With the accelerated emphasis for accountability in the ...



What is the Framework for Effective Fluency Instruction of Struggling Readers?

RE 5710

Jeanie Hawkins

April 25, 2005

With the accelerated emphasis for accountability in the United States brought on by the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, school systems across the country have become more diligent in their efforts in order to meet the high standards. One area of reading instruction that has concerned many educators in recent years has been oral reading fluency. Dr. Timothy Rasinski describes fluency in reading as “the ability to read accurately, quickly, expressively, with good phrasing, and with good comprehension.” (Rasinski, 2003) Though fluency is a fundamental feature of successful reading because of its reciprocal relationship to comprehension, teachers rarely focus on it due to time constraints that compacted curriculums create in the classroom. Many students acquire the ability to read fluently through regular classroom instruction and through teacher/parent modeled reading. However, for students who struggle in this area, fluency practice is vital to developing and continuing good reading skills.

Recent research by the National Reading Panel (2000) states, “An extensive review of the literature indicates that classroom practices that encourage oral reading with feedback and guidance lead to meaningful improvement in reading expertise for students – for good readers as well as those who are experiencing difficulties.” In my Title I classroom, it is the upper elementary-aged students with whom this hits home. A majority of these students have acquired the skill of decoding and have developed sufficient sight vocabulary; yet, their oral reading is painful. They have not mastered nor do they show motivation to master fluency in their reading. Many look at reading as merely a task to be completed instead of as a meaningful experience. Though I have implemented repeated readings in a one-on-one tutorial situation, I have had little success getting my students actively engaged in repeated readings in the reading lab setting. Thus, the goal of this inquiry is to discover the common denominators of effective fluency instruction for struggling readers.

Annotated Bibliography

Archer, A. L., Gleason, M. M., & Vachon V. L. (2003). Decoding and fluency: foundation skills for struggling older readers. Learning Disability Quarterly, 26(2), 89-101.

In this examination of struggling older readers, the inability to read fluently is attributed to one of two factors: (a) the lack of decoding instruction, (b) the lack of practice. For the purpose of this study, Archer, Gleason, and Vachon define “older struggling readers” as those students in secondary schools that read between the 2.5 and the 5.0 grade level on informal reading and/or word recognition inventories. It is concluded in their research that significant gains in reading fluency are more likely to occur when students are instructed in the decoding of long words using one of three approaches: reading segmented words part by part, decoding different syllable types, or using a flexible strategy for reading long words. In addition to this word work, it is noted that teachers must allocate time for explicit reading practice in order to achieve increased reading rates. Strategies listed for these kinds of fluency practice are oral guided reading, choral reading, partner reading, and repeated reading activities.

Though the researchers, all of whom hold Ph.D.s and are currently consultants in various aspects of secondary education, site the necessity of fluency instruction for low-performing students at the secondary level as being critical for text comprehension, they show no evidence of a connection between the prosody and comprehension. Early detection and intervention programs such as Read Naturally and Great Leaps are addressed and viewed to be vital in redirecting the lack of fluency among secondary-aged youth. Strong emphasis is placed on the grouping of students based on areas of most need for instruction, guidance and modeling of fluency practices with the use of effective materials, and providing time for opportunities to develop fluency skills.

Blau, L. (2001). Five surefire strategies for developing reading fluency. Instructor, 110(7), 28-30.

This article heralds the need for fluency instruction in developing elementary school students, specifically those students reading below grade level by grade four. Blau, an adjunct professor at Seattle Pacific University and educational consultant, is a proponent of the use of humor and drama in the world of literacy. She poses five strategies: dramatic, age-appropriate read aloud; repeated readings; phrasing instruction; fluency tutors; and reader’s theater. Blau notes the need for teachers to assess the fluency needs in his/her classroom before initiating these strategies. However, it is apparent that all levels of students can benefit from involvement with any of the techniques.

