The Five Components of Reading Discussed · Web view1.3 synonyms, antonyms, and homographs. 1.4 Greek and Latin Roots; and 1.5 figurative and metaphorical use of words in context

Essential Elements of LiteracyA Research Alignment

Katylee Hoover, Senior Researcher

June 2008

© Research Alignment for MM-H California Treasures, June 12, 2008 Katylee Hoover, Senior Researcher

If literacy opens the door of opportunity, will all of California’s students be able to cross the threshold to literary success?

Macmillan/McGraw-Hill answers yes to this question. Their history has been to help every child learn to read, write, and communicate and to help every instructor teach literacy

skills in the most effective manner possible—a practice that continues today withCalifornia Treasures K-8 Comprehensive Literacy Program.

The California Treasures program will guide students across the literacy threshold to mastery of the skills and strategies they need to become successful in higher education and

the workplace—because California Treasures is anchored in salient and consequential research about what works.

Building Literacy for Life Requires a Synergy of Skills

River formation and a student’s advance to literacy share much in common. A mighty river, such as California’s longest, the Sacramento, is a synergy of smaller mountain streams that begin in the Cascades, coalesce, and join larger rivers—the Feather, McCloud, and American. This powerful, united force travels many miles before reaching its destination, the Pacific Ocean. Literacy is much like the longest river in California. It is a coalescence of skills that are developed over time into the most commanding of lifelong endeavors. The streaming skills of Phonemic Awareness, Phonics, Fluency, Vocabulary, and Comprehension flow together to form the Reading Competency a child needs to be successful early in school. But the literacy stream is not yet mighty. Robust reading skills must be reinforced and joined by cogent Writing and compelling Communication skills before they can coalesce into that powerful force known as Literacy. Each element contributing to mastery exists within the context of the whole, and each builds upon the other to become an integral part of lifelong competence. With reading, writing, and communicating practiced and mastered, a student’s advance to literacy reaches its natural destination—one bordered only by the horizon—the sea of knowledge.

Because of the strong dependency of the components that make up literacy, the teaching and learning milieu must be rich and connected. Literacy is formative—it is strengthened and enriched as it develops. It is vital to all other endeavors and accomplishments in life. This document presents each of the essential ingredients of literacy—reading, writing, speaking, and listening—aligned with the California Reading/English-Language Arts Framework and Content Standards, supported by current research, and demonstrated in the California Treasures (Macmillan/McGraw-Hill) reading curriculum. The findings apply to California students, kindergarten through eighth grade, who are on differing individual achievement levels, including English Learners (EL) and students who are reading and communicating below grade level.

California Treasures is designed to meet the specific literacy needs of California’s teachers and students. The program content is aligned to national and state standards and assessment. The curriculum is grounded in scientifically based research and the wisdom and expertise of those recognized as most knowledgeable in literacy instruction. California Treasures is designed for the inclusion of all students, depending on their special needs, such as students whose first language is not English, those who are approaching grade level, and those in need of brief intervention on their

2


way to mastery. The program also includes students who need enrichment in fundamental areas, those who are succeeding on grade level in need of maintaining literacy skills, and students achieving beyond grade level who may be gifted in specific areas of literacy such as writing composition or analyzing advanced texts. The curriculum is permeated with literature selections and reading and writing strategies that are designed to reach students who have traditionally struggled with literacy and need motivation to reach mastery—typically adolescents and low achievers.

California Treasures begins in kindergarten with the formation of a substantial foundation based on the Five Essential Elements for Reading. This foundation sets students up for success as they move from the primary grades through upper elementary and middle school on their way toward mastery in literacy. Throughout the progression of grades, the curriculum reinforces “The Big Five”—phonemic awareness, phonics, vocabulary, fluency, and comprehension—as students learn to read for meaning and progress toward one million words annually by middle school.

In order to illustrate the way the elements of a typical primary lesson flow together and are reinforced, we include here an example of a kindergarten lesson. The day begins with the Morning Message that reinforces high-frequency words and phonics elements previously taught. During this time, the Weekly Theme is also introduced. The lesson moves on to Oral Language, giving time for students to relate their prior knowledge to the background information that they will need for new learnings. During this point in the lesson, specific oral vocabulary that relates to the theme is introduced. While reading a selection related to the theme in the Big Book, students focus on listening comprehension. New high frequency words are introduced through a rhyme that is related to the theme. Lessons on Phonemic Awareness and Phonics follow. The lesson concludes with writing opportunities that incorporate the high frequency words, phonics, and Weekly Theme. As students move into the upper elementary grades, they scaffold new concept construction upon the foundation set forth in the primary grades. Foundational skills and new skills join, reinforce, and spiral as students reach mastery of the elements of literacy. Lessons are explicit and direct, incorporating clear explanations of concepts and skills, teacher modeling, guided practice with the teacher and peers, and independent practice. Additional small-group instruction on all priority skills is incorporated into the scaffolding to reinforce the skill structure where needed. When students encounter areas of difficulty, they join a group for reinforcement and enrichment until the skill is mastered, but they do not leave the whole group for this intervention.

Intervention components blended with California Treasures are available on an as-needed basis in grades one through six. These interventions provide research-based instructional reading strategies designed specifically to accelerate reading for below-grade-level readers and to reteach previously introduced content. Through the interventions, students receive supplemental practice and positive feedback. Teachers monitor student progress continually and are provided with the tools to pinpoint problems early so that students can receive the help they need exactly when they need it. Most important, students continue in the whole group with their peers while receiving the directed instruction in decoding and fluency, comprehension strategies and skills, and language arts—writing composition, grammar, spelling—while they are becoming proficient readers and writers.

3


The Importance of Research in Literacy

The federal government commenced its most sustained commitment to literacy with the landmark Reading First initiative. Based on years of scientifically based research findings, the goal of Reading First is to provide children with effective reading instruction in the early grades so that, as a nation, we may ensure that all children grow up to become literate adults.

Learning to read, write, and communicate and—for teachers—teaching literacy is work that requires the most effective materials available because literacy is foundational for all other learnings. In fact, the National Institute for Literacy’s Partnership for Reading (2000) states that “success in school starts with reading.” Research is now available that suggests how to give each child a good start toward that success. Increasingly, federal, state, and local requirements in every area focus on the need for research-verified instructional strategies, methods, and approaches. Macmillan/McGraw-Hill Reading has stepped up to this challenge by identifying highly regarded research related to effective literacy instruction, summarizing relevant instructional recommendations based on that research, and then showing how those recommendations are incorporated into the Macmillan/McGraw-Hill California Treasures Reading Curriculum.

In this document, we outline:

A Synopsis of Findings for Macmillan/McGraw-Hill built in conjunction with the work of Interactive Educational Systems Design, Inc. (IESD), and their analysis of research-supported best practices related to instruction of struggling adolescent readers, prepared for Glencoe/McGraw-Hill.

An alignment of research findings and California Treasures through a Synopsis of Findings and Demonstration of Alignment (Hoover).

An alignment of California Treasures and the California Reading/Language Arts Framework and Content Standards (Hoover).

This document is a user-friendly précis of the key research findings across the components of Reading, Writing, Speaking and Listening with the addition of a Demonstration of Alignment that provides specific examples from California Treasures Grades K–8. We describe how the Macmillan/McGraw-Hill K-6 reading program meets findings of scientific research related to literacy. The continuum of literacy skills is extended and advanced in the middle grades (6–8) by the addition of McGraw-Hill/Glencoe Literature—California Treasures. Our discussion begins with reading, the first component of literacy, and continues into a summarization of key findings and recommendations related to instruction in writing.

Although this document includes literacy research implications for all K–8 students in California, the alignment places special emphasis on two specific groups: K–8 English Learners and early adolescents in middle school. We examine the research findings regarding these two groups and focus on strategies in California Treasures that are designed to meet their needs.

Literacy for Adolescents and English Learners

4


While the acquisition of literacy skills is crucial for all students, research suggests that we must build upon the success of Reading First (K–3) by expanding it into the upper grades (4–5) and extending it into middle school (6–8). Research also tells us that millions of middle school students lack the reading and writing skills they need in order to succeed in college and compete in the workforce.

A Critical Need to Support Struggling Adolescent Readers

Problems with literacy have serious and long-lasting consequences. A lack of literacy skills is “one of the most commonly cited reasons” for students to drop out of school (Biancarosa & Snow, 2006, p. 7). A resource guide on adolescent literacy prepared for the Southwest Educational Development Laboratory described the problem as follows:

For secondary-level students . . . the social and economic consequences of not reading well can be cumulative and profound: the failure to attain a high school diploma, a barrier to higher education, underemployment or unemployment, and difficulty in managing personal and family life. Years of failing at what is deemed a hallmark of intelligence and worth can also leave struggling readers with emotional consequences, such as anxiety and low self-esteem, which affect personality and interpersonal relationships. These effects within and beyond the classroom walls show that by the secondary grades educators can no longer defer solutions to future development or instruction. (Peterson et al., 2000, p. 6) 1

Numerous sources attest to the scope of the challenge. Reading Next cited both results from the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) and the opinions of experts in adolescent literacy that “as many as 70 percent of students struggle with reading in some manner” that requires instruction differentiated for their specific needs (Biancarosa & Snow, 2006, p. 8, citing Loomis & Bourque, 2001; NCES, 1999, 2006; Olson, 2006).

In a salient and consequential research brief that was released in June, 2008, Predicting Success, Preventing Failure: An Investigation of the California High School Exit Exam (CAHSEE), authors Andrew Zau and Julian Betts relate “a highly accurate method for identifying students likely to fail the CAHSEE” (p. ii). The brief emphasized that California students at risk of failing the exam can be identified as early as fourth grade. According to the authors, fourth-grade EL students are just as likely as other students to pass the CAHSEE. However, by ninth grade, ELs constitute a major part of the 10 percent of students who failed the controversial exam in 2006. The research suggests that

Help with reading in the early grades could help a student in all other subjects,

given that reading and writing are gateway skills needed to master other areas (p. vi).

Adolescents struggle with literacy for a variety of reasons. For some, English may not be their first language. Others may have mild learning disabilities. In many cases, students may simply lack experience and skill with reading. Unfortunately, difficulties in reading don’t cure themselves, but instead tend to get worse as students get older—a phenomenon reading experts refer to as the “Matthew Effect” (Stanovich, 1986). These students need literacy instruction that addresses the

1 Peterson et al. (2000) is laid out in a paginated PDF format, but the format does not include page numbers. Page references for quotes from Peterson et al. (2000) that are given in this paper have therefore been calculated on the basis of page numbers shown in the document table of contents.

5


specific challenges they face, using the best available research-based methods and principles, in order to improve their chances of succeeding both during school and afterward.

The State of Research on Struggling Adolescent Readers

According to IESD Research: English Language Learners for JRN (2007), “Over the last two decades, attempts to improve student literacy on the national level have focused largely on elementary instruction, and particularly on early literacy—that is, literacy at the primary grades. For example, the focus of the Reading First initiative was on improving literacy at the primary levels. Recently, however, a number of efforts—including research summaries for a variety of sources, publication of the Reading Next report and other documents from the Alliance for Excellent Education, and position statements from organizations such as the National Reading Conference and the International Reading Association—have helped create a higher profile for instructional issues related to adolescent readers, and particularly the large proportion of adolescents who struggle with reading” (p. 2).

Government initiatives, such as the No Child Left Behind Act, have raised expectations for instruction. Learning programs are expected to be backed with scientifically based research that suggests that implementation of an initiative is likely to result in a positive impact on student learning. Unfortunately, research on what constitutes effective literacy instruction for adolescents is still limited. According to the editors of a volume intended to “compile from the best researchers in the field a summary and synthesis of adolescent literacy research and practice,” as of 2003 there is not a body of research to tell us appropriate interventions that will help struggling middle and secondary school readers who can barely read. As of 2003, we still do not have a body of research to provide us with appropriate interventions to help high school readers who can read fluently but remain 3 or 4 years below grade level in reading (Jetton & Dole, 2004, p. 6).

Although research on what constitutes effective literacy instruction for adolescents is limited in significant ways, there is substantial support in research and expert opinion for a variety of specific instructional recommendations. The state of knowledge with regard to effective instruction for struggling adolescent readers fits the description of best available evidence as characterized by U.S. Department of Education Assistant Secretary Grover J. Whitehurst; that is, “the integration of professional wisdom with the best available empirical evidence in making decisions about how to deliver instruction” (Whitehurst, 2002).

The Reading Next Report

Reading Next, a report to the Carnegie Corporation of New York (2004) focused on the needs of adolescent readers (defined in the report as those in grades 4–12), with a special emphasis on the needs of struggling readers.2 The Reading Next recommendations represent a synthesis of research-informed expert opinion that serves as an index for effective adolescent literacy instruction. That said, experts agree that additional research studies are needed before we can use the report as a yardstick for measuring program effectiveness.

The 15 elements of effective adolescent literacy programs are the following:1. Direct, explicit phonics instruction

2 A second edition of the report was published in 2006.

6


2. Direct, explicit comprehension instruction3. Text-based collaborative learning4. Motivation and self-directed learning5. Diverse texts6. Intensive writing7. Ongoing formative assessment of students8. Ongoing summative assessment of students and programs9. Strategic tutoring10. A technology component11. Professional development12. Extended time for literacy13. Teacher teams14. Leadership15. A comprehensive and coordinated literacy program

While all 15 elements identified by Reading Next are characterized as having “a substantial base in research and/or professional opinion” (Biancarosa & Snow, 2006, p. 12), the report cautions that “the optimal mix of these factors has yet to be determined. . . . Nor does the remediation of adolescent literacy difficulties involve indiscriminately layering on all 15 key elements. Choices should be matched to school and student needs” (Biancarosa & Snow, 2006, p. 29). The expectation is not that each literacy program should necessarily include all 15 elements, but that curriculum developers and program adopters should select those elements that seem best suited to their specific circumstances.

The explicit focus of Reading Next is on “the large population of struggling students who already decode accurately but still struggle with reading and writing after third grade” (Biancarosa & Snow, 2006, p. 11). Therefore, the report does not include recommendations related to areas such as decoding and fluency that may be important for readers who are struggling at a more basic level.

The State of Research on English Learners

Part of the challenge of providing effective instruction for English Learners lies in the broad diversity of needs and backgrounds encompassed within the EL label. As Short and Fitzsimmons (2007) noted

[B]ecause adolescent ELLs are a diverse group of learners in terms of their educational backgrounds, native language literacy, socioeconomic status, and more, some strategies will work for certain ELLs but not for others (p. 1).

Areas of difference among adolescent ELs include differing levels of language proficiency, both in English and in their native language; knowledge of academic subject matter; immigrant status; age of entry into U.S. schools; socioeconomic status; parents’ educational levels; and much more (Short & Fitzsimmons, 2007, p. 10). These various factors all have an important potential impact on how well students do in schools and what kinds of instruction will be most effective in helping them improve their literacy and content-area knowledge and skills.

7


The Literacy Needs of English Learners

Almost 25 percent of California’s students across grade levels enter state schools as bilingual or speaking a primary language other than English. Adolescent English learners—defined as “second language learners who are still developing their proficiency in academic English” (Short & Fitzsimmons, 2007, p. 1)—represent an increasing sector of the population of struggling adolescent readers and one whose needs are frequently not well met in many existing programs.

Although there is a broad overlap between principles of effective instruction for struggling adolescent readers in general and those of English language learners, there are also some important differences, arising from the distinct language backgrounds and often different experiences of ELs. Some of the differences between adolescent ELs and native English-speaking struggling readers (as described by Short & Fitzsimmons, 2007) include the following:

Typically, native English speakers “have proficient command of the spoken language, at least of conversational English,” whereas “[m]any [ELs] have weak or no oral English skills.” As a result, decoding a word is typically “not sufficient to access its meaning.” Similarly for ELs, “providing an oral preview of a text or assignment may not unlock its meaning unless it is accompanied by sheltered instruction techniques” (p. 9).3

While native English speakers can often (with teacher guidance) “tap into prior knowledge to aid comprehension or interpretation of new text,” in the case of ELs, “often teachers must build the background; they can’t just activate prior knowledge” (p. 9).

Native English speakers are “[m]ore likely to recognize multiple meanings” of words, although they “may still need to be taught appropriate academic terminology.” In contrast, ELs “[m]ay know one meaning of a word (power means strength; Cherokee is a large car) but not other meanings, including the one needed for a particular subject (political power; Cherokee tribe)” (p. 9).

For many ELs, knowledge of cognates (words with a common ancestor) is an important strategy for developing knowledge of English vocabulary (p. 9).

Because of the unique linguistic needs of ELs, content-area teachers may be particularly poorly prepared to offer them the support they need to “develop subject-specific vocabulary and literacy skills” (p. 9; see also Ruiz-de-Velasco & Fix, 2000, p. vii).

Native English speakers often “have weak intrinsic motivation,” while ELs “[m]ay have strong intrinsic and extrinsic motivation” (p. 9).

Even these broad generalities vary greatly among ELs depending on the experiences they have had, including prior academic preparation and the specific nature of their first-language knowledge. Unfortunately, research on “the educational experiences and learning needs of adolescent ELs” has been characterized as “relatively new and under-developed, with a particular scarcity of longitudinal studies, studies using experimental designs, and research reviews” (Meltzer &

3 “Sheltered instruction . . . refer[s] to an instructional approach for content-area teachers to teach academic subjects using English as the language of instruction. The teachers highlight key language features and incorporate ESL techniques that make the content comprehensible to students while at the same time promoting their English language development” (Short & Fitzsimmons, 2007, p. 28).

8


Hamann, 2005, p. 13, citing NWREL, 2004). Nonetheless, literacy researchers have analyzed the available data and identified a variety of instructional practices that are supported by research and expert opinion for helping adolescent EL struggling readers.

Instructional Recommendations for English Learners

The following are areas, according to research and expert opinion, for effective instruction of adolescent English language learners. Instructional recommendations for each area can be found in specific sections of the document and in the Demonstration of Alignment tables.

Decoding Fluency Vocabulary Developing key background knowledge Comprehension and content-area literacy Integrating language modalities Collaborative learning strategies Motivation and engagement Diverse texts Writing Assessment Differentiated instruction Technology Professional development Support for infrastructure improvement

The high standards of California Treasures have not been altered for ELs. The curriculum extends to them the opportunity to fully engage in literacy learning. It challenges them to work toward the same goals. But do English Learners receive additional supports on their way to mastery? ¡Sí!

Research and expert opinion support a variety of instructional practices for use with ELs that are incorporated as an integral part of the California Treasures reading program. Many of these practices correspond to recommendations for instruction of struggling adolescent readers in general and have been included in the Demonstration of Alignment at key junctures such as word analysis, fluency, vocabulary development, and reading comprehension.

California Treasures also provides writing resources for ELs that are customized to meet their specific needs. Some of these resources include: Spanish Glossaries; Vocabulary Word Cards with Spanish cognates; Spanish issues of inTIME Magazine; and reteaching suggestions.

Research supports the claim that especially for ELs and adolescents there is a strong correlation between motivation, literacy development, and achievement. Studies suggest that the link between greater comprehension and motivation to read is powerful (Allington, 1986; Anderson, Wilson & Fielding, 1988; Hidi, 1990; Tobias, 1994). When a student has a personal reason for reading, he or she will put more effort into learning. According to Ford (1992) students are motivated to read when they have confidence that they can read and when the information is of value to them personally.

9


Several research studies sustain the importance of the role of high self-concept and enhanced reading performance (Paris & Oka, 1986; Schunk, 1985).

A study by Flippo (2001) found that there was consensus among teachers and literacy experts that specific classroom characteristics promoted motivation and engagement in reading: (1) access to books, magazines, and anthologies; (2) opportunity to select reading materials; (3) time for personal reading; (4) interacting with others around reading; (5) personal identification with cultural qualities of characters, settings, and circumstances (Gambrell, 2004).

The read-aloud strategy is a way of making literature accessible to students who may be struggling with reading. Research suggests that students are very motivated to read stories and books that the teacher has read aloud to the class (Chasen & Gambrell, 1992). Often, teachers read mostly narrative texts to their students. However, reading aloud informational texts also is critical to student motivation (Doiron, 1994). Teachers should strive to read a wide range of genres during read-aloud time. Students need to listen to narratives that reflect their own culture as well as texts about other ethnicities, characters, and circumstances.

Research also identifies robust findings that student motivation to read increases when there is freedom of choice in reading materials. When students select books that interest them, they are highly engaged in finding out, and they are more interested in learning and in understanding (Gambrell, 1995).

Studies indicate that providing time for students to read independently also increases motivation to read. Self-selected reading and time for quiet, sustained independent reading practice promotes proficiency (Allington, 1983; Stanovich, 1986). Cunningham and Stanovich (1998) discovered that students who spend extended time in independent reading enhance their verbal intelligence. According to their research, all students benefit from sustained reading, but struggling readers benefit the most.

Studies support the notion that students are more motivated to read and have higher achievement in reading when they discuss what they have read with others. Social interaction around literature has a positive influence on higher-level cognition and an intrinsic desire to read (Almasi, 1995; Guthrie, Schafer, Wang & Afflerbach, 1995). The NAEP report on trends in academic progress, cited student discussions about books and articles with family and peers as being an extremely valuable factor in increased reading scores (Campbell, Hombo & Mazzeo, 2000).

The “Big Five” Components of Reading

To meet Reading First guidelines, reading programs must be based on scientific evidence related to the five elements that have been identified as essential in reading instruction—“The Big Five.”

10


What are the components of reading?

1. Phonemic awareness2. Phonics3. Fluency4. Vocabulary5. Comprehension

This document summarizes major research findings and research-based recommendations related to effective reading instruction from two key sources describing the body of research on which Reading First was based:

Report of the National Reading Panel. Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction: Reports of the subgroups (National Institute of Child Health and Human Development [NICHHD], 2000). This source presents an extensive, detailed research review related to five broad categories (see under Reading First Content Focus). In cases where the data were of sufficient quality and uniformity, research results were summarized in a meta-analysis, a method for statistically combining research results across an entire body of research studies.

Preventing reading difficulties in young children, a review of research on early childhood reading commissioned by the National Research Council (Snow, Burns & Griffin, 1998). This source represents a broad-ranging research summary and review but without inclusion of specific details of the research.

The Five Components of Reading Discussed

Components of Reading Phonemic Awareness 111


“Phonemic awareness instruction helps children learn to read.”—Put Reading First (Armbruster, Lehr & Osborn, 2003, p. 6)

A. What is phonemic awareness?

“Phonemic awareness is the ability to hear, identify, and manipulate the individual sounds—phonemes—in spoken words” (Armbruster, Lehr, & Osborn, 2003, p. 10). It is the foundation for reading. It is the ability to detect individual speech sounds within words. This ability is a requirement for developing accurate decoding skills and strategies (McShane, 2006, p. 13). Phonemic awareness is often described as part of a broader category known as phonological awareness. Phonological awareness includes the ability to work with larger units in spoken language such as syllables and rhymes, which often include more than one phoneme. Children typically find it easier to work with these larger units (e.g., rhyming words) before proceeding to develop skills with individual phonemes (NICHHD, 2000, p. 2-10).

B. Why is phonemic awareness instruction important?

Strong phonemic awareness is considered an early indicator of eventual success in beginning reading. Phonemic awareness instruction helps children learn to read words, spell words, and comprehend text. The National Reading Panel reached three conclusions about phonemic awareness instruction in its Teaching Children to Read document: — Phonemic awareness instruction has a positive overall effect on reading and spelling. — Phonemic awareness instruction leads to lasting reading improvement. — Phonemic awareness instruction can be effectively carried out by teachers.

Source: Report of the National Reading Panel. Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction: Reports of the subgroups (National Institute of Child Health and Human Development [NICHHD], 2000).

C. Who benefits from phonemic awareness instruction?

Readers do. Phonemic awareness instruction has been shown to have a positive impact on reading skills across many student categories and grade levels. The Reading Panel cited normally developing readers, children at risk for future reading problems, and (later research) specifically kindergartners at risk for developing dyslexia (Elbro & Petersen, 2004), disabled readers, preschoolers, kindergartners through sixth graders, children across various socioeconomic status (SES) levels, and children learning to read in English as well as in other languages.

Spellers do. Phonemic awareness instruction has been shown to have a positive impact on spelling skills across many student categories and grade levels. The Reading Panel cited kindergartners, first-graders, children at risk for future reading problems, normally developing readers, children across various SES levels, and children learning to spell in English as well as in other languages.

English Language Learners do. Short and Fitzsimmons (2007) stated, “For adolescent ELL students who do not read or write in any language, it is important to teach them the components of reading: beginning

12


with phonemic awareness and phonics (the sounds of a language and how to put sounds together to form words) and adding vocabulary, text comprehension, and fluency” (p. 34, citing August & Shanahan, 2006).

Struggling Adolescent Readers do. Researchers estimate that approximately 10 percent of adolescent readers do, in fact, struggle with decoding (Biancarosa & Snow, 2006, p. 11; NASBE, 2006, p. 19; Kamil, 2003, p. 8, citing Curtis & Longo, 1999). For these students, it is important to provide instruction that addresses their specific decoding needs.

D. Common Phonemic Awareness Tasks and Examples

E. Research Recommendations

Phonemic Isolation

Recognizing individual sounds in words.

E.g.: What sound do you hear at the beginning of pin? (/p/)

1. Range and scope of instruction

Grade Levels

Research summarized by the NRP suggests that Phonemics Awareness (PA) instruction should be provided

— At the kindergarten level— At the first-grade level— At elementary levels above first grade as supplemental instruction for English Learners and other students with special needs— At the middle school level

According to the National Reading Panel, “[Phonemic awareness] instruction helped all types of students improve their reading, including . . . children in 2nd through 6th grades (most of them were disabled readers)” (NICHHD, 2000, p. 2-50). Reading Next’s general endorsement of the National Reading Panel’s findings as applicable to struggling adolescent readers suggests that phonemic awareness instruction also may be appropriate for students at higher grade levels who lack needed phonemic awareness skills.

Reading at Risk: The State Response to the Crisis in Adolescent Literacy reported that “about 10 percent of students enter middle and high school with deficits in their ability to decode print that will impair their fluency and comprehension” (NASBE, 2006, p. 19).

Writing more specifically about beginning ELL students, Short and Fitzsimmons (2007) stated, “For adolescent ELL students who do not read or write in any language, it is important to teach them the components of reading: beginning with phonemic awareness and phonics (the sounds of a language and how to put sounds together to form words) and adding vocabulary, text comprehension, and fluency” (p. 34, citing August & Shanahan, 2006). Letters plus sounds.

Phonemic Identification

Recognizing the common sound in words.

E.g.: What sound do you hear that is the same in sat, sun, and soup? (/s/)

Phoneme Categorization

Recognizing the oddsound in a set of words.

E.g.: Listen to these words—hand, heart, sun. Which word begins with a different sound? (sun)

13


The National Reading Panel found that instruction that used letters to teach phoneme manipulation had a considerably greater impact on reading than instruction that did not use letters but was limited to

Phoneme Blending Listening to a sequence of separately spoken sounds and then blending them naturally into a recognizable word.

E.g.: What word is /b/ - /a/ - /t/? (bat)

2. Instructional methods and features

Spoken and written versus spoken only. Instruction that used letters to teach phoneme manipulation had a considerably greater impact on both reading and spelling than instruction that did not use letters but was limited to spoken sounds only.

Assessment for kindergarteners based on phoneme recognition. Findings suggest that a group-administered assessment based on phoneme recognition can serve as a useful screening tool for identifying the general level of students’ PA skills in kindergarten, which in turn is a useful indicator of students who might need targeted PA skills intervention.

Guidance by initial and ongoing assessment in the first and second grades. Based on the research findings, the NRP recommended a design in which assessment results drive PA instruction at the first- and second-grade levels, both initially and through ongoing formative assessments.

Assessments conducted before PA instruction begins should “indicate which children need the instruction and which do not, which children need to be taught rudimentary levels of PA (e.g., segmenting initial sounds in words), and which children need more advanced levels involving segmenting or blending with letters” (NICHHD, 2000, p. 2–6).

In order to determine the length of PA instruction, “what is probably most important is to tailor training time to student learning by assessing who has and who has not acquired the skills being taught as training proceeds” (NICHHD, 2000, p. 2-42). The NRC research review argued that “intensity of instruction should be matched to children’s needs” (Snow, Burns & Griffin, 1998, p. 321).

Phoneme SegmentationBreaking a word into its sounds by tapping out or counting the sounds.

E.g.: How many sounds do you hear in cat? (three)

Phoneme Deletion Recognizing the word that remains when a specific phoneme is removed.

