AN ANALYSIS OF THE EFFECTIVENESS OF THE EARLY READING INTERVENTION FOR SELF-EFFICACY (E-RISE) ON FIRST, SECOND, AND THIRD GRADE STUDENTS IN AN AT-RISK.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
RtI Response to Intervention
Advertisements

Kindergarten Reading at PS 11
PAYS FOR: Literacy Coach, Power Hour Aides, LTM's, Literacy Trainings, Kindergarten Teacher Training, Materials.
Research-Based Instruction in Reading Dr. Bonnie B. Armbruster University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign Archived Information.
Reading Fluency Intervention Strategies and Techniques 1. Does repeated reading alone show students gaining at least 10% reading comprehension skills of.
Digging Deeper with DIBELS Data
VALUE – ADDED 101 Ken Bernacki and Denise Brewster.
Read to Achieve North Carolina: Excellent Public Schools Act.
Fountas & Pinnell Leveled Literacy Intervention.
Effective Intervention Using Data from the Qualitative Reading Inventory (QRI-5) Developed by the authors of the Qualitative Reading Inventory (QRI) -5,
Implementation and Evaluation of the Rural Early Adolescent Learning Project (REAL): Commonalities in Diverse Educational Settings Jill V. Hamm, Dylan.
Project MORE Mentoring in Ohio for Reading Excellence Images were found using Google image search Mentor Training.
Early Literary Success: Effective Intervention for Kindergarten Students at Risk for Reading Difficulties Washington Education Research Association 22nd.
How students learn to read from grades K - 4 Presented by Lisa Papazian Instructional Coach Shrewsbury Public Schools.
STAR Basics.
International Conference on Lifelong Leaning ICLLL 2011
Implementation Plan Jamie Stief. Problem Statement Several upper elementary students receiving pull out special education services are continuing to struggle.
Reading First Assessment Faculty Presentation. Fundamental Discoveries About How Children Learn to Read 1.Children who enter first grade weak in phonemic.
Parent Tutoring (PT) An Individualized Tier 3 Intervention for Students with Reading Problems Study 1 Duvall, Delquadri, Elliott & Hall (1992) Study 2.
INCREASING READING FLUENCY Implementing Reading Intervention in Grades 7-9 Andrea Nelson University of Utah Special Education.
Guided Reading versus Differentiated Instruction
Literacy Development in Elementary & Middle School Week 3 Course 05:300:495 Joseph Campisi.
Guided Reading: Now What? Summer Educator’s Conference Jill Hager- Instructional Coach Thornton Elementary.
Written By: Mrs. Carrie McSweeney, MEd. Fluency: A Primer for Parents.
1 Integrating Google Apps for Education to Business English Student Trainees’ On-the-Job Training English Reports Asst.Prof. Phunsuk Kannarik.
Richland School District 2013 EOY Gains Analysis Data reflects implementation by 7/16/13 export.
UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA Minnesota Center for Reading Research 175 Peik Hall 159 Pillsbury Drive SE, Minneapolis, MN Contacts: Kathrin Maki:
Project MORE Independent Evaluation Completed by The Center for Evaluation Services Bowling Green State University Updated 11/12.
The 90 Minute Reading Block. What does research evidence tell us? Effective reading instruction requires: At least 90 uninterrupted minutes per day At.
The Developmental Reading Assessment
Welcome to Title I Reading Night! September 24, 2012.
4th & 5th Grade Coffee January 27, Levels are determined by benchmarking, MAP testing, anecdotal notes and MCAS. Assessment informs instruction.
Response to Intervention (RTI) at Mary Lin Elementary Principal’s Coffee August 30, 2013.
Reading Action Research Team
Instruction, Teacher Evaluation and Value-Added Student Learning Minneapolis Public Schools November,
