Teacher as Researcher Project: The Effects of Repeated Readings on Fluency and Comprehension Kristen Reynolds Jackie Jenkins

Background Information Helping primary students develop their reading fluency to a point where they are comprehending text often proves difficult. We have decided to study how students reading fluency affects their reading comprehension. Readers who struggle with fluency then have difficulty for the rest of their school careers. Problem Statement Therrien (2004)- “ Assessment of fluency is essential to addressing comprehension deficits. Pilukski and Chard- “Reading Fluency is one of the five critical components of the reading process.” Rasinsk (2004)- Repeated readings of poems, plays, jokes, and other forms of spoken word help students become more fluent. Hudson (2006)- “Rereading creates automatic word recognition, the ability to apply phonetic, morphemic and contextual analysis skills to recognize unfamiliar words.” Literature Review How might repeated readings of poetry and songs increase fluency? How does effective fluency instruction affect comprehension? Research Questions

Our Classroom Populations Jackie teaches Kindergarten at a public school in Catawba County Teaches 19 students Hour-a-day assistant Kristen teaches second grade at a public school in Lincoln County Teaches 20 students ½ day assistant * are concerned with fluency skills to aid in comprehension and to prepare students for the next grade level expectations. *Feel as if fluency work is often overlooked by teachers. *Used repeated readings to increase fluency and comprehension and create life-long readers Both

Students N.B. (male)- 8years olds- Reading level G (1 st grade level) Severe ADHD Enjoys playing video games and reading nonfiction P.G. (female)- 7 years old- Reading level G (1 st grade level) ESLstudent Came to school in October, has made tremendous improvements in reading and writing since then J.B. (female)- 7 years old- Reading level I- late 1 st grade Insecure about reading but very bright T.R. (male)- 8 years old- Reading level H (1 st grade level) Sweet spirited kid who loves to learn Kristen’s Students C.G. (male)- 6 years old- Reading Level E (PP3) Good Student Enjoys science and playing outside M.T. (female)- 6 years old- Reading Level F (primer) Great student, inquisitive J.W. (female)- 6 years old- Reading Level E (PP3) Decodes words well Well-behaved N.C. (male)- 6 years old- Reading level E (PP3) Smart, sometimes stubborn Jackie’s Students

Intervention Procedures Monday- Introduce reading material, echo read Tuesday- reread reading material, pull out and discuss vocabulary words Wednesday- Reread with various methods (partner read) Thursday- Reread with another method (choral reading, reading with different voices) Friday- reread again with another method, check for comprehension (questions, retell,etc.)

Data Collection Sources (Pre-, Mid-, and Post Intervention ) Fluency Likert Scale Another teacher listened to the student read and rated their fluency on a scale of 1-5 1: dysfluent 2:slightly fluent 3: somewhat fluent 4: mostly fluent 5: fluent Median Score from Oral Reading Passages Students read three passages one level above their instructional reading level We took the median score of the three passages to give us their fluency rate (how many words per minute?) Retell We had students retell what they remembered from the passage and counted the words they retold The more words students effectively retell the better we know their comprehension of the text Teacher Questioning We used direct and higher-level thinking questioning to assess student comprehension We took notes based on student responses

How we stored our data Data was collected and then compiled onto a Google Documents Chart so that we could compare and analyze our results in one place. We coded our assessments and results by putting an “F” on any information relevant to fluency and a “C” on any information relevant to comprehension. We kept paper copies of our data in locked file cabinets at our respective schools.

Oral Reading Fluency Graph

Retell Graph

Fluency Likert Scale Results StudentsPre-InterventionPost-Intervention N.C.4- mostly fluent C.G.3- somewhat fluent4-mostly fluent M.T.5- fluent J.W.4- mostly fluent5-fluent N.B.2- slightly fluent3- somewhat fluent J.B.3- somewhat fluent4- mostly fluent T.R.3- somewhat fluent5-fluent P.G.2- slightly fluent4- mostly fluent - Fluency expectations are relative to grade level. -We decided to not do a mid-intervention assessment with this measure due to two factors. 1. We did not want to overburden a colleague with completing three scales 2. We thought the most growth would be shown at the end of intervention

