systematic assessment data (Wanzek et al., 2018). As student-level assessment data is closely monitored, instructional scaffolding can be modified based on current learning need (Hanover Research, 2019; Kilpatrick, 2015; Stover, Sparrow, & Siefert, 2017).
Differentiated instruction is also a key principle in the success of literacy interventions.
As cited by Hanover Research (2019), differentiation is a multi-faceted process that requires a significant commitment on the part of the teacher and true engagement from the learner. “Differentiation allows teachers to alter the instructional time, literacy content, and intensity of scaffolding that students receive based on their [current] reading level” (p. 5). Ankrum and Bean (2008) further propose necessary conditions for true differentiation and appropriate coaching to occur. “Differentiated instruction can only truly occur if the teacher possesses a deep knowledge of the reading process, an understanding of the strengths and needs of their students, and the ability to teach responsively” (p. 134). When differentiated instruction is closely aligned with learner need and the plan for intervention, “…skill sets and ability levels of diverse learners” are better met and supported (Hanover Research, 2019, p. 5).
Effective literacy intervention focuses on quality over quantity and owns the belief that less offers more. Jones, Conradi, & Amendum (2016) claim that “…too many interventions are inefficient and fail to accelerate readers’ progress” (p. 307). With measures in place to avoid the implementation of excess interventions, instruction can remain “…differentiated, efficient, and focused” (Jones, Conradi, & Amendum, 2016, p. 314). Extension of this idea again stresses a central theme that student need, determined by present achievement and assessment data, defines the plan for intervention. “Because not all striving readers need help in all areas of reading, we promote brief, systematic interventions targeting the students’ most pressing need” (Jones, Conradi, & Amendum, 2016, p. 307).
Early readers desire to feel competent, possess autonomy as new readers, remaining motivated to establish goals, and anticipate open communication and feedback (Harvey & Ward, 2017).
with specific grouping structures and formats (Johnson, 2011). Desiring independence with all things reading, early readers further seek and appreciate opportunities for choice in both what they read and how (Walczyk & Griffin-Ross, 2007). As efforts are made to satisfy these specific needs among our striving, primary readers, research has highlighted tools and instructional frameworks that collectively support plans for effective literacy intervention.
Comprised of three, intervention levels of support, Response to Intervention (RtI) and MTSS are framed in prevention, “…aimed at improving outcomes for all students” (National Center on Response to Intervention, 2020). By screening all students, data-based decision-making processes can be activated to further determine which students require progress-monitoring to more closely track records of achievement under a more intensive intervention plan. Jones, Conradi, & Amendum (2016) encourage teachers and literacy professionals alike to utilize “…curriculum-based measures to [accurately] determine what [each striving] reader needs most” (p. 308). A variety of literacy assessments can be utilized to aid in making this evidence-based determination, including: Comprehensive Test of Phonological Processing (CTOPP); Test of Word Reading Efficiency (TOWRE); Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills (DIBELS); Phonological Awareness Screening Test (PAST); and, Pathways to Reading (PtR).
.
Double-click to add teoo