Response to Intervention: Improving Achievement for ALL Students Understanding the Response to Intervention Process: A Parent’s Guide Presented by: Dori.
Guided Reading: Now What? Summer Educator’s Conference Jill Hager- Instructional Coach Thornton Elementary.
Literacy Plan Kara Klokis and Carol Pippen Longwood University.
Maine Department of Education 2006 Maine Reading First Course Session #12 Fluency Instruction.
Assessment of an Arts-Based Education Program: Strategies and Considerations Noelle C. Griffin Loyola Marymount University and CRESST CRESST Annual Conference.
Reevaluation Using PSM/RTI Processes, PLAFP, and Exit Criteria How do I do all this stuff?
Evaluation of Shoreline Science Jia Wang & Joan Herman UCLA Graduate School of Education & Information Studies National Center for Research on Evaluation,
Planning Needs-Based Instruction, Part 2 Sharon Walpole Michael C. McKenna Georgia Reading First.
Reading Recovery—Does it work?-Staff Presentation Patti Lapham January 15, 2011 Classroom Reading and Writing-
What is Title I and How Can I be Involved? Annual Parent Meeting Pierce Elementary
 Research Questions. Consider…  Being able to EVALUATE research is the first step in becoming a researcher. This said…read, read, read…every study that.
Maine Department of Education Maine Reading First Course Session #1 Introduction to Reading First.
Literacy Plan Kara Klokis and Carol Pippen Longwood University.
More Time to Learn… Experimental Instructional Response Models for Primary Literacy Serving Students at Risk, Grades 1 & 2 Mary Hogan Elementary School,
Setting ambitious, yet realistic goals is the first step toward ensuring that all our students are successful throughout school and become proficient adult.
Implementation of the North Carolina Read to Achieve Program Parent Guide
The Interactive Strategies Approach to Early Literacy Intervention (ISA) Michelle Eackles RDG 692 Best Practices in Early Literacy Instruction Diane M.
The State of Our School Fall, Goals What do we want all children to know and be able to do with text in our school? K – 90% of students will reach.
Offered by The Florida Center for Reading Research Reading First Assessment “Catch Them Before They Fall”
Winter  The RTI.2 framework integrates Common Core State Standards, assessment, early intervention, and accountability for at-risk students in.
PEPs Suggested guidelines For getting started Suggested guidelines For getting started.
IMPACT OF READ NATURALLY SUMMER AND FALL 2013 ACTION RESEARCH PROJECT AND EDU604 CULMINATION PROJECT DOANE COLLEGE SUE SCHLICHTEMEIER-NUTZMAN, PH.D. By.
The 90 Minute Reading Block. What does research evidence tell us? Effective reading instruction requires: At least 90 uninterrupted minutes per day At.
AUTHOR: NADIRAN TANYELI PRESENTER: SAMANTHA INSTRUCTOR: KATE CHEN DATE: MARCH 10, 2010 The Efficiency of Online English Language Instruction on Students’
Schoolwide Reading: Day Instructional Priorities
DECISION-MAKING FOR RESULTS HSES- Data Team Training.
Responsiveness of Students With Language Difficulties to Early Intervention in Reading O’Conner, R.E., Bocian, K., Beebe-Frankenberger, M., Linklater,
AN OUTLINE FOR AN ACTION RESEARCH REPORT By Andrea Schwalm.
Karissa Tatom.  As a beginning teacher who took multiple speech courses, I was interested in the impact of the oral language on students’ academics after.
Implementation of the North Carolina Read to Achieve Program
Solving the Mystery for Struggling Readers
Diagnosis and Remediation of Reading Difficulties
Implementation of the North Carolina Read to Achieve Program
Overview: Understanding and Building a Schoolwide Assessment Plan
CI804 Wichita State University May 3, 2012
Presentation transcript:

AN ANALYSIS OF THE EFFECTIVENESS OF THE EARLY READING INTERVENTION FOR SELF-EFFICACY (E-RISE) ON FIRST, SECOND, AND THIRD GRADE STUDENTS IN AN AT-RISK SCHOOL SETTING LRA Conference 2013 Jeanne Nolan

Introduction  33% of fourth grade students in the United States were reading below grade level (National Assessment of Education Progress, 2009 ).  Fourth graders from the United States ranked last in their attitudes towards reading (Guthrie, McRae, & Klauda, 2007).

Introduction  Reading motivation is one factor that can increase reading achievement.  Reading efficacy is one component of reading motivation that is strongly correlated to reading achievement.

Theoretical Framework

Rationale Research suggests older struggling readers tend to have low reading efficacy. Current early reading intervention do not incorporate reading efficacy in their models. Thus, would adding this component improve reading achievement and reading efficacy of struggling readers?

Rationale Therefore, the purpose of this research is to investigate the effectiveness of an Early Reading Intervention for Self-Efficacy (E- RISE) on early struggling readers’ efficacy and reading achievement in an at-risk elementary school setting.

Methodology Quantitative Research Study Three Research Questions: 1.What impact does E-RISE have on the reading achievement of early struggling readers who attend an at- risk school? 2. What impact does E-RISE have on the reading efficacy of early struggling readers who attend an at-risk school? 3. What is the relationship between reading efficacy and reading achievement? Does this relationship differ for struggling readers and readers who are achieving at or above grade level?

Methodology Experimental pretest and posttest design Data Collection Instruments 1.Benchmark Reading Assessment (Fountas & Pinnell, 2009): reading achievement scores 2.Reading Self-Concept Scale (Chapman & Tunmer, 1995): reading efficacy scores

Methodology Data was analyzed using the scores from the two data collection instruments: – Regression-Discontinuity Design – ANOVAs – Simple and Multiple Regression

Population An at-risk K-6 public elementary school in the Midwest Contains general education classrooms and bilingual classrooms for all grade levels (Students with Limited English Proficiency: 49%) Title I Building – Not making AYP – Low Socio-Economic Status (78%)

Sampling Criterion Sampling: Participants meet a certain criteria in order to be assigned to the intervention group, all other students assigned to comparison group (Mertens, 2005). Intervention Group: First, second, and third grade students enrolled in general education classrooms who scored at least one-half year below (- 0.5) on their fall benchmark reading assessment

Final Sample 117 first, second, and third graders in general education classrooms Intervention Group-39 students –12 first graders –12 second graders –15 third graders Comparison Group-78 students –21 first graders –29 second graders –28 third graders

E-RISE Framework * Intervention group participated in E-RISE for 20 weeks; 3x a week for 30 minutes Reading Component Description of Reading Activity Reading Efficacy Instructional Strategy Time Word Work Making Words Manipulated letters and sounds to make words that focused on a skill or pattern at students’ instructional reading level. Self-Regulation Training Five steps incorporated during the making words activity: Stop, Think and Decide, Check, Confirm, and Evaluate your words. 5 minutes FluencyRepeated Readings Reviewed sight word vocabulary and/or reread familiar book. Strategy Verbalization Students verbalized strategies they used to help them decode words or comprehend familiar books when rereading. 5 minutes Decoding New Reading New book given at student’s instructional level. Word strategies applied were recorded on checklist Attribution Retraining The researcher attributed students’ success while reading new books to the correct strategies they were utilizing. 10 minutes Comprehension Reader Response Responded to text orally or in writing. One comprehension strategy was focused on during each lesson. Strategy Instruction and Feedback The researcher explicitly modeled a comprehension reading strategy and gave students feedback on the strategies they were utilizing. 10 minutes

Reading Efficacy Prompts for Teachers Word Work Prompts Fluency PromptsNew Reading Prompts Reader Response Prompts You were able to make real words that follow ____ pattern. You got the hang of making real words that follow ____ pattern. Now you have the knack of making real words that follow ____ pattern. You have the word skills to make real words that follow ___ pattern. Watch me….you actually used this strategy (name the strategy) figure out how to say the word/ understand the text/ figure out the meaning of the word, not that strategy (name the strategy. I noticed how you used this strategy (name the strategy), you have the ability to use this strategy again when you reread. Try to remember what strategy (name the strategy) I am about to use. You will be able to use this same strategy next time you reread. Because you used this strategy (name the strategy) during reading, you were able to figure out how to say that word/understand the text better/figure out the meaning of that word. As a result of using this strategy (name the strategy), you were able to figure out how to say that word/ understand the text better/figure out the meaning of that word. Remembering this strategy (name the strategy) helped you figure out how to say that word/ understand the text better/ figure out the meaning of the word. Did you see what strategy we talked about today? I would like you to use this strategy in your reader response journal. Listen while I use this strategy again, you can also use this strategy in your response. Try to remember to use this strategy in your response today.