The reading fluency interventions that Blau suggests are easily implemented in the classroom and would engage struggling readers as well as fluent ones. Strong reading models are provided along with structured discussion of how “good reading,” sounds. This procedure not only provides the reader with an effective example, but a rationale as to how to accomplish the task. Increased rate is another area that is studied; yet, it is only measured in two of the three strategies. The last characteristic of Blau’s surefire strategies for improvement in reading fluency focuses on reading for the purpose of performing to an audience. It is this aspect of student performance that is Blau’s predominant goal.

Bowe, F. (2002). Enhancing reading ability to prevent students from becoming "low-functioning deaf" as adults. American Annals of the Deaf, 147(5), 22-27.

Enhancing the reading abilities and fluency performance of deaf children has become a major recommendation of the Commission on Education of the Deaf (COED) due to recent studies stating that one in five deaf students leave school with a reading level at or below second grade. The author stresses the importance of active learning opportunities in order to correct this situation. Early Reading First and Reading First programs are being placed in many schools where deaf students are mainstreamed based on authorized funding for “scientifically based reading research” by the No Child Left Behind Act. Other approaches being taken for intervention with these students support early detection of need for remediation, careful modeling of strategies to attack written texts such as vocabulary development and self talk, oral reading (or signing) instead of silent reading based on the need for appropriate feedback and miscue analysis.

Daly, E., Murdoch, A., & Lillenstein L. (2002). An examination of methods for testing treatments: conducting brief experimental analyses of the effects of instructional components on oral reading fluency. Education and Treatment of Children, 25(3), 288-316.

Daly and colleagues investigate fluency in regards to low academic performance being a behavioral deficit and the need to link assessment to intervention. They conducted brief experimental analyses with five, second graders in a regular education setting who had been referred for reading problems by their classroom teachers. Students were assessed using grade passages of the Burns/Roe Informal Reading Inventory for fluency (in terms of rate) and comprehension prior to participation in the study. Treatment strategies were composed of the following:

• Baseline Repeated Reading ~ repetitious reading of text with no model.

• Listening Passage Preview Repeated Reading ~ teacher models passage, then student reads three times before being scored for rate.

• Word List Training ~ students are introduced to words in passages before repeated reading.

• Phrasing Drills ~ during first reading, teacher underlines words/phrases read incorrectly, then instructs student to practice reading miscues three times in a row before continuing repeated readings.

• Contingent Rewards ~ students are allowed to pick rewards based on improved performance of reading task

The study showed that students had different instructional needs and that by conducting brief experimental analyses, teachers might be able to adjust current fluency instruction practices on a case-by-case basis.

The fluency strategies applied in this study included modeling, practice, direct instruction, and tangible incentives (prizes). One of the strengths of this report is that it can be useful in arguing that there is no “one size fits all” method of instruction for students with reading disabilities. Components of good fluency instruction are present; however, each student’s needs were assessed and treated individually.

Eckert, T. L., Ardoin S. P., Daly E. J., and Martens, B. K. (2002). Improving oral reading fluency: a brief experimental analysis of combining an antecedent intervention with consequences. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 35(3), 271-281.

Written by educational psychologists, the purpose of this experimental analysis is to evaluate the effectiveness of combining contingent reinforcement and performance feedback with fluency interventions such as repeated reading and listening passage preview. The participants in the study consisted of six struggling elementary school children ranging in ages of seven to nine years. The evidence suggests that when some type of reinforcement was offered along with the intervention, students performed better than with just the intervention itself. However, no significant difference was sited between the differing types of reinforcement (performance feedback and reward).

This study supports the need for fluency instruction to be an interactive process. Guidance and praise from another individual appears to be a driving force in fluency instruction and practice. It also provides evidence that attends to the obligation of the teacher to perform brief experimental analyses of student performance in order to recognize and support inadequacies of instruction.

Fuchs, D., Fuchs, L., & Yen L. (2001). Developing first grade reading fluency through peer mediation. Teaching Exceptional Children, 34(2), 90-93.

