Special Edition - Beyond the Reading Wars Vol. 44, Issue 3 | Page 49

Quantitative Analysis of the Effectiveness of Intentional Reading Interventions

Among Striving Readers in Grades K-2

by

New Author

The writing workshop is a block of instructional time in which students practice the writing process (Dorfman & Shubitz, 2019). Writing workshops can be used with young children and with adolescent students. This article provides a brief overview of instructional methods involved in the implementation of a writing workshop.

Conducting a Writing Workshop

Increased time to write with a focus on the strategies of pre-writing, drafting, revising, editing, and publishing are linked to increased writing quality (Graham & Harris, 2016). Unfortunately, students tend to demonstrate a decrease in enthusiasm for writing from early childhood to middle school and high school, due to less time to write and less engaging writing opportunities (Graham & Perin, 2007) so it is imperative to engage students in workshops that are personally and culturally meaningful. We recommend that it should be evident that multicultural literature is being read, enjoyed and analyzed across the curriculum. Writing workshops provide opportunities for lively inquiry and discussion about texts with diverse characters, settings, and cultures (Alexander, 2018).

Conversations

Harry

by Dr. David Kiene & Dr. Johannah D. Baugher

 

by

New Author

The writing workshop is a block of instructional time in which students practice the writing process (Dorfman & Shubitz, 2019). Writing workshops can be used with young children and with adolescent students. This article provides a brief overview of instructional methods involved in the implementation of a writing workshop.

Conducting a Writing Workshop

Increased time to write with a focus on the strategies of pre-writing, drafting, revising, editing, and publishing are linked to increased writing quality (Graham & Harris, 2016). Unfortunately, students tend to demonstrate a decrease in enthusiasm for writing from early childhood to middle school and high school, due to less time to write and less engaging writing opportunities (Graham & Perin, 2007) so it is imperative to engage students in workshops that are personally and culturally meaningful. We recommend that it should be evident that multicultural literature is being read, enjoyed and analyzed across the curriculum. Writing workshops provide opportunities for lively inquiry and discussion about texts with diverse characters, settings, and cultures (Alexander, 2018).

Conversations

Harry

Since EBRI should have an impact on the phonemic awareness and decoding ability in students, the study used assessments that measured the skills of manipulating sounds and sight-reading of words. The study used the Comprehensive Test of Phonological Processing-2® (CTOPP-2) Elision test for measuring phonological ability and the Test of Word Reading Efficiency® (TOWRE) test to measure students’ efficiency in phonemic decoding and recognition of sight words. The study also utilized three PtR assessments to measure the same reading skills.  Lastly, the researchers evaluated fluency with the DIBELS assessment to measure students reading rate, words per minute (wpm).

Theoretical Underpinnings

 

Intentionality and Intervention 

            Driven in purpose and best practice, intentionality should be infused throughout any instructional plan for effective literacy intervention.  Through deliberate action and an awareness of quality behaviors before, during, and after reading experiences, the expectation for rich learning to occur is set (Slavin, 2000; Stover, Sparrow, & Siefert, 2017).  With principles of intention aligned with each intervention, Kilpatrick (2015) further claims this practice is the key differentiator for eliminating students’ barrier(s) inhibiting proficiency in reading.  “Intervention is based on a student’s assessment data, which provides a hypothesis about why the student is struggling.  Intervention efforts are then directed toward removing the hurdles that are preventing the student from making typical reading progress” (p. 286).  Wanzek et al. (2018) further supports the use of assessment data pre-intervention to identify opportunities for growth, while simultaneously capturing an image of present levels of reading achievement.  The same can be completed post-intervention to determine degree of gain, acknowledging the level of effectiveness for the literacy interventions implemented. Students in this study were given intentional intervention based on the idea that repetitive practice with real reading experiences is the best form of improving reading for striving readers.