Result # 1 E-RISE and Reading Achievement Over time both groups’ reading achievement scores significantly increased (p <.001). Intervention groups’ posttest reading achievement scores were significantly below the comparison groups’ posttest reading achievement scores ( p <.05). The mean posttest reading achievement score of the intervention group was 0.33 grade-level lower than the mean posttest reading achievement score of the comparison group ( p <.05).

Discussion E-RISE and Reading Achievement Matthew Effect (Stanovich, 1986): – Lack of practice – Lack of decoding skills – Lack of exposure to difficult reading materials.

Result # 2 E-RISE and Reading Achievement In the intervention group, first graders’ reading achievement growth was significantly greater than the reading achievement growth of second and third graders (p <.01).

Discussion E-RISE and Reading Achievement The earlier an intervention is implemented the larger effect it has on reading achievement (Hiebert & Taylor, 2000).

Result #1 E-RISE and Reading Efficacy Both groups significantly increased their total reading efficacy scores over time ( p <.001) Intervention and comparison’s groups’ total reading efficacy growth scores did not differ significantly over time ( p =.18 ). The intervention group’s reading attitude scores significantly increased more than the comparison group’s reading attitude scores ( p =.05 )

Discussion E-RISE and Reading Efficacy The structure of E-RISE may have contributed to the intervention and comparison’s groups’ reading efficacy growth scores not differing significantly over time, and the intervention groups having significantly higher reading attitude scores compared to the comparison group.

Result #2 E-RISE and Reading Efficacy Intervention Group: – Significantly increased over time: perception of competence scores ( p <.001) reading attitude scores ( p <.05) – Remained consistent over time: perception of difficulty scores ( p =.23 ).

Discussion E-RISE and Reading Efficacy Perception of difficulty scores for the intervention group may have remained consistent due to: –Reading achievement scores being below-grade level expectations –Awareness of receiving reading interventions –Low-achieving students tend to focus on skills they lack (Bandura, 1993)

Results: Reading Achievement and Reading Efficacy Relationship For the total sample, a significant, positive relationship between posttest reading efficacy scores and posttest reading achievement scores was found ( p <.01) For the total sample, posttest reading efficacy scores significantly predicted posttest reading achievement scores ( p <.01) No difference in the relationship between reading achievement and reading efficacy was found between the intervention and comparison groups ( p =.52).

Discussion: Reading Achievement and Reading Efficacy Relationship Previous research findings supports a positive correlation exists between reading achievement scores and reading efficacy scores. The findings of E-RISE were consistent with this previous research.

Conclusions Struggling Readers’ Achievement: – Reading achievement of struggling readers increased over time but not to the same extent of non- struggling readers – First grade struggling readers had significantly greater gains in their reading achievement compared to second and third grade struggling readers

Conclusions Struggling Readers’ Efficacy: – Reading efficacy of struggling readers significantly increased over time in a similar pattern of the non-struggling readers – Struggling readers’ attitude toward reading improved more over time than non-struggling readers – Over time struggling readers felt more competent in their reading abilities; yet still found reading difficult

Implications for Practice Ongoing evaluation of progress monitoring Flexible intervention models Reading efficacy integration in early reading intervention models Professional development for teachers providing reading interventions on how to integrate reading efficacy strategies in their intervention frameworks

Implications for Future Research Implementation of E-RISE with a group of struggling readers and comparing the results to another group of struggling readers who receive a different reading intervention, or the same intervention without the reading efficacy components Analyze the impact of E-RISE on the reading volume and reading rate of struggling readers Implementation of E-RISE during first semester of first grade or second semester of kindergarten

Final Thoughts E-RISE could be considered as a possible intervention for first grade struggling readers The reading efficacy strategies implemented throughout E-RISE may have helped to instill in struggling readers the positive attitude and belief that they have the ability to be a successful reader If E-RISE is implemented early in schooling, a significant increase in reading achievement, perception of competence, and reading attitude may occur.