E.g.: What word do we have when we say smile without the /s/? (mile)

.

Demonstration of Phonemic Awareness Alignmentin California Treasures

14


Summary of Research Recommendations for Phonemic Awareness

Demonstration of Phonemic Awareness Alignment inCalifornia Treasures K–8

Kindergarten instruction is designed to provide practice with the sound structure of words and the recognition and production of letters.

English-Language ArtsCalifornia Content Standards

Phonemic Awareness 1.7 Track isolated phonemes.1.8 Track and represent changes in simple syllables and words. 1.9 Blend vowel-consonant sounds; 1.10 Rhyming Words1.11- 1.13 Sounds and syllables in words.Decoding and Word Recognition 1.14 Match all consonant and short-vowel sounds to appropriate letters.1.15 Read simple one-syllable and high-frequency words. 1.16 Understand that as letters of words change, so do the sounds.

California Treasures Kindergarten:Phonemic awareness tasks begin with skills such as “concept of a word,” “rhyme,” and “count syllables.” The tasks then progress to “oral blending” (with continuous first sounds) and “oral segmentation” (with continuous first sounds—2-letter words, then 3-letter words). Finally, tasks progress to “oral manipulation” and more complexblending and segmentation of words beginning with stop sounds and longer words (4 or more phonemes).

Sample of a Typical Primary-Level Lesson in California Treasures

Unit 4, Week 1—Phoneme Isolation: /n/ The teacher models the new sound using the corresponding Alphabet Card and California Treasures Photo Card. Students practice listening to the sound and repeating it. Students then review previously introduced sounds such as /i/ and /t/ with Photo Cards. During guided practice, the teacher displays Photo Cards and the children identify and pronounce the initial sounds.

Weekly themes in kindergarten lessons are aligned with phonemic awareness tasks. For example, in Unit 5, Week 3, the theme is “Animal Homes.” The main selection for that week is “Mole and the Baby Bird”; the paired selection is “The Pond is Our Home.” The phonics/spelling skills that go along with these selections are review initial: o, f; medial: o, -at, -am, -an, -ap word families. The fluency strategies are Choral-Read, Echo-Read, and Word Automaticity (high-frequency words)—presenting a synergistic plan designed for students to practice a specific sound structure.

California Treasures Phonemic Awareness Scope and Sequence

Grades K–2: Identify and distinguish phonemes (initial, medial, final); count phonemes; blend phonemes; and segment phonemes.Primary Grades (K–3): Manipulate phonemes (addition, deletion, substitution).Grades 1–6: Silent letters; inflectional endings; and triple-consonant clusters.Grades 2–6: Schwa words.Grades 3–6: Unfamiliar and complex words families.

Assessment for kindergarteners is based on phoneme recognition.

Phonemic awareness and phonics skills are assessed together in kindergarten, especially in the beginning units of this level. A new letter is introduced at the beginning of each unit and it is at this point that phoneme isolation is practiced. At the end of the unit, teachers assess these skills by using “Pencil and Paper Assessments.” These assessments are a combination of Activity Book and Practice Book pages. For an example, see page 64 of Kindergarten Unit 1. In this typical unit, Activity Book page 12 and Practice Book pages 25–26 are suggested as a Pencil and Paper Assessment for the sound/letter /m/.

15


English-Language ArtsCalifornia Content StandardsPhonemic Awareness1.9 Blend vowel-consonant sounds orally to make words or syllables.1.10 Identify and produce rhyming words in response to an oral prompt.

Typical Kindergarten Examples: Phonemic Awareness Warm-Up—Recognize Rhyme. After children become familiar with a rhyme, the teacher says word pairs and gives a “thumbs up” if the words rhyme: Muffet/tuffet, whey/spider, whey/away, sat/her.Another example: Children engage in fingerplay in the rhyme “My Apple.” The teacher says sets of words and guides the children to repeat the two words from each set that rhyme: round, do, ground; do, two, round; two, down, you.

Phoneme Categorization: The children are shown Photo Cards. They say the picture names with the teacher. Children identify the picture name that does not begin with the same sound.

Phoneme Blending: Children listen to a fingerplay from the Audio CD Listening Library. They join in as “Bake a Cake” is read. The teacher models blending the sounds to say the words: /k/ /a/ /k/, cake; /m/ /i/ /ks/, mix; /i/ /n/, in; /m/ /a/ /k/, make; /i/ /t/, it.

Instructional Routines for phonological awareness/phonemic awareness in kindergarten are: rhyme, oddity tasks, sound categorization, oral blending, oral segmentation, and manipulation.

The first-grade curriculum builds upon the phonemic awareness foundation that is begun in kindergarten.

First-grade instruction is designed to provide explicit instruction and practice with sound structures that lead to phonemic awareness.

English-Language ArtsCalifornia Content Standards Grade 1 Reading 1.0 Word AnalysisPhonemic Awareness1.6 Rhyming Words; Consonant Blends1.8 Blend two to four phonemes into recognizable words.

Phonemic awareness instruction and practice are incorporated into daily lessons. Teachers are prompted to explicitly model proper pronunciation of sound structures using visual cues such as letter and alphabet cards. After modeling, teachers guide students in group and individual practice of the new sound structure or letter. For additional phonemic awareness instruction, students may also be asked to independently complete complementary pages in the leveled Student Activity Book.

Weekly themes in first-grade lessons are aligned with phonemic awareness tasks. For example, a unit theme is “Kids Around the World.” The main selection for that week is “Kids Can Help,” and the paired selection is “Poems by Kids.” The phonics/spelling skills that go along with these selections are s blends /sl/sl-, /sm/sm-, /sn/sn-, /sp/sp-, /st/st-, /sw/sw, and the fluency strategy is pausing for sentence punctuation—presenting a synergistic plan designed for students to practice a specific sound structure.

At elementary levels above first grade, phonemic awareness is provided as supplemental instruction for EL students and other students with special needs.


Sample of a Typical Second-Grade California Treasures Unit:Unit 2, Weeks 1–5, features short /u/u, long /ū/ u_e; blends /sl/sl, /dr/ dr, /sk/ sk,/sp/sp, /st/ st; long /ā/ ay, ai; long /ī/ I,, igh, ie, y; and long /ō/ o, oa, ow, oe. The correlating Phonemic Awareness skills are reinforced in the Leveled Reader Program, Leveled Practice Books, and the Intervention Anthology for Approaching Level, Beyond Level, and EL students.

Each lesson has a separate phonemic awareness plan, for example:Second Grade, Unit 2, Week 1, Day 1: (p. 155A) Phoneme Categorization—The teacher models words with the central /u/ sound. Guided practice and independent practice activities provide children with opportunities to learn the phoneme. Further practice and assessment are provided in Approaching Practice Book A. A similar procedure is followed for Day 2 and long u; Day 3, blending phonemes; Day 4,

16


Phonemic AwarenessFourth Grade 1.0 Students use phonics, syllabication, and word parts. They use this knowledge to achieve fluent oral and silent reading

phoneme substitution; and Day 5, blending practice.

Third–Grade Example: Cross-Curricular Activities, Word Study. Consonant Blends /thr/, /spr/, /scr/, /str/. Students write words that contain these blends on note cards. They underline the first three letters of each word. Then they sort the cards into three piles. They make one pile for each three-letter blend. As an extension, students use a dictionary to look up the meaning of unfamiliar words and write the meaning next to the word.

End of Fourth–Grade Example:Students sort Spelling Word Cards according to how the schwa + n sound is spelled. They take turns sorting cards and explaining their sorting system. In Unit 6 of fourth grade, the weekly theme is “Discovering Nature's Secrets.” The main selection is “Meet a Bone-ified Explorer;” the phonics/spelling skills are words with prefixes [dis-, mis-, non-, un-] (uncover, nonstop, dislike, misfire); and the fluency strategy is pronunciation of vocabulary and other hard words— presenting a synergistic plan designed for students to practice a specific sound structure.

Fourth-Grade EL Example:EL students use phonics and multisyllabic decoding to learn spelling and vocabulary words. In the section “ELL: Access for All—Practice Spelling,” the teacher supplies a list of words for each long i pattern in the spelling words. The teacher pronounces each word with the EL students. Then she randomly says a word and has students repeat it and spell it aloud. Finally, she covers the words after she says them and challenges students to spell them.

EL Students and Adolescents with Special Needs:Phonemic awareness skills instruction starts at the beginning of an individualized scope and sequence as determined through the examination of the most recent test score data.

For example, upon analysis of post-test data, an EL student may be diagnosed with a short-vowel-sound skill need. This student will engage in age-appropriate practices to learn how to attack and master the short-vowel sound in a variety of examples even though the specific activities are typically found in first-grade-level instruction.

Phonemic awareness instruction is a part of both reading and spelling.


Grade Two 1.0 Word Analysis, Fluency, and Systematic Vocabulary Development1.1 Spelling patterns. 1.1 Spelling patterns.1.2 Syllabication. 1.3 Decode two-syllable nonsense words.

Typical Second-Grade Example:

Each week, spelling words are taken from a decodable reader and reflect the skills emphasized in the phonemic awareness lessons. For example, in Unit 2, Week 1, Day 1, fifteen spelling words with the short u sound are introduced and pretested. The decodable reader, Luke’s Tune, provides fluency practice when students echo-read words with the short- and long-u sounds. Students complete the activity in the Spelling Practice Book using these high-frequency words. On Day 3, students complete a Word Sort with the high-frequency words. On Day 4, students work in pairs using the Spelling Word Cards. Day 5 brings review and assessment of phoneme blending and a spelling test with words that have short and long u.

Typical Third-Grade Example: Word Families—Words with th, ph, wh, sh (voiced and unvoiced th, beginning, medial, final) Unit 2, Week 3; Unit 4, Week 3: Words with soft c and g (cent, gym—beginning and final); Unit 5, Week 4: Words with VC/CV pattern (closed syllables) (The teacher models counting syllables with clapping here; including words with different consonants as in basket and doublets as in summer).

17



Grade Three1.0 Word Analysis, Fluency, and Systematic Vocabulary Development. Decoding and Word Recognition.1.1 Complex word families. 1.2 Multisyllabic words.

Multisyllabic words: Unit 6, Week 5–words with accented syllables.

Typical Middle-Grades (6–8) Example: Weekly themes in middle school lessons are aligned with phonics tasks. For example, in Unit 6, Week 4, the theme is “Print, Past and Present.” The main selection for that week is “Breaking into Print: Before and After the Printing Press;” the paired selection title is “Future Bookmaker.” The phonics/spelling skills that go along with these selections are words from mythology (Ceres—cereal, Mars—martial, Pan—panic, Jove—jovial), and the fluency strategy is choral reading with tempo. The progression presents a synergistic plan for each lesson designed for students to practice a specific sound structure.

Assessment results drive phonemic awareness instruction at the first- and second-grade levels, both initially and through ongoing formative assessments.

The assessments in California Treasures are designed to inform phonemic awareness instruction at the first- and second-grade levels. Therefore, assessment is ongoing, varied, and rigorous. Teachers use results to modify instruction.

Example of Informal Assessment:Throughout the lessons, students are observed informally. Because lessons are highly interactive and the student-response rates are high, teachers have ample opportunity to check each student’s daily phonemic progress.

Daily “Quick Check” Observations in the Teacher’s Guide (TE) remind teachers what to observe. If students encounter difficulties, immediate lesson modifications are provided via the “Corrective Feedback” suggestions. If additional phonemic awareness instruction and/or guided practice are required, the TE directs teachers to the “Additional Instruction” section.

Example of Formal Assessment:Weekly Assessments and Unit Tests are used as ongoing formative assessments to monitor students’ phonemic awareness acquisition. Additionally, the Daily Quick Check Observations are compiled and compared with the Quick Check Rubric to assess student skills diagnose, and prescribe additional lessons or intervention instruction if necessary.

18


Components of Reading Phonics

“Identification of sounds and letter-sound relationships should be modeled, demonstrated, and applied in a logical and systematic manner” (Curtis, 2004, p. 128).

A. What is phonics?

Phonics instruction teaches children the relationship between letters (graphemes) and the sounds in spoken language (phonemes) and how to apply that knowledge in reading and spelling words.

Phonics instruction builds on phonemic awareness. Although it includes some types of phonemic awareness activities, in which students “use grapheme-phoneme correspondences to decode or spell words,” it [phonics instruction] extends beyond such tasks to “include other

activities such as reading decodable text or writing stories” (NICHHD, 2000, p. 2-11).

B. What is “systematic and explicit” phonics instruction?

Research recommendations favor phonics instruction that is “systematic and explicit.” An explicit approach includes specific directions to teachers for teaching letter-sound correspondences. A systematic approach is one that incorporates a planned, sequential set of phonetic elements to master. These elements must be explicitly and systematically introduced in meaningful reading and writing tasks.

Systematic and explicit phonics instruction includes teaching a full spectrum of key letter-sound correspondences:

19


D. Who benefits from phonics instruction? E. Research Recommendations

20


1. The NRP meta-analysis found that students in kindergarten and first grade experienced significantly better improvement from phonics instruction than from other types of instruction in all six areas measured (decoding regular words, decoding pseudowords, reading miscellaneous words, spelling, reading text orally, and comprehending text), with a moderate- to large- effect size for all areas except reading text orally (NICHHD, 2000, p. 2-159).

2. Students in grades 2–6 also experienced significantly better improvement from phonics instruction in four out of six areas (decoding regular words, decoding pseudowords, reading miscellaneous words, and reading text orally), with effect sizes for the various areas ranging from small to moderate (NICHHD, 2000, p. 2-159).

3. Similarly, a research summary commissioned by the Southwest Educational Development Laboratory found that “explicit instruction for word recognition . . . has been effective with struggling secondary readers” (Peterson et al., 2000, p. 13, citing Gaskins, Cuncelli & Satlow, 1992; Lenz & Hughes, 1990; Lewkowicz, 1985; Meyer, 1982). Peterson et al. (2000) also cited Henry (1993) in support of the argument that “these readers need extended decoding and spelling instruction to help them decode multisyllabic words” (p. 13).

When working with older readers, instruction should include the major sound-spelling relationships of consonants and vowels, syllable types, and basic reading-spelling vocabularies” (p. 128, citing Graham, Harris & Loynachan, 1993).

Level at which phonics should be taught. The NRP finding that phonics instruction benefited students in kindergarten, first grade, and grades 2–6 (the majority of whom were disabled readers) suggests a value to including phonics instruction at the kindergarten and first-grade levels and beyond, particularly for disabled readers.

Level at which phonics instruction should begin. The NRP meta-analysis found that phonics instruction in kindergarten and first grade was “much more effective” than phonics instruction that began in second grade or later, after students have learned to read independently.

Letter knowledge is a precursor to reading. Two developmental studies, drawing on and extending a body of existing research, suggest that knowledge of letter names and/or letter sounds is an important precursor to the earliest stages of reading knowledge. Muter et al. (2004) found that students’ ability to identify letter sounds and/or names on entering schooling (average age 4 years, 9 months) was one of two significant predictors, together with phoneme sensitivity, of word-recognition ability a year later (pp. 671–672).

Instruction should be continued over multiple years. Results of a few multi-year studies examined by the NRP “suggest that when phonics instruction is taught to children at the outset of learning to read and continued for 2 to 3 years, the children experience significantly greater growth in reading at the end of training than children who receive phonics instruction for only one year after first grade” (NICHHD, 2000, p. 2-118).

Instruction should take place in a systematic and explicit manner. Summarizing “suggestions for helping adolescents who struggle with word identification [that] have emerged from the work of researchers and clinicians,” Curtis (2004) stated, “Systematic, explicit, and direct instruction produces the best results. Identification of sounds and letter-sound relationships should be modeled, demonstrated, and applied in a logical and systematic manner” (p. 128; emphasis in original).

Approach to decoding instruction: Mastery versus implicit understanding. Curtis (2004) described a “difference in opinions . . . relative to whether instructional emphasis is best placed on mastery of the phonetic patterns that characterize the relationships among sounds and letters or on development of an implicit understanding of those

21


“Instruction should be reflective” (Curtis).

Lessons should highlight:High-frequency words.Word identification by analogy.Opportunities for students to apply what they have learned.Opportunities to decode in context.

Lessons should be:Fast-paced.Multisensory.Lively and brief.Inclusive of materials that encourage students to apply what they have learned.

phonic generalizations via examples and discussions” (p. 124). According to Curtis, “Research suggests that both approaches can be effective . . . and that a combination of the two—beginning first with an emphasis on pattern mastery, then shifting to a focus on pattern generalization—may be most productive” (p. 125, citing Lovett, Lacarenza & Borden, 2000; Lovett & Steinbach, 1997).

Reflective approach is a goal of instruction. Based on “the work of researchers and clinicians,” Curtis (2004) concluded, “Instruction should be reflective. Learning to recognize patterns and making generalizations from and about them—not memorizing rules—should be the goal of instruction” (p. 128; emphasis in original).

Lesson characteristics should include specific elements. Several researchers identified specific elements that should be a part of phonics/decoding lessons.

According to Curtis (2004), “Lessons should be fast-paced, multisensory, lively and brief, and include materials that encourage students to apply the knowledge and skills being learned” (p. 128, citing as examples Curtis & Chmelka, 1994; Curtis & McCart, 1992).Curtis also cited the National Reading Panel report in support of modeling, demonstration, and application of sounds and letter-sound relationships (p. 128, citing NICHHD, 2000).

Peterson et al. (2000) claimed that “Successful programs . . . include an explanation of what skill is being taught, regular modeling of how to perform the skill, constant discussion of why the skill is important, and demonstrations of when it is best to apply the skill” (p. 13).

Instruction should focus on high-frequency-word elements. According to Curtis (2004), “High-frequency sound-spelling relationships and words should be the focus of instruction. When working with older readers, instruction should include the major sound-spelling relationships of consonants and vowels, syllable types, and basic reading-spelling vocabularies” (p. 128, citing Graham, Harris & Loynachan, 1993; emphasis in original).

Word identification by analogy is effective. Curtis (2004) identified word identification by analogy as a “successful strategy” for word analysis. In this method, “Students learn how to use familiar words that rhyme with unfamiliar word parts to aid in their word identification” (Curtis, 2004, p.

22


Students should use decoding skills with many types of words.

Students should learn to build, apply, and practice decoding skills.

126, citing Gaskins et al., 1988; emphasis in original).

Students need practice with multiple word types. Curtis (2004) stated, “Beyond instruction and practice in analyzing words, providing students with opportunities to apply what they have learned is also an essential part of improving their reading ability. . . . [A]pplication needs to occur with words that require students to use the knowledge and skills they are acquiring. For example, multisyllabic words such as cockroach and scapegoat provide students with a chance to generalize understanding of the sound of oa in ways that practice with words such as boat and coat do not” (p. 126, citing Curtis & Chmelka, 1994). This argument suggests a general value to practicing decoding skills with many different types of words, including multisyllabic words.

Students need practice with decoding in context. Curtis (2004) also argued, “Opportunities to practice identification of words in context should be frequent. Word identification should never be viewed by students as an end in itself; it must always be seen as a means to an end. To accomplish this, regular opportunities to engage in oral reading—in a setting where teens are comfortable with taking risks—should be provided” (p. 129; emphasis in original). More specifically, “[A]pplication needs to occur in context, so that students can be encouraged to use their developing word-analysis skills to read unknown words on the page (rather than relying on the context to guess at them)” (Curtis, 2004, p. 126). Taken together, these recommendations suggest that students should be provided with opportunities to practice decoding in context, including oral reading, and should be encouraged to use their decoding skills in those contexts.

Benefits by Student Categories Instructional Methods and Features

Phonics instruction has been shown to have a statistically significant positive impact across many student categories (NICHHD, 2000, p. 2-160):

Kindergartners at risk of developing future reading problems;First-graders at risk of falling below grade level;First-grade normally achieving readers;Second- to sixth - grade normally achieving readers and disabled readers; and

Spelling instruction. An analysis of research commissioned by the NRC claimed that spelling instruction, in particular at the second-grade level, is important in building “phonemic awareness and knowledge of basic letter-sound correspondences” (Snow, Burns & Griffin, 1998, p. 212).

Phonics instruction. Based on their interpretation of the research results, the NRP argued that phonics instruction (i.e., “the teaching of letter-sound relations”) should not be pursued as an end in itself, but should be directed toward the goal of helping students in their “daily reading and writing activities” (NICHHD, 2000, p. 2-96). Students should

23


students across various SES levels. EL and struggling secondary readers who “need extended decoding and spelling instruction to help them decode . . .” (Peterson et. al., p. 13).

understand that this is the goal of learning letter-sounds and should have practice in putting their skills to use.

Variable, guided by assessment. Based on their interpretation of the research results, the NRP argued that, ideally, phonics instruction should be variable based on the needs of individual students as determined through assessment (NICHHD, 2000, pp. 2-96, 2-97). Similarly, the NRC research review argued that “intensity of instruction should be matched to children’s needs” in applying explicit instruction on the connection between phonemes and spellings (Snow, Burns & Griffin, 1998, p. 321).

Demonstration of Phonics Alignmentin

California Treasures

Summary of ResearchRecommendations for

Phonics

Demonstration of Phonics Alignmentin California Treasures K-8

24


Phonics instruction begins before reading is introduced.

In kindergarten, each lesson begins with a phonemic awareness Warm-Up that is followed by Oral Language. Next, the teacher uses the Big Book while students practice listening comprehension. Children talk about the story. In every lesson, students engage in phonemic awareness and phonics before reading is introduced.

The instructional routines for kindergarten Unit 1 Phonics are: blending; introducing sound-spelling cards; letter recognition; building words; building fluency; reading decodables; and multisyllabic words/routine.

California Treasures Phonics and Decoding Scope and SequenceFirst Grade: Understand the alphabetic principle.Grades K–2: Blend sounds into words, including VC, CVC, CVCe, CVVC words.Primary Grades (K–3): Sound-letter correspondence; blend common word families; decode one-syllable words in isolation and in context; and identify common irregular words, high-frequency words.Grades 1–6: Identify compound words, contractions; long vowels; variant vowels; r-controlled vowels; initial consonant digraphs; medial and final consonant digraphs; and diphthongs.Grades 2–6: Hard/soft consonants; abbreviations, regular and irregular plurals; use knowledge of spelling patterns to identify syllables; and decode multisyllabic words in isolation and in context.

Letter names and sounds are taught to students early in kindergarten.

Letter-name identification and sound instruction begin on the first day of kindergarten. Throughout the Smart Start period (i.e., the first three weeks of kindergarten), the entire alphabet is introduced, and students are guided in letter names and sounds through individual practice and group participation. The “Sing, Talk, Rhyme Chart 1,” Letter Cards, Alphabet and Sound Cards, and Big Book are resources used by teachers to reinforce letter- and sound-recognition skills throughout kindergarten.

Phonics instruction begins in kindergarten and continues regularly for 3 years.

English-Language ArtsCalifornia Content Standards Grade KR K.1.6 Recognize and name all uppercase and lowercase letters of the alphabet.

California TreasuresInstruction begins with the continuous consonants m and s. After several consonants are learned, students are taught short vowel a and how to blend VC and CVC words with short a (beginning with continuous sounds). First grade follows this same pattern,which continues through third grade.

California Treasures Kindergarten Example: TE Unit 1, p. 215. Model—Distribute High-Frequency Words Cards for I, am, the and the Photo Card for astronaut. Have children stand in sequence. Repeat with ant.

California Treasures First Grade Example: Unit 1, TE p. 111F. ABC Order. Teach the order of the letters of the alphabet. Show how to put the letters in order. Model ABC order. Have children practice and apply.

Phonics instruction teaches students to convert letters into sounds

In California Treasures, phonics follows a “smart” scope and sequence in which letter-sounds are introduced and then applied to simple VC and CVC words. As the sequence progresses, students encounter more sophisticated sound-spelling patterns and more complex words, including multisyllabic words.

25


and then to blend the sounds to form recognizable words.

English-Language ArtsCalifornia Content Standards Grade KR K.1.5 Distinguish letters from words. R K.1.4 Recognize that sentences in print are made up of separate words.

English-Language ArtsCalifornia Content Standards Grade 5 R 5.1.2 Use word origins to determine the meaning of unknown words.R. 1.3 Recognize the origins and meanings of frequently used foreign words in English and use these words accurately in speaking and writing.

ELD StandardsReading Grades 6-8EA1 Apply knowledge of word relationships, such as roots and affixes, to derive meaning from literature and texts in content areas.

English-Language ArtsCalifornia Content StandardsGrade 6: Reading

1.0 Word Analysis, Fluency, and Systematic Vocabulary Development.

Spelling instruction is used to build phonemic awareness.

Kindergarten Example: In a typical lesson, the teacher models the sound for T. She places the Large Letter Card T in the pocket chart. Next to the T, she places the card i. She moves her hand from left to right below the letters as she sounds out the blending of the two sounds. Students practice blending the sounds. Next, she places the Letter Card m in the pocket next to the Ti. She moves her hand from left to right as she blends the three sounds. Students then blend the sounds with the teacher. This routine is repeated with other words.

Kindergarten Example: TE Unit 1, p. 185. Students say the cues together as they trace with their index fingers the letter the teacher wrote on the board. Children write M and m in the air as they say /mmm/. Repeat with A and a.

Second-Grade Example: In a typical lesson, the teacher places Letter Cards c, h, e, e, r in the chart pocket. Students and the teacher blend the sounds together and read the word. After blending the phonemes, they replace the letters to build new words. Finally, students use their own Small Letter Cards to blend and build word pairs such as near/dear and year/fear.

Fourth-Grade Example: By the fourth grade, students decode the words as a class. For example, they underline the long i syllable or syllables in each of their vocabulary words. They also underline clues that show how to pronounce the words. Following an activity such as this, partners play a game with spelling words having the long i sound.

Fifth-Grade Example: By fifth grade, Students analyze words such as tractor, pointing out the Latin root, tract, and the suffix, -or. They analyze attraction from “A Song for Makaio,” their main reading selection. As they read the selection, they identify clues that reveal the meanings and pronunciations of the vocabulary words (Examples: Unit 1:31B; Unit 2:234, 253A, Unit 6: 728, 747A).

Typical Fifth-Grade EL Example: English learners practice sounds that are difficult for them to pronounce in isolation as well as within words.

Typical Middle School Example: Advanced phonics skills, such as prefixes, suffixes, and multi-syllabic words are taught in isolation via the blending lines and explicit instruction. Students read words containing the skills in the connected text in their Student Anthologies and Student Workbooks.

Typical Sixth-Grade Example: The weekly theme is “Taking a Stand.” The main selection is Let It Shine: Stories of Black Women Freedom Fighters, and the phonics/spelling skills are Suffixes –ant, –ent; -ance, -ence (important, importance; present, presence). The paired selections are from "Caged Bird" and "I Dream a World," and the fluency strategies are Rhyme, Simile, and Repetition—all of which work together to help students to convert letters into sounds and then to blend the sounds to form recognizable words.

Glencoe Literature, Middle Grades Example: Word Parts, Connection to Literature. Students find clues to the meaning of words by looking at its parts. A suffix can change a word from one part of speech to another. For example, the word disgusting includes the root gust, which means “to taste.” The prefix dis- means “not.” The suffix –ing signals an adjective. Students practice with other words.

California Treasures Primary Grades Example: Each week has a 5-Day Spelling

26


English-Language ArtsCalifornia Content Standards Grade 5R 5.1.4 Know abstract, derived roots and affixes from Greek and Latin and use this knowledge to analyze the meaning of complex words.

LC 5.1.5 Spell roots, suffixes, prefixes, contractions, and syllable constructions correctly.

plan: Day 1—pretest; word sort. Day 2—Teacher-modeled word sort. Day 3—Student word sort; game. Day 4—Test Practice: Dictation. Day 5—Posttest. For example, in second grade, on the first day of each week, students are given the pretest for ten spelling words, two review words (from pervious lessons), and three high-frequency words. Word cards are displayed for high-frequency words. The teacher says the words; the children read the words and use each one in a sentence in a “display, say, spell, read, and write” routine. Students then decode the words in the connected text (story in a Decodable Reader). Students complete sentences with each word in the On Level Practice Book O. (An Approaching Practice Book A and a Beyond Practice Book B are also provided, targeted to the student’s current reading level.)