Teacher Questioning and Observations Jackie’s students N.C.- Used good voice inflection when reading (for example “Oh, No!). Showed evidence of understanding the main idea of the story when retelling but lacked details of character names, etc. Had trouble following along in readers theater at first. C.G. Had high word recognition accuracy but read slowly and the sentences were choppy (pauses not at the end of sentences etc). Retell lacked character details but showed ability to retell in a good sequence. M.T- Is a smooth, fluent reader. Paused at appropriate times and showed expression in voice. Retell was extremely detailed and showed understanding of character motivation and character feelings (“Robert felt left out because his mom and dad were too busy with the new baby”) J.W.- Great accuracy in word recognition. Distracted by pictures in the stories which affected her fluency rate. Prosody increased by mid-intervention assessment. Retell shows clear plot understanding. Kristen’s students N.B. enjoyed reading all of the poems, especially the poem called “Worms.” He read with great enthusiasm on that particular poem, so I tried to show him that he can read that way with any text. He responded to direct questioning much more than with higher-level questioning. He has a hard time focusing, so asking him to think about something for a long time is difficult. J.B. read each of the texts much better after we pulled out vocabulary words. Once she understood what many of the words meant, she read the text with much more confidence and her retell and answers were much more inclusive. T.G.’s fluency has really improved, but his retell and answering still is lacking. He seems to understand what he reads but simply does not share much of what he remembers with being probed. He answers direct questions quickly, but needs much more guidance with higher-level questions. Because P.G. is an ESL student, vocabulary is a concern in her reading. Pulling out vocabulary was very helpful to her and helped her read more fluently. She also was better able to retell after she knew the vocabulary words. She really tries to read with prosody and seemed to really enjoy each text.

Conclusions (what we know so far…) Improved Fluency Retell results varied according to grade level, but overall, the majority of students ability to retell what they read increased. Based on percent growth at the mid-point assessment, most students’ fluency increased due to repeated readings Students enjoyed reading reader’s theatre, songs, and poems. They stated that they were not as boring as some books! Using a focused intervention strategy like repeated readings with a small group was beneficial to students reading fluency and comprehension skills.

Now What? Primary teachers can and should focus instruction on reading fluency. We determined that students’ comprehension can improve if teachers will set aside instructional time to work on building fluency and retell. In twenty minutes per day, students can become more expressive, independent readers through a fun and interactive method.

Resources John Pikulski and David Chard, “Beyond the Book Strategies: Fluency: The Bridge from Decoding to Reading Comprehension,” the-book.com/strategies/strategies_ html. the-book.com/strategies/strategies_ html Christine Neddenriep, Abigail Fritz, and Miranda Carrier, “EBSCOhost: Assessing for generalized improvements in reading comprehension by interven...,” ehis.ebscohost.com.wncln.wncln.org/ehost/detail?hid=5&sid=dcb90ae2- 35a e7e- d90341f563c6%40sessionmgr10&vid=7&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2 ZQ%3d%3d#db=ehh&AN= ehis.ebscohost.com.wncln.wncln.org/ehost/detail?hid=5&sid=dcb90ae2- 35a e7e- d90341f563c6%40sessionmgr10&vid=7&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2 ZQ%3d%3d#db=ehh&AN= William J. Therrien, “Fluency And Comprehension Gains As A Result Of Repeated Reading: A Meta Analysis - Research and Read Books, Journals, Articles at Questia Online Library,” 621D4C3BEFA98EAEFD16.inst2_2a?docId= D4C3BEFA98EAEFD16.inst2_2a?docId= “fluency Rasinski.pdf,”

Resources continued Maryanne Wolf, “New Research on an Old Problem: A Brief History of Fluency | Scholastic.com,” Yaacov Petscher and Kim Young-Suk, “science.pdf - Powered by Google Docs,” 1eb&mt=application/pdf&url= d7649c26%26view%3Datt%26th%3D12e05378da4b61eb%26attid%3D0.1%26disp %3Dsafe%26zw&sig=AHIEtbTwNOteccLKyp-vZIbldKdyEQVDxQ&pli=1.” 1eb&mt=application/pdf&url= d7649c26%26view%3Datt%26th%3D12e05378da4b61eb%26attid%3D0.1%26disp %3Dsafe%26zw&sig=AHIEtbTwNOteccLKyp-vZIbldKdyEQVDxQ&pli=1 Mark Shinn et al., “shinnetalSPR1992.pdf-link.pdf - Powered by Google Docs,” f6&mt=application/pdf&url= 7649c26%26view%3Datt%26th%3D12e05383e84f38f6%26attid%3D0.1%26disp%3 Dsafe%26zw&sig=AHIEtbQix9vOllNRfs1g7AQ3xKSe9vIhUQ.” f6&mt=application/pdf&url= 7649c26%26view%3Datt%26th%3D12e05383e84f38f6%26attid%3D0.1%26disp%3 Dsafe%26zw&sig=AHIEtbQix9vOllNRfs1g7AQ3xKSe9vIhUQ