Defining Factors of Effective Literacy Interventions

           Duration, frequency, instructional grouping format, instructional group size, explicit instruction, systematic assessment, open dialogue, differentiated instruction, and multi-tiered systems of support (MTSS) have been identified as contributing factors to the effectiveness of various literacy interventions.  Hence, students are put into small groups. Furthermore, progress-monitoring practices and opportunities for authentic learning experiences are similarly identified by current research to positively influence the effectiveness of implemented literacy interventions (Ankrum & Bean, 2008; Connor, Fishman, & Glasney, 2009; Hanover Research, 2019; Jones, Conradi, & Amendum, 2016; Kilpatrick, 2015; Rupley, Blair, & Nichols, 2009; Scholastic, 2016; Stover, Sparrow, & Siefert, 2017). 

           Literacy interventions must be implemented at a reasonable duration, or length (Wanzek et al., 2018).  By the same token, the frequency of such should be closely examined, supporting daily instructional intervention whenever possible (Ankrum & Bean, 2008; Wanzek et al., 2018).  Reducing the instructional group size for intervention has also been found to be effective, particularly in small group and individualized settings.  Directed by students’ academic progress, exercising fluidity with grouping structures is likewise encouraged (Wanzek et al., 2018).  Explicit and systematic instruction in support of learning is critical to steady, student progress, highlighting cornerstones of quality modeling and frequent think-alouds (Hanover Research, 2019; Kilpatrick, 2015; Rupley, Blair, & Nichols, 2009; Wanzek et al., 2018). 

Open dialogue rooted in rich and regular feedback has also been identified as a critical factor to the success of implemented literacy interventions (Rupley, Blair, & Nichols, 2009).  This practice can easily be imbedded within MTSS and through the support of multiple stakeholders as need(s) for intervention are found (Jones, Conradi, & Amendum, 2016; Scholastic, 2016; Wanzek et al., 2018).  Moreover, MTSS should further be utilized to continuously monitor students’ degrees of intervention, while adjusting as needed based on 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 pinnacle 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).

            Ongoing monitoring of student progress through systematic, pre/post assessment cycles can further support differentiation efforts (Ankrum & Bean, 2008; Hanover Research, 2019; Scholastic, 2016; Stover, Sparrow, & Siefert, 2017).  Likewise, MTSS can be strategically utilized to organize systematic assessment cycles and guide further instruction and intervention (Scholastic, 2016).  Current research also emphasizes that following instructional intervention, authentic learning experiences should be crafted to further support students’ application and practice of the new skill or strategy (Connor, Fishman, & Glasney, 2009; Kilpatrick, 2015; Rupley, Blair, & Nichols, 2009; Scholastic, 2016).

            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).

Literacy Instruction and Intervention in the Primary Grades

            In the primary grades, research suggests that early literacy intervention should support the mission in learning to read, as opposed to reading to learn.  Implementation of a comprehensive, balanced literacy approach is necessary to further literacy development in the areas of phonemic awareness, phonics, fluency, vocabulary, and comprehension (Hanover Research, 2019; Kilpatrick, 2015; Stover, Sparrow, & Siefert, 2017).  Components of interests, motivation, and attitude; schema and background knowledge; concepts of print; spelling; writing; and, listening and speaking should be regarded as equally significant to one’s literacy development (Baugher & Akins, 2020).  By delivering literacy instruction and intervention which parallel these best practices, early literacy skills will continue to “…benefit [learners], extend[ing] well beyond the primary grades…” (Scholastic, 2016, p. 31) and throughout their lifetime.

Striving Readers’ Needs in the Primary Grades

            Early reading behaviors can be promoted through several practices targeted for all readers, but particularly, our striving readers.  Striving readers in the primary grades need easy access to books to further their appreciation and hopefully, love of reading (Johnston, 2010; Layne, 2009).  Striving, primary readers need the support of a reader-centered, literacy-rich environment, where they are supported by instruction, in reading materials, and through others in their learning community (Allington, 2012; Harvey & Ward, 2017; Pressley, 2006; Scholastic, 2016).  Young readers rely heavily upon teachers to assist them in finding the ‘just right’ text and depend heavily on them to scaffold that process, until which point they can do so independently (Boushey & Moser, 2005; Scholastic, 2016). 

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).  They further want to avoid labels, similar to those that could be associated or linked 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. 

Literacy Interventions within a Multi-Level Prevention System

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 text

Double-click to add text

Double-click to add text

Double-click to add textadd