Second-Grade Example: In a typical second-grade lesson, students identify and make oral rhymes with the spelling words for phonemic awareness practice. On Day 2, Large Letter Cards are used to model blending sounds followed by Guided Practice/Practice and Cumulative Review. Students use Spelling Pattern Cards in a pocket chart to build word automaticity followed by completing a page in their Spelling Practice Book. On Day 3, students work independently or in pairs with Spelling Cards to practice sorting the spelling words. They complete the next page in the Spelling Practice Book. On Day 4, students work in pairs to take turns dictating the spelling words. They also use their Spelling Cards to practice reading each word quickly. They complete the next page in the Spelling Practice Book and write from a prompt using the words. On Day 5 students repeat each word the teacher pronounces before they write it for the posttest.

Upper Elementary Grades Example: By fifth grade, spelling words fit a pattern such as “all of the words have a suffix.” Students learn that spelling sometimes changes when a suffix is added. They use spelling words in dictation sentences. They invent sorting schemes for Spelling Word Cards and participate in daily teacher and student word sorts. Students create graphics to identify definitions. They proofread and use spelling words in original writing. (Examples: Unit 1: S11, Unit 4: 456, 465A, Unit 5: 542, 559A, 586, 595A; Unit 6: 683C, 683D, 711C.)

Grades 6–8 Middle School Example: Spelling lessons further emphasize words with spelling patterns, words families; words from mythology; words with Greek and Latin roots; syllables: patterns, rules, accented, stressed, closed, open; and root and base words.

Middle School EL: California Treasures recognizes that phonics, word recognition, and spelling are influenced by what students know about the sounds, word structure, and spelling in their primary languages. For example, beginning readers who speak Spanish and are familiar with its spelling will often spell short o with an a, a letter that in Spanish makes the short o sound. Students learn about the way pronunciation influences their reading and spelling, beginning with large contrasts among sounds. Then they study the finer discriminations. As vocabulary advances, the meaning of words leads students to the sound contrasts.

For example, shoe and chew may sound alike initially, but meaning indicates otherwise. Students’ reading and discussions of what they read advance their word knowledge as well as their knowledge in all language and literacy systems, including phonics, pronunciation, grammar, and vocabulary.

27


The California Treasures program provides “Language Transfers:the Interaction between English and Students’ Primary Languages” (J. Echevarria & D. Bear)

to help teachers with phonics transfers, areas where a positive transfer of sounds and symbols occurs for English Learners from their native languages into English.

ELD StandardsReading Grades 6–8EA3 Use knowledge of English morphemes, phonics, and syntax to decode and interpret the meaning of unfamiliar words.

ELD Standards Reading Grades 6–81.0 Word Analysis E13, I2, EA2 Distinguish between cognates and false cognates in literature and texts in content areas.

Language Transfers are used on charts that help teachers anticipate and understand possible student errors in pronouncing or perceiving certain English sounds. Skills are highlighted for preteaching and for additional practice time.The transfers are located in the lessons as illustrated below:

Sound-Spelling Cards with Articulation Photos are provided in the program to assist teachers in working with English Learners.

Grammar Transfers with English Learner Response Charts help students move to the next level of language acquisition and master English grammatical forms.

Lists of Cognates and False Cognates for the academic language are used during lessons. For example, knowing the cognates school/escuela and telephone/teléfono can help with comprehension. Students and teachers must also be aware of false cognates—words that look similar in two languages, but have different meanings, such as soap in English and sopa (meaning soup) in Spanish.

AAVE System

African American Vernacular English (AAVE) will be the language of some students. AAVE is a language system with well-formed rules for sounds, grammar, and meanings. Throughout the year, K–8 teachers will help African American students learn standard academic English by focusing on those places where AAVE differs from the standards on patterns that will have the most immediate impact on students’ reading and writing development.

Teachers use the charts provided in the California Treasures program to identify AAVE linguistic differences and instructional modifications that can help students as they learn to successfully and fluently speak, read, and write standard English.

The AAVE Charts focus on the following:Providing students with clear enunciation examples during phonics and phonemic

awareness lessons targeting difficult sounds. In addition, practice is provided during small group phonics lessons. For example, use of r-blends: Many speakers of African American Vernacular English drop the /r/ in worlds with r-blends. These students may say th’ow for throw.

Using contrastive analysis during whole group and small group time in which students code switch between AAVE and standard English . The difference in each grammatical structure is highlighted, and students are provided ample opportunities

to practice standard English in speaking and writing. They are also taught the proper context for each usage. For example, with the verb to be in speaking: Many speakers of AAVE will use was in the singular and plural forms, as in He was and They was.

Using Discrimination Drills in which two sentences are read aloud or written on the board. One is standard English; the other reflects common AAVE structures. Students must determine which is standard English.

Using Translation Drills in which students change an AAVE sentence into Standard

28


English.

Phonics instruction is directed toward the goal of helping students in their daily reading and writing activities.

English-Language ArtsCalifornia Content StandardsReading1.0 Word analysis, Fluency, and Systematic Vocabulary Development. Students use their knowledge of word origins and word relationships, as well as historical and literary context clues, to determine the meaning of specialized vocabulary and to understand the precise meaning of grade-level-appropriate words.

The California Treasures curriculum provides checklists that help students understand specific elements of a piece of writing. Students use rubrics to identify their efforts to improve their own writing and to provide a framework for peer editing. The “Word Work” (phonics and spelling) objectives are reinforced in informal cross-curricular activities each week. For example, second-graders might play “Guess My Word” with current and past Spelling Word Cards.

Fourth-Grade Example: By the time students are in fourth grade, they use multi-syllabic decoding when reading words in all texts. For example, the teacher writes on the board disunity, foolhardy, screwdriver, evolution, and uncooked—words that are used in the students’ main selection. The teacher models how to decode disunity, focusing on the long u sound and noting the prefix. Students decode the other words on the list, explaining how the sounds differ. Students use this technique when reading the main selection in the student text. Students also use these words in creative writing.

Upper Grades Example: In fifth grade, students become even more sophisticated in their daily reading and writing activities. For example, they may read the words surrounding a homophone to decide on a definition for the homophone that is based on the homophone’s contextual use. Or they may choose, based on clues gathered from the main selection, which suggested meaning makes the best sense.

Middle School Example: Eighth-grade California Treasures Literature, p. 450. Apply Good Writing Traits: Word Choice. Use precise words that clearly express your images and ideas.

Phonics instruction is integrated with other reading instruction.

Primary Grades: The “Word Work” portion of each reading lesson in the primary grades combines phonics, spelling, and vocabulary. Selected spelling words reinforce specified phonemic awareness strategies and the phonics skill that is highlighted each week. For example, in second grade, Unit 6, Week 1, phonemic awareness emphasizes the endings –dge, -ge, -lge, -nge, -rge. Phonics and spelling align with phonemic awareness. Upper Grades Example: A phonics instructional strategy used in fourth grade is the “Think Aloud.” For example, while reading the main selection, the teacher may say, “I see that this word begins with or. That’s probably pronounced /ô/. I know that ph often has the sound /f/. If the last syllable is unaccented, I should pronounce it /ən/. When I blend the sounds together, I get /ô fən/. I know that word.” Students learn to analyze words in this way.

Phonics instruction is variable and is based on students’ needs as determined through assessment.

Weekly Assessments and Daily Quick Check Observations are used in determining the need for differentiated phonics instruction. Based on results of the Weekly Assessments and observed student performance, teachers are provided leveled options (e.g., Approaching, On, and Beyond Level) to appeal to students’ specific instructional needs.

For students in need of phonics intervention, assessments are provided in the Phonics-QPS (Quick Phonics Screener). This assessment, developed by program author Jan Hasbrouck, evaluates each student’s decoding skills and provides the teacher with valuable information to address decoding issues.

29


Students are provided with opportunities to practice decoding in context, including oral reading contexts.

ELA/ELD Standards Grade 8 Reading1.0 Word Analysis, Fluency, and Systematic Vocabulary Development. Students use…context clues to determine the meaning of specialized vocabulary.

English-Language ArtsCalifornia Content StandardsReading1.0 Word analysis, Fluency, and Systematic Vocabulary Development. 1.4 Use word, sentence, and paragraph clues to determine meaning.

Listening and Speaking 1.6. Support opinions with detailed evidence and with visual or media displays that use appropriate technology.

Typical Middle School Example: Speaking, Listening, and Viewing Workshop: Oral Response to Literature including an Oral Presentation Checklist.

A feature of McGraw-Hill/Glencoe Literature for middle school students is Literature Online. Students can look online for project ideas and presentation tips using a “Quick Pass” code.

Curriculum developers selected texts to match students’ likely interests and to relate to their circumstances, including immigration and changes in culture. Many of the text selections are written about adolescents or written from an adolescent’s perspective. The grade-level themes are threaded throughout the selections and engage adolescents with issues that are meaningful in their daily lives.

Sixth-Grade Examples: “The Sand Castle,” by Alma Luz Villanueva, of Native American heritage, is a story from the author’s Mexican Yaqui Indian heritage. She uses themes in her writing such as the Native American sense of oneness with nature. Another example is “The Emperor’s Silent Army,” by Jane O’Connor, a story of the Terracotta Warriors of ancient China. In Unit 2, students explore traditions, such as the oral tradition illustrated in “The End of the World,” a tale that a Sioux woman named Jenny Leading Cloud told to the authors, Eroes and Ortiz, who wrote American Indian Myths and Legends (1984). Zora Neale Hurston also contributes to this unit. She grew up in a close-knit African American town in rural Florida. She is best known for her novel Their Eyes Were Watching God, but her folktale “How the Snake Got Poison,” from Dust Tracks on a Road, is in the sixth-grade text.

Seventh-Grade Examples: Text selections include “All Together Now,” a story by Barbara Jordan, who tried to influence others to create a tolerant society. She writes about Lyndon B. Johnson and the Voting Rights Act. She seeks to persuade young readers that ordinary people can affect the state of society. In the same unit, Clifton Davis shares his “Mason-Dixon Memory,” a story of the invisible line between the North and the South. The Civil Rights Activist Toni Cade Bambara, contributes a short story about the Vietnam War, “The War of the Wall.” Also included in the text is a folktale from Puerto Rico by Judito Ortiz Cofer, “Aunty Misery,” that students use to compare and contrast with “Strawberries,” a different type of literature and across cultures.

As the literature analysis becomes more advanced, students are challenged to use higher-level skills to support their opinions. For example, in eighth grade, the Unit 1 Big Question is “How do you stay true to yourself?” Students build background by reading and reacting to “And Ain’t I a Woman?” by Sojourner Truth, a traveling preacher born into slavery. Before reading another selection, “The Medicine Bag,” students talk with a partner about family tradition. The author of this selection, Virginia Driving Hawk Sneve, tells of traditions of the Sioux and how the government forced them to leave their land. In another selection, Laurence Yep contributes an ancient Asian folktale, “Waters of Gold.”

Decoding instruction combines mastery and implicit instruction.

For the upper grades and EL students, decoding instruction is a part of the 5-Day Vocabulary Plan: “Build Robust Vocabulary,” and the 5-Day Spelling Plan.In the middle grades, the Language Handbook provides spelling rules, examples, and exceptions that help students master the spelling of many words. For example, spelling unstressed vowels, prefixes, and suffixes are discussed and illustrated.

For EL students, decoding is emphasized in the Glosario. This glossary lists the vocabulary words found in the selections in the student text. The definition given is for the words as they are used in the selection. There is a student-friendly key for pronunciation in both English and Spanish.

30


Decoding instruction is reflective, not rule-based.

Instruction in California Treasures is designed to help students recognize patterns and make generalizations. The curriculum does not use a rule- or algorithm-based approach to teaching decoding. (See the section on Fluency Alignment for additional decoding examples.)

Word identification by analogy is used for EL students to learn decoding.

ELA/ELD Standards Grades 6-8 Reading. Vocabulary and Concept Development.1.1 Analyze . . . analogies . . . to infer the literal and figurative meanings of phrases.

ELL Example: Differentiated Spelling Lists, Pretests and Posttests are available in the Teacher’s Resource Book. During the weekly 5-Day Spelling Plan, students learn sounds, such as short vowels, and use them in spelling words. They use the words when writing Dictation Sentences, completing Word Sorts, and Practice Book pages on their individual reading levels.

In the eighth-grade text, students continue to analyze poetic structure, sound devices, imagery, and figurative language. This type of analysis began in the early elementary grades and gradually became more challenging through the ensuing grades.

By eighth grade, the following Structure and Sound Devices are taught: rhyme, including rhyme scheme; rhythm; repetition; alliteration; assonance; and onomatopoeia. Imagery and Figurative Language are also emphasized, including simile, metaphor, and personification. In a typical lesson, students use a web or other graphic to help them identify the literary elements of a selection. (Course 3, p. 336).

Components of Reading Fluency 3

“Excessively slow, halting reading limits comprehension and the amount of print that can be read, creating a burden that can extinguish the desire to read” (Peterson et al., 2000, p. 12).

A. What is fluency?

Fluency is the ability to read text quickly, accurately, and with expression. It provides a bridge between word recognition and comprehension. “Fluency is vital to comprehension” (McShane, p. 14). Fluency includes word recognition but extends beyond knowledge of individual words to reflect the meaningful connections among words in a phrase or sentence. Fluent readers are able to recognize words and

31


comprehend them simultaneously.

B. Why is fluency instruction important?

Fluency is widely acknowledged to be a critical component of skilled reading. A study conducted by the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) found a “close relationship between fluency and reading comprehension” (NICHHD, 2000, p. 3-1, citing Pinnell et al., 1995). More generally, a National Research Council report stated that “Adequate progress in learning to read English beyond the initial level depends on . . . sufficient practice in reading to achieve fluency with different kinds of texts written for different purposes” (Snow, Burns & Griffin, 1998, p. 223). Additional evidence of this link between fluency and the development of general reading ability, particularly reading comprehension, is provided by several studies that found that student performance on fluency assessments was an effective predictor of their performance on other types of reading measures.

In reviewing the research on fluency instruction, the National Reading Panel (NRP) found value in approaches that incorporated repeated oral reading, guided or unguided, as opposed to less focused attempts to encourage reading in general. Three key findings:

1. Repeated oral reading instruction has a positive overall effect on reading. A meta-analysis by the NRP found that fluency instruction in the form of repeated oral reading (guided or unguided) “had a consistent and positive impact on word recognition, fluency, and comprehension as measured by a variety of test instruments and at a range of grade levels” (NICHHD, 2000, p. 3-3). The weighted average of these effect sizes resulted in a moderate effect on student reading (NICHHD, 2000, p. 3-16).

2. Repeated oral-reading instruction has a positive impact on specific skill areas. The NRP meta-analysis found that repeated oral reading had a moderate effect on reading accuracy, a somewhat less strong effect on reading fluency, and a smaller effect on reading comprehension (NICHHD, 2000, pp. 3-3, 3-18).

3. In contrast, encouraging children to read on their own has no research-verified impact on reading achievement. The NRP reviewed research studies on attempts to build fluency through encouraging independent student reading; most of these were studies of sustained silent reading. It found that the body of research failed to confirm any positive effects (NICHHD, 2000, pp. 3-3, 3-24–3-26, citing 14 studies).

C. Who benefits from fluency instruction?

Analysis of grade levels covered by the studies in the NRP meta-analysis led to the conclusion that “repeated reading procedures have a clear impact” on reading ability among “non-impaired readers at least through fourth grade” and “students with various kinds of reading problems throughout high school” (NICHHD, 2000, p. 3-17)

Why Is Fluency Important for Struggling Adolescent Readers?

Fluency is an essential component of skilled reading, according to the National Reading Panel

32


(NICHHD, 2000, p. 3-1). Many researchers in adolescent literacy argue that for readers who “have not yet achieved automaticity in word recognition (fluency),” the simple task of decoding words takes up cognitive resources that are needed in order to understand the meaning of the text—thereby impacting student comprehension (Rasinski et al., 2005, p. 22, citing LaBerge & Samuels, 1974). This may help explain research findings such as those of Rasinski et al. (2005), who “found a statistically significant . . . and moderately strong relationship” between fluency (reading rate) scores and comprehension scores among 303 ninth-grade students (p. 25). Allington (2006) argued that “there are a substantial number of rigorously designed research studies demonstrating (1) that fluency can be developed, most readily through a variety of techniques that involve rereading texts; and (2) that fostering fluency has reliable positive impacts on comprehension performance” (p. 107).

Researchers have also drawn connections among fluency, breadth of reading, and student motivation. For example, a summary of research prepared for the Southwest Educational Development Laboratory argued that “excessively slow, halting reading limits comprehension and the amount of print that can be read, creating a burden that can extinguish the desire to read” (Peterson et al., 2000, p. 12, citing LaBerge & Samuels, 1974; Nathan & Stanovich, 1991; Samuels, 1994). Along similar lines, the Study Group on Middle and High School Literacy for the National Association of State Boards of Education declared that fluency of word identification is not sufficient for comprehension. Yet, it is an important prerequisite for it. If children read slowly and laboriously, their comprehension of texts will likely be limited. (NASBE, 2006, pp. 20–21)

How Can Fluency Be Improved?

Research and expert opinion agree that practice with reading—especially oral reading—is the key to helping students become more fluent readers. A variety of specific methods have been developed for helping students improve their fluency skills, with a particular focus on guided oral reading and repeated oral reading procedures, often with a modeling component. A research review and meta-analysis by the National Reading Panel found that “repeated reading procedures have a clear impact on the reading ability of . . . students with various kinds of reading problems throughout high school” (NICHHD, 2000, p. 3-17).

D. Research Recommendations on Fluency

Range and Scope of Instruction

The NRP research findings suggest a value to including fluency instruction in the form of repeated oral reading procedures at least through the fourth-grade level, and possibly beyond in a supporting capacity for students with reading problems. A review of research on early childhood reading commissioned by the National Research Council (NRC) identified fluency instruction as a key component of first-grade instruction and argued that “throughout the early grades, time, materials, and resources should be provided” for both daily independent reading and daily supported reading and rereading (Snow, Burns & Griffin, 1998, p. 195).

“[T]he five major factors that impact advanced literacy skills and the ability of adolescents to understand and learn from what they read [are] speed and accuracy when reading text, vocabulary, background knowledge, comprehension, and motivation.”—Reading at Risk: The State Response to the Crisis in Adolescent Literacy (NASBE, 2006, p. 19).

33


Instructional Methods and Features

Effective Methods

Some of the methods that produced “clear improvement”—albeit with small sample sizes within each category—(NICHHD, 2000, p.3-15) included the following

Repeated readings (set number of repetitions, set amount of time, or until fluency criteria were reached) (NICHHD, 2000, p. 3).

Repeated readings “combined with other [guiding] procedures such as a particular type of oral reading feedback . . . or phrasing support for the reader” (NICHHD, 2000, p. 3).

Practice of oral reading “while listening to the text being read simultaneously” (NICHHD, 2000, p. 3).

Oral reading practice (general). In the their description of effective repeated oral reading programs, the NRP stated that many of these programs provided increased oral reading practice “through the use of one-to-one instruction, tutors, audiotapes, peer guidance, or other means,” compared to earlier approaches (NICHHD, 2000, p. 3-11). Similarly, discussing the importance of developing word-analysis skills in context, Curtis (2004) noted, “In this regard, oral reading is increasingly being recognized for its effectiveness with older as well as younger readers” (Curtis, 2004, p. 126, citing Allinder, Dunse, Brunken & Obermiller-Krolikowski, 2001; NICHHD, 2000).

Repeated oral reading. Repeated oral reading techniques are widely acknowledged as an effective method to improve student fluency. For example: As noted above, the National Reading Panel found that “repeated [oral] reading

procedures have a clear impact on the reading ability of . . . students with various kinds of reading problems throughout high school” (NICHHD, 2000, p. 3-17).

A report on adolescent literacy to the National Association of State Boards of Education endorsed this finding, stating, “There are specific methods to improve students’ automaticity so that readers can process text with minimal errors. Repeated readings, assessing word accuracy and reading rates, and providing models through paired reading or reading aloud can improve decoding, reading rates, expressive reading, and comprehension of passages that the reader has not seen” (NASBE, 2006, p. 21).

Curtis (2004) acknowledged that “repeated reading techniques . . . are very effective in improving fluency (as measured by rate) in older as well as younger students,” though she also raised questions about how well those gains transfer to comprehension (p. 127).

Modeling. Summarizing “suggestions for helping adolescents who struggle with word identification [that] have emerged from the work of researchers and clinicians” (p. 128), Curtis (2004) stated, “Fluent reading should be modeled, with numerous opportunities for students to practice. . . . Teachers should read aloud with their students, directing their attention to the rhythms in written language” (p. 129; emphasis in original). Similarly, describing ways to help students build decoding skills, Peterson et al. (2000) claimed, “Struggling readers benefit from expert modeling of fluent reading” (p. 13, citing Chall, 1996).

34


Instructional Methods and Features (continued)

Modeling is also a component, together with monitoring student growth, of “assisted” reading—a procedure that has been recommended by some experts to help develop student fluency. According to Curtis (2004), “Providing students with a model of fluent reading, along with a means for monitoring their growth, has been emphasized by some proponents of the use of repeated readings with adolescents (Harris, Marchand-Martella & Martella, 2000; Hasbrouck, Ihnot & Rogers, 1999). Based on their review of fluency research conducted with both younger and older students, Stahl and Kuhn (2002) also conclude that such ‘assisted’ repeated reading produces better results than an unassisted approach” (Curtis, 2004, p. 127).

Independent reading. While most of the research on effective fluency practices relates to oral reading in a planned context, independent reading is also described by some experts as an important part of helping students develop fluency. For example, after describing oral reading practices, Curtis (2004) stated, “Teens need to be provided with opportunities and encouragement to read independently as well” (p. 129).

Practice with reading words in meaningful contexts. In response to the question “What kinds of practice develop fluency?” the National Reading Panel referenced evidence that “reviewing and rehearsing word lists” is “insufficient as it may fail to transfer when the practiced words are presented in a meaningful context” (citing Fleischer, Jenkins & Pany, 1979), and then stated, “Competent reading requires skills that extend beyond the single-word level to contextual reading, and this skill can best be acquired by practicing reading in which the words are in a meaningful context” (NICHHD, 2000, pp. 3-10–3-11). Curtis (2004) made the same point, arguing that “Opportunities to practice identification of words in context should be frequent. Word identification should never be viewed by students as an end in itself; it must always be seen as a means to an end” (Curtis, 2004, p. 129; emphasis in original).

Level-appropriate texts. Allington (2006) argued that one cause of student difficulties related to reading fluency may be because “they have had limited reading practice in appropriately leveled materials” (p. 95) and instead have been reading texts that are too difficult. He stated further, “[T]he widespread evidence that struggling readers are often placed in texts that are too hard (given the level of support available) and the commonness of fluency problems in these students suggests that this hypothesis deserves consideration” (p. 96). This suggests that it may be particularly important to ensure that texts that are made available for student reading should be at an appropriate level of difficulty.

Part of a larger reading program context. The National Reading Panel found that in all the repeated oral reading and guided repeated oral reading studies they reviewed, “the fluency work was only part of the instruction that students received” (NICHHD, 2000, p. 3-20). They cited a study cautioning against too much focus on fluency issues as a potential distraction from reading comprehension, then concluded that repeated oral reading should occur “in the context of an overall reading program, not as stand-alone interventions” (NICHHD, 2000, p. 3-20, citing

35


Anderson, Wilkinson & Mason, 1991). Similarly, Underwood and Pearson (2004) argued for “a balance that does justice to issues of comprehension, writing in response to reading, and critical examinations of text,” providing “rich opportunities to learn to comprehend printed text, while still providing a focus on the teaching of decoding skills, promoting growth in sight words, and providing opportunities and incentives for easy recreational reading. . . . Fluency—along with its attendant correlates, accuracy and automaticity—may indeed be a necessary, but surely not sufficient, condition for comprehension” (p. 139).Sight word recognition training. Based on a combination of theoretical analysis and empirical evidence, Pressley (2000) concluded that training in “rapid recognition” of common words can improve students’ comprehension (pp. 546–547, 552, citing LaBerge & Samuels, 1974; Tan & Nicholson, 1997).4 Other research has verified that sight word instruction can be highly effective across multiple age ranges for students with moderate and severe disabilities (Browder & Xin, 1998).5 Taken together, these findings suggest a potential value for training students to recognize the most frequent sight words.

Specific oral reading formats. Allington (2006) identified a variety of specific intervention strategies that “have demonstrated effectiveness in developing fluency and, concurrently, fostering comprehension” (p. 96). Some of these included the following: Choral-reading, in which “all the students in a group read aloud together” (p. 99).Echo-reading, in which “[t]he teacher provides the fluent model, reading in phrases and with appropriate intonation” (p. 100), after which the students imitate the teacher. Rereading for performance, a label for several activities (e.g., Reader’s Theater, Be the Character, and Oprah) in which “readers must attempt to take on the actual voice of the characters as well as attitude, stance, and personality. In each case multiple readings of the text, or segments of the text, are necessary” (pp. 103–104).

Extensive reading. Pressley (2000) noted that “[t]he development of fluent, automatic word recognition depends on many encounters with words . . . with the most natural way for that to occur through reading and lots of it” (p. 553, citing LaBerge & Samuels, 1974). Similarly, Allington (2006) claimed, “In learning to read it is true that reading practice—just reading—is a powerful contributor to the development of accurate, fluent, high-comprehension reading” (p. 35).

Regular assessment. The NRP recommended that “teachers should assess fluency regularly,” using both formal and informal methods (NICHHD, 2000, p. 3-4). Such informal methods can include “reading inventories . . . miscue analysis . . . pausing

4 In Tan & Nicholson (1997), below-average readers, ages 7–10, were trained to recognize target words quickly and accurately, using flashcards. These students answered more comprehension questions than students in a control group who had orally discussed the meanings of the target words with the researcher but had not seen the words, “despite the fact, that if anything, the control condition developed understanding of the target words better than did the training condition” (Pressley, 2000, p. 547).

5 According to the ERIC abstract of this study, “A review of 48 studies on the use of sight-word methodology to teach functional reading to individuals with moderate and severe disabilities found that sight-word instruction has been highly effective with this population. New strategies have included feedback procedures and applying constant time delay. A persistent limitation of the research is failure to measure functional use” (accessed June 28, 2007).

36


indices . . . running records . . . and reading speed calculations” (NICHHD, 2000, p. 3-9, citing 5 studies). Similarly, the NRC report recommended that “Because the ability to obtain meaning from print depends so strongly on the development of . . . reading fluency,” fluency “should be regularly assessed in the classroom, permitting timely and effective instructional response” (Snow, Burns & Griffin, 1998, p. 323).Allington (2006) cautioned, “For rate and fluency data to be useful, they need to be gathered regularly from texts that are used in the classroom” (p. 90). He argued specifically against rate of reading for isolated word lists and pseudo-words.

Validity of oral reading fluency measures. According to Hasbrouck and Tindal (2006), measuring student oral reading fluency in terms of words correct per minute “has been shown, in both theoretical and empirical research, to serve as an accurate and powerful indicator of overall reading competence, especially in its correlation with comprehension. The validity and reliability of these measures has been well established in a body of research extending over the past 25 years” (citing Fuchs, Fuchs, Hosp & Jenkins, 2001; Shinn, 1998). For example, several studies have shown that third-grade tests of oral reading fluency from the DIBELS correlated well to high-stakes reading assessments from Arizona, Colorado, Florida, North Carolina, and Oregon.

Instructional Methods and Features (continued)

Oral reading fluency norms. Based on analysis of assessment data from a pool ranging from approximately 3,500 to over 20,000 students collected between 2000 and 2005, Hasbrouck and Tindal (2006) have developed a new set of oral reading fluency norms to replace the widely used norms that were published in 1992 (Hasbrouck & Tindal, 1992). The new norms “align closely with both those published in 1992, and also closely match the widely used DIBELS norms . . . with few exceptions.” These new norms cover grades 1–8 and provide information for 90th, 75th, 50th, 25th, and 10th percentile rankings.

Researchers also provided specific norm-related recommendations for using oral reading results for screening, diagnosis, and monitoring student progress:

Screening. “Fluency-based assessments have been proven to be efficient, reliable, and valid indicators of reading proficiency when used as screening measures” (citing Fuchs et al., 2001; Good, Simmons & Kame’enui, 2001).

Diagnosis. According to the authors, oral reading fluency norms “can play a useful role in diagnosing possible problems that are primarily fluency based.”

Monitoring Progress. Oral-reading fluency measures “have been found by many educators to be better tools for making decisions about students’ progress than traditional standardized measures, which can be time-consuming, expensive, are only administered infrequently, and have limited instructional utility” (citing Good et al., 2001; Tindal & Marston, 1990).

37


Demonstration of Fluency Alignmentin California Treasures

Summary of ResearchRecommendations for Fluency

Demonstration of Fluency Alignmentin California Treasures K–8

California Treasures provides support for fluency through daily opportunities to practice fluency and weekly fluency lessons with explicit instruction and leveled practice. Fluency instruction reflects the guidance of Jan Hasbrouck with the basic belief that fluency refers to

accuracy, speed, and proper expression during oral reading. This belief has been enhanced by Tim Shanahan’s contributions and his work on the National Reading Panel.

The goal of fluency instruction in California Treasures is for students to perceive authors’ written thoughts with clear understanding and with the kind of phrasing, pausing, and emphasis that make their reading sound like fluid language. The following Best Practices are emphasized in the curriculum:

◦Fluency progress is monitored to determine students’ needs◦Models of fluent reading are available (audio CDs of main selections and Leveled Readers)◦Students have repeated opportunities to read and reread text orally◦A variety of formats are available for fluency practice, including partner-reading, echo-reading, reading while listening, and choral-reading◦Students are taught how to time their own reading and chart progress to provide evidence that practice helps.

Examples: Grade 1, Unit 1, pp. 37D, 65D, 65J-KGrade 2, Unit 1, pp 77A, 77I, 81X, 81Y, 81ZGrade 3, Unit 2, pp. 188, 205A, 211M-N, 211Q, and 211S.

To further monitor fluency, the Fluency Assessment component provides leveled assessments. The DIBELS Correlation provides teachers guidance in using DIBELS results to inform instruction.

Fluency instruction is included in the form of repeated oral reading procedures through the fourth-grade level.

English-Language Arts

California Treasures Primary Grades Example: Students read each story multiple times with varying degrees of scaffolded supports, such as Choral-Reading with the teacher providing modeling and corrective feedback; Partner-Reading and Independent Reading with the teacher circulating and listening in to provide support and feedback; or Echo-Reading, with the teacher modeling pronunciation and students reading back to the teacher one sentence at a time. Students also echo-read with a partner giving the partner feedback, such as “sound out this word.”

38


California Content Standards KindergartenSubstrand: Concepts about Print

R K. 1.2 Follow words from left to right and from top to bottom on the printed page.

R K.1.3 Understand that printed materials provide information.

Grade1:1.0 Decoding and Word Recognition 1.16 Read aloud with fluency in a manner that sounds like natural speech.

Grade 5: 1.1Grade 6:1.1 Read aloud narrative and expository text fluently and accurately and with appropriate pacing, intonation, and expression.

Typical Example: Kindergarten TE Unit 1, p. 180. Instructions to the teacher:

Write the following question on chart paper: How can families change? Track the print as you read the question. Point to the top and bottom of the page. Prompt the children to point to the top and the bottom of the page.

Typical Example: Kindergarten TE Unit 1, p. 202. Instructions to the teacher:Tell the children that photographs can give information more easily than words can. Turn to the photograph on page 29. Ask children to describe what a skunk looks like. [Content Big Book, “Wonders.”]

First-Grade Example: Unit 3, Weeks 4 & 5. Students read dialogue in Smile, Mike! and Gram and Me. These selections emphasize long /ī/i_e and blends /skr/scr-, /spl/spl-, /spr/spr-, /str/str.

Upper Grades Example: By the fourth-grade level, students echo-read the main selection. They vary the intonation of their voices to make what is happening in the text clearer. For the same reason, they also pause at appropriate places. The teacher models reading aloud from a transparency that contains excerpts of the main selection. She reads one sentence at a time while students echo-read each sentence. Students practice intonation and pauses independently.

Fifth-Grade Example: Unit 1 emphasizes Proper Phrasing (Pauses and Intonation); Echo- Reading: Punctuation; and Choral-Reading: Pronunciation. This unit also emphasizes oral reading tempo.

Sixth-Grade Units emphasize Phrase-Cued Text: Pause, stops, and intonation; and reading tempo.

EL Example: Read with Expression. The teacher models reading a passage phrase by phrase and the dialogue line-by-line, using expression. The students repeat the reading. Then they are encouraged to read the passage aloud on their own. In writing, they summarize what is happening in each paragraph. Finally, they practice using expression when reading their summaries.

California Treasures Fluency Scope and SequenceApply letter/sound knowledge to decode phonetically regular words accurately and quickly (K–8); recognize high-frequency words; read regularly on independent and instructional levels (K–8); read orally with fluency from familiar texts (choral, echo, partner, Readers Theater) (K–6); use appropriate pace, expression, intonation, and phrasing (1–8); read with automaticity (K–8); use punctuation cues in reading; adjust reading rate to purpose, text difficulty, form, and style; repeated readings; and timed readings (1–8).

In grades K–3, materials and resources are provided for daily independent reading as well as daily supported reading and rereading.

Using California Treasures, students read multiple short passages and stories each week in both the Student Anthology and Student Workbook. Student texts and Practice Books provide rich independent reading sources. Each week has its own theme and genre. For example, for second grade, Unit 6, Week 5, the weekly theme is “Other People, Other Places,” and the genre is Realistic Fiction. The Decodable Reader is “How Bird Was Lured away from Fire”; the main selection is “Babu’s Song”; the Vocabulary/Comprehension selection is “E-mails from Other Places”; and the Social Studies Link nonfiction article is “Where in the World is Tanzania?” Each Leveled Reader is realistic fiction with the same theme, vocabulary, and comprehension skills: Approaching Level, “Ice Cool”; On Level, “Lions at Last”; Beyond Level, “Jolly Good Hockey!”; and the ELL Reader is “The Soccer Team.” The books in the Classroom Library for the week are about George Washington, Jackie Robinson, and Harriet Tubman. All work together in a synergy of daily supported

39


reading.Repeated readings are a part of instruction.

California ELA/ELD Standards Reading Grades 6–8:E17 Read aloud with appropriate pacing, intonation, and expression.

In the lower grades, students read each story multiple times with varying degrees of scaffolded support such as choral-reading, with the teacher providing modeling and corrective feedback. They also echo-read, taking turns with the teacher or a partner. They participate in partner-reading and independent reading with the teacher circulating and listening in to provide support and feedback.

Typically, in the upper grades, students read aloud literary/narrative text accurately using appropriate phrasing. A typical fourth-grade lesson example:The teacher tells students that good readers learn to read groups of words together in phrases. The teacher uses Transparency 1 to show how the text has been marked with slashes that indicate pauses and stops. A single slash indicates a pause—usually between phrases. A double slash indicates a stop—usually between sentences. Students listen carefully to the teacher’s pauses and intonation as the passage is modeled. Students read aloud the sentences paying close attention to the phrasing.

Upper Grades Example: In fifth and sixth grades, typically one student reads aloud, and then a second joins in, then a third, and so on, until all students are reading aloud. Another approach is for pairs of students to read aloud, marking the passage for speed, accuracy, and emphasis. They take turns reading aloud with appropriate phrasing and intonation.

EL Example: Guided Support. Throughout the year, the “Teach/Practice/Apply Routine” and the English Learner supports on transparencies are used to provide additional instruction and practice.

Fluency instruction includes oral reading feedback and phrasing support.

California ELA/ELD Standards Reading Grades 6-8:E17 Read aloud with appropriate pacing, intonation, and expression.

Primary Grades Example: As a part of a primary grades weekly lesson, the teacher reads aloud a passage from the Practice Book. Students note the teacher’s pronunciation of the vocabulary words and her use of expression. The TE provides Think Alouds for the teacher to use to encourage student participation. For example, “If I see words I do not know how to pronounce, I can read slowly, sound out each word, and see if it makes sense in the sentence. If I can’t figure it out, I can write it down and look it up later.” Next, the teacher reads the passage one sentence at a time, and asks the students to echo-read. Later, partners take turns echo-reading the passage. Children write down any words that they could not pronounce and look them up later. There are variations of this procedure each week.

Upper Grades and EL Example: In the upper grades, typically students read a Practice Book selection aloud. They watch for commas and exclamation points. Pairs of students read aloud to each other while marking the passage for speed, accuracy, and emphasis. They take turns reading aloud with appropriate phrasing and intonation.

Students practice oral reading while listening to the text being read simultaneously.Increased oral reading practice is provided through the use of one-to-one instruction, tutors, audiotapes, and peer guidance.

California English-

California Treasures Fluency Transparencies with single and double slashes to indicate phrasing are provided for choral reading. The transparencies contain several paragraphs from each week’s main selection. Often choral-reading is repeated to give students more practice with natural phrasing, tempo, and expression. Frequently, students read aloud with the teacher or a partner. For additional fluency practice, students use the passages in the Practice Book, or they follow along with the reader on the Fluency Solutions Audio CD’s rendition of the weekly main selection.

Upper Grade Example: Monitor and Clarify—adjust reading rate. Students learn to adjust their rate when reading historical fiction.

Middle Grades and EL Examples: Each new vocabulary word appears in bold type when it first appears in the reading selection. The word and its pronunciation, part of speech, and

40


Language Arts Content StandardsReading

1.0 Word Analysis, Fluency, and Systematic Vocabulary Development. Word Recognition1.1 Read aloud narrative and expository text fluently and accurately and with appropriate pacing, intonation, and expression.

California ELA/ELD StandardsReading Grades 6-8:B1, E1, I1 Recognize and correctly pronounce most English phonemes while reading aloud. Produce most English phonemes comprehensibly while reading aloud. Apply knowledge of common English morphemes in oral reading.

definition appear at the bottom of the same page. Some vocabulary words are explained with the help of pictures.

Selection footnotes explain words or phrases that students may not know so that they can better understand the story. On the “After You Read” pages, students can practice using the vocabulary words in an exercise. This exercise shows them how to use a vocabulary strategy to understand new or difficult words. Many of the “After You Read” pages also introduce students to examples of academic vocabulary. They use these words to answer questions.

In the middle grades, students are taught to speak slowly, clearly, and in a normal tone of voice. They are encouraged to pause a few seconds after making an important point. They practice pronunciation and vocal projection with partners.

Students read texts at the appropriate instructional level to supplement repeated oral reading.

California ELA/ELD Standards Reading Grade 81.0 Word Analysis, Fluency, and Systematic Vocabulary Development.

Students use their knowledge of word origins and word relationships, as well as historical and literary context clues, to determine the meaning of specialized vocabulary and to understand the precise meaning of grade-level-

Student Readers and the ELL Readers highlight the weekly literature theme and genre, and all students, regardless of reading level, share the same theme, vocabulary, and comprehension skills. The Decodable Reader, Student Text, with the main selection, Vocabulary/Comprehension Book, and book for the content links, such as Social Studies or Science, are supplementary texts. The audio CD Listening Library contains main selections, leveled readers, and the Intervention Anthology for fluency solutions. Leveled Trade Books that reflect the week’s theme and genre are available in the Classroom Library. There is also a Leveled Reader Database with available titles at www.macmillanmh.com.

Middle School Example: Students analyze Academic Vocabulary using graphic organizers. On page 380 of the sixth grade text, students analyze a selection using “mental activity.” In another example (p. 355), they compare the word instructor with the word teacher. They fill in the blanks of a sentence that is based on the selection they are reading to further enhance their understanding of the words’ relationships.

41

http://www.macmillanmh.com/


appropriate words.

Repeated oral reading occurs in the context of the overall program and not as a stand-alone intervention.

Retelling Cards are used each week as part of the fluency program. Leveled Readers are used each day to reinforce the weekly theme. Graphic organizers and strategies such as compare and contrast also emphasize fluency. The teacher uses Fluency Quick Checks each day to determine small group instruction. Through use of “Home-School Connection” stories, parents and other caregivers can help students become more fluent readers.

Middle School Example: “Write with Style,” Seventh Grade. California Treasures Glencoe Literature, page 383. After reading Annie Dillard’s From an American Childhood, a memoir about growing up in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, students think of a memorable experience they had when they were younger. They write with a tone that reflects how they felt. They use a graphic organizer to map out their approach.

In California Treasures Glencoe Literature, students use a variety of graphic organizers to help them arrange information. The graphic organizers include: Venn diagrams, compare-and-contrast charts, cluster diagrams, and chain-of-events charts.

Adolescent and ELL students read extensively.

ELD Standards ReadingE15 Read simple paragraphs and passages independently.

In the California Treasures curriculum, silent reading is supported by audio and oral fluency activities.

Students practice reading from a variety of genres (short stories, essays, poems, plays) and content areas (science, literature, social studies).

The program includes activities and print resources for reading. using anthologies and copies of Time magazine.

The program also provides a list of suggested additional readings for each unit in the Resources section of the Teacher Resource Guide. These represent additional book-length texts that teachers can make available to their students.

Instruction should include modeling of fluent reading.

In California Treasures, fluent oral reading is modeled by the expert recordings of the fluency passages. Students can choose to listen to these expert recordings as often as they wish. The Fluency Solutions CD provides leveled practice. Leveled Readers meet a wide range of fluency needs. The Listening Library of CDs models many selections.The Teacher Resource Guide section on Fluency encourages teachers to model fluent oral reading and provides tips for doing so effectively.The Professional Development Module gives guidance to teachers for modeling oral reading.

An optional on-site professional development session on “Scaffolded Instruction to Build Fluency” helps teachers explore activities that build accuracy, phrasing, and expression using paired readings, repeated readings, choral readings, and phrase-cued text lessons, including many techniques that involve modeling fluent reading.

Fluency practice should focus on reading words in meaningful contexts.

English-Language ArtsCalifornia Content Standards R 1.1.16

Throughout the program, reading skills are practiced in the context of a paragraph, a passage, or a selection. Even when individual vocabulary words are taught, a sample sentence is always provided. Students are not drilled on lists of words.

First-Grade EL Example: Unit 1, TE p. 131 HH. Reread for Fluency. Students reread a portion of “Soccer.” They tell a partner what the selection is about. They focus on 2–4 pages and work with the teacher and/or other children to read with expression and at the appropriate pace. They choral-read each sentence, stopping briefly whenever they come to the end of a sentence.

Fluency programs The units in California Treasures teach common “instant words” that students must learn to

42


should train students to quickly recognize high-frequency “sight words.”

recognize by sight, since they do not feature phonemic sound-spelling correspondences. These sight words are first introduced in isolation, and then students gain practice reading them in the context of sentences and poems. According to reputable research sources, the frequent sight words represent approximately 50 percent of all the words appearing in written English (Fry, 1997, 1999, 2004).

Language Modalities should be integrated for English Learners.

The California Treasures program incorporates both oral and written language use. Reading, writing, speaking, and listening are integrated in a variety of ways; for example:--Writing activities support reading themes and ideas--Audio support is provided for written texts--Online fluency activities integrate reading, listening, and speaking--Group activities incorporate speaking and listening related to texts students have read--Reteaching activities include oral teacher modeling, oral student responses, and student reading.

Instruction should incorporate formats for oral reading fluency activities that are supported by research and/or expert opinion, such as:

Choral reading Echo reading Reading for

performance

Choral-Reading The Fluency section of the Teacher Resource Guide encourages teachers to use choral- reading and provides tips for how to implement it in the classroom. The online oral reading fluency Professional Development Module models choral reading for teachers. On-site professional development sessions can also provide modeling of choral reading activities.

Upper Grades Choral Reading: In Grade 5, Unit 2, Week 1, the main selection is Shiloh. The fluency strategy for this selection is Choral-Reading: Punctuation. This strategy is repeated in Week 3, when “Maya Lin: Architect of Memory” is the main selection. In Unit 6, Week 5, the fluency strategy is Choral-Reading: Pauses and Intonation, and the main selection is “Hidden Worlds: Looking Through a Scientist's Microscope.”

Echo-Reading The Fluency section of the Teacher Resource Guide suggests echo-reading as an activity that students can complete with each other in pairs or can complete after listening to the teacher model the reading.

Upper Grades Echo-Reading. For Grade 6, Unit 6, Week 2, the fluency strategy uses punctuation, context voices' clues, and characters' voices. The main selection is LAFFF. Another example: Pronunciation of vocabulary and other hard words in Unit 5; the main selection is Many Countries, One Currency: Europe and the Euro.

Reading for Performance:The Fluency section of the Teacher Resource Guide includes subsections on Readers Theater and radio reading, both of which are forms of reading for performance. The Teacher Resource Guide provides tips for implementing both of these approaches in the classroom.

Reading for Performance in the Upper Grades: The fluency strategy for Grade 6, Unit 3, is Readers Theater: Dialogue, Tempo, and Intonation; the main selection is The Case of the Phantom Poet. Another example occurs in Grade 4, Unit 5, where the fluency strategy is Dialogue and Characters' Roles in Putting on a Play: “Ranita, the Frog Princess.”

Fluency is assessed regularly using both formal and informal

Formal Methods: One group of students per week is assessed using the timed readings in the Grades 1–6 Fluency Assessment Book. The Oral Fluency Record Sheet is used to track the number of words read correctly.

43


methods. Informal Methods: Students are regularly assessed in the classroom through informal reading inventories, miscue analyses, pausing indices, running records, and reading speed calculations. Leveled Practice Books are also used for fluency assessment. For example, in second grade, a fluency assessment strategy for Approaching Level Options is for students to read aloud the fluency passage in Practice Book A (page 215) paying close attention to the words inside quotation marks. Another strategy is to have students follow along as the teacher rereads the fluency passage from the main selection in the Practice Book modeling expressive reading. Students also practice fluency assessment with partners.

Students’ oral reading fluency is measured in terms of words correct per minute (WCPM).

The Fluency Goal for California Treasures is Speed

As early as first grade, students time each other while partner reading. They become skilled at using the Informal Reading Inventory to check each other’s reading for miscues and WCPM. They set class goals as well as personal goals. As the students progress through the grade levels, they increase their speed and accuracy.

In the Fluency Assessment Book for grades 1–6, text passages that are several paragraphs in length—not words from a list—are used along with the Oral Fluency Record Sheet to track the number of words read correctly. One group of students is assessed each week. By second grade, for example, the fluency goal for On Level students is 79–99 words correct per minute (WCPM). Approaching Level students are tested in weeks 1, 3, and 5; On Level students are tested in weeks 2 and 4; and Beyond Level students are tested in week 6. Using these assessments, the teacher is able to diagnose and prescribe. For example, if a student is reading 72-78 WCPM, the Audio CD, Fluency Solutions, is used for remediation, and if a student is reading 0-71 WCPM, the student is evaluated for intervention with the Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills (DIBELS).

By the end of fourth grade, students read a 179-word unfamiliar text with comprehension check. The teacher records first-read WPM, Number or Errors, and Words Correct Score; and second-read WPM, Number of Errors, and Words Correct Score.

English-Language ArtsCalifornia Content StandardsSubstrand: Concepts about PrintR K.1.1 Identify the front cover, back cover, and title page of a book.Grade 1:R 1.1.2

Example: TE: Unit 1: p. 106. Concepts about Print. The teacher displays the Big Book cover. She turns to the title page (The Picnic at Apple Park) and reads it with the children as she tracks the print. The teacher explains that this page is called the title page. The teacher points out the author’s (Alma Flor Ada) and illustrator’s (Ana Iosa) names.

44


Components of Reading Vocabulary 4“Of the many compelling reasons for providing students with instruction to build vocabulary, none

is more important than the contribution of vocabulary knowledge to reading comprehension” Baumann, Kame‘enui & Ash, 2003.

A. What is vocabulary? Vocabulary is knowledge of the meaning, use, and pronunciation of individual words. It includes both oral vocabulary—words we use in speaking or recognize in listening—and reading vocabulary—words we use or recognize in print. Vocabulary is a key component of comprehension. Before readers can understand the meaning of spoken or written text, they must know what most of the words mean.

B. Why is vocabulary instruction important?

Much of our vocabulary knowledge comes from simple exposure to new words in context. However, research has verified that direct instruction in vocabulary—specifically teaching the meaning of new words, and teaching strategies for vocabulary building—has a positive impact on students’ language development. Two links (comprehension and specific skills) to vocabulary development are discussed below:

Link between vocabulary development and reading comprehension. According to the National Reading Panel (NRP), although a direct causal link between vocabulary development and reading comprehension has not been established by research, still a variety of studies “underscore the notion that comprehension gains and improvement on semantic tasks are results of vocabulary learning” (NICHHD, 2000, pp. 4-15, 4-20, citing 7 studies).

Similarly, a longitudinal study on early reading development among British schoolchildren found evidence that vocabulary knowledge, as tested at the start of the students’ first year of school, was one of three predictors of reading comprehension during the first year, as tested at the start of the students’ third year of school—a span of two school years (Muter et al., 2004).

Effects on specific skill areas.

According to a review of research on early childhood reading commissioned by the National Research Council (NRC), “Vocabulary instruction generally does result in measurable increase in students’ specific word knowledge. Sometimes, and to some degree, it also results in better performance on global vocabulary measures, such as standardized tests, indicating that the instruction has evidently enhanced the learning of words beyond those directly taught. Second, pooling across studies, vocabulary instruction also appears to produce increases in children’s reading comprehension” (Snow, Burns & Griffin, 1998, p. 217).

45


C. Who benefits from vocabulary instruction?

At least five studies reviewed by the NRP supported vocabulary instruction by the third-grade level. The NRC report expanded the grade range of students who can benefit from vocabulary instruction, advocating direct instruction in vocabulary development for “children who have started to read independently, typically second-graders and above” so that they will “sound out and confirm the identities of visually unfamiliar words” (Snow, Burns & Griffin, 1998, p. 322). The NRP analysis underscored the fact that development of reading ability is dependent on oral vocabulary: in order for students to understand a word once it has been decoded, it must already be part of their vocabulary (NICHHD, 2000, p. 4-15). Similarly, the NRC report argues, “Learning new concepts and the words that encode them is essential for comprehension development” (Snow, Burns & Griffin, 1998, p. 217). Based on these factors, it seems reasonable to conclude that even before students can read independently, direct methods for building oral vocabulary may help contribute to students’ ultimate success in reading.

“The importance of semantic knowledge shows up in the strong correlations between comprehension and the size and degree of both general and passage-specific word knowledge, and vocabulary.”—Building Reading Proficiency at the Secondary Level: A Guide to Resources, Southwest Educational Development Laboratory (Peterson et al., 2000, p. 13, citing Beck & McKeown, 1991).

D. Research Recommendations

Range and Scope of Instruction Instructional Methods and Features

Grade Levels. Given the NRP research findings related to effectiveness of vocabulary instruction at third grade and above, and the NRC recommendations for direct instruction in vocabulary at the second-grade level, instruction in vocabulary seems appropriate by the second- and third-grade levels. Before that point, exposure to new words and concepts through oral vocabulary development is a worthwhile goal, since “even at the youngest ages, the ability to understand and remember the meanings of new words depends quite strongly on how well developed one’s vocabulary already is” (Snow, Burns & Griffin, 1998, p. 217, citing Robbins & Ehri, 1994). “[A]lmost all students need to be supported as they learn unfamiliar vocabulary.”—Position statement from the International Reading Association’s Commission on Adolescent Literacy (Moore et al., 1999, p. 4).

To succeed academically in high school and to prepare for college, students need to know academic vocabulary—special terms used in classroom discussion, assignments, and tests. These words are also used in the workplace.

Multiple strategies, incorporating direct and indirect vocabulary instruction. Based on research surveyed by the NRP, “It is clear that vocabulary should be taught both directly and indirectly”—that is, using both explicit instruction in vocabulary and methods of decoding word meanings, on the one hand, and more contextual approaches to exposing students to vocabulary on the other (NICHHD, 2000, p. 4-24). Based on both the research results it reviewed and theoretical considerations, the NRP further recommended that reading instruction include a combination of different strategies, both direct and indirect, for building vocabulary, rather than relying on only one method (NICHHD, 2000, p. 4-27).

46


Role of Vocabulary Knowledge in Adolescent Literacy

Vocabulary knowledge is a key component of both general reading comprehension and content-area literacy. As Pressley (2000) stated, “The extent of a reader’s vocabulary is related to the person’s comprehension skills (e.g., Anderson & Freebody, 1981; Nagy, Anderson & Herman, 1987). Particularly important here, there are experimental data making clear that a more extensive vocabulary promotes comprehension skill” (p. 548, citing Beck, Perfetti & McKeown, 1982; McKeown, Beck, Omanson, & Perfetti, 1983; McKeown, Beck, Omanson, & Pople, 1985).

As students grow older, vocabulary knowledge becomes critical not only for general reading comprehension, but also for content-area learning. As Readence and colleagues (2004) wrote, “all groups of people . . . share special idioms and technical terminology which characterize the group. ‘Insiders’ use this vocabulary freely and through it gain access to the collective knowledge of the group.”

The task of the content teacher is to help students become insiders whose minds move with facility in the fields of science, English, social studies, or mathematics. To a large extent, this is accomplished by teaching them the technical terminology of each discipline (p. 139).

Vocabulary Acquisition

According to Pressley (2000), “Although vocabulary can be taught, most vocabulary words are learned incidentally as a function of encounters in context” (p. 548, citing Sternberg, 1987). Such word acquisition is not automatic; indeed, research has found that only 5 percent to 15 percent of the unfamiliar words readers encounter will actually be learned from that encounter (Beck et al., 2002, citing Nagy, Herman & Anderson, 1985; Swanborn & de Glopper, 1999). Researchers have identified a variety of factors that affect whether and how easily individuals learn specific words from context, including how many encounters they have with the word; the range and variety of sources for those encounters; and how the word is referenced within the text for those encounters (Blachowicz and Fisher, 2000, p. 508; Baumann et al., 2003, pp. 755–756).

An important complicating factor in describing vocabulary learning is the fact that students’ word learning is not simply an on/off switch, but rather a matter of degree and even type of knowledge. For example, it may require less knowledge to understand what a word means within a specific written context than to use it appropriately in writing or speaking (Baumann et al., 2003, p. 755). As Beck and colleagues (2002) stated, “It is not the case that one either knows or does not know a word. In fact, word knowledge is a rather complex concept. . . . [T]he extent of knowledge one may have about individual words can range from a little to a lot, and . . . there are qualitatively different kinds of knowledge about words” (p. 9). Depending on the measure that is used, the same person may be assessed as either knowing or not knowing a specific word.

Vocabulary Instruction Researchers describe several broad approaches to learning vocabulary, including: Encouraging wide reading and broad language exposure to stimulate

47


All three approaches should be incorporated in vocabulary instruction.

Positive outcomes result from best practices in vocabulary instruction.

Vocabulary instruction is critical for ELs.

Vocabulary knowledge is critical to content-area learning.

students’ incidental word learning Instruction in transferable and generalizable strategies that can help

students become more proficient at learning vocabulary on their own Direct instruction in specific vocabulary words

Research supports all three broad approaches. Because they operate in different ways and toward different goals, there is a potential value in incorporating all these approaches as part of vocabulary instruction. For example, Baumann and colleagues (2003) recommended that programs for teaching vocabulary should “include goals that provide for teacher-initiated vocabulary learning as well as ones that strive for student independence in vocabulary learning” and should “include instruction in both specific-word and transferable and generalizable strategies” (p. 777).

Potentially, vocabulary instruction can result in several types of positive outcomes: Instruction in use of word-learning strategies can transfer, so that

students are more likely to successfully apply the strategies with words they have not previously learned.

Instruction in use of word-learning strategies can transfer, leading to improved comprehension of texts where use of such strategies is appropriate.

Instruction in specific words can lead to improved word identification or generation of correct word meanings.

Instruction in specific words can lead to improved comprehension of texts that use those words.

Any of these outcomes represent some level of positive results from instruction. The underlying assumption of research focused on word-level outcomes seems to be that instruction that leads to improved knowledge of specific vocabulary words may have a long-term, aggregate impact on text comprehension, even if that outcome is not immediately measurable.

Vocabulary instruction is particularly critical for English Learners. Describing the immense difficulty faced by EL students in learning academic English, Short and Fitzsimmons (2007) stated, “The academic vocabulary challenge alone is overwhelming. Consider that high school students are expected to have a vocabulary of approximately 50,000 words to be able to master the increasingly complex coursework of high school (Graves, 2006; Nagy & Anderson, 1984) and the average student learns 3,000 new words each year. In four years, then, the average beginning ELL might learn 12,000 to 15,000 words without targeted interventions, falling far short of the 50,000-word goal” (pp. 26–27).

As noted above, vocabulary knowledge is also particularly important for content-area learning, in part because so much critical content-area knowledge consists of learning meanings of key technical vocabulary. Readence et al. (2004) cautioned that much of this vocabulary must be directly taught:

48


Students do not automatically assimilate new words—they must be taught.

“If there is one thing which contributes most heavily to the burdens of learning technical vocabulary, it is the simple lack of direct instruction. Teachers frequently assume that students will automatically assimilate new words just because they are introduced in textbook assignments. This is a mistake. While incidental learning of word meanings may occur with narrative, story-type material, even across cultures . . . this will, more than likely, not occur with textbook material” (p. 148).

Effective Instructional Methods for Young Students

“Active student participation,” which includes activities such as student-initiated talk in the context of listening to storybooks (NICHHD, 2000, pp. 4-21, 4-26, 4-27) is an effective method.

Good instruction in vocabulary includes deriving meaning from context (NICHHD, 2000, p. 4-23, citing 2 studies) and a combination of context-based and definitional approaches (NICHHD, 2000, p. 4-23, citing 2 studies) and “Restructuring the task” of learning new words in a variety of different ways, such as providing redundant information and providing sample sentences along with definitions (NICHHD, 2000, pp. 4-22–4-23, citing 7 studies).Direct instruction in “vocabulary items that are required for a specific text to be read as part of the lesson” (NICHHD, 2000, pp. 4-24–4-25, citing 4 studies). This includes pre-instruction of vocabulary before the reading or the reading lesson (p. 4-25, citing 3 studies).

Storybook reading. A body of research evidence shows that “reading storybooks aloud to young children . . . results in reliable gains in incidental word acquisition” (Ewers & Brownson, 1999, p. 12, citing 5 additional studies).

These methods call for active student participation, as in finding echoes. These methods reflect the findings of Ewers and Brownson (1999), who reported on a study in which a storybook with 10 targeted vocabulary words was read aloud individually to 66 kindergarteners. Pretest-posttest comparison found that students in both treatments learned a significant number of the targeted vocabulary words; however, students in the active (question-answering) treatment learned significantly more words than those in the passive treatment. This result was true both of students with a high phonological working memory and of those with a low phonological working memory.

Characteristics of effective instructional methods for older children, adolescents, and EL students.

Students need richness of context.

A principle identified by Blachowicz and Fisher (2000) was that “students should be active in developing their understanding of words and ways to learn them” (p. 504).

Similarly, Beck and colleagues (2002) identified “opportunities for students to interact with word

“Richness of context in which words are to be learned,” including “extended and rich instruction of vocabulary (applying words to multiple contexts, etc.)” (NICHHD, 2000, pp. 4-22, 4-27) influence instruction. Along similar lines, the NRC report cites a review of studies in which “methods in which children were given both information about the words’ definitions and examples of the words’ usages in a variety of contexts

49


Vocabulary knowledge develops as a side effect of reading.

There are “positive correlations between the measures of reading activity and reading comprehension and vocabulary development” (Allington).

meanings in ways that oblige them to think about what a word means” as a construct that helped students develop initial understandings of vocabulary words (p. 35).

Extensive reading. There is disagreement among researchers about the extent to which vocabulary develops automatically in readers—particularly struggling readers—versus the need for direct instruction. There is universal agreement, however, that vocabulary knowledge does develop as a side effect of reading. As Baumann and colleagues (2003) stated in their review of research on vocabulary instruction, “We certainly agree with Nagy et al. (1987) and Cunningham and Stanovich (1998) that word learning does occur during normal reading and that wide reading is a necessary and probably a causal factor for large levels of vocabulary growth” (p. 761). Similarly, Allington (2006) cited McQuillan’s (1998) summary of correlational studies that “have produced consistent findings showing positive correlations between the measures of reading activity [author and/or title recognition checklists] and reading comprehension and vocabulary development” (Allington, 2006, p. 39). This suggests an emphasis on broad, extensive reading as a method to develop vocabulary knowledge, both in order to introduce new words and to broaden and deepen students’ understanding of words to which they have already been exposed.

Use of audio with written texts.

resulted in the largest gains in both vocabulary and reading comprehension,” compared to drill and practice (Snow, Burns & Griffin, 1998, pp. 217–218, citing Stahl & Fairbanks, 1986). The NRP further recommended that vocabulary items should be “derived from content learning materials” and likely to appear in a variety of other contexts as well (NICHHD, 2000, p. 4-25).

One of four principles identified by Blachowicz and Fisher (2000) for guiding vocabulary instruction, based on their analysis of research on vocabulary instruction, was that “students should be immersed in words” (p. 504).According to Blachowicz and Fisher (2000), “Listening studies . . . studies of family literacy . . . studies of wide reading . . . and more focused studies of incidental word learning from context . . . all support the importance of exposing students to rich language environments. These studies with varying contexts and ages of learners all confirm that environments where language and word use are celebrated and noted encourage vocabulary learning” (Blachowicz & Fisher, 2000, p. 507).Along similar lines, Baumann et al. (2003) identified one possible objective for vocabulary instructional programs as being to “help students to develop an appreciation for words and to experience enjoyment and satisfaction in their use” (p. 778). Potential ways of doing this included the following: “Set a positive model. Demonstrate how

word play can be interesting and enjoyable by expressing the value in possessing a versatile vocabulary and by demonstrating how word learning can be interesting and fun” (p. 778).

“Have fun with words. Play word games linked to content topics and ones that may be done purely for entertainment and enjoyment” (p. 778).

Systematic and sustained approach. Based on their analysis of research on vocabulary

50


instruction, Baumann and colleagues (2003) recommended to teachers: “Establish vocabulary learning goals for your students” and “Provide struggling readers a systematic and sustained program of vocabulary instruction that teaches them more important words and efficient strategies in less time” (p. 777, citing Baker et al., 1998a; Kame’enui & Simmons, 1990; Stanovich, 1986).

Use of audio books can support students’ literacy development (Short and Fitzsimmons).

Training in morphological elements may be effective.

According to a review of research on adolescent English language learners, “The use of audio books can also support students’ literacy development, especially if students follow along with a written text; the recordings provide students with models for pronunciation and read-aloud fluency. For students whose spoken English is better than their reading skills, hearing the words read aloud can aid in vocabulary comprehension” (Short & Fitzsimmons, 2007, p. 37).

Morphemic analysis. Another general strategy that has been identified for vocabulary instruction is training students in morphemic analysis, which is described as “a word identification strategy in which the meanings of words can be determined or inferred by examining their meaningful parts,” including root words, prefixes, and suffixes (Baumann et al., 2003, p. 773). In their review of research, Baumann and colleagues (2003) determined, “Although several studies suggest that instruction in morphological elements may not be fruitful (e.g., Freyd & Baron, 1982; Otterman, 1955), other, perhaps more methodologically and pedagogically sound, experiments suggest that such training may be effective. Specifically, it appears as though elementary and middle grade students can be taught specific morphemic elements (e.g.,

Contextual analysis. According to Baumann and colleagues, “[R]esearch on teaching the process of contextual analysis as a transferable and generalizable skill is somewhat limited and at times equivocal (cf. Askov & Kamm, 1976; Hafner, 1965). However, experiments by Buikema and Graves (1993), Jenkins et al. (1989), Patberg et al. (1984), and Sternberg (1987) provide some evidence that instruction in contextual analysis may enable students to infer the meanings of words that have not been taught directly” (p. 772). Baumann et al. concluded: “Research on teaching contextual analysis as a transferable and generalizable strategy for word learning suggests that instruction does facilitate students’ ability to infer word meanings from surrounding context, although the relative efficacy of instruction in specific context clues versus simple practice in inferring meanings from context remains in question” (p. 774).

Targeting of appropriate vocabulary words. Several researchers have raised issues related to which specific words should be selected for direct vocabulary instruction. --Blachowicz and Fisher (2000) raised the concern that “the words chosen for instruction in commercial anthologies might be ones that many students already know” (p. 509, citing Ryder & Graves, 1994; Stallman et al., 1990). --Beck et al. (2002) identified “three things to keep in mind” in “evaluating words as possible candidates for instruction”: “How generally useful is the word? . . . How does

51


Graves & Hammond, 1980) and that they are able to spontaneously generalize (infer) the meaning of one word from a morphologically similar derivative (Wysocki & Jenkins, 1987). There is some indication that students can be taught specific morphemes (e.g., prefixes) that may enable them to unlock the meanings of unknown words containing these elements; also, there is some evidence that teaching students the meanings of unfamiliar words enables them to infer the meanings of morphologically related words” (p. 774).

Repeated exposures to words. A third principle for guiding vocabulary instruction identified by Blachowicz and Fisher (2000) was that “students should build on multiple sources of information to learn words through repeated exposures” (Blachowicz & Fisher, 2000, p. 504).

Elaborating further on this principle, Blachowicz and Fisher (2000) wrote, “Stahl and Fairbanks’ meta-analysis (1986) concluded that methods that focus on providing students with multiple sources of information result in superior word learning. Repeated exposures to a word can also be an important component of word learning. Stanley and Ginther (1991), working with sixth-grade students, supported earlier findings (Gipe, [1978–1979]; McKeown, 1985) that exposing a word in differing contexts facilitates word learning” (p. 508).

This finding connects to the National Reading Panel’s identification of “multiple, repeated

the word relate to other words, to ideas that students know or have been learning? . . . What does the word bring to the text or situation?” (p. 29). Beck and colleagues outlined a multitier system for classifying potential vocabulary words: “The first tier consists of the most basic words—clock, baby, happy, walk, and so on. Words in this tier rarely require instructional attention to their meanings in school. The third tier is made up of words whose frequency of use is quite low and often limited to specific domains. . . . The second tier contains words that are of high frequency for mature language users and are found across a variety of domains. Examples include coincidence, absurd, industrious, and fortunate. Because of the large role they play in a language user’s repertoire, rich knowledge of words in the second tier can have a powerful impact on verbal functioning. Thus, instruction directed toward Tier Two words can be most productive” (p. 8). Beck et al.’s tier model was described as a “promising approach” by Kamil (2003, p. 11).

Vocabulary learning outside the classroom. McKeown et al. (1985) found that fourth-grade students learned vocabulary better when they were motivated to look for targeted vocabulary words outside the classroom. Citing this result, Baumann et al. (2003) recommended that teachers should “promote student use of vocabulary learned at school in nonschool contexts” (p. 778). Along similar lines, they recommended that teachers should “provide students with activities that allow them to explore the richness and subtleties of word meanings in natural contexts” (p. 778, citing Scott, Butler, Asselin & Henry, 1996).

52


exposures,” including “extended and rich instruction of vocabulary (applying words to multiple contexts, etc.),” as a characteristic of effective vocabulary instruction methods in the research they surveyed (NICHHD, 2000, p. 4-22).

Assessment. Based on the variety of measures used to assess student vocabulary and the different results those measures can achieve, the National Reading Panel recommended that vocabulary should be assessed in multiple ways in the classroom. In particular, they argued that “the more closely the assessment matches the instructional context, the more appropriate the conclusions about the instruction will be” (NICHHD, 2000, p. 4-26).

“High-frequency and multiple, repeated exposures to vocabulary material” is essential (NICHHD, 2000).

Specific Strategies for Teaching Vocabulary

Preteach vocabulary (Baumann)

Introduce meanings in context (Beck)

Preteaching vocabulary . Based on their review of the research literature, Baumann et al. (2003) recommended, “Preteach critical vocabulary necessary to comprehend selections students read in basal readers and in content area textbooks” (Baumann et al., 2003, p. 778).

This strategy was also recommended by the National Reading Panel review of vocabulary research. The NRP recommended direct instruction in “vocabulary items that are required for a specific text to be read as part of the lesson” (NICHHD, 2000, pp. 4-24–4-25, citing four studies).6 This included pre-instruction of vocabulary before the reading or lesson (p. 4-25, citing three studies).7

Introducing word meanings in context . In contrast with the strategy of preteaching vocabulary, Beck et al. (2002) recommended, “[I]f the word is likely to affect comprehension of the story, then the most effective place to introduce word meanings may be at the moment the

6 Tomesen & Aarnoutse, 1998; White, Graves & Slater, 1990; Dole, Sloan & Trathen, 1995; Rinaldi, Sells & McLaughlin, 1997.

7 Brett, Rothlein & Hurley, 1996; Wixson, 1986; Carney, Anderson, Blackburn & Blessing, 1984.

53


Explain words in student-friendly terms (Beck).

Provide an instructional context (Beck).

Employ semantic mapping (Baumann).

Adolescents need visual support for new words (Short and Fitzsimmons).

word is met in the text. . . . [E]ven if students have been introduced to a word’s meaning before reading, their memory for a newly introduced word meaning may still be rather tentative, making it difficult to bring that meaning into the text” (pp. 42–43). This suggests a value to either teaching students new words in context, when students first encounter them, or reminding students of previously taught word meanings when they encounter them in context.

Student-friendly explanations of new words . One of the elements Beck and colleagues (2002) identified in the success of their instructional strategy with fourth-grade students was “student-friendly explanations of words,” which they characterized as incorporating “two basic principles . . . : (1) Characterize the word and how it is typically used. (2) Explain the meaning in everyday language” (p. 35).

Instructional contexts for vocabulary words . Another element Beck et al. (2002) recommended for introducing new words was providing an instructional context. Instructional contexts were described as differing from natural contexts in that the instructional context is deliberately constructed so that students can derive the correct meaning of the word from the context (p. 39). In other words, the surrounding words are deliberately designed to help students clarify the meaning of the new word.

Semantic mapping . Semantic mapping was identified by Baumann et al. (2003) as a specific research-supported vocabulary-instruction strategy that “organizes words related to a core concept into meaningful clusters” (p. 766).

Typically, it involves “[1] Selecting a key or central word from a reading selection about which the teacher can assume that the students have some familiarity. [2] Having the students free associate on the core word and generate a list of related words. [3] Organizing the words into categories (and perhaps labeling them). [4] Discussing alternate ways of categorizing the words, adding new words, and forming new categories” (Baumann et al., 2003, p. 766).

Baumann et al. (2003) found that “in the majority of studies . . . semantic mapping . . . appear[s] to be [an] effective strateg[y] for teaching students the meanings of new words that lie within a semantically related category [with] which students are familiar. In addition, there is evidence that [this technique] also promote[s] passage comprehension and [is] effective with learners of diverse ages, ethnic backgrounds, and reading abilities” (Baumann et al., 2003, p. 767).

Visual support for word learning . Describing the needs of adolescent English language learners, Short and Fitzsimmons (2007) identified several strategies that provide some form of visual support for vocabulary learning: “Students can learn new words through a variety of methods. Visuals, graphic organizers, [and] demonstrations . . . can help students better understand and remember words and their meanings” (p. 35).

54


Middle School and EL students respond to peer tutoring (NICHHD).

Engage students in written composition (Baumann).

Provide word manipulation in many contexts (Blachowicz and Fisher).

Combine vocabulary and writing instruction (Baumann).

Reciprocal peer tutoring . The National Reading Panel reviewed a research study in which reciprocal peer- tutoring was compared to traditional vocabulary instruction. The study found that “The 7th and 8th grade students in the reciprocal peer-tutoring group had significantly higher scores on weekly vocabulary quizzes” (NICHHD, 2000, p. 4-23, citing Malone & McLaughlin, 1997).

Along similar lines, Peterson et al. (2000) stated, “Opportunities for social interaction can help struggling second language learners acquire linguistic knowledge of English” (p. 14).

Oral and written composition . Based on their research review, Baumann et al. (2003) recommended, “Engage students in oral and written composition on a regular and sustained basis. Have students express themselves in writing and speech daily. Generative processes must be used and exercised if receptive vocabulary is to become expressive” (p. 778).

Along similar lines, Blachowicz and Fisher (2000) stated, “For retention and usage, student manipulation of words in many contexts seems to be critical. We cite . . . Stahl and Vancil's study (1986), which highlights the importance of discussion in learning and retention of new [content-area] vocabulary” (p. 513).

Baumann et al. (2003) reviewed one study in particular that showed the potential for writing as part of rich vocabulary instruction: “Duin and Graves (1987) explored the impact instruction in a set of semantically related words has on essay writing. Seventh-grade students were taught 13 target words over 6 days according to one of three methods:

(a) intensive vocabulary and writing instruction (similar to the McKeown et al., 1985, extended rich instruction, but it included many writing activities),

(b) intensive vocabulary alone (same as intensive vocabulary and writing, but no writing activities were included), or

(c) traditional vocabulary instruction (worksheet/definition activities). As measured by a multiple-choice vocabulary knowledge test, an analysis of the students’ use of target words in essays, and holistic analyses of the essays, the vocabulary and writing group consistently outperformed the other two groups, and the vocabulary alone group outperformed the traditional vocabulary group. The authors concluded that teaching a set of related words to students before they write not only results in students learning the meanings of those words but also improves the quality of their essays” (Baumann et al., 2003, p. 769).

Similarly, the authors of the Writing Next report claimed, “Using writing tasks to learn content offers students opportunities to expand their knowledge of

55


vocabulary” (Graham & Perin, 2007, p. 23).

…..

Demonstration of Vocabulary Development Alignmentin California Treasures

Summary of Research Recommendations for

Vocabulary

Demonstration of AlignmentGrades K–8

The strong, explicit vocabulary instruction in California Treasures is based on the research studies of Isabel Beck, Steven Stahl, and the overall guidance of Tim Shanahan.

The following concepts form the basis for the instruction:

Comprehension improves with well-developed oral vocabulary. Strong vocabulary instruction with emphasis on meaning directly affects reading

comprehension. Multiple exposures are necessary for internalization of new words. Instruction needs to include understandable definitions and use of the new words in sentences. Enhanced oral language lessons are important parts of the vocabulary instruction in all grades.

In Grades K–2, oral language lessons begin each day to help students build robust oral vocabularies. The oral language lessons in Grades 3–6 appear at the beginning of the week, in the “Prepare” Section.

Isabel Beck’s Vocabulary Routine is a strong component of vocabulary instruction in California Treasures:→ Define: Compose a student-friendly definition→ Example: Supply an example that connects to students’ understanding→ Ask: Connect the word to the students’ life experiences

Every week, vocabulary instruction in Grades 1–6 begins with a short story for the purpose of word introduction for the three paired selections that follow. The vocabulary lessons use Isabel Beck’s Routine. The new vocabulary is repeated frequently throughout the three selections with additional minilessons at point of use (POU).

56


All Leveled Readers—including the EL Reader—continue to include all of the vocabulary words that are introduced in the first short story of the week. (The EL Reader is a modified version of the On Level Reader.)

Guidance for flexible small group instruction is determined through Quick Checks and includes explicit instruction for Approaching, On Level, Beyond, and EL.

Enhanced Vocabulary Strategy Instruction begins weekly in first grade, Unit 4, and includes the strategies of dictionary, word parts, and context clues. Vocabulary strategy instruction continues every week in Grades 2–6 and expands the vocabulary strategies taught in those grades.

Vocabulary development begins in kindergarten. Direct instruction in vocabulary begins at the second-grade level and continues in third grade and above.

English-Language ArtsCalifornia Content Standards Kindergarten1.0 Vocabulary and Concept Development 1.17 Identify and sort common words in basic categories (e.g., colors, shapes, foods).1.18 Describe common objects and events in both general and specific language.

Grades 2 and 3: 1.7 Understand and explain common antonyms and synonyms; 1.8 Use knowledge of individual words in unknown compound words to predict their meaning; 1.9 Know the meaning of simple prefixes and suffixes.

California Treasures Examples for Kindergarten and First Grade: In kindergarten, vocabulary words are discussed in relation to the selection in the Read-Aloud Anthology. Students draw pictures of the words. High-Frequency Word Cards are used for review and assessment of vocabulary words. In Grades K–1, exposure to new words and concepts comes through oral vocabulary development.

Kindergarten Example: TE Unit 1, p. 129. Review Same and Different; TE Unit 1, p. 111. Same and Different Colors; TE Unit 1, p. 52. Size Words, big, small, tall, short.

Kindergarten Example: TE Unit 1, p. 102. Oral Grammar Naming Words (Nouns). Model. Use the Big Book, The Picnic at Apple Park, to introduce naming words. Nouns can name people, animals, places, or things.

Kindergarten EL Example: Identify academic language. TE Unit 1, p. 160. Language Objective—Use academic language in classroom conversations. This week’s academic words are boldfaced throughout the lesson. The teacher defines the word in context and provides a clear example from the selection. EL students generate examples or words with similar meanings. Newcomer Survival Skill: Basic Requests.

First-Grade EL Example: TE Unit 1, p. 131EE. English Learners—Academic Language. Use academic language in classroom conversation. The TE supplies a chart of theme words, key selection words, and strategy and skill words for the EL book, StudentWorks Plus, “Soccer.”

Primary Grades Example: Grades 2–3: In second and third grades, the words are taken directly from the main selection. For example in second grade, Unit 6, Week 1, the theme is “Creating Stories.” After the teacher accesses prior knowledge, students make a graphic organizer of concept words that expands their prior-knowledge vocabulary. Next, the teacher begins the routine (define, example, ask) for vocabulary introduction based upon prior knowledge. Then a vocabulary strategy is introduced. In this sample lesson, the strategy is to use word parts such as Greek and Latin roots to understand new words. The vocabulary words are

57


English-Language ArtsCalifornia Content Standards Grade 5Vocabulary and Concept Development

1.2 Use word origins to determine the meaning of unknown words.1.3 synonyms, antonyms, and homographs.1.4 Greek and Latin Roots; and 1.5 figurative and metaphorical use of words in context.

highlighted in a selected text— for example, Vocabulary/Comprehension Selection, Making Stories Happen. On Day 2, students expand their vocabulary by categorizing the words in a graphic organizer. Next, students review the words in context using Vocabulary Transparency 53.

The teacher uses guided practice first, and then students independently complete the exercise. Partners check each other’s answers. After reading the main selection as a group, students typically use vocabulary words in a creative form of writing. On Day 3, students use a transparency to explore Latin roots, and then they complete a page in their Practice Book using Greek and Latin roots. During Days 4 and 5, students use vocabulary words in context and review and assess vocabulary words. This weekly procedure is typical for the second- and third-grade levels.

K–8 and EL:Vocabulary words for all grades are taught using authentic contexts and are boldfaced in the reading selections. California Treasures engages students in writing and speaking tasks that help them incorporate new words into their expressive vocabulary. The program uses a variety of instructional aids and devices to teach vocabulary to students, including interactive exercises with immediate feedback, spoken text, semantic mapping to complete word webs, sample sentences, and word cards.

Upper Grades: By the end of fifth grade, students use context clues, Greek and Latin roots, and prior knowledge to predict the meaning of difficult words. Students express orally and in writing why and how they used specific vocabulary strategies.

Multiple-meaning words are taught in conjunction with the literature selections. Additionally, teacher materials include a suggestion to focus on words with multiple meanings in reading context.

California Treasures Vocabulary Development Scope and SequenceGrades 1–8: Identify academic language; identify salient features of vocabulary; and use context clues—word, sentence, paragraph; definition, example, restatement, description.Grades 3–5: (in addition to the above) Synonyms, antonyms, and opposites; use word identification strategies; multiple-meaning words; use dictionary to locate meanings, pronunciation, and derivatives; compound words; base (root) words and their derivations; prefixes and suffixes; Greek and Latin roots; denotation and connotation; words families; inflectional endings; use a thesaurus; use reference sources; homographs; homophones; figurative language; idioms; and analogies.

Middle Grades: Add to the above shades of meaning; origins; and morphology. By the end of fifth grade, students use context clues, Greek and Latin roots, and prior knowledge to predict the meaning of difficult words. Students express orally and in writing why and how they used specific vocabulary strategies. Strategies used in California Treasures include accessing prior

58


Reading instruction includes a combination of strategies, both direct and indirect, for building vocabulary.

It is not as important for us to build students’ existing

knowledge as it is for them to become aware

of their prior knowledge and how to develop it

and use it to scaffold

their own understandings ~ Lapp, Flood, & Block

knowledge of vocabulary words; making graphic organizers; and using words in context—both orally and in writing.

Other strategies are introduced as a unit unfolds: recognizing antonyms, base words, comparatives and superlatives, compound words, and context clues. Students learn to recognize homophones, inflected nouns and verbs, multiple-meaning words, prefixes, suffixes, and synonyms. Students also use syntactic and semantic cues, word parts and families. They use dictionaries, thesauruses, and glossaries to find word meanings. Typically, by the end of fifth grade, students analyze words with opposite meanings and use a thesaurus or dictionary to find antonyms for words in the main selection. Students use vocabulary at the end of each unit in a cumulative research project. They investigate indices and glossaries to find pertinent information or confirm word meanings and to clarify shades of meaning.

Middle School Example: After each reading selection, students complete an activity designed specifically for reinforcing vocabulary in the selection. Students practice using the words in other contexts. They use graphic organizers to illustrate the meanings of words.

Vocabulary is taught using a variety of specific instructional methods such as context-based approaches, restructuring, and pre-instruction in vocabulary before the reading lesson begins.

In California Treasures, pre-instruction in vocabulary occurs before the reading lesson begins and takes the form of accessing prior knowledge regarding vocabulary meaning. Students make graphic organizers at the beginning of the lesson and add to them as the lesson unfolds.The curriculum uses a context-based approach—students derive word meanings from context clues. A true “definitional” approach is not used; however, students compose definitions from contextual information using vocabulary skills and strategies such as restructuring. Vocabulary does not come from lists of words that are unrelated to the reading selections. Teachers use questioning strategies that expose vocabulary words and definitions that are required for a specific text as part of the lesson. Spellings and definitions are confirmed by using reference materials.

K–8 and EL: California Treasures includes strategies that help teachers ascertain prior knowledge and ELs develop and activate background knowledge and experience. Pre-reading activities help students connect new learnings to prior knowledge and experience. Teacher materials and professional development include suggestions for activating prior knowledge. The program includes features that help build students’ general background knowledge in a variety of ways, including direct vocabulary instruction, pre-reading activities, and reteaching suggestions.

Middle Grades Example: Each selection in every unit begins with a pre-reading section: “Before You Read.” The pre-reading activities include making prior knowledge connections. Sometimes this is accomplished with “Partner Talk,” as in Grade 8, Unit 5, p. 640. Before reading “O Captain! My Captain!” by Walt Whitman, students talk to a partner about how the death of someone you have never met can have a deep impact on your feelings. Next, students Build Background by finding out how the

59


author was affected by the brutality of the Civil War. Students are invited to “Log On” to Literature and do an Author Search to gain additional background knowledge.

Storybooks are read aloud to children.

English-Language ArtsCalifornia Content Standards Kindergarten3.0 Literary Response and Analysis3.2 Identify everyday print materials (e.g., storybooks).

In California Treasures kindergarten classes, vocabulary words are discussed in relation to the selection in the Read-Aloud Anthology. Students discuss the author and illustrator as well as the characters in the story. They analyze the illustrations and photographs. Their reading is done, for the most part, in the large group. Kindergartners draw pictures of the vocabulary words and re-create their own storybook scenarios. Students in first through third grades also enjoy hearing stories. They learn to emulate the teacher’s oral expressions, inflections, and pauses. Children read to each other in peer groups or with partners. Through the Home-School Connection, they are encouraged to read to those at home, and family members are encouraged to read to them.

Students are given both information about the words’ definitions and examples of the words’ usages in a variety of contexts.

ELD StandardsReading Grades6–8. EA5. Use a standard dictionary to determine the meanings of unknown words.

Using the California Treasures curriculum, students apply words to multiple contexts beginning with what they already know about the words. They extend their knowledge through cross-curricular activities, research, and creative writing. They use vocabulary words in their personal journal entries. They add suffixes to base words to create new words that they use in creative writing. They locate the words in a variety of genres such as newspaper articles and song lyrics. Students learn to think of words in terms of cultural perspectives and applications.

Students are taught to analyze word meanings based on context in content areas. A cross-curriculum approach, as recommended by Reading Next, is advocated in the California Treasures curriculum.

The “Glossary/Glosario” section of the MM-H/Glencoe Literature course textbooks contains a side-by-side English/Spanish vocabulary list of words found in the middle school (6–8) literature selections. The definitions of the words are given in both languages according to the ways the words were used in the selections. A pronunciation key is also provided along with the page in the text where the word was used.

Vocabulary items are derived from content learning materials.

California Treasures vocabulary words related to the weekly theme are taken directly from the weekly main selection. The words are also reinforced in the High-Frequency Word Routine and the Vocabulary/Comprehension selection. The student Practice Books provide further word exploration. Student readers and the Classroom Library as well as selected trade books reinforce vocabulary development.

All vocabulary is learned and used in the context of reading.

Words are not used or taught in isolation. After each reading selection, students use the vocabulary in the text to respond to questions about the

60


selection. They transfer the meanings to other contexts through activities that are designed specifically to reinforce the meanings of the words. In the middle grades, Academic Vocabulary is taken directly from the reading selections and applied in other contexts immediately after reading. A typical example is in Grade 8, Unit 2, p. 264.

Vocabulary is taught through active (question-answering) student participation.

Throughout California Treasures, K–8 students are given repeated exposure to vocabulary material. They participate in student-initiated conversation in the context of listening to stories related to the theme and genre of the main selection. The student Practice Books contain sentence excerpts from the main selection that include targeted vocabulary words.Students substitute vocabulary words with synonyms. Their interaction with vocabulary is always active—not a passive treatment—beginning with prior knowledge and continuing with creative writing and research that uses words in context. They have repeated exposure to vocabulary material throughout the week as well as later in comprehensive review.

A typical activity can be found in “Respond and Think Critically,” at the end of the student selections 6–8. Students are asked to paraphrase events that take place in the story. They predict word meaning and choose sentences that best use vocabulary words to express intended meaning. (Grade 8, Unit 4, p. 570).

Word recognition is regularly assessed in multiple ways.

California Treasures assessment matches instructional context. In their Practice Books, students choose vocabulary words from a list to complete each sentence. They write original sentences using the vocabulary words. Words are highlighted in the reading selections, and students stop at each word and identify clues to the meanings. Using transparencies, students model how to figure out word meanings. They suggest or review the meanings as well. They complete graphic organizers such as semantic webs, and they add words to the Word Wall. Students also use a Practice Book page each week to demonstrate pronunciation and comprehension of vocabulary words.

61


Components of Reading Comprehension 5“Text comprehension can be improved by instruction that helps readers use specific

comprehension strategies.” —Put Reading First (Armbruster, Lehr & Osborn, 2003, p. 49)

A. What is text comprehension?

Comprehension is often identified as the primary goal of reading: Children and adults read in order to understand. If children can “read” words but cannot understand them, they are merely decoding. Real reading requires understanding. Over the past 30 years, reading researchers have come to understand that such comprehension is not merely passive, but is the result of active involvement on the part of the reader.

B. Why is text comprehension instruction important?

Researchers have identified a variety of strategies effective readers use to actively comprehend texts. Additional research has verified the positive impact of teaching such strategies to students as a means of improving comprehension. Two discussions on instructional effectiveness:

Effectiveness of comprehension instruction Effects on specific skill areas

In examining research on reading comprehension instruction, the National Reading Panel (NRP) identified 16 broad categories, or methods, of comprehension instruction. Of these, seven methods were identified as having “a firm scientific basis for concluding that they improve comprehension in normal readers” (NICHHD, 2000, p. 4-42)—demonstrating that comprehension can be improved through explicit, formal instruction. Five of these methods were in use by the third-grade level, and are thus research-verified as appropriate and effective for instruction in the early elementary grades.

Similarly, a review of research on early

According to the NRP, research “favors the conclusion that teaching of a variety of reading comprehension strategies leads to increased learning of the strategies, to specific transfer of learning, to increased memory and understanding of new passages, and, in some cases, to general improvements in comprehension” (NICHHD, 2000, p. 4-52).

62


childhood reading commissioned by the National Research Council (NRC) concluded that “Explicit instruction in comprehension strategies has been shown to lead to improvement” (Snow, Burns & Griffin, 1998, p. 322).

C. Who benefits from

text comprehension

instruction?

Multiple Grade Levels. The NRP’s review of research verified the effectiveness of some methods of text comprehension instruction as early as the second- or third-grade level and ranging up to ninth grade. The NRC, based on its interpretation of the research evidence, recommended such instruction as early as the kindergarten and first-grade levels, advocating explicit instruction on text comprehension “throughout the early grades” (Snow, Burns, & Griffin 1998, p. 323).

D. Research Recommendations

Range and

Scope of

Instruction

Early Grades. According to the NRC report recommendations for reading instruction in kindergarten through third grade, “Throughout the early grades, reading curricula should include explicit instruction on strategies such as summarizing the main idea, predicting events and outcomes of upcoming text, drawing inferences, and monitoring for coherence and misunderstandings. This instruction can take place while adults read to students or when students read [to] themselves” (Snow, Burns & Griffin, 1998, p. 323).

Upper Elementary Grades

Of the seven instructional methods verified by the NRP as having a research base, one (comprehension monitoring) was in use by second grade in the studies examined, and an additional four were in use by third grade. The NRP concluded that “The instruction of comprehension appears to be effective on Grades 3 through 6” (NICHHD, 2000, p. 4-51). This suggests a solid research base for including comprehension instruction as part of the reading curriculum by the third-grade level.

Middle GradesAccording the Readence et al. (2004), “As students become more adept, the demonstration and guidance teachers provide should be faded, or withdrawn, so students can be moved toward independence in their reading and learning” (p. 10). This aligns with calls for scaffolded reading comprehension instruction in Reading Next and other sources.

63


Instructional Methods and

Features

Specific effective methods

Methods that were identified by the NRP as having “a firm scientific basis for concluding that they improve comprehension in normal readers” (NICHHD, 2000, p. 4-42) and that were used by third grade in the research studies included the following

Question answering (17 studies, mostly grades 3–5), in which teachers ask questions about the text.Question generation (27 studies, grades 3–9), in which students “generate questions during reading” (NICHHD, 2000, p. 4-45).

Story structure (17 studies, Grades 3–6), in which students are instructed in the “content and organization of stories,” including use of graphic organizers in conjunction with story content and structure (NICHHD, 2000, p. 4-45)

Comprehension monitoring (22 studies, Grades 2–6), in which students learn how to monitor their own understanding of texts using procedures such as Think Aloud.

Cooperative learning (10 studies, grades 3–6), in which “peers instruct or interact over the use of reading strategies” (NICHHD, 2000, p. 4-45)

Multiple strategiesIn looking at 36 studies featuring instruction that combined a variety of different comprehension methods, the NRP concluded that “considerable success has been found in improving comprehension by instructing students on the use of more than one strategy during the course of reading” (NICHHD, 2000, p. 4-47). One particular advantage of this approach is its ability to guide students through the kind of “coordinated and flexible use of several different kinds of strategies” that is required for skilled reading (NICHHD, 2000, p. 4-47).

Instructional model In its discussion of the research, the NRP identified a four-part model for building student comprehension strategies in which “teachers demonstrate, explain, model, and implement interaction with students in teaching them how to comprehend a text” (NICHHD, 2000, p. 4-47, citing 6 studies).

Regular assessment According to the NRC report, “Conceptual knowledge and comprehension strategies should be regularly assessed in the classroom, permitting timely and effective instructional response where difficulty or delay is

64


apparent” (Snow, Burns & Griffin, 1998, p. 323).

Demonstration of Comprehension Development in Treasures

Summary of Research Recommendations for Comprehension

Demonstration of Alignment

“… by grade eight students read one million words annually on their own …”California Content Standards

Comprehension strategies are routines or procedures in California Treasures that teachers can use to help students become independent, active, and engaged

readers who use multiple strategies as they read.

The strategies in the curriculum are written to do the following: Explain the purpose of the strategy and when to use it Model the use of the strategy while reading (teacher and student Think Aloud) Offer guided practice in using the strategy Provide opportunities for students to demonstrate the use of the strategy Teach students to be flexible in the use of the strategies.

Authors Tim Shanahan, Scott Paris, and Jan Dole provided research and guidance for the inclusion of the Comprehension Strategies. The instruction is based on the

research of Bloom, Marzano, and Harvey.

California Content Standards (2.0) Reading Comprehension (Focus on Informational Materials) for sixth grade state: “Students read and understand grade-level-appropriate material. They describe and connect the essential ideas, arguments, and perspectives of the text by using their knowledge of text structure, organization, and purpose. The selections in Recommended

65


Literature, Kindergarten through Grade Twelve illustrate the quality and complexity of the materials to be read by students. In addition, by grade eight students read one million words annually on their own, including a good representation of grade-level-appropriate narrative and expository text (e.g., classic and contemporary literature, magazines, newspapers, online information). In grade six, students continue to make progress toward this goal.”

In kindergarten through third grade, the curriculum includes explicit instruction on strategies such as (1) summarizing the main idea; (2) predicting events and outcomes of upcoming text; (3) making inferences; and (4) monitoring for coherence and misunderstandings.

English-Language ArtsCalifornia Content StandardsSubstrand: Structural Features of Informational MaterialsR K.2.1 Locate the title, table of contents, name of author, and name of illustrator.Substrand: Comprehension and Analysis of Grade-Level-Appropriate TextR K.2.3 Connect to life experiences the information and events in texts. K.2.4 Retell familiar stories.W 5.2.2.a Write responses to literature. Demonstrate an understanding of a literary work.LAS 5.2.3.a Deliver oral responses to literature.R 5.2.4 Draw inferences, conclusions, or generalizations about text and support them with textual evidence and prior knowledge.

Examples of alignment in California Treasures:

1. Summarizing the Main Idea: Students use graphic organizers to summarize the author’s craft, for example. They use outlines and journals to keep track of main events and actions. They learn to identify pertinent facts and summarize the main ideas.

2. Predicting Events and Outcomes: Before beginning to read the main selection, students preview the title and illustrations and make predictions. Students record their predictions and questions that they want to have answered as they read.

3. Making Inferences: The teacher explains facts about the text or calls attention to the actions of the characters and asks questions to help students understand why events occur. Students state reasons for believing why story events occurred as they did [cause and effect].

4. Monitoring for Understandings: Students monitor comprehension by analyzing text structure. They make decisions about the selection based on text and picture clues and prior knowledge.

5. Draw Conclusions: Students reread the selection for comprehension, paying close attention to the text structure. Using what they know from real life, they draw conclusions about the text’s topic. They use a graphic organizer (Transparency) to record their conclusions. After they complete the Conclusion Chart, they share their facts and conclusions with the class.

Kindergarten Example: TE Unit 1, p. 97. Preview the cover, the title, and the names of the author and illustrator.

Kindergarten Comprehension Scope and Sequence Examples: Compare and contrast, including character, setting, plot, topics; classify and categorize; fantasy and reality; main idea and supporting details; problem/resolution; and sequence/chronological order.

Kindergarten Example: TE Unit 1, p. 149. After reading, ask

66


children to retell the story and to share personal responses. Did the story remind you of eating with your family? What foods do you and your family like to eat?

Seventh-Grade Example: California Treasures Glencoe Literature, Unit 1, pp. 14–16.Identify Cause and Effect Relationships in The Wise Old Woman, a folktale by Yoshiko Uchida. Students use their cause-and-effect graphic organizer to help explain why the farmer goes against the lord’s decree. They also describe the effect of his decision. (Analysis)

Typical Middle School Example: Students explain a story’s plot. They include the five main parts: (1) background information, called the exposition, introduces the character and the situation; (2) the conflict is a problem that causes the events in the story to take place; (3) complication, or rising action, is what occurs when the main character tries to overcome the conflict; (4) the climax is the plot’s turning point, which resolves the conflict; and the falling action is the resolution of the conflict and the events that follow it. Throughout their study in California Treasures, they describe the events in the selections that identify which main part the event is in. They describe these events in writing.

Also: Students summarize the selection by paraphrasing important events using their own words and Draw Conclusions: After reading “Through My Eyes,” by Ruby Bridges, students infer from the selection why African American parents wanted their children to go to white schools.

Eighth-Grade Example: Unit 1, p. 87. Determine Main Idea and Supporting Details. Students use a graphic organizer to record main ideas and supporting details in “The Question of Popularity,” Time Magazine.

Comprehension instruction begins in second grade and continues as an integral part of the third-grade reading curriculum.

English-Language ArtsCalifornia Content StandardsKindergartenR K.2.5 Ask and answer questions about essential elements of a text.

Examples in California Treasures:Strategies such as Analyze Story Structure, Generate Questions, Monitor Comprehension, Reread, Summarize, Visualize,Draw Conclusions, Make Predictions, Retell, and Determine MainIdea and Details are taught in each unit levels 2–3. The skill—analyze text structure, for example–is pre-taught using the Student Book and applied to a short passage before students read the longer main selection. Students are guided through the application of the strategy with the help of graphic organizers.

Students use higher-order thinking skills during “Think and Compare”: (1) Character and Setting; (2) Syntheses; (3) Text-to-Self; (4) Text-to-

67


First GradeR 1.2.1; R 1.3.1; R 1.3.3

English-Language ArtsCalifornia Content Standards Grade SixComprehension and Analysis of Grade-Level-Appropriate Text

2.4 Create outlines and summaries. 2.5 Follow multiple-step instructions for preparing applications.Expository Critique.2.6 Determine the adequacy and appropriateness of the evidence for an author’s conclusions.2.7 Make reasonable assertions about a text through accurate, supporting citations.2.8 Note instances of unsupported inferences, fallacious reasoning, persuasion, and propaganda in text.

World; and (5) Text-to-Text to answer questions about elements of the text.

Kindergarten Example: TE Unit 1, p. 134. Build Robust Vocabulary. Use the following questions to check children’s understanding: Why would a trip to a park be exciting? What would flowers look like if you gathered them? What is more exhausting—watching television or playing baseball? How do children cooperate when they play sports? What kinds of activities do you do in a park?

First-Grade Example: TE Unit 1, p. T2. “The Chick and the Duckling,” Strategy: Analyze Story Structure. The teacher uses a Think

Aloud to help the children to compare and contrast characters.

Graphic Organizers are found at the beginning of every main selection providing students with a tool to organize information, to help them see relationships, and to make connections. Graphic organizers appear again at the end of every main selection to use for summarizing. Retelling Cards at the end of selections in K–2 include modeling and guided prompts for checking comprehension. (Examples: Grade 1, Unit 1, pp. 14/15, 27; Grade 2, Unit 1, pp. 42, 65; Grade 3, Unit 2, pp. 182, 205.)

California Treasures Comprehension Scope and SequencePrimary (1–3) Author’s point of view; author’s purpose; classify and categorize; drawing conclusions; making generalizations; and written and oral instructions/directions.Upper Grades (4–5) Fact and opinion; making judgments; and implied message.Middle School (6–8) Persuasion/persuasive techniques.

Upper Grades Example: In Unit 2, Week 5, of the sixth-grade Treasures, the comprehension skill is Sequence. The comprehension strategy is Summarize. In Grade 6, Unit 6, Week 3, the comprehension strategy is Summarize, the paired selection skill is Functional Documents (forms).

The Main Selection for Unit 6, Week 1, is Leonardo's Horse. The comprehension strategy is Generate Questions, and the paired selection strategy is Text Feature; the skill is Primary Source.

California Treasures Glencoe LiteratureEighth-Grade Example: PE, p. 524. Reading skill: Analyze Evidence. Students select probable evidence to support the author’s conclusion about global warming.Also, Unit 1, p. 229, Media Workshop. Students analyze standards of behavior related to the press.On p. 239, in a small group activity, students discuss excerpts and evidence in “Poe’s Tales of Terror.” They examine the author’s mood,

68


note details about his thoughts and actions, and make a general statement on the basis of these details.

California Treasures Glencoe LiteratureEighth-Grade Example: PE, p. 229. Media Workshop—Media Ethics. “Cite It”: Give credit to the source. Acknowledge where the information came from (with examples). “Try It”—Analyze Media Ethics.

California Treasures Glencoe LiteratureEighth Grade Example: PE, p. 566. Media Workshop—Propaganda. After students study and recognize types of propaganda, they make a chart showing strategies that advertisers use to make their products seem appealing. With a partner, they analyze a television commercial and write a letter to the advertisers, giving them feedback on the impact the commercial has on them. (Also aligns with California Content Standards, Listening and Speaking 1.7.)

The teacher asks questions about the selection.

English-Language ArtsCalifornia Content StandardsKindergartenSubstrand: Comprehension and Analysis of Grade-Level-Appropriate TextR K.2.2 Use pictures and context to make predictions about story content.KindergartenSubstrand: Narrative Analysis of Grade-Level-Appropriate TextR K.3.1 Distinguish fantasy from realistic text.R K.3.2 Identify types of every day print materials (e.g., story books, poems, newspaper, signs, labels).R K.3.3 Identify characters, settings, and important events.

English-Language ArtsCalifornia Content Standards Kindergarten Reading

In the California Treasures Teacher’s Edition, teachers are regularly prompted to ask students questions pertaining to the reading selection to maintain and increase comprehension. Such questions help students to retell the story or preview/predict the plot of a story. Examples: What kind of story do you think this is? What do you think it will be about? Was she worried? Why do you think she tells us this?

Kindergarten Example: TE Unit 1, p. 190. Skill: Make Predictions. Look for clues on pages 8–9; Think Aloud.

Kindergarten Example: In Unit 2, Weeks 1–3, the comprehension strategy is Ask Questions and again in Unit 9, Weeks 1–3.

Kindergarten Example: TE Unit 1, p. 212. Genre: Fiction. Review fiction: “Jennifer Bing, Why Won’t You Sing?” It is a story that did not really happen. Remind children that Peter’s Chair is also a fictional story.

Kindergarten Example: TE Unit 1, p. 202. Informational Text. Use Photographs.

Kindergarten Example: ES.3.b. Students know changes in weather occur from day to day and across seasons, affecting Earth and its inhabitants. California Treasures also contains specific content lessons using informational text. For example, in Unit 1, the Content Big Book Extension is Wonders Vol. 1: “A Favorite Season.” The lesson includes deciduous trees, weather changes that affect plants, seasonal weather changes, and a discussion of dormancy.

Kindergarten Example: TE Unit 1, p. 135. Comprehension skill:

69


2.0 Comprehension2.5 Ask and answer questions about essential elements of a text. First Grade: Students generate and respond to essential questions. 2.2 Respond to who, what, when, where, and how questions.Second Grade2.4 Ask clarifying questions.Third Grade 2.2 Ask questions and support answers.

Identify Setting. Create a chart to compare the settings in The Picnic at Apple Park and “The Squeaky Old Bed.”

First-Grade Example: In Unit 3, Weeks 4 and 5, the comprehension strategy is Generate Questions, as well as in Unit 5, Weeks 3–5. Unit 6, Week 2, emphasizes the text feature: Question/Answer format.

Second-Grade Example: In Unit 2, Weeks 4 and 5; and Unit 4, Weeks 1–3 the comprehension strategy is Generate Questions.

Third-Grade Example: In Unit 2, Weeks 1, 2, and 4, the comprehension strategy is Generate Questions.

Fourth-Grade Example: In Unit 2, Weeks 2, 4, and 5, the comprehension strategy is Generate Questions. This is also the case in Unit 4, Weeks 1 and 2.

The Treasures curriculum uses the QAR (Question Answer Relationship) questioning model. QAR basically defines itself. It is the relationship between questions and their answers. There are four basic types of question/answer relationships:

1. Right There -- In this type of QAR, the answer is found in the text. Also, the words in the question and the words in the answer are usually in the same sentence. The reader can point to the answer.

2. Think and Search -- In this type of QAR, the answer is found in the text. However, the words in the question and the words in the answer are not found in the same sentence. The reader must put together different parts of the text to get the answer.

3. Author and Me (or Author and You) -- The answer is not found in the text. The reader has to put together the information the author provides with information the reader already knows to come up with the answer.

4. On My Own (or On Your Own) -- The reader does not use the text at all to answer the question. The answer is based on the reader's opinions and experiences.

This method is used daily in “conversational reading” as a way of increasing comprehension.

Upper Grades Example: Develop Comprehension Skill: Students develop questions about the characters in a selection and cite specific examples from the text.

70


Students generate questions during reading.

Answering questions is a consistent part of the lessons in all grades. Answering questions is a strategy used with Shared Reading of Big Books, the Student Book selection, trade books, and Leveled Readers. “Preview and Predict” is used in the “Prepare to Read” part of the lesson, in the introduction of each main selection, and at the end of the main selection with “Return to Predictions and Purposes.”

Example: Students preview the title of the main selection and make predictions about it. They write about their predictions and list questions that they want to have answered through their reading. They question each other in small group discussions and in pairs. Students learn specific strategies (steps) for answering questions: 1. Analyze Text Structure/Draw Conclusions; 2. Evaluate; 3. Text-to-Self; 4. Text-to-World; and 5. Text-to-Text.

Students use graphic organizers to show story content and structure.

In California Treasures, Teaching Charts and/or Graphic Organizer Transparencies are available for students to use to reinforce reading comprehension by displaying the sequence of a story. They are also used to evaluate the author’s purpose and to analyze characters and setting. Students make character maps, Venn diagrams, story maps, and charts. By the beginning of fourth grade, as students read they fill in problems and resulting actions that lead to their solutions in a Problem and Solution Chart. They also fill in Main Idea Webs and Description Webs that show details that the author uses in the main selection.

Students use procedures such as Think Aloud to monitor their own understanding of texts.

As a strategy to develop comprehension, teachers using California Treasures are encouraged to model the Think-Aloud Strategy for students to encourage them to use this strategy on their own. Students set a purpose for reading by concentrating on a focus question.

Peers use reading strategies to interact with each other.

Example: Students read story selections together as a class or in pairs. During partner-reading, one child practices taking turns reading the story to another. They give feedback to each other. Students are also encouraged to role-play their favorite scenes from a selection with each other to further improve comprehension development. In the upper grades, students give informal reading inventories to each other and check the Words Comprehended per Minute (WCPM) of peers.

Students use multiple strategies to improve comprehension.

Students are taught strategies through California Treasures to improve reading and listening comprehension. Such strategies include setting a purpose for reading and identifying questions that they want to have answered as they read; analyzing and identifying text structure, generating questions while reading, summarizing, using graphic organizers, and visualizing. In addition, students are also taught to

71


“Think Aloud” while reading, role play with a peer, talk and write about what has been read, and use illustrations to preview and predict story structure.

Typical Middle School Example: Unit 5, Grade 8, p. 630, California Treasures Glencoe Literature. In the Time Magazine article, “A Father’s Daring Trek,” a Tibetan man takes his 6-year-old daughter on a dangerous journey. Students first set a purpose for reading; next, they preview the article; finally, they analyze the cultural context paying close attention to the details that reveal the setting, values, and behaviors characteristic of the Tibetan culture. As they read, students note details that they learn about life in the towns of Lhasa and Dharmsala.

Teachers use a multiple-step instructional model.

English-Language ArtsCalifornia Content StandardsKindergarten1.0 Listening and Speaking Substrand: ComprehensionLAS K.1.1 Understand and follow one- and two-step directions.

Example: Teachers demonstrate, explain, model, and implement interaction with students in teaching them how to comprehend a text. A typical second-grade comprehension lesson flows as follows: The teacher begins by ascertaining student prior knowledge. Next, a comprehension strategy is presented such as Analyzing Text Structure. This is followed by the introduction of a specific comprehension skill such as Draw Conclusions. Students are then asked to Preview and Predict using the title and illustrations. The genre is introduced and the definition of the genre type is read from the Student Book. Next, students discuss the “Read to Find Out” question in the Student Book. Students are reminded to use the Conclusion Chart in the Practice Book to record facts and conclusions that they draw about the selection. Finally, students set their own purpose for reading. Throughout reading, comprehension is developed through Teacher Think Alouds and questioning. Students retell the story and complete a summative assessment, Comprehension Check.

Kindergarten Example: TE Unit 1, p. 182. Children follow simple directions for sitting in different places in the room; e.g., Sit on the chair; Sit on the floor.

Conceptual knowledge and comprehension strategies are regularly assessed in the classroom.

English-Language ArtsCalifornia Content StandardsLAS 1.2.1

Comprehension is assessed both formally and informally, and the curriculum uses both formative and summative forms of assessment. Comprehension assessment begins when reading begins. Quick Check Observations are used throughout the passage as an informal means of student comprehension assessment. By the end of the week, Weekly Tests are administered to assess conceptual knowledge and comprehension strategies. In addition, Unit Tests and Benchmark Tests are regularly administered to monitor student progress.

Kindergarten Example: By using the TE End-of-Unit Assessment for Unit 1, the teacher is able to clearly diagnose the following elements: Reading Comprehension; Vocabulary/High-Frequency Words; Phonemic Awareness/Phonics; Text Features; and Grammar, Mechanics, and Usage. If the child gets less than 75% correct on the assessment of any of these components, the teacher can follow the “Prescribe” suggestions and use

72


the Intervention Kit to help students correct errors. First-Grade Example: TE Unit 1, p. 62L. Build Background: Access Prior Knowledge. Discuss how children are growing up and how everybody changes as they grow. Make a chart of children’s thoughts.Typical EL Universal Access for Primary Students: During discussions of the main selections, the teacher builds on students’ responses to help them move to the next level of language acquisition. For example, if a child answers “bigger” to the question say, “Yes, we are growing bigger and changing in many ways.” Have the students repeat the sentence.

English-Language ArtsCalifornia Content Standards Grade Six 2.0 Reading Comprehension (Focus on Informational Materials).2.1 Identify the structural features of popular media.R 3.5 Identify the speaker and recognize the difference between first- and third-person narration.

ELA/ELD Standards Reading Grades 6–8 Vocabulary and Concept Development. 1.1 Analyze idioms, analogies, metaphors, and similes to infer the literal and figurative meanings of phrases.

Sixth-Grade Example:Week 1, Unit 5, the specific comprehension skill is Author’s Purpose; the fluency emphasis is Phrase-Cued Text: Pauses, stops, and intonation; the paired selection strategy is Text Feature; and the highlighted skill is Schedules.

California Treasures Glencoe LiteratureEighth-Grade Example: Media Workshop, p. 208. Students discuss media elements in the story of “Huge, Freed Pet Pythons Invade Florida Everglades.” They identify and give examples of text and content, visuals, and audio elements.

In Unit 5, Week 2 of sixth grade, the specific comprehension skill is Compare and Contrast; the fluency emphasis is Echo-Reading: Punctuation and characters' voices; the paired selection strategy is Literary Elements; and the highlighted skill is Moral and Personification.

Sixth-Grade EL Example: The paired selection skill for "Caged Bird" and "I Dream a World" is Rhyme, Simile, and Repetition in Unit 5, Week 5 of Sixth Grade California Treasures. Also in each unit, there are “Strategies for Extra Support,” such as Figurative Language: Simile, “What’s got your face all colored up like a stormy day?”

Middle Grades: Genre: Autobiography—Students explore elements of an autobiography in the main selection and discuss what makes an autobiography different from a biography. They also explore narrator and point of view (e.g., “What does the narrator’s reaction reveal about him?”).

California Treasures Glencoe LiteratureEighth Grade Example: Literary Elements—Similes and metaphors in

Elegy on the Death of César Chávez.

73


Examples of Genre in California Treasures Scope and Sequence

Genre: Fiction (Grades 3–8)Drama/play, fantasy, historical fiction, humorous fiction, mystery, realistic fiction, short story, and traditional stories (e.g., fairy tale, fable, folktale, tall tale, myth, and legend). Grades 4–8: Science fiction.

Genre: Poetry (Grades 3-8)Forms (e.g., refrain, cinquain, free verse, haiku, limerick, lyric, narrative,

and simple).Middle Grades: Tone

Genre: Nonfiction (Grades K–8)Expository text, how-to, informational text, narrative, letter, newspaper,

science article, personal essay, persuasive essay, and photo essay.Upper and Middle Grades: Biography and autobiography, diary/journal,

encyclopedia, and practical/functional text.

Examples of Literary Devices and Elements in California Treasures Scope and Sequence

Grades K-8: Character, plot development, setting, onomatopoeia.Grades K-6: Alliteration, repetition, rhyme/rhyme schemes.Grades 1-8: Descriptive and figurative language (e..g., metaphors,

similes, personification, and hyperbole), imagery, sensory words and details, theme, and rhythm.

Upper Grades (3-6): Consonance and assonance.Grades 3-8: Dialect, foreshadowing, flashback, meter.Grades 4-8: Symbolism.

Concluding Remarks

Learning to read and teaching reading are both work that requires the most effective materials, because reading is foundational for all other learnings. If fact, The National Institute for Literacy’s Partnership for Reading (2000) states that “success in school starts with reading.” This report identifies highly regarded research related to effective reading instruction that suggests how to give each student a good start toward success in literacy. Macmillan/McGraw-Hill and Glencoe have met the challenge of research-verified instructional strategies, methods, and approaches and have incorporated them in K–6 California Treasures and in the middle school Glencoe Literature curricula. Literature is the basis for all of the program components—it overlaps and becomes more

74


challenging and complex as the school year progresses. The curriculum presents a model for an integrated whole with an increasingly complex spiral.

What can be learned from this comprehensive alignment? California Treasures and Glencoe Literature present a synergy of strategies and skills that are grounded in a foundation of what works. The curricula are designed to build literacy for life by meeting the needs of California’s teachers, students, and families. The program content is aligned with national literacy guidelines and English Language Arts California Content Standards. The curriculum is planned specifically for California and is grounded in science-based research as well as in the wisdom and expertise of those recognized as most knowledgeable in teaching reading, writing, and communicating. California Treasures is intended for the inclusion of all students in grades K–9, and lessons are informed by ongoing assessment of students’ strengths and needs. The program is permeated with culturally sensitive literature selections and reading and writing strategies that engage and motivate. It is hoped that California policymakers and educators will find this research alignment valuable when facing the urgency of reform and the challenges of curriculum implementation.

ReferencesEssential Elements of Literacy

-A-

Adams, A., Carnine, D., & Gersten, R. (1982). Instructional strategies for studying content area texts in the intermediate grades. Reading Research Quarterly, 18(1), 27–55.

Allinder, R. M., Dunse, L., Brunken, C. D., & Obermiller-Krolikowski, H. (2001). Improvingfluency in at-risk readers and students with learning disabilities. Remedial and SpecialEducation, 22, 48–54.

Allington, R. L. (2006). What really matters for struggling readers: Designing research-based programs (2nd ed.). New York: Pearson Education.

Allington, R. L. (1986). Policy constraints and effective compensatory reading instruction: A review. In J. V. Hoffman (Ed.), Effective teaching of reading: Research and practice (pp. 261–289). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.

Allington, R. L. (1983). The reading instruction provided readers of differing reading ability. Elementary School Journal, 83, 549–559.

75


Almasi, J. F. (1995). The nature of fourth graders’ sociocognitive conflicts in peer-led and teacher-led discussions of literature. Reading Research Quarterly, 30, 314–351.

Alvermann, D. E. (2001). Effective literacy instruction for adolescents. Chicago: NationalReading Conference. Retrieved February 13, 2007, fromhttps://www.nrconline.org/publications/alverwhite2.pdf

Anderson, R., & Biddle, W. (1975). On asking people questions about what they are reading. In G. H. Bower (Ed.), The psychology of learning and motivation (Vol. 9, pp. 90–132). New York: Academic Press.

Anderson, R. C., Wilkinson, I. A. G., & Mason, J. M. (1991). A microanalysis of the small-group, guided reading lesson: Effects of an emphasis on global story meaning. Reading Research Quarterly, 26, 417–441.

Anderson, R. C., Wilson, P. T., & Fielding, L. G. (1988). Growth in reading and how children spend their time outside of school. Reading Research Quarterly, 23, 285-303.

Anderson, V., & Roit, M. (1993). Planning and implementing collaborative strategy instruction for delayed readers in grades 6–20. Special issue: Strategies instruction. Elementary School Journal, 94(2), 121–137.

Armbruster, C. C., Lehr, F., & Osborn, J. (2003). Put reading first: The research building blocks for teaching children to read(2nd ed.). Washington, DC: Partnership for Reading, a collaborative effort of the National Institute for Literacy, the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, and the U.S. Department of Education. Retrieved March 7, 2005, from http://www.nifl.gov/nifl/partnershipforreading/publications/PFRbooklet.pdf

Askov, E. N., & Kamm, K. (1976). Context clues: Should we teach children to usea classification system in reading? Journal of Educational Research, 69, 341–344.

August, D., & Shanahan, T. (Eds.). (2006). Developing literacy in second-languagelearners:Report of the National Literacy Panel on language minority children and youth.Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

-B-

Babbs, P. J. (1984). Monitoring cards help improve comprehension. Reading Teacher, 38(2), 200–204.

Baker, L., & Zimlin, L. (1989). Instructional effects on children’s use of two levels of standards for evaluating their comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 81(3), 340–346.

Baker, S. K., Simmons, D. C., & Kame’enui, E. J. (1998a). Vocabulary acquisition: Instructional

76

http://www.nifl.gov/nifl/partnershipforreading/publications/PFRbooklet.pdf


and curricular basics and implications. In D. C. Simmons & E. J. Kame’enui (Eds.), Whatreading research tells us about children with diverse learning needs (pp. 219–238). Mahwah,NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Barger, J. (2003). Comparing the DIBELS oral reading fluency indicator and the North Carolina end of grade reading assessment. (Technical Report). Asheville: North Carolina Teacher Academy. Retrieved September 2005 from the DIBELS Technical Reports webpage: http://dibels.uoregon.edu/techreports/index.php

Baumann, J. F., Kame’enui, E. J., & Ash, G. E. (2003). Research on vocabulary instruction:Voltaire redux. In J. Flood, D. Lapp, J. R. Squire, & J. M. Jensen (Eds.), Handbook of researchon teaching the English language arts (2nd ed., pp. 752–785). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum

Associates.

Baumann, J. F., & Bergeron, B. S. (1993). Story map instruction using children’s literature: Effects on first graders’ comprehension of central narrative elements. Journal of Reading Behavior, 25(4), 407–437.

Baumann, J. F., Seifert-Kessell, N., & Jones, L. A. (1992). Effect of think-aloud instruction on elementary students’ comprehension monitoring abilities. Journal of Reading Behavior, 24(2), 143–172.

Beck, I. L., Perfetti, C. A., & McKeown, M. G. (1982). Effects of long-term vocabulary instruction on lexical access and reading comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 74(4), 506–521.

Beck, I. L., & McKeown, M. G. (1991). Conditions of vocabulary acquisition. In R. Barr, M. Kamil, P. Mosenthal, & P. D. Pearson (Eds.), Handbook of reading research, (Vol. 2, pp. 789–814). New York: Longman.

Beck, I. L., & McKeown, M. G. (2001). Text talk: Capturing the benefits of read aloud experiences for young children. The Reading Teacher, 55, 10-20.

Beck, I. L., McKeown, M. G., & Kucan, L. (2002). Bringing words to life: Robust vocabulary instruction. New York: Guilford.

Beck, I. L., McKeown, M. G., & McCaslin, E. S. (1983). All contexts are not created equal. Elementary School Journal, 83, 177-181.

Bereiter, C., & Bird, M. (1985). Use of thinking aloud in identification and teaching of reading comprehension strategies. Cognition and Instruction, 2, 131–156.

Biancarosa, C., & Snow, C. E. (2006). Reading next: A vision for action and research in middleand high school literacy: A report to Carnegie Corporation of New York (2nd ed.). Washington,DC: Alliance for Excellent Education. Retrieved January 8, 2007, fromhttp://www.all4ed.org/publications/ReadingNext/ReadingNext.pdf.

77


Blachowicz, C. L. Z., & Fisher, P. (2000). Vocabulary instruction. In Kamil et al. (Eds.),handbook of reading research (Vol. 3, pp. 503–523). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998a). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education,5(1), 7–71.

Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998b). Inside the black box: Raising standards through classroomassessment. Phi Delta Kappan, 80(2), 139–148.

Blaha, B. A. (1979). The effects of answering self-generated questions on reading. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Boston University.

Blanchard, J. S. (1980). Preliminary investigation of transfer between single-word decoding ability and contextual reading comprehension by poor readers in grade six. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 51(3), p2.t2.

BockBlock, C. C. (1993). Strategy instruction in a literature-based reading program. Special issue: Strategies instruction. Elementary School Journal, 94(2), 139–151.

Brady, P. I. (1990). Improving the reading comprehension of middle school students through reciprocal teaching and semantic mapping strategies. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Alaska.

Bramlett, R. K. (1994). Implementing cooperative learning: A field study evaluating issues for school-based consultants. Journal of School Psychology, 32(1), 67–84.

Brett, A., Rothlein, L., & Hurley, M. (1996). Vocabulary acquisition from listening to stories and explanations of target words. Elementary School Journal, 96(4), 415–422.

Browder, D. M., & Xin, Y. P. (1998). A meta-analysis and review of sight word research and its implications for teaching functional reading to individuals with moderate and severe disabilities. Journal of Special Education, 32, 130–153.

Brown, R., Pressley, M., Van Meter, P., & Schuder, T. (1996). A quasi-experimental validation of transactional strategies instruction with low-achieving second-grade readers. Journal of Educational Psychology, 88(1), 18–37.

Buck, J., & Torgesen, J. (2003). The relationship between performance on a measure of oral reading fluency and performance on the Florida Comprehensive Assessment Test. (FCRR Technical Report No. 1). Tallahassee: Florida Center for Reading Research. Retrieved September 2005 from the DIBELS Technical Reports webpage: http://dibels.uoregon.edu/techreports/index.php

Buikema, J. L., & Graves, M. F. (1993). Teaching students to use context cues to infer word meanings. Journal of Reading, 36(6), 450–457.

78


Burley, J. E. (1980). Short-term, high intensity reading practice methods for Upward Bound Students: An appraisal. Negro Educational Review, 31, 156–161.

Buss, R. R., Ratliff, J. L., & Irion, J. C. (1985). Effects of instruction on the use of story structure in comprehension of narrative discourse. National Reading Conference Yearbook, 34, 55–58.

-C-

Campbell, J. R., Hombo, C. M., & Mazzeo, J. (2000). NAEP 1999 trends in academic progress: Three decades of student performance. Education Statistics Quarterly, 21, 31–36.

Carney, J. J., Anderson, D., Blackburn, C., & Blessing, D. (1984). Preteaching vocabulary and the comprehension of social studies materials by elementary school children. Social Education, 48(3), 195–196.

Carnine, D., & Kinder, D. (1985). Teaching low-performing students to apply generative and schema strategies to narrative and expository material. Remedial and Special Education, 6, 20–30.

Carr, E., Bigler, M., & Morningstar, C. (1991). The effects of the CVS strategy on children’s learning: Fortieth yearbook of the National Reading Conference. Chicago, IL: National Reading Conference.

Carr, E. M., Dewitz, P., & Patberg, J. P. (1983). The effect of inference training on children’s comprehension of expository text. Journal of Reading Behavior, 15(3), 1–18.

Carver, R. P., & Liebert, R. E. (1995). The effect of reading library books in different levels of difficulty on gain in reading ability. Reading Research Quarterly, 30, 26–48.

Chall, J. S., & Dale, E. (1995). Readability revisited: The new Dale-Chall readability formula.Cambridge, MA: Brookline Books.

Chan, L. D. S., & Cole, P. G. (1986). Effects of inference training on children’s comprehension of expository text. Remedial and Special Education, 7, 33–40.

Chasen, S. P., & Gambrell, L. B. (1992). A comparison of teacher read aloud practices and attitudes: 1980-1990. In S. Clewell, J. G. Almasi, & S. A. Wagoner (Eds.), Literacy: Issues and Practices, 9, 29–32.

Clay, M. M. (1972). The early detection of reading difficulties. Auckland, NZ: Heinemann.

Cline, R. K. J., & Kretke, G. L. (1980). An evaluation of long-term SSR in the junior high school. Journal of Reading, 23, 503–506.

79


Cohen, R. (1983). Students generate questions as an aid to reading comprehension. Reading Teacher, 36, 770–775.

Collins, C. (1980). Sustained silent reading periods: Effects on teachers’ behaviors and students’ achievement. Elementary School Journal, 81, 108–114.

Cross, D. R., & Paris, S. G. (1988). Developmental and instructional analyses of children’s metacognition and reading comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80(2), 131–142.

Cunningham, A., & Stanovich, K. E. (1998, Spring/Summer). What reading does for the mind. American Educator, 8–15.

Curtis, M. E. (2004). Adolescents who struggle with word identification: Research and practice. In T. L. Jetton & J. A. Dole (Eds.), Adolescent literacy research and practice (pp. 119–134). New York: The Guilford Press.

Curtis, M. E., & Longo, A. M. (1999). When adolescents can’t read: Methods and materials that work. Cambridge, MA: Brookline Books.

Curtis, M. E. & Chmelka. M. B. (1994). Modifying the Laubach Way to Reading Program foruse with adolescents with LDs. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 9, 38–43.

Curtis, M. E., & McCart, L. (1992). Fun ways to promote poor readers’ word recognition.Journal of Reading, 35, 398–399.

-D-

Davey, B., & McBride, M. (1986). Effects of question-generation on reading comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 22, 2–7.

Davis, Z. T. (1988). A comparison of the effectiveness of sustained silent reading and directed reading activity on students’ reading achievement. The High School Journal, 72(1), 46–48.

Dermody, M. (1988). Metacognitive strategies for development of reading comprehension for younger children. Paper presented at the American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education, New Orleans, LA.

Doiron, R. (1994). Using nonfiction in a read-aloud program: Letting the facts speak for themselves. Reading Teacher, 47, 616–624.

Dole, J. A., Sloan, C., & Trathen, W. (1995). Teaching vocabulary within the context of literature. Journal of Reading, 38(6), 452–460.

80


Dreher, M. J., & Gambrell, L. B. (1985). Teaching children to use a self-questioning strategy for studying expository text. Reading Improvement, 22, 2–7.

Dunn, L. M., Whetton, C., & Burley, J. (1997). British Picture Vocabulary Scale II. Windsor, England: NFER-Nelson.

-E-

Elbro, C., & Petersen, D. K. (2004). Long-term effects of phoneme awareness and letter sound training: An intervention study with children at risk for dyslexia. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96(4), 660–670.

Eldredge, J. L. (1990). Increasing the performance of poor readers in the third grade with a group-assisted strategy. Journal of Educational Research, 84(2), 69–77.

Eller, R. G., Pappas, C. C., & Brown, E. (1988). The lexical development of kindergartners: Learning from written context. Journal of Reading Behavior, 10, 5–23.

Elley, W. B. (1989). Vocabulary acquisition from listening to stories. Reading Research Quarterly, 24, 174–187.

Elliot-Faust, D. J., & Pressley, M. (1986). How to teach comparison processing to increase children’s short- and long-term listening comprehension monitoring. Journal of Educational Psychology, 78, 27–33.

Evans, H. M., & Towner, J. C. (1975). Sustained silent reading: Does it increase skills? Reading Teacher, 29, 155–156.

Ewers, C. A., & Brownson, S. M. (1999). Kindergartners’ vocabulary acquisition as a function of active vs. passive storybook reading, prior vocabulary, and working memory. Journal of Reading Psychology, 20, 11–20.

Ezell, H. K., et al. (1992). Use of peer-assisted procedures to teach QAR reading comprehension strategies to third-grade children. Education and Treatment of Children, 15(3), 205–227.

-F-

Faulkner, H. J., & Levy, B. A. (1999). Fluent and nonfluent forms of transfer in reading: Words and their message. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 6, 111–116.

81


Fischer Galbert, J. L. (1989). An experimental study of reciprocal teaching of expository test with third, fourth, and fifth grade students enrolled in chapter 1 reading. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Ball State University, Muncie, IN.

Fischer, J. A. (1973). Effects of cue synthesis procedure and post questions on the retention of prose material. Dissertation Abstracts International, 34, 615.

Fischer Galbert, J. L. (1989). An experimental study of reciprocal teaching of expository text with third, fourth, and fifth grade students enrolled in chapter 1 reading. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Ball State University, Muncie, IN.

Fitzgerald, J., & Spiegel, D. L. (1983). Enhancing children’s reading comprehension through instruction in narrative structure. Journal of Reading Behavior, 15(2), 1–17.

Fleischer, L. S., Jenkins, J., & Pany, D. (1979). Effects on poor readers’ comprehension of training in rapid decoding. Reading Research Quarterly, 14, 30–48.

Foorman, B. R., Francis, D. J., Fletcher, J. M., Schatschneider, C., & Mehta, P. (1998). The role of instruction in learning to read: Preventing reading failure in at-risk children. Journal of Educational Psychology, 90, 37–55.

Ford, M. E. (1992). Motivating humans. New York: Sage.

Frey, N., and Fisher, D. (2006). Language arts workshop: Purposeful reading and writing instruction. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill Education.

Freyd, P., & Baron, J. (1982). Individual differences in acquisition of derivational morphology.Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 21, 282–295.

Fry, E. B. (2004). Phonics: A large phoneme-grapheme frequency count revised. Journal ofLiterary Research, 36(1), 85–98.

Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., Eaton, S., & Hamlett, C. L. (2000). [Relation between reading fluency and reading comprehension as a function of silent versus oral reading mode]. Unpublished data.

Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., Hosp, M. K., & Jenkins, J. R. (2001). Oral reading fluency as an indicator of reading competence: A theoretical, empirical, and historical analysis. Scientific Studies of Reading, 5(3), 239–256.

Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., & Maxwell, L. (1988). The validity of informal measures of reading comprehension. Remedial and Special Education, 9(2), 20–28.

-G-

Gambrell, L. B. (2004). Literacy motivation implications for urban classrooms. In D. Lapp,

82


C. C. Block, E. J. Cooper, J. Flood, N. Roser, & J. V. Tinajero (Eds.), Teaching all the children:Strategies for developing literacy in an urban setting (pp. 193–199). New York: The GuilfordPress.

Gambrell, L. B. (1995). Motivation matters. In W. M. Linek & E.G. Sturtevant (Eds.),Generations of literacy: Seventeenth yearbook of the College Reading Association (pp. 2–24).Harrisonburg, VA: College Reading Association.

García, G. E., & Godina, H. (2004). Addressing the literacy needs of adolescent Englishlanguage learners. In T. L. Jetton & J. A. Dole (Eds.), Adolescent literacy and research andpractice (pp. 304–320). New York: The Guilford Press.

Garner, R., Hare, V. C., Alexander, P. A., Haynes, J., & Winograd, P. (1984). Inducing use of a text lookback strategy among unsuccessful readers. American Educational Research Journal, 21, 789–798.

Garner, R., Macready, G. B., & Wagoner, S. (1984). Readers’ acquisition of the components of the text-lookback strategy. Journal of Educational Psychology, 76, 300–309.

Gaskins, I. W., Downer, M. A., Anderson, R. C., Cunningham, P. M., Gaskins, R. W., Schommer, M., et al. (1998). A metacognitive approach to phonics: Using what you know to decode what you don’t know. Remedial and Special Education, 9, 36–41.

Gathercole, S. E., Willis, C. S., Baddeley, A. D., & Emslie, H. (1994). The Children’s Test of Nonword Repetition: A test of phonological working memory. Memory, 2, 103–127.

Gilroy, A., & Moore, D. W. (1988). Reciprocal teaching of comprehension-fostering and comprehension-monitoring activities with ten primary school girls. Special issue: Changing academic behavior. Educational Psychology, 8(1–2), 41–49.

Gipe, J. P., & Arnold, R. D. (1979). Teaching vocabulary through familiar associations and contexts. Journal of Reading Behavior, 11(3), 281–285.

Good, R. H., Simmons, D. C., & Kame’enui, E. J. (2001). The importance and decision-making utility of a continuum of fluency-based indicators of foundational reading skills for third-grade high-stakes outcomes. Scientific Studies of Reading, 5(3), 257–288.

Good, R. H., Simmons, D. S., Kame’enui, E. J., Kaminski, R. A., & Wallin, J. (2002). Summary of decision rules for intensive, strategic, and benchmark instructional recommendations in kindergarten through third grade. (Technical Report No. 11). Eugene: University of Oregon.

Goodman, Y. M., & Burke, C. L. (1972). Reading miscue inventory: Procedure for diagnosis and correction. New York: Macmillan.

Gordon, C. J., & Rennie, B. J. (1987). Restructuring content schemata: An intervention study. Reading Research and Instruction, 26(3), 162–188.

83


Gordon, J., Schumm, J. S., Coffland, C., & Doucette, M. (1992). Effects of inconsiderate vs. considerate text on elementary students’ vocabulary learning. Reading Psychology, 13(2), 157–169.

Graham, S., Harris, K. R., & Loynachan, C., (1993). The basic spelling vocabulary list. Journal of Educational Research, 86, 363–368.

Graham, S., & Perin, D. (2007). Writing next: Effective strategies to improve writing of adolescents in middle and high schools: A report to Carnegie Corporation of New York. Washington, DC: Alliance for Excellent Education. Retrieved February 12, 2007, from http://www.all4ed.org/publications/WritingNext/Writing Next.pdf

Grant, J., Elias, G., & Broerse, J. (1989). An application of Palinscar and Brown’s comprehension instruction paradigm to listening. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 14(2), 164–172.Graves, M. (2006). The vocabulary book: Learning and instruction. New York: Teachers College, Columbia University.

Graves, M. & Hammond, H. K. (1980). A validated procedure for teaching prefixes and its effect on students’ ability to assign meaning to novel words. In M L. Kamil & A. J. Moe (Eds.), Perceptives on reading research and instruction: Twenty-ninth yearbook of the National Reading Conference (Vol. 29, pp. 184–188). Washington, DC: National Reading Association.

Greenewald, M. J., & Rossing, R. L. (1986). Short-term and long-term effects of story grammar and self-monitoring training on children’s story comprehension. National Reading Conference Yearbook, 35, 210–213.

Griffey, Q. L., Jr., et al. (1988). The effects of self-questioning and story structure training on the reading comprehension of poor readers. Learning Disabilities Research, 4(1), 45–51.

Guthrie, J. T. (2004, Spring). Teaching for literacy engagement. Journal of Literacy Research,36(1), 1–30.

Guthrie, J. T., & Wigfield, A. (2000). Engagement and motivation in reading. In M. Kamil, R.Barr, P. Mosenthal, & P. D. Pearson (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (Vol. 3, pp. 403–

422).New York: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Guthrie, J. T., et al. (1996). Growth of literacy engagement: Changes in motivations and strategies during concept-oriented reading instruction. Reading Research Quarterly, 31(3), 306–332.

Guthrie, J. T., Schafer, W., Wang, Y., & Afflerbach, P. (1995). Relationships of instruction to amount of reading: An exploration of a social, cognitive, and instructional connection. Reading Research Quarterly, 30, 8-25.

84

http://www.all4ed.org/publications/WritingNext/Writing


-H-

Hafner, L. E. (1965). A one-month experiment in teaching context aids in fifth grade. Journal of Educational Research, 58, 471–474.

Hansen, J., & Pearson, P. D. (1983). An instructional study: Improving the inferential comprehension of good and poor fourth-grade readers. Journal of Educational Psychology, 75(6), 821–829.

Harmon, J. M., Keehn, S., & Kenney, M. S. (2004, Winter). Tutoring struggling adolescentreaders: A program investigation. Reading Research and Instruction, 44(2), 46–74.

Harris, R. E., Marchand-Martella, N., & Martella, R. C. (2000). Effects of a peer-delivered corrective reading program. Journal of Behavioral Education, 10, 21–36.

Hasbrouck, J., & Tindal, G. A. Oral reading fluency norms: A valuable tool for reading teachers. The Reading Teacher, 59 (7). (April 2006).

Hasbrouck, J. E., & Tindal, G. (1992). Curriculum-based oral reading fluency norms for students in grades 2 through 5. Teaching Exceptional Children, 24(3), 41–44.

Hasbrouck, J. E., Woldbeck, T., Ihnot, C., & Parker, R. I. (1999). One teacher’s use of curriculum-based measurement: A changed opinion. Learning Disabilities: Research & Practice, 14(2), 118–126.

Hasselhorn, M., & Koerkel, J. (1986). Metacognitive versus traditional reading instructions: The mediating role of domain-specific knowledge on children’s text-processing. Human Learning: Journal of Practical Research and Applications, 5(2), 75–90.

Heise, B. L., Papalewis, R., & Tanner, D. E. (1991). Building base vocabulary with computer-assisted instruction. Teacher Education Quarterly, 18(1), 55–63.

Helfeldt, J. P., & Lalik, R. (1976). Reciprocal student-teacher questioning. Reading Teacher, 33, 283–287.

Hidi, S. (1990). Interest and its contribution as a mental resource for learning. Review of Educational Research, 60(4), 549–571.

Holt, S. B., & O’Tuel, F. S. (1989). The effect of sustained silent reading and writing on achievement and attitudes of seventh and eighth grade students reading two years below grade level. Reading Improvement, 26, 290–297.

85


Hosp, M. K., & Fuchs, L. S. (2000). The relation between word reading measures and reading comprehension: A review of the literature. Manuscript submitted for publication.

-I-

Idol, L. (1987). Group story mapping: A comprehension strategy for both skilled and unskilled readers. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 20, 196–205.

Idol, L., & Croll, V. J. (1987). Story-mapping training as a means of improving reading comprehension. Learning Disability Quarterly, 10, 214–229.

-J-

Jacobs, J. E., & Paris, S. G. (1987). Children’s metacognition about reading: Issues in definition, measurement, and instruction. Educational Psychologist, 22, 255–278.

Jenkins, J. R., Fuchs, L. S., van den Broek, P., Espin, C., & Deno, S. L. (2003). Sources of individual differences in reading comprehension and reading fluency. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95(4), 719–729.

Jetton, T. L., & Dole, J. A. (2004). Introduction. In T. L. Jetton & J. A. Dole (Eds.), Adolescentliteracy research and practice (pp. 1–11). New York: The Guilford Press.

Johnson, M. S., Kress, R. A., & Pikulski, J. J. (1987). Informal reading inventories (2nd ed.). Newark, IL: International Reading Association.

Jones, M. P. (1987). Effects of reciprocal teaching method on third graders’ decoding and comprehension abilities. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Texas A&M University.

Judy, J. E., Alexander, P. A., Kulikowich, J. M., & Wilson, V. L. (1988). Effects of two instructional approaches and peer tutoring on gifted and non-gifted sixth-grade students’ analogy performance. Reading Research Quarterly, 23(2), 236–256.

-K-

Kameenui, E., Carnine, D., & Freschi, R. (1982). Effects of text construction and instructional procedures for teaching word meanings on comprehension and recall. Reading Research Quarterly, 17(3), 367–388.

Kamil, M. L. (2003). Adolescents and literacy: Reading for the 21st century. Washington, DC: Alliance for Excellent Education. Retrieved February 17, 2007, from http://www.all4ed.org/publications/AdolescentsAndLiteracy.pdf

86


Kelly, M., Moore, D. W., & Tuck, B. F. (1994). Reciprocal teaching in a regular primary school classroom. Journal of Educational Research, 88(1), 53–61.

Kim, H. S., & Kamil, M. L. (2004). Adolescents, computer technology, and literacy. In T. L.Jetton & J. A. Dole (Eds.), Adolescent literacy research and practice (pp. 351–368). New York:The Guilford Press.

King, A. (1989). Effects of self-questioning training on college students’ comprehension of lectures. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 14, 366–381.

King, A. (1990). Improving lecture comprehension: Effects of a metacognitive strategy. Applied Educational Psychology, 29, 331–346.

King, A. (1992). Comparison of self-questioning, summarizing, and note taking-review as strategies for learning from lectures. American Educational Research Journal, 29, 303–325.

Kirk, S. A., McCarthy, J. J., & Kirk, W. D. (1968). Illinois Test of Psycholinguistic Abilities. Urbana: University of Illinois Press. Klingner, J. K., Vaughn, S., & Schumm, J. S. (1998). Collaborative strategic reading during social studies in heterogeneous fourth-grade classrooms. Elementary School Journal, 99(1), 3–22.

Kolich, E. M. (1991). Effects of computer-assisted vocabulary training on word knowledge. Journal of Educational Research, 84(3), 177–182.

-L-

Labercane, G., & Battle, J. (1987). Cognitive processing strategies, self-esteem, and reading comprehension of learning disabled students. Journal of Special Education, 11, 167–185.

LaBerge, D., & Samuels, S.A. (1974). Toward a theory of automatic information processing inreading. Cognitive Psychology, 6, 293–323.

Langford, J. C., & Allen, E. G. (1983). The effects of U.S.S.R. on students’ attitudes and achievement. Reading Horizons, 23, 194–200.

Lapp, D., Flood, J., & Block, C. D. (2004). What types of assessment really inform instruction inan urban school? In D. Lapp, C. C. Block, E. J. Cooper, J. Flood, N. Roser, & J. V. Tinajero(Eds.), Teaching all the children: Strategies for developing literacy in an urban setting (pp. 193–199). New York: The Guilford Press.

Leung, C. B., & Pikulski, J. J. (1990). Incidental learning of word meanings by kindergarten and first grade children through repeated read aloud events. In J. Zutell & S. McCormick (Eds.), Literacy theory and research: Analyses from multiple paradigms (pp. 231–241). Chicago: National Reading Conference. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. 324646).

87


Levin, J., Johnson, D., Pittelman, S., Levin, K., Shriberg, L., Toms-Bronowski, S., & Hayes, B. (1984). A comparison of semantic- and mnemonic-based vocabulary-learning strategies. Reading Psychology, 5(1–2), 1–15.

Levin, J., McCormick, C., Miller, G., & Berry, J. (1982). Mnemonic versus nonmnemonic vocabulary-learning strategies for children. American Educational Research Journal, 19(1), 121–136.

Levy, B. A., Nicholls, A., & Kohen, D. (1993). Repeated readings: Process benefits for good and poor readers. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 56, 303–327.

Lonberger, R. (1988). The effects of training in a self-generated learning strategy on the prose processing abilities of fourth- and sixth-graders. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, State University of New York at Buffalo.

Loomis, S. C., & Bourque, M. L. (Eds.). (2001). National assessment of educational progressachievement levels 1992–1998 for reading.Washington, DC: National Assessment Governing Board. Retrieved fromhttp://www.nagb.org/pubs/readingbook.pdf

Loranger, A. L. (1997). Comprehension strategies instruction: Does it make a difference? Reading Psychology, 18(1), 31–68.

Lovett, M. W., Lacarenza, L., & Borden, S. L., (2000). Putting struggling readers on the PHAST track: A program to integrate phonological and strategy-based remedial reading instruction and maximize outcomes. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 33, 458–476.

Lovett, M. W., & Steinbach, K. A., (1997). The effectiveness of remedial programs for reading disabled children of different ages: Does the benefit decrease for older children? Learning Disability Quarterly, 20, 189–210.

Lysynchuk, L. M., Pressley, M., & Vye, N. J. (1990). Reciprocal teaching improves standardized reading-comprehension performance in poor comprehenders. Elementary School Journal, 90(5), 469–484.

-M-

MacGregor, S. K. (1988). Use of self-questioning with a computer-mediated text system and measures of reading performance. Journal of Reading Behavior, 20(2), 131–148.

Malone, R. A., & McLaughlin, T. F. (1997). The effects of reciprocal peer tutoring with a group contingency on quiz performance in vocabulary with seventh- and eighth-grade students. Behavioral Interventions, 12(1), 27–40.

88


Manning, G. L., & Manning, M. (1984). What models of recreational reading make a difference. Reading World, 23, 375–380.

Manzo, A. V. (1969). Improving reading comprehension through reciprocal teaching. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Syracuse University.

Markman, E. M. (1977). Realizing that you don’t understand: A preliminary investigation. Child Development, 46, 986–992.

Marston, D. (1989). A curriculum-based measurement approach to assessing academic performance: What is it and why do it? In M. R. Shinn (Ed.), Curriculum-based measurement: Assessing special children (pp. 18–78). New York: Guilford.

Mathes, P. G., et al. (1994). Increasing strategic reading practice with Peabody classwide peer tutoring. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 9(1), 44–48.

McKeown, M. G., Beck, I. L., Omanson, R. C., & Pople, M. T. (1985). Some effects of the nature and frequency of vocabulary instruction on the knowledge and use of words. Reading Research Quarterly, 20(5), 522–535.

McKeown, M. G., Beck, I. L., Omanson, R. C., & Perfetti, C. A. (1983). The effects of long-term vocabulary instruction on reading comprehension: A replication. Journal of Reading Behavior, 15(1), 3–18.

McQuillan, J. (1998). The literacy crisis: False claims, real solutions. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Medo, M. A., & Ryder, R. J. (1993). The effects of vocabulary instruction on readers’ ability to make causal connections. Reading Research and Instruction, 33(2), 119–134.

Meltzer, J., & Hamann, E. T. (2004). Meeting the literacy development needs of adolescentEnglish language learners through content area learning: Part one: Focus on motivation andengagement. Providence, RI: The Education Alliance at Brown University. Retrieved February13, 2007, from http://www.alliance.brown.edu/pubs/adlit/adell_litdv1.pdf

Meltzer, J., & Hamann, E. T. (2005). Meeting the literacy development needs of adolescentEnglish language learners through content-area learning: Part two: Focus on classroomteaching and learning strategies. Providence, RI: The Education Alliance at Brown University.Retrieved February 13, 2007, from http://www.alliance.brown.edu/pubs/adlit/adell_litdv1.pdf

Miller, G. E. (1985). The effects of general and specific self-instruction training on children’s comprehension monitoring performances during reading. Reading Research Quarterly, 20(5), 616–628.

89


Miller, G. E. (1987). The influence of self-instruction on the comprehension monitoring performance of average and above average readers. Journal of Reading Behavior, 19(3), 303–317.

Miller, G. E., Giovenco, A., & Rentiers, K. A. (1987). Fostering comprehension monitoring in below average readers through self-instruction training. Journal of Reading Behavior, 19(4), 379–394.

Moore, D. W., Bean, T. W., Birdyshaw, D., and Rycik, J. A. (1999). Adolescent literacy: A position statement. Retrieved January 29, 2007, fromhttp://www.reading.org/downloads/positions/ps1036_adolescent.pdf. Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy, 43, 97–112.

Morris, D., Bloodgood, J. W., Lomax, R. G., & Perney, J. (2003). Developmental steps in learning to read: A longitudinal study in kindergarten and first grade. Reading Research Quarterly, 38(3), 302–328.

Morrow, L. M., & Weinstein, C. S. (1986). Encouraging voluntary reading: The impact of a literature program on children’s use of library centers. Reading Research Quarterly, 21, 330–346.

Muter, V., Hulme, C., Snowling, M. J., & Stevenson, J. (2004). Phonemes, rimes, vocabulary, and grammatical skills as foundations of early reading development: Evidence from a longitudinal study. Developmental Psychology, 40(5), 665–681.

-N-

Nagy, W. E., Anderson, R. C. (1984). How many words are there in printed school English? Reading Research Quarterly, 19, 304–330.

Nagy, W. E., Anderson, R. C., & Herman, P. A. (1987). Learning word meanings from context during normal reading. American Educational Research Journal, 24(2), 237–270.

Nagy, W. E., Herman, P. A., & Anderson, R. C. (1985). Learning words from context. Reading Research Quarterly, 20(2), 233–253.

NASBE Study Group on Middle and High School Literacy. (2006). Reading at risk: The state response to the crisis in adolescent literacy (Rev. ed.). Alexandria, VA: National Association of State Boards of Education. Retrieved February 17, 2007, from http://www.carnegie.org/literacy/pdf/Reading_at_Risk_report.pdf

Nathan, R. G., & Stanovich, K. E. (1991). The causes and consequences of differences in reading fluency. Theory into Practice, 30(3), 176–184.

National Association of State Boards of Education (NASBE). (2006). Study Group on Reading

90

http://www.carnegie.org/literacy/pdf/Reading_at_Risk_report.pdf

http://www.reading.org/downloads/positions/ps1036_adolescent.pdf


and High School Literacy. Reading at risk: The state response to the crisis in adolescent literacy(Rev. ed.). Alexandria, VA: National Association of State Boards of Education. RetrievedFebruary 17, 2007, from http://www.carnegie.org/literacy/pdf/Reading_at_Risk_report.pdf

National Center for Education Statistics (NCES). (1999). Nation’s report card: Reading 1998.Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=1999500

National Center for Education Statistics (NCES). (2006). Nation’s report card: Reading 2005.Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=2006451

National Institute of Child Health and Human Development. (2000). Report of the National Reading Panel. Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction: Reports of the subgroups (NIH Publication No. 00-4754). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.

Neale, M. (1997). Neale Analysis of Reading Ability II. Window, England: NFER-Nelson.

Neill, K. (1979). Turn kids on with repeated reading. Teaching Exceptional Children, 12, 63–64.

Nelson, C. S., et al. (1996). The effect of teacher scaffolding and student comprehension monitoring on a multimedia/interactive videodisc science lesson for second graders. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 5(3–4), 317–348.

Nokes, J. D., & Dole, J. A. (2004). Helping adolescent readers through explicit strategy instruction. In T. L. Jetton & J. A. Dole (Eds.), Adolescent literacy research and practice (pp. 162–182). New York: The Guilford Press.

Nolte, R. Y., & Singer, H. (1985). Active comprehension: Teaching a process of reading comprehension and its effects on reading achievement. Reading Teacher, 39(1), 24–31.

-O-

Olson, L. (2006). A decade of effort. Quality Counts, 25, 8–10, 12, 14, 16, 18–21.

Omanson, R. C., Beck, I. L., Voss, J. F., McKeown, M. G., et al. (1984). The effects of reading lessons on comprehension: A processing description. Cognition and Instruction, 1(1), 45–67.

O’Shea, L. J., Sindelar, P. T., & O’Shea, D. J. (1985). The effects of repeated readings and attentional cues on reading fluency and comprehension. Journal of Reading Behavior, 17, 129–142.

Otterman, L. M. (1955). The value of reading prefixes and word roots. Journal of Educational Research, 48, 611–616.

91


-P-

Padron, Y. N. (1985). Utilizing cognitive reading strategies to improve English reading comprehension of Spanish-speaking bilingual students. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Houston.

Palinscar, A. S. (1987). Collaborating for collaborative learning of text comprehension. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Washington, DC.

Palinscar, A. S., & Brown, A. L. (1984). Reciprocal teaching of comprehension-fostering and comprehension-monitoring activities. Cognition and Instruction, 2, 117–175.

Palinscar, A. S., David, Y. M., Winn, J. A., & Stevens, D. D. (1991). Examining the context of strategy instruction. Special issue: Cognitive instruction and problem learners. RASE: Remedial and Special Education, 12(3), 43–53.

Paris, S. C., & Oka, E. R. (1986). Self-regulated learning among exceptional children. Exceptional Children, 53, 103–108.

Partnership for Reading. (2001, September). Put reading first: The research building blocks for teaching children to read. Washington, DC.: National Institute for Literacy; National Institute of Child Health and Human Development; and U.S. Department of Education.

Patberg, J. P., Graves, M. F., & Stibbe, M. A. (1984). Effects of active reaching and practice in facilitating students’ use of context clues. Changing perspectives on research in reading language processing and instruction. Thirty-third yearbook of the National Reading Conference (Vol. 33, pp. 146–151). Rochester, NY: National Reading Conference.

Payne, B. D., & Manning, B. H. (1992). Basal reader instruction: Effects of comprehension monitoring training on reading comprehension, strategy use and attitude. Reading Research and Instruction, 32(1), 29–38.

Peak, J., & Dewalt, M. W. (1994). Reading achievement: Effects of computerized reading management and enrichment. ERS Spectrum, 12(1), 31–34.

Pelow, R. A., & Colvin, H. M. (1983). PQ4R as it affects comprehension of social studies reading material. Social Studies Journal, 12, 14–22 (Spring).

Peterson, C. L., Caverly, D. C., Nicholson, S. A., O’Neal, S., & Cusenbary, S. (2000). Buildingreading proficiency at the secondary level: A guide to resources. Austin, TX: SouthwestEducational Development Laboratory. Retrieved April 3, 2007, fromhttp://www.sedl.org/pubs/reading16/buildingreading.pdf

92


Pickens, J., & McNaughton, S. (1988). Peer tutoring of comprehension strategies. Educational Psychology: An International Journal of Experimental Educational Psychology, 8(1–2), 67–80.

Pinnell, G. S., Pikulski, J. J., Wixson, K. K., Campbell, J. R., Gough, P. B., & Beatty, A. S. (1995). Listening to children read aloud. Washington, DC: Office of Educational Research and Improvement, U. S. Department of Education.

Pressley, M. (2002). Comprehension strategies instruction: A turn-of-the-century status report. InC. C. Block & M. Pressley (Eds.), Comprehension instruction: Research-based best practices(pp. 11–27). New York: The Guilford Press.

Pressley, M. (2000).What should comprehension instruction be the instruction of? In M. Kamil,P. B. Mosenthal, P. D. Pearson, & R. Barr (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (Vol. 3, pp.545–561). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Pressley, M., & Forrest-Pressley, D. (1985). Questions and children’s cognitive processing. In A. C. G. B. Black (Ed.), The psychology of questions (pp. 277–-296). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

-R-

Raphael, T. E., & McKinney, J. (1983). An examination of fifth- and eighth-grade children’s question-answering behavior: An instructional study in metacognition. Journal of Reading Behavior, 15(3), 67–86.

Raphael, T. E., & Pearson, P. D. (1985). Increasing students’ awareness of sources of information for answering questions. American Educational Research Journal, 22, 217–235.

Raphael, T. E., & Wonnacott, C. A. (1985). Heightening fourth-grade students’ sensitivity to sources of information for answering comprehension questions. Reading Research Quarterly, 20(3), 282–296.

Rasinski, T. V., Padak, N. D., McKeon, C. A., Wilfong, L. G., Friedauer, J. A., & Heim, P.(2005). Is reading fluency a key for successful high school reading? Journal of Adolescent &Adult Literacy, 49(1), 22–27.

Rasinski, T. V. (1990). Effects of repeated reading and listening-while-reading on reading fluency. Journal of Educational Research, 83, 147–150.

Readence, J. E., Bean, T. W., & Baldwin, R. S. (2004). Content area literacy: An integrated approach (8th ed.). Dubuque, IA: Kendall/Hunt.

Reitsma, P. (1998). Reading practice for beginners: Effects of guided reading, reading-while-listening, and independent reading with computer-based speech feedback. Reading Research Quarterly, 23, 219–235.

93


Reutzel, D. R. (1984). Story mapping: An alternative approach to communication. Reading World, 24(2), 16–25.

Reutzel, D. R. (1985). Story maps improve comprehension. Reading Teacher, 38(4), 400–404.

Reutzel, D. R. (1986). Clozing in on comprehension: The Cloze story map. Reading Teacher, 39(6), 524–528.

Reutzel, D. R., & Hollingsworth, P. M. (1991a). Reading comprehension skills: Testing the distinctiveness hypothesis. Reading Research and Instruction, 30, 32–46.

Reutzel, D. R., & Hollingsworth, P. M. (1991b). Reading time in school: Effect on fourth graders’ performance on a criterion-referenced comprehension test. Journal of Educational Research, 84(3), 170–176.

Rich, R. Z. (1989). The effects of training adult poor readers to use text comprehension strategies. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Columbia University, New York.

Richmond, M. G. (1976). The relationship of the uniqueness of prose passages to the effect of question placement and question relevance on the acquisition and retention of information. In G. H. McNinch (Ed.). Reflections and investigations on reading. Twenty-fifth yearbook of the National Reading Conference (pp. 268–278). Clemson, SC: National Reading Conference.

Rinaldi, L., Sells, D., & McLaughlin, T. F. (1997). The effects of reading racetracks on the sight word acquisition and fluency of elementary students. Journal of Behavioral Education, 7(2), 219–233.

Ritchie, P. (1985). Graduate research: Reviews and commentary: The effects of instruction in main idea and question generation. Reading-Canada-Lecture, 3(2),139–146.

Robbins, C., & Ehri, L. C. (1994). Reading storybooks to kindergartners helps them learn new vocabulary words. Journal of Educational Psychology, 86(1), 54–64.

Rosenshine, B., & Meister, C. (1994). Reciprocal teaching: A review of the research. Review of Educational Research, 64(4), 479–530.

Rosenshine, B., Meister, C., & Chapman, S. (1996). Teaching students to generate questions: A review of the intervention studies. Review of Educational Research, 66(2), 181–221.

Rowls, M. D. (1976). The facilitative and interactive effects of adjunct questions on retention of eighth-graders across three prose passages: Dissertation in prose learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 68, 205–209.

94


Ruiz-de-Velasco, J., & Fix, M. (with Clewell, B. C.). (2000). Overlooked and underserved: Immigrant students in U.S. secondary schools. Washington, DC: The Urban Institute. Retrieved February 13, 2007, from http://www.urban.org/pdfs/overlooked.pdf

Rush, R. T., & Milburn, J. L. (1988). The effects of reciprocal teaching on self-regulation of reading comprehension in a post-secondary technical school program. Paper presented at the National Reading Conference, Tucson, AZ.

Ryder, R. J., & Graves, M. F. (1994). Vocabulary instruction presented prior to reading in two basal readers. Elementary School Journal, 95(2), 139–153.

-S-

Samuels, S. J. (1994). Toward a theory of automatic information processing in reading, revisited. In R. B. Ruddell, M. R. Ruddell, & h. Singer (Eds.). Theoretical models and processes of reading (4th ed., pp. 816–837). Newark, NJ: International Reading Association.

Schmitt, M. C. (1988). The effects of an elaborated directed reading activity on the metacomprehension skills of third graders. National Reading Conference Yearbook, 37, 167–181.

Schunk, D. H., & Rice, J. M. (1984). Strategy self-verbalization during remedial listening comprehension instruction. Journal of Experimental Education, 53(1), 49–54.

Schunk, D. H., & Rice, J. M. (1985). Verbalization of comprehension strategies: Effects on children’s achievement outcomes. Human Learning: Journal of Practical Research and Applications, 4(1), 1–10.

Schwartz, R. M., & Raphael, T. E. (1985). Instruction in the concept of definition as a basis for vocabulary acquisition. In J. A. Niles & R. V. Lalik (Eds.), Issues in literacy: A research perspective: Thirty-fourth yearbook of the National Reading Conference (pp. 116–124).

Scott, J. A., Butler, C. E., Asselin, M. M., & Henry, S. K. (1996, December). The effect of mediated assistance in word learning. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Reading Conference, Charleston, SC.

Scott, J., & Nagy, W. (1997). Understanding the definitions of unfamiliar verbs. Reading Research Quarterly, 32, 184–200.

Senechal, M. (1997). The differential effect of storybook reading on preschoolers’ acquisition of expressive and receptive vocabulary. Journal of Child Language, 24(1), 123–138.

Senechal, M., & Cornell, E. H. (1993). Vocabulary acquisition through shared reading experiences. Reading Research Quarterly, 28, 360–374.

95


Serenty, M. L., & Dean, R. S. (1986). Interspersed post-passage questions and reading comprehension achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 78(3), 228–229.

Shaw, R., & Shaw, D. (2002). DIBELS oral reading fluency-based indicators of third grade reading skills for Colorado State Assessment Program (CSAP). (Technical Report). Eugene: University of Oregon. Retrieved September 2005 from the DIBELS Technical Reports webpage: http://dibels.uoregon.edu/techreports/index.php

Sheldon, S. A. (1984). Comparison of two teaching methods for reading comprehension. Journal of Research in Reading, 7(1), 41–52.

Shinn, M. R. (1998). Identifying and defining academic problems: CBM Screening and eligibility procedures. In M. R. Shinn (Ed.), Curriculum-based measurement: Assessing special children (pp. 90–129). New York: Guilford.

Short, D., & Fitzsimmons, S. (2007). Double the work: Challenges and solutions to acquiring language and academic literacy for adolescent English language learners: A report to Carnegie Corporation of New York. Washington, DC: Alliance for Excellent Education. Retrieved February 27, 2007, from http://www.carnegie.org/literacy/pdf/DoubletheWork.pdf

Short, E. J., & Ryan, E. B. (1984). Metacognitive differences between skilled and less skilled readers: Remediating deficits through story grammar and attribution training. Journal of Educational Psychology, 76(2), 225–235.

Shortland-Jones, B. (1986). The development and testing of an instructional strategy for improving reading comprehension based on schema and metacognitive theories. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Oregon.

Silven, M. (1992). The role of metacognition in reading instruction. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 36(3), 211–221.

Simpson, P. S. (1989). The effects of direct training in active comprehension on reading achievement, self-concepts, and reading attitudes of at-risk sixth grade students. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Texas Technological University.

Sindelar, P. T. (1982). The effects of cross-aged tutoring on the comprehension skills of remedial reading students. Journal of Special Education, 16(2), 199–206.

Sindelar, P. T., Monda, L. E., & O’Shea, L. J. (1990). Effects of repeated readings on instructional- and mastery-level readers. Journal of Educational Research, 83, 220–226.

Singer, H., & Donlan, D. (1982). Active comprehension: Problem-solving schema with question generation for comprehension of complex short stories. Reading Research Quarterly, 17(2), 166–186.

96


Smith, D. D. (1979). The improvement of children’s oral reading through the use of teacher modeling. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 12(3), 39–42.

Smith, K., Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1981). Can conflict be constructive? Controversy versus concurrence seeking in learning groups. Journal of Educational Psychology, 73(5), 651–663.

Smith, N. J. (1977). The effects of training teachers to teach students at different reading ability levels to formulate three types of questions on reading comprehension and question generation ability. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Georgia.

Snow, C. E., Burns, M. S., & Griffin, P. (Eds.). (1998). Preventing reading difficulties in young children. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

Soriano, M., Vidal-Abarca, E., & Miranda, A. (1996). Comparación de dos procedimentos de instrucción en comprensión y aprendizaje de textos: Instrucción directa y enseñanza recíproca. [Comparison of two procedures for instruction in comprehension and text learning: Direct instruction and reciprocal teaching]. Infancia y Aprendizaje, 74, 57–65.

Spiegel, D. L., & Fitzgerald, J. (1986). Improving reading comprehension through instruction about story parts. Reading Teacher, 39(7), 676–682.

Stahl, S. (1983). Differential word knowledge and reading comprehension. Journal of Reading Behavior, 15(4), 33–50.

Stahl, S. A., & Kuhn, M. R. (2002). Making it sound like language: Developing fluency. ReadingTeacher, 55, 582–584.

Stahl, S. A., & Fairbanks, M. M. (1986). The effects of vocabulary instruction: A model-based meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 56(1), 72–110.

Stallman, A. C., Commeyras, M., Kerr, B., Reimer, K., Himenez, R., Hartman, D. K., & Pearson,P. D. (1990). Are “new” words really new? Reading Research and Instruction, 30(4), 31–41.

Stanovich, K. E. (1986). Matthew effects in reading: Some consequences of individualdifferences in the acquisition of literacy. Reading Research Quarterly, 21, 360–407.

Sternberg, R. B. (1987). Most vocabulary is learned from context. In M. G. McKeown & M. E. Curtis (Eds.), The nature of vocabulary acquisition (pp. 89–105). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Stevens, R. J. (1988). Effects of strategy training on the identification of the main idea of expository passages. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80(1), 21–26.

Stevens, R. J., Madden, N. A., Slavin, R. E., & Farnish, A. M. (1987). Cooperative integrated reading and composition: Two field experiments. Reading Research Quarterly, 22(4), 433–454.

97


Stevens, R. J., Slavin, R. E., & Farnish, A. M. (1991). The effects of cooperative learning and instruction in reading comprehension strategies on main idea identification. Journal of Educational Psychology, 83(1), 8–16.

Stoddard, K., Valcante, G., Sindelar, P., O’Shea, L., & Algozzine, B. (1993). Increasing reading rate and comprehension: The effects of repeated readings, sentence segmentation, and intonation training. Reading Research and Instruction, 32, 53–65.

Summers, E. G., & McClelland, J. V. (1982). A field-based evaluation of sustained silent reading (SSR) in intermediate grades. Alberta Journal of Educational Research, 28, 100–112.

Swanborn, M. S. L., & de Glopper, K. (1999). Incidental word learning while reading: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 69(3), 261–285.

-T-

Tan, A., & Nicholson, T. (1997). Flashcards revisited: Training poor readers to read words faster improves their comprehension of text. Journal of Educational Psychology, 89, 276–288.

Taylor, B. M., & Frye, B. J. (1992). Comprehension strategy instruction in the intermediate grades. Reading Research and Instruction, 32(1), 39–48.

Taylor, N. E., Wade, M. R., & Yekovich, F. R. (1985). The effects of text manipulation and multiple reading strategies on the reading performance of good and poor readers. Reading Research Quarterly, 20, 566–574.

Tierney, R. J., & Shanahan, T. (1991). Research on the reading-writing relationship: Interactions,transactions, and outcomes. In R. Barr, M. L. Kamil, P. B. Mosenthal, & P. D. Pearson (Eds.),Handbook of Reading Research (Vol. 2, 246–280). New York: Longman Publishing.

Tindal, G., & Marston, D. (1990). Classroom-based assessment: Testing for teachers. Columbus, OH: Merrill Publishing.

Tobias, S. (1994). Interest, prior knowledge, and learning. Review of Educational Research, 64(1), 37–54.

Tomesen, M., & Aarnoutse, C. (1998). Effects of an instructional programme for deriving word meanings. Educational Studies, 24(1), 107–128.

Tomlinson, C. A. (2004). Differentiating instruction: A synthesis of key research and guidelines.In T. L. Jetton & J. A. Dole (Eds.), Adolescent literacy research and practice (pp. 228–248).New York: The Guilford Press.

98


Tomlinson, C., Brighton, C., Hertberg, H., Callahan, C., Moon, T., Brimijoin, K., Conover, L., & Reynolds, T. (2003). Differentiating instruction in response to student readiness, interest, and learning profile in academically diverse classrooms: A review of literature. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 27(2/3), 119–145.

Tregaskes, M. R., & Daines, D. (1989). Effects of metacognitive strategies on reading comprehension. Reading Research and Instruction, 29(1), 52–60.

Tunmer, W. E. (1989). The role of language-related factors in reading disability. In D Shankweiler & I. Y. Liberman (Eds.), Phonology and reading disability: Solving the puzzle (pp. 91–131). Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.

Turpie, J. J., & Paratore, J. R. (1995). Using repeated reading to promote success in a heterogeneously grouped first grade. In K. A. Hinchman, D. J. Leu, & C. K. Kinzer (Eds.), Perspectives on literacy research and practice: Forty-fourth yearbook of the National Reading Conference (pp. 255–263). Chicago: The National Reading Conference.

-U-

Underwood, T., & Pearson, P. D. (2004). Teaching struggling adolescent readers to comprehendwhat they read. In T. L. Jetton & J. A. Dole (Eds.), Adolescent literacy research and practice(pp. 135–161). New York: The Guilford Press.

Uttero, D. A. (1988). Activating comprehension through cooperative learning. Reading Teacher, 41(4), 390–395.

-V-

van Bon, W. H. J., Boksebeld, L. M., Font Freide, T. A. M., & van den Hurk, A. J. M. (1991). A comparison of three methods of reading-while-listening. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 24, 471–476.

van Bon, W. H. J., & van Leeuwe, J. F. J. (2003). Assessing phonemic awareness in kindergarten: The case for the phoneme recognition task. Applied Psycholinguistics, 24, 195–219.

VanWagenen, M. A., Williams, R. L., & McLaughlin, T. F. (1994). Use of assisted reading to improve reading rate, word accuracy, and comprehension with ESL Spanish-speaking students. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 79, 227–230.

Varnhagen, C. K., & Goldman, S. R. (1986). Improving comprehension: Causal relations instruction for learning handicapped learners. Reading Teacher, 39(9), 896–904.

99


Vollands, S. R., Topping, K. J., & Evans, R. M. (1999). Computerized self-assessment of reading comprehension with the Accelerated Reader: Action Research. Reading and Writing Quarterly, 15, 197–211.

-W-

Watts, G. H. (1973). The “arousal” effect of adjunct questions on recall from prose materials. Australian Journal of Psychology, 25, 81–87.

White, T. G., Graves, M. F., & Slater, W. H. (1990). Growth of reading vocabulary in diverse elementary schools: Decoding and word meaning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82(2), 281–290.

Whitehurst, G. J. (2002, October). Evidence-based education (EBE) [electronic presentation].Retrieved May 31, 2007, from http://www.ed.gov/nclb/methods/whatworks/eb/edliteslide001.html

Williamson, R. A. (1989). The effect of reciprocal teaching on student performance gains in third grade basal reading instruction. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Texas A&M University.

Wilson, J. (2005). The relationship of Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills (DIBELS) oral reading fluency to performance on Arizona Instrument to Measure Standards (AIMS). (Research Brief). Assessment and Evaluation Department, Tempe School District No. 3. Retrieved September 2005 from the DIBELS Technical Reports webpage: http://dibels.uoregon.edu/techreports/index.php

Wixson, K. K. (1983). Questions about a text: What you ask about is what children learn. Reading Teacher, 37(3), 287–293.

Wixson, K. K. (1986). Vocabulary instruction and children’s comprehension of basal stories. Reading Research Quarterly, 21(3), 317–329.

Wong, Y. L., & Jones, W. (1982). Increasing metacomprehension in learning disabled and normally achieving students through self-questioning training. Learning Disability Quarterly, 5, 228–239.

Wu, H.-M., & Solman, R. T. (1993). Effective use of pictures as extra stimulus prompts. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 63(1), 144–160.

Wysocki, K., & Jenkins, J. R. (1987). Deriving word meanings through morphological generalization. Reading Research Quarterly, 22, 66–81.

Z

100

http://www.ed.gov/nclb/methods/whatworks/eb/edlite


Zau, A. C., & Betts, J. R. (2008). Predicting success, preventing failure: An investigation of the California High School Exit Exam. San Francisco, CA: Public Policy Institute of California.

101