Abstract
Developing a successful model for a reading program which meets the needs of a wide range of abilities in a Grade 2 class is the objective of this inquiry. Specific strategies for providing well timed, intensive, individualized intervention for struggling readers within a balanced reading program, while still meeting the needs of the rest of the class, will be investigated and evaluated.
Situating the Inquiry
Walsh Public School is a Junior Kindergarten to Grade 8 School with a student population of 403. It is located in a rural area of Norfolk County and most of the children are bused in from the surrounding villages and countryside. My Grade 2 class this year consists of a diverse group of learners with many needs and challenges. In this class there are several children with behavioural problems, including two with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, several students who are struggling with literacy skills for unknown reasons, which could range from developmental delays, to learning disabilities, to intellectual exceptionalities, and four students for whom English is a second language. There is also one student with autism.
Identifying Areas of Concern
My main area of concern was for the large group of struggling readers in my class whose reading skills were well below the provincial standard. I needed to improve their reading skills dramatically in a short time. However, I also had a group of students with excellent reading skills, who were able to read well above the provincial standard. Their needs were very different from those of the lower group. In addition, there was a group of students whose reading skills fell somewhere in between these two extremes. Initially, ten out of twenty-three students were able to read below standard, seven out of twenty-three students were able to read above standard and six out of twenty-three students were able to read at or approaching the provincial standard.
I felt great concern about this situation in my classroom because I knew that I had to improve the reading skills of the lower group of readers as quickly as possible, or they would fall farther and farther behind. I was determined to set up a reading program which would meet the needs of all the children in the class. I needed to develop an action plan to teach the beginning reading skills necessary for the struggling readers, while at the same time teaching the skills that the more competent readers required.
A September excerpt from my journal demonstrates my concerns:
"I need to do a better job with my slow learners, my learning disability kids, my behavioural kids, my attention deficit kids and my reluctant readers and writers, without neglecting or even remotely compromising the progress of my flyers. I need to find some creative, constructive and effective teaching practices to be able to help the weak ones learn to read better. How can I close the gap between the lower functioning group and the higher functioning group and still be fair to everybody? There's only so much time in the day!!! They need more time on task (i.e. reading and writing). How do I clone myself? What do I know they need to do, and then how do I deliver what they need to all of them?" (G. Booker, Journal, September, 2002)
The focus of my research question therefore became, "How can I organize a reading program for a Grade 2 class with diverse needs and a wide range of abilities?"
The Plan - Part 1
My plan for a balanced reading program in September included these components:
- Weekly whole group shared reading using various Grade Two readers, reader's theatre activities and poetry.
- Weekly small group guided reading activities, using leveled books.
- Weekly individual reading conferences, using leveled books.
- Daily word study activities, including spelling, phonics and working with words, using various Grade Two spellers, the book Month-By-Month Phonics For Second Grade by Hall and Cunningham, the book Word Families by Lynch, the book Making Words by Cunningham, and the Strategies for Early Literacy binder from the Grand Erie District School Board.
- Daily read aloud activities, using a variety of children's literature.
I began by grouping my class according to their needs and abilities. I wanted to ensure that they were engaging in lots of reading at their independent level, as well as receiving the necessary teaching at their instructional level. I used Developmental Reading Assessment(DRA) data from the previous June, the Slosson Oral Reading Test(SORT), and anecdotal information from individual reading conferences, to determine reading levels and learning needs.
My classroom library consisted of a variety of trade books, as well as photocopies of books downloaded from the computer web-site, http:www.readinga-z.com. I organized these books into leveled bins according to the system described in the book, Guided Reading by Fountas and Pinnell. This organization ensured that the children would be able to select appropriate books for independent reading, rather than books which were too hard or too easy for them. I had already noticed during our daily quiet reading time, that many of the weaker readers were choosing books which were much too difficult, and were simply pretending to read them.
I set up a classroom routine whereby students were expected to choose books from the appropriate level, read them independently, and then write about them in a reading response journal. This procedure required a lot of modeling and teaching, but it was important to me that the students were actually reading and comprehending during independent reading time. Our reading response chart started with only two components, the title of the book and the author, and I gradually added more components to their repertoire of responses. Eventually, many of the students were able to complete an entire page, including a variety of detail and information, as described in the book, Retelling, Relating, Reflecting: Beyond the 3R's by Susan Schwartz and Maxine Bone. While the students were completing independent reading and writing tasks, I was able to work with students in an individual or group situation.
However, it soon became apparent that this plan was not leading to the improvement I had hoped for, especially for the weaker readers. I knew something had to change because, after almost two months of school, the weakest group had made little, if any, measurable improvement in their Developmental Reading Assessment levels since the beginning of the year. My journal demonstrated that my first inclination was to blame the kids, ("What's wrong with them? Why aren't they learning to read better?"), but I later revealed my true feelings regarding the situation when I wrote, "The truth is, I have to get these kids reading and writing better. I have to teach harder! So what techniques am I using, and how effective are they?" (G. Booker, Journal, October, 2002)
I felt great concern about this situation in my classroom because it contradicted many of my strongly-held beliefs. I believe that reading is the most important component of the curriculum in the primary grades. I know from my experiences as a resource teacher and a Reading Recovery teacher that virtually all children can learn to read. I also feel that all children have the right to be taught to read as early as possible in their school careers. I feel that it is my responsibility as the classroom teacher to create the necessary conditions in the environment to motivate and encourage all my students to learn to read well.
However, I also feel that primary students who are not reading should receive intensive, individualized intervention as soon as possible, because this support is crucial in order to prevent reading failure in some children. From my resource experience and my Reading Recovery training, I know that treating and teaching everyone in the same manner is not always fair. Although all children learn to read by actually reading real books at the appropriate level, some children require more intensive instruction and different teaching strategies in order to learn to read. The struggling readers in my Grade 2 class definitely needed more intensive intervention. With these beliefs in mind, I began to re-think what was required in order to bring about the necessary, significant improvement in reading.
The Plan - Part Two
I determined that activities to ensure several key components would need to be added to the plan for my struggling readers.
- Faster, more fluent reading
- Increased sight vocabulary
- Better use of good reading strategies
- Better phonemic awareness and phonics skills
- More time on task actually reading
Because this struggling group of readers had very limited sight vocabulary and weak phonics skills, I knew they needed to work on these areas. I also knew that they had to develop a repertoire of good reading strategies and become faster, more fluent readers. They also avoided reading tasks whenever possible, so I had to come up with some strategies to motivate them to engage in reading.
It became evident to me that I could not accomplish all these objectives on my own while still meeting the needs of the rest of the class, so I began to search for partners to share in the teaching. I had hoped to be able to send my lower group to our resource teacher, Lindsey Huyge, for remedial help. Despite repeated attempts to reorganize her schedule, she was unable to free up a block of time because of the large number of identified students she was required to support. I was also unsuccessful at finding parent volunteers to come in and work with my class.
However, I was able to access the time of Samantha Swarts, the educational assistant assigned to my class. We quickly agreed to organize her schedule so that she could help with the lowest reading group. I was aware that, although an educational assistant could be very useful for providing drill and extra practice of skills, it was not appropriate to ask her to take on the responsibility of providing the entire remedial program for this group. We determined that she would focus on sight words and fluent reading of familiar text, while I would teach new concepts and skills during shared, guided, and independent reading activities in the classroom. We also agreed that this group of students would only monopolize her time for a three or four-week period, and that we would then reassess and decide where to go from there.
She worked with a group of five students for an hour a day for three weeks, and focused on activities to increase their sight vocabulary. She also spent some time doing individual and shared reading activities, so the children could practise their fast, fluent reading. She used two resources in her program, the Bridge reading books, which pair words and pictures to teach sight vocabulary (Benson, 1983, Bridge Books) and a computer program which drills sight vocabulary by pairing auditory and visual stimuli found at www.netrover.com. Parents were contacted to inform them of the program. All five families agreed to help their children learn sight vocabulary, so word lists and Bridge books were sent home regularly.
At this point, I also started to do more individual conferences with the lower group. I tried to have at least two conferences per week with these five students. My teaching was guided by my training as a Reading Recovery teacher, and by many of the strategies described in the books, Guided Reading by Fountas and Pinnell, and On Solid Ground by Taberski.
I set up a definite schedule for reading conferences, with one or two of the weaker readers every day, and three or four others as time allowed. During the conferences, I prompted the children to do fluent reading, to use meaning, structure and visual cues, and to use good reading strategies. I used individual reading conference books to record the details of each session. These books helped me and the students to track progress and to remember what we had worked on previously. At the end of each session, I wrote personal notes to the children to reinforce what they had done well and to remind them of what to work on next ("I like the way you...Remember to...").I also continued with weekly shared and guided reading activities.
In November, after three weeks of remedial assistance for the lower reading group, I reevaluated their skills using the SORT and the DRA. All five had shown significant improvement in their sight vocabulary. Samantha and I were ecstatic, as this quote from my journal demonstrates. "They've all improved at least one grade level! Yahoo!" (G. Booker, Journal, December, 2002)
Although sight vocabulary had improved, I was still not happy with DRA results, because all five students were still reading well below what I considered to be acceptable levels for Grade Two. I determined to modify the plan to ensure more time on task, more motivation to do reading activities and more reading instruction for the whole class.
The Plan - Part Three
My new plan, which began in January 2003, included several important components:
1. Partner reading. The students were paired with partners to do repeated readings of familiar material. Sometimes I let them choose their own partners, and sometimes I paired a stronger reader with a weaker reader.
2. Reading with an educational assistant. Samantha Swarts worked with a variety of different groups for shared reading and individual conferences for one or two periods each day.
3. Reading buddies with Grade Four students. My class read with a Grade Four class for fifteen minutes every week. The older buddies helped the younger buddies to read familiar books, as well as some new material.
4. Reading buddies with Kindergarten students. My students chose picture books and practised reading fluently for fifteen minutes twice a week with a younger buddy.
5. Reading with a volunteer. Pat Cooke, a retired teacher, agreed to come in once a week to read with my class. She worked with individual students, encouraging fast, fluent reading and the use of good reading strategies.
6. Reading incentive programs. In an effort to increase the amount of reading homework the children did, I decided to reward them for the time they spent reading at home. After 150 minutes of reading, monitored by parents, they were allowed to choose a prize from a box full of dollar store toys and book club books. They also put their names in a daily draw for a free container of milk, after each 15 minutes of reading done at home. We also decided to have a class pizza party when the reading homework draw container was full.
7. More instruction in reading strategies. I sent home information to teach parents about ways to help at home, including strategies to try and prompts to use. This information was also provided to my educational assistant and my volunteer. I wanted to ensure that we would all be stressing the same strategies and using the same prompts when working with the children. This excerpt from my journal demonstrates my thinking. "I have to give parents, my educational assistant and my volunteer, the knowledge to teach strategies and to prompt the children appropriately." (G. Booker, Journal, January, 2003)
8. I also used personal contact with parents to inform them of progress and ways to help. Every week, I would make "sunshine calls" to several parents to tell them what was going well, and to make suggestions and plans about what to do next. These calls were excellent methods for establishing rapport and partnerships with parents. I reflected on this when I wrote, "I feel that my phone calls home have been very effective for opening up lines of communication. I wish I had time to do them more often." (G. Booker, Journal, October, 2002)
9. More word study instruction. I took a small group to do "making words" activities with cut-up letters, two or three times a week for ten minutes. I knew that several of the weaker students needed additional teaching to improve their phonemic awareness and understanding of how words work.
10. Literature circles. This routine from the Strategies for Early Literacy binder allowed a group of students the opportunity to work together on a reading task. I thought that the social interaction involved in this strategy would be motivating for many students.
11. More non-fiction reading material. I started to search for more non-fiction reading material that would appeal to the interests of the reluctant readers. I felt that they would be more motivated to read about real things, like sports and animals. I also gave them research organizers, where they could record the information they learned from these non-fiction books, and then use it later to write reports.
I believed that by including these activities in my program, it would encourage more time on task with the weaker group of readers. I had to change the environment to include more intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. I wanted to create an atmosphere in which the children either had to read, or wanted to read. Motivators included small group and individual reading activities where the teacher or adult could demand attention to the reading task, the use of encouraging oral and written feedback during reading conferences, the use of non-fiction reading material, the use of reading buddies and partners where many students enjoy the social interaction, and the use of incentives, where students receive rewards for engaging in reading activities.
I was somewhat concerned about the use of rewards to encourage more reading, since I felt that the children should not need extrinsic motivation, but should be developing an intrinsic love of reading. I agreed with Cunningham and Allington, who wrote in the book, Classrooms That Work, "Children who are going to become readers must begin to view reading as its own reward." (p.44) However, I felt that this type of incentive program would be short term, and would motivate those reluctant readers who currently were doing very little independent reading. My intention was to use the toys only in the initial stages of the program, and later to use only books and food as prizes. Eventually, I hoped that the reading at home habit would be established, and that the children would no longer need external motivators. Also, I expected that some of the other components of my program, such as choosing their own books and reading more non-fiction books, would result in more intrinsic motivation and a stronger desire to read independently.
In February, my plan changed again. After much negotiating and soul-searching, our learning resource teacher, Lindsey Huyge, decided to use the block of time from 8:40 a.m. to 9:00 a.m. to do word study activities with a group of my students, using Cunningham's Making Words book. In March, she increased her time with my class and began to do small group and individual reading activities several times a week. This was a wonderful addition to my intervention program. At this point, she also began working with two new students who had extremely weak language skills. One was a student who spoke very little English and the other appeared to have major behavioural and learning difficulties.
I was also fortunate to acquire a student teacher, Melanie Boros, in February. She added her expertise and time to the reading program by doing guided reading, shared reading, and individual reading conferences. She was also invaluable in helping to keep the class focused while I worked with groups and individuals.
Data Collection
In order to gather information and produce evidence to show the effectiveness of my actions, I collected a diversity of data. The quantitative data included the Slosson Oral Reading Test, the Developmental Reading Assessment, the Hearing and Recording Sounds in Words Test from the Reading Recovery Observation Survey, report card marks and comments, running records of reading behaviour from individual reading conference books, and work samples from student reading response journals. The qualitative data included excerpts from my journal, anecdotal comments regarding reading behaviour, photographs and videotape of reading activities, and the voices of students, parents and colleagues, as expressed in letters, conversations, phone calls, surveys and interviews.
Findings
The quantitative data showed that all my students had made adequate progress in their reading development. Some had actually made quite amazing progress since the beginning of the year. I found that the students demonstrated more fluent reading, increased sight vocabulary, improved ability to use appropriate cues and strategies, better phonemic awareness and ability to use phonics, improved comprehension and ability to complete appropriate written responses in reading journals and increased ability to read books at higher levels of difficulty.
1. Faster, more fluent reading - DRA comments and individual reading conference books confirmed that students were able to read more fluently.
2. Increased sight vocabulary - The SORT indicated that all students had increased their sight vocabulary, some by more than two grade levels.
3. Improved ability to use appropriate cues and strategies - Data from individual reading conferences, DRA tests, and report cards showed that all students had improved their use of good reading strategies and their ability to use meaning, structural and visual cues effectively.
4. Improved phonemic awareness and phonics skills - Individual reading conference books and the Hearing and Recording Sounds in Words Test indicated that all students had improved their phonemic awareness and their phonics skills, as well as their ability to use these skills to decode and to write.
5. Improved reading comprehension and ability to complete written responses in reading journals - Student reading response journals confirmed that all students had increased their reading comprehension, as demonstrated in their ability to respond appropriately to the books that they had read. They were also able to write longer, more complex reading responses.
5. Improved ability to read books at increasing levels of difficulty - The DRA showed that all students were able to read increasingly more difficult books independently. This improvement was also confirmed by data from individual conference books and report cards.
6. The qualitative data from my journal, as well as from parent, student and colleague surveys and interviews, also revealed some interesting information. Here are some of the results I discovered.
7. First, the reading program resulted in improved skills and strategies. Student surveys and interviews revealed that all students felt that their reading skills had improved since the beginning of the year. They reported that they knew this because they were now reading harder or higher level books. One student wrote, "I went from level C to level K." Another wrote," I read chapter books now." Many students reported that they got better by reading more, practising a lot and reading at home. One student wrote, "I read and read and read and read." Several said that I helped them by making them read, by reading with them, by giving them strategies, by making them read harder books and by giving them rewards. (Student Surveys, April, 2003)
8. Parent surveys and interviews showed that all parents had noticed improvement in their child's reading skill levels. Here are some of their comments. "... doesn't struggle like before, is able to sound out words with more success, recognizes sight words faster and with more confidence, reads more challenging books, reads with more expression, reads more fluently, reads chapter books, reads independently..." The reasons for these changes were recorded as "...extra help in the small group, nightly help at home, lots of help at school, rewards and encouragement for reading, personal goal setting to read more books, lots of practice, re-reading favourite books, school and home working together, reading to learn about different things like animals, reading constantly..." (Parent Surveys, April, 2003)
9. Secondly, the reading program resulted in improved student attitudes regarding reading. Many parents reported improvements in their child's attitude. Here are some of their comments. "...seems more interested in reading, willingly brings home books, asks to go to the bookstore, more willing to read, proud of his reading ability, reads on his own, shows more interest in different types of books, talks about things he has learned while reading, likes to read, talks about books, reads as a source of entertainment, reads without being told to, tries reading different things like newspapers and cereal boxes, doesn't get as frustrated, has more fun reading..." The reasons for these changes were thought to be "...more confidence, more willing to read because books are easy or interesting, proud of his accomplishments, finds reading relaxing, enjoys books more, eager to learn, less frustrated by reading, understands the importance of reading, better comprehension..." (Parent Surveys, April, 2003)
10. Third, the use of computer programs was effective in increasing student motivation to engage in reading tasks. One of the children who received extra help confirmed our belief that the program was motivating, when he described a particularly intensive session by exclaiming, "We didn't have to do any hard work. We just read some easy books and played on the computer!" (G. Booker, Journal, November, 2002) The educational assistant commented, "I had them working on an interactive sight word program on the computer. I found this program extremely beneficial. I believe any time children are given a chance to work on the computer they enjoy learning more." (Samantha Swarts, Colleague Survey, April, 2003)
11. The reading buddy program was also helpful in increasing student motivation, as well as in consolidating skills and building self-esteem. I recorded that "The reading buddy activities are really a joy to behold. A room full of kids all reading and enjoying themselves doing it. It only takes fifteen minutes out of the day, but it's definitely time well spent. Lots of benefits for both partners, including increased self-esteem and improved reading skills. Plus they have a fun social time as well." (G. Booker, Journal, January, 2003) A student described the reading buddy program with the words, "I love reading buddies. I really like my buddy. We have fun! I just love reading with my reading buddy!" (G. Booker, Journal, January, 2003) A colleague noted,"My Grade Four students are reading buddies with the Grade Two class. I have seen benefits to both groups. The Grade Fours consolidate skills and gain self-confidence. The social aspect is a nice bonus." (Lorie Dertinger, Colleague Survey, April, 2003)
12. Another motivator was the use of rewards and incentives. Prizes were effective in motivating some children to engage in more reading tasks. I reflected on the reading incentive program in my journal when I wrote, "This program may cost me money, but it will be well spent if they do more reading at home. Fred has already done two hours this week and Tyler took home six books tonight. He's got his eyes on the Harry Potter journal in the prize box." (G. Booker, Journal, January, 2003) I later wrote, "We should have a budget for this type of incentive program. Many kids need the motivation of extrinsic rewards and teachers should not have to buy them." (G. Booker, Journal, January, 2003) The educational assistant noted, "I believe an incentive program works well for children wanting to learn. I had a pizza party at the end of the three weeks. I find variation keeps the attention and eagerness at a higher level." (Samantha Swarts, Colleague Survey, April, 2003)
