ezekial)
Dec.
Maria & Ezekial
Jan.
DeJavan (with occasional Change 1 Sound & Guided Oral
Reading with Maria & Ezekial)
Feb.
John (with occasional Change 1 Sound & Guided Oral
Reading with DeJavan; once or twice with Maria & Ezekial)
March John & DeJavan
April Jackie (with occasional Change 1 Sound & Guided Oral
Reading with John; once or twice with DeJavan)
May
Jackie & John
Easing into the TRI: Kindergarten
Date
# of TRI sessions
TRI Strategies Used
Week One
1 time
Guided Oral Reading 10 min.
High teacher support
Week Two
2-3 times
Guided Oral Reading 10-15 min.
High teacher support
Week Three
3-4 times
Word Work* 10 min. (Segmenting Words & Change 1 Sound)
Guided Oral Reading 5 min.
Week Four
4+ times
Word Work* 8 min. (Segmenting Words, Change 1 Sound, & Read,
Write, & Say)
Guided Oral Reading 7 min.
Full TRI
Implementation
Assessment-based instruction: Diagnostic Maps
Re-Reading for Fluency
Reader:
____________________________________
Focus on:
_____________________________________
Word Work
Segmenting Words
___Pink ___Blue
Target Sounds:
_____________________________________
Words:
_____________________________________
Rate the
reading
1
2
Text Difficulty
3
4
Too
easy
Alphabetic
Principle
Able to segment
sounds in
3-sound
words
Just
right
Yes
Yes
Too
hard
Frequent phonics errors
No
Frequent phonics errors
Change One Sound
Target Sounds:
_____________________________________
Word Chain:
_____________________________________
Able to manipulate
phonemes in
3-sound
words
4-sound
words
Able to blend
Read, Write, & Say
Target Sounds:
_____________________________________
Words:
_____________________________________
3sound
words
4sound
words
Phonics
knowledge
Says sounds while
writing
Alphabetic Principle
Yes
Yes
Needs
reminding
No
Collaborative Consultation Model for
Rural Teachers
Essential Personnel
• TRI personnel
– A K-1 TRI Consultant for each school
• Site-based personnel
– Superintendent
– District Curriculum Coordinator
– Principal
– A K-1 School Consultant
– K-1 Classroom Teachers
– K-1 Teaching Assistants
Effective Collaborative Strategies in
the LEEP Consultation Model
Professional Development
Mechanisms
•
•
•
•
•
Summer Institute
Weekly TRI Team meetings
Monthly workshops
TRI consultant visits
Videos of teachers, guides, and materials
Weekly
Team
Meetings
Professional
Development
Workshops
Summer Institute
Summer Institute
• Three Day Summer Institute for all teachers,
aides, and principals to learn the TRI strategies
• Teachers will learn
–
–
–
–
–
how to link assessment with efficient instruction
essential elements of reading development
how and when to use essential strategies
why intensive instruction is worth it
why repetition across the day is worth it
Weekly TRI Team Meetings
Specific agenda:
• To link assessment data with efficient
instruction
• To repeat and extend content from the
summer institute
• To problem-solve collaboratively
• To ensure participation and fidelity
Monthly Workshops
• To build relationships across K-1
• To extend the TRI content knowledge and skills
on a specific timeline
• To link assessment data with efficient instruction
• To provide a video model of teachers using the
TRI or examples of TRI Extensions
• To provide opportunity for school to receive
coaching from TRI Consultant, in person, via
conference call, or via web cam
Research Design (2005-2007)
• Select rural counties with limited access to
teacher professional development.
• Select four non-Reading First elementary
schools willing to participate. In the following
year select two additional Reading First
schools.
• Randomly assign schools to the intervention
(TRI) and control group (no TRI).
– Randomly select 5 struggling learners
– Randomly select 5 non-struggling learners
Child characteristics
TRI
Non-TRI
Race
African American
European American
Other
Gender
Male
Female
Parents Married
Maternal Education
61%
32%
7%
33%
37%
31%
73%
27%
46%
63%
37%
54%
M = 11.8
yrs
M = 13.3
yrs
Teacher characteristics
# of years teaching
M = 18 yrs
Teacher Age
M = 43 yrs
Teacher Ethnicity
Caucasian
African-American
Other
65%
30%
5%
National Board Certification
5%
Certification type
Temp
Regular
Specific grade certification
10%
40%
50%
Data collected
• Lots of data were collected!
• Today—report on:
– Child assessments:
•
•
•
•
Phonological awareness with the CTOPP
Word Attack (Woodcock-Johnson)
Letter/Word ID (Woodcock-Johnson)
Receptive Vocabulary with the PPVT-III
– Classroom observations
Child Outcomes: (Fall and Spring
Testing)
LSMean
Outcome
F-Test
Group
Gain
Phonological awareness F(1,69) =1.29
(CTOPPS)
Non-TRI
.52
TRI
1.67
Word Attack (Woodcock F(1,151) = 4.09*
Johnson)
Non-TRI
27.15
TRI
35.86
F(1,152) = 5.25*
Non-TRI
34.12
TRI
42.22
Letter/Word
Identification
(Woodcock Johnson)
F(1,120) = 0.38
Peabody Picture
Vocabulary Test (PPVT)
Non-TRI
1.20
TRI
2.32
Child Outcomes: (Fall and Spring
Testing)
Outcome
T-Test
Group
LSMean
Gain
Classroom
Observations
Observed one-toone teacher/child
interaction
t (187) = 3.83,
p < .0002
Non-TRI
.30
TRI
2.64
Final Thoughts
• TRI = efficient, effective
reading instruction
• TRI = effective
professional
development processes
• It works! Evidencebase.
• Sustainability and
portability
One Teacher’s Experience…