Targeted Reading Intervention Classroom intervention for rural kindergarten and first grade teachers

Pledger FedoraKelley MayerSteve Amendum

Targeting instructional match in every interaction…

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;

Vernon-Feagans, 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.

• 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

Principles of The Targeted Reading Intervention (TRI), continued

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 FrameworkRe-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

– Segmenting Words

– Change One Sound

– Read, Write, & Say

– Pocket Phrases

Word Work(~8+ minutes)

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 ScheduleHow 5 struggling readers might get the TRI

Sept. EzekialOct. EzekialNov. Maria (with occasional Change 1 Sound &

Guided Oral Reading with Ezekial)Dec. Maria & EzekialJan. 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 & DeJavanApril 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+ timesFull TRI

Implementation

Word Work* 8 min. (Segmenting Words, Change 1 Sound, & Read, Write, & Say)

Guided Oral Reading 7 min.

Assessment-based instruction: Diagnostic Maps

Re-Reading for FluencyReader: ____________________________________Focus on: _____________________________________

Word WorkSegmenting Words ___Pink ___Blue Target Sounds: _____________________________________Words:_____________________________________

Change One SoundTarget Sounds:_____________________________________Word Chain:_____________________________________

Read, Write, & SayTarget Sounds:_____________________________________Words:_____________________________________

Rate the reading

Text Difficulty

1 2 3 4 Too easy

Just right

Too hard

Able to segment sounds in

Alphabetic Principle

Frequent phonics errors

3-sound words

Yes Yes No

Able to manipulate phonemes in

Frequent phonics errors

3-sound words

4-sound words

Able to blendSays sounds while writing

Alphabetic Principle

3-sound words

4-sound words

Phonics knowledge

Yes Needs reminding

Yes 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

Race African American European American Other

61%32% 7%

33%37%31%

Gender Male Female

73%27%

63%37%

Parents Married 46% 54%

Maternal Education

M = 11.8 yrs

M = 13.3 yrs

TRI Non-TRI

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)

Phonological awareness(CTOPPS)

F(1,69) =1.29 Non-TRI

TRI

.52

1.67

Word Attack (WoodcockJohnson)

F(1,151) = 4.09*

Non-TRI

TRI

27.15

35.86

Letter/Word Identification (Woodcock Johnson)

F(1,152) = 5.25*

Non-TRI

TRI

34.12

42.22

Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test (PPVT)

F(1,120) = 0.38 Non-TRI

TRI

1.20

2.32

Outcome F-Test GroupLSMean

Gain

Child Outcomes: (Fall and Spring Testing)

Classroom Observations

Observed one-to-one teacher/child interaction

t (187) = 3.83, p < .0002

Non-TRI

TRI

.30

2.64

Outcome T-Test GroupLSMean

Gain

Final Thoughts

• TRI = efficient, effective reading instruction

• TRI = effective professional development processes

• It works! Evidence-base.

• Sustainability and portability

One Teacher’s Experience…