This article describes an intervention aimed at promoting the reading development, including fluency, of disabled and nondisabled first-grade students. PALS (Peer Assisted Literacy Strategies) is conducted among same-age peers in the general education setting. The strategy incorporates the use of teacher directed instruction, phonology and sight word practice, and partner reading. The developers of the strategy described in this article found that a mere two and one half hours of the intervention spread out over a twenty-two week period produced statistically significant gains in performance (by .20 and .30 SDs).

Though the PALS program appears to be easily manageable and effective in the classroom and reveals increased reading rate, it does not measure phrasing and expression, both of which are key components of fluency in relation to comprehension. This is ironic due to close relationship of the researchers to the Center of Accelerating Student Learning whose focus is to develop effective, multicomponent instructional interventions. Some promising features of this program are that it attends to modeling and peer tutoring, reinforces gains in performance through verbal and tangible rewards, and follow-up measures such as corrective feedback and progress charts.

Hawkins, J. (2004). What Repeated Reading Strategies are Better Motivators in the Title I Classroom?

As part of a graduate level action research project, under guidance of Dr. Gary Moorman, Hawkins conducted a study within her fourth-grade reading lab of repeated reading procedures. She looked at which methods of repeated reading: timed-repeated reading, tape-assisted repeated reading, partner reading, reader’s theater, or poetry alive motivated her Title I students to strive for reading fluency. Response logs, journals, interviews, and performance critiques were used to gain knowledge of student attitudes and opinions of each method. Hawkins found that students viewed oral repeated reading as successful and meaningful when there was consistent feedback in the form of peer helpers, teacher input, and an audience. Students indicated disinterest in using timed-repeated reading strategies and tape-assisted reading strategies based on the absence of a clear purpose for completion.

This research points out the need for practitioners to place value on students’ philosophies and attitudes toward learning tasks when planning for meaningful instruction. Improvements were made in students’ reading fluency with regard to all strategies used; however, one could question what the range of gains would be if all strategies were continued versus continuing only the methods that students viewed as worthwhile.

Jones, K. M., & Wickstrom, K. F. (2002). Done in sixty seconds: further analysis of the brief assessment model for academic problems. The School Psychology Review, 31(4), 554-568.

With recent amendments to the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, Jones and Wickstrom advocate for direct assessment of educational needs for diverse learners. The researchers support the use of curriculum-based assessment in order to focus intervention and remedial services. In their brief Experimental analysis, four instructional strategies were administered to five students in need of reading assistance. The relative effects of incentives, repeated practice, increased learning trials, and easier materials were examined as related to oral reading fluency.

Studies such this one reflect the need for teachers to pay close attention to the interventions used in their classroom reading environments and the students with which these interventions are used. Through systematic manipulation of variables, Jones and Wickstrom have shown the importance of the job of strategic planning for educators ~ identifying how to teach, rather than what to teach and to whom.

Keehn, S. (2003). The effect of instruction and practice through reader's theatre on young readers' oral reading fluency. Reading Research and Instruction, 42(4), 40-61.

Keehn conducts a study of the implementation of Reader’s Theater as an instructional intervention among four second-grade classrooms in a rural school district in central Texas. For the purpose of further examining the effectiveness of the use of Reader’s Theater with low-achieving students versus their higher-achieving peers, two types of intervention took place over a nine-week period. Condition One, which was impressed upon students with most need, consisted of the implementation of Reader’s Theater paired with explicit instruction, feedback, and mini-lessons performed by the teacher. Condition Two, comprised of students performing at or above grade level, consisted of the implementation of Reader’s Theater only. Results of the study conclude that Reader’s Theater is a viable vehicle for reading fluency showing significant gains in rate, phrasing, fluidity, expressiveness, comprehension, and word recognition. Because students in both treatment groups made substantial growth, it was not concluded that the addition of explicit instruction to one group made any difference. However, it could be argued that the reversal of control groups (higher achieving students receiving explicit instruction conjoined with RT/low achieving students receiving only RT) could potentially have an effect on the outcome of fluency.