13. Several parents reported that their children were reading more because of the incentive program. One mother wrote, "I've never seen him do so much reading before. Thank you for the prizes." (Written Correspondence, January, 2003) Here are some other parent comments regarding the reading incentive program. "Now he wants to read every night. I can't get him to stop!" (G. Booker, Journal, February, 2003) "He's asking me to listen to him read. He wants to do it now. He's even reading to his younger nieces." (G. Booker, Journal, February, 2003) "I can't believe he's doing all that reading for a chance to win free milk. It's wonderful!" (G. Booker, Journal, January, 2003)
14. The investment of personnel was extensive but worthwhile. An educational assistant, the learning resource teacher and volunteer support helped to improve student learning. This excerpt from my journal indicates how vital the support of Samantha Swarts, my educational assistant, was, to the program. "My educational assistant is fantastic! Every primary class should have this type of assistance for struggling readers." (G. Booker, Journal, November, 2002) I demonstrated similar feelings about my volunteer, Pat Cooke, when I wrote, "She read with every child today and wrote a personal note to each one, as well as a note to me about what the child did. Wow!" (G. Booker, Journal, January, 2003) Many students also mentioned that the educational assistant, Samantha Swarts, the learning resource teacher, Lindsey Huyge, and the student teacher, Melanie Boros, helped them learn to read at school. (Student Surveys, April, 2003)
15. Small group and individual activities also resulted in improved learning for the weaker group of readers. One colleague recorded, "I believe the small group and individual conferences are most beneficial to the individual student's needs." (Melanie Boros, Colleague Survey, April, 2003) Another said, "I used the Bridge Program with five Grade 2 boys for three weeks. I believe this worked extremely well, since when they were re-tested on the SORT they all moved up a grade level." (Samantha Swarts, Colleague Survey, April, 2003) The learning resource teacher noted, "I teach making words to a small group of Grade Two students. I also listen to students read and assist them with their reading responses. They are making good progress. I wish I had more time in the resource schedule for primary "" (Lindsey Huyge, Colleague Survey, April, 2003) My volunteer described her role this way. "I assist the teacher with individual reading conferences. I use prompts as shown to me by Mrs. Booker and make note of individual strengths and weaknesses to help in student evaluation. I wish I could come every day!" (Pat Cooke, Colleague Survey, April, 2003) Several parents mentioned that they believed their child's improved reading was due to "extra help at school" and "extra help in the small group". (Parent Surveys, April, 2003)
16. Other strategies utilized involved the social interaction of literature circles and partner reading. The interaction was motivating for many students. I reflected on this observation in my journal when I said, "I started literature circles with a small group today. They were really excited and eager to do it." (G. Booker, Journal, January, 2003) Later, I had each of these students teach the process to two other students. I reported in my journal, "They love the group interaction, but it got a bit noisy. Sometimes they don't do the reading work when they read with a group, but that's okay for a change of pace. It's less intense and more relaxing for them to share the work. Children learn best when they are in a down-shifted emotional state, relaxed, calm, happy." (G. Booker, Journal, January, 2003)
17. Family support was also helpful in ensuring student success in learning to read. All students reported that their parents helped them with reading at home. Some also received help from siblings, grandparents, cousins and even babysitters. Many students also mentioned that the educational assistant, the learning resource teacher and the student teacher helped them learn to read at school. (Student Surveys, April, 2003) My student teacher reported, "I think you have thought of every possible option to teach your students to read, building a close team within the school and at home with parents." (Melanie Boros, Colleague Survey, April, 2003) Another colleague offered these observations after visiting my classroom. "Your reading program is comprehensive with various groups and a wide range of abilities, from English as a Second Language students, to special education students, to behavioural students. Your work with Reading Recovery, your communication with parents and your understanding of how students master reading all help to keep this group of students learning." (B. Nichol, Colleague Survey, April, 2003)
Conclusions
Throughout this inquiry into my practice, I learned some things about developing a reading program to meet the wide range of needs in my class. I identified some important aspects of a successful intervention program for struggling readers. In addition, I discovered some effective strategies for teaching reading to all children. I also clarified my understanding of the key components which I feel are essential in an instructional program which will support the reading development of all children.
First, I learned that an intensive intervention program is essential in order for some children to learn to read. This program must provide small group and individualized activities which will ensure more reading time and more specific instruction in sight vocabulary, word study, phonemic awareness, phonics skills and fast, fluent reading. The students must be taught a wide range of strategies and skills which will enable them to read increasingly more difficult reading material independently.
Second, I discovered several teaching strategies which are effective in supporting children's reading development. These activities include the use of computer programs, shared reading with partners, reading buddies with younger and older students, literature circles, incentive programs, the use of word study and making words activities and the use of a wide variety of leveled fiction and non-fiction reading material.
Third, I learned that there are several key components which make primary reading programs more effective. These essential components include the assistance of other professionals, the support of volunteers, family involvement, activities to improve reading skills and strategies, and activities to improve motivation, attitude and self-esteem.
I am now even more certain that children who struggle to read can be helped with well-planned, intensive, individualized intervention programs. This passage from my journal demonstrates my attempt to analyze why these strategies were successful. "Why is it that some kids learn to read more quickly than others? I think that part of the reason is that they spend more time on task, actually reading. Why did the remedial program work? Because it forced kids to spend more time reading at the easy and instructional level, with lots of support to learn strategies, so that they became more and more independent and a self-extending system developed. My job with my struggling readers is to get them to spend more time reading, and to become more independent. The more opportunities that I, as the classroom teacher, set up for them to read, the more chance that they will do more reading. They do not seek out reading tasks on their own, because they don't feel intrinsically motivated to read. It's hard for them, for whatever reason (learning disabilities, delayed language development, weak phonemic awareness, or behavioural issues). So I have to use all the strategies I can think of to make reading a motivating activity for them, including choosing interesting books and using extrinsic rewards. I also have to find them real reasons and real people to read for and to, like reading buddies, partners and volunteers. The social aspect of reading to and with others is very motivating for them." (G. Booker, Journal, January, 2003)
Finally, through my research, I also discovered some things about myself as a teacher. I learned that I value the interaction and input of partners, both professional colleagues and parents, in my classroom. Although I felt that it was my responsibility to create the appropriate environment and to establish the teaching procedures necessary for the students to learn to read, it was also impossible for me to do the whole job alone, especially for the weaker readers in my class. I needed the assistance of as many people as possible as I tried to implement the strategies which I felt would lead to improvement for all my students. My goal therefore became that of creating partnerships and finding allies to assist in the hard teaching that was necessary to ensure success for my struggling readers.
I demonstrated this understanding in my journal when I wrote,
"I have to clone myself by giving other people the knowledge and opportunity to teach strategies through appropriate prompts. I need to explain how important fast, fluent reading is and why they have to encourage strategies, independence, problem-solving, use of cues, etc. Parents need the information so they can say the same things I do when they work with kids at home. This adds to the power of my teaching, because they hear it not just from me, but from everyone they read with. By teaching what I know about reading to others, I extend and expand my influence to create partnerships, so that I don't have to do the whole job alone. My struggling readers, indeed all my students, get more opportunities to learn strategies, and therefore will make faster and better progress in their acquisition of reading skills." (G. Booker, Journal, January, 2003)
This new insight into myself and my values also led to the discovery that the focus of my research question, which had been so difficult to formulate in the first place, was no longer what it had been when my action research journey began. As I searched for strategies and supports to help me teach my students who had reading difficulties, my question evolved from "How can I create an effective reading program?" to "How can I develop successful partnerships to improve student learning?"
Next Steps
My research this year has caused me to consider several areas of further action.
In the future, I plan to continue to lobby for resource support and early intervention programs for primary children. Because of my belief that some students need intensive intervention in order to learn to read, I feel that I need to do more to ensure that the necessary support is provided to all children. I believe that funding and personnel should be allocated to support primary classroom teachers in their efforts to teach the struggling students in their classes.
I also feel that all primary teachers should be provided with ongoing professional development to help them acquire the expertise and skills necessary to teach children with reading difficulties and other learning problems. Although we do not often formally identify at-risk students as exceptional in the primary grades, we must still strive to meet their learning needs. This requires a great deal of knowledge, effort and flexibility on the part of the classroom teacher, but it is absolutely vital if our special children are to be successful. The job would definitely be easier if resources were specifically allocated to early intervention programs. However, the responsibility now rests with the classroom teacher, who must implement effective teaching strategies for many learning difficulties, with very little outside help. I strongly feel that this is not right, and I will continue to advocate for more support for special needs primary children.
If extra help is not available for my struggling readers, I will continue to use the types of strategies that I employed in my reading program this year, as well any others which I can discover or design, in order to ensure that all my students develop their reading skills to the highest possible level. I will definitely continue to use incentive programs and social activities as motivators. I plan to continue to search for and use more non-fiction reading material in my program, as well.
I also intend to continue to develop partnerships with others to support my program. I am now more convinced than ever that the hard job of teaching reading, or anything else, can be more easily accomplished through the power of collaborative teamwork. I value the expertise and assistance of other professionals within my school, as well as other adults within the community, who are willing to help with the education of my students. I also value the development of strong partnerships with parents who can assist me in my efforts to teach their children, so another area of my practice that I hope to improve in the future is parent communication and involvement. I plan to continue to extend my influence and empower my parents with more specific information packages, and possibly some information sharing workshops next year.
I know that my action research inquiry into effective strategies to teach students who struggle to learn to read, and the resulting search for partnerships to improve student learning, will continue in the future. The quest may even result in another action research project. It was hard work this year, but well worth the effort. I reflected on this in my journal when I wrote, "All my DRA tests are done and everyone has made good progress! Yes! Why do I do it this way? Because I know that all kids can learn to read, some just take longer to get going. I know they can be accelerated with hard, powerful teaching, because I've seen it happen." (G. Booker, Journal, March, 2003) My goal next year will be to make it happen again for a whole new group of children.
References
Beaver, J. (2001) Developmental Reading Assessment. Parsippany, NJ: Celebration Press.
Benson, J. (1983) Bridge Books. Toronto: Ontario Institute for Studies in Education.
Clay, M. (1991) Becoming Literate: The Construction of Inner Control. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Clay, M. (1993) An Observation Survey of Early Literacy Achievement. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Clay, M. (1993) Reading Recovery: A Guidebook for Teachers in Training. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Cunningham, P. M. & Hall, D. (1994) Making Words. Torrance, CA: Routledge.
Cunningham, P. M. & Allington, R. L. (1999) Classrooms That Work. Addison Wesley Longman: New York.
Fountas, I. & Pinnell, G. S. (1996) Guided Reading: Good First Teaching for All Children. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Grand Erie District School Board. (2002) Strategies for Early Literacy. Brantford, ON.
Hall, D. P. & Cunningham, P. M. (1998) Month-by-Month Phonics For Second Grade. Greensboro, NC: Carson-Dellosa.
Lynch, J. (1998) Easy Lessons for Teaching Word Families. New York: Scholastic.
Schwartz, S. & Bone, M. (1995) Retelling, Relating, Reflecting: Beyond The 3 R's. Toronto: Irwin.
Taberski, S. (2000) On Solid Ground. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Websites
www.netrover.com/~jjrose/dolch/intro.html
www.readinga-z.com