With repeated reading of manageable text as the foundation of Reader’s Theater, it is safe to say that repetition and practice of “real” reading techniques contribute to gains in fluency. The anecdotal and observational records showed evidence of high student engagement and enthusiasm as well as transfer of prosodic elements of phrasing and expression to other content areas (i.e. Social studies, science, etc.). It would be important to conduct further research into the aspect of student motivation during Reader’s Theater as opposed to the traditional practices of repeated reading.

Kuhn, M. R., & Stahl, S. A. (2003). Fluency: a review of developmental and remedial practices. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95(1), 3-21.

Kuhn and Stahl review the theory and research related to fluency instruction and development. They conclude that though fluency instruction is generally effective, it is unclear whether or not it can be attributed to that instruction or to the increased time allotted for reading. In regards to fluency practices the authors found that assisted approaches that move beyond automaticity of word recognition to include prosodic features were more effective than unassisted approaches. Another interesting point that is uncovered is the stage at which this fluency intervention needs to take place. Phrasing, stress and intonation can only be managed once the learner is knowledgable and skilled at decoding words.

These researchers show a model of reading fluency instruction that supports frequent use of the following techniques: modeling of fluent reading; assistive and repetitive reading tasks; direct instruction for features such as phrasing, intonation, pitch, and stress; and intervention in early grades and remediation for older struggling readers.

Mastropieri, M. A., Leinart, A., & Scruggs A. E. (1999). Strategies to increase reading fluency. Intervention in School and Clinic, 34(5), 278-283.

It would be beneficial for special education teachers to look into the strategies produced in this article. Mastropieri and Scruggs, both professors of special education at the graduate level, along with Leinhart, a special education teacher in the public school system, encourage the use several strategies that have proven to be effective with students of severe reading difficulties. Since most students who are reading disabled are for the majority instructed with the sole purpose of decoding and comprehending text, many lack the opportunities to develop and refine fluent reading practices. These specialists promote the use of repeated reading with specific instructions, guidance, and procedures for monitoring individual reading performance.

These researchers state a need for real reading experiences across curricula, with explicit vocabulary instruction in order to see a transfer in reading fluency. Their investigations suggest that various methods of fluency instruction incorporate similar components: frequent use of word lists, preview strategies, repeated reading, additional independent reading practice, and encouragement of the reader to read as fast as he/she can.

Nes, S. L. (2003). Using paired reading to enhance the fluency skills of less-skilled readers. Reading Improvement, 40(4), 179-192.

The positive effects of one-to-one instructional reading interventions are discussed in this article by Nes, a researcher at Texas Tech University. Nes evaluates a study exploring reading fluency, comprehension and accuracy within the context of the paired-reading instructional intervention. Less-skilled readers were paired with trained peers of higher reading ability to complete activities that foster fluency in regards to rate of correct words per minute. Reading rates and accuracy percentages were calculated and graphed daily during all phases of the study (baseline, instructional, and maintenance). Results indicate that reading fluency substantially improved for all participants, with accuracy and comprehension remaining at stable levels.

Rasinski, T. (2003). Fluency is fundamental. Instructor, 113(4), 19-20.

Dr. Rasinski’s insight on fluency as a bridge between decoding and comprehension clearly sets the stage for educators who wish to incorporate fluency instruction into their classroom procedures. In this article Rasinski compels teachers to focus on three key elements of effective fluency instruction: modeling fluent reading, having students practice reading (repeatedly) specific graded passages, and supporting students while they read. He heralds the work of individual teachers that use creativity in implementing the strategies for the purpose of student motivation and entertainment by stating that if children “love reading…their fluency improves dramatically.”

Shaywitz, S. E., & Shaywitz, B. A. (2004). The new science of reading and its implications for the classroom. Education, 44(1), 20-23.

The “new science” reference made in the title of this article refers to the implications and mandates that the No Child Left Behind Act brings to education today. Shaywitz and Shaywitz, both medical doctors specializing in children with attention disorders and dyslexia, call for highly-qualified educators who understand the “science” of reading to use systematic repeated oral reading practices in their instruction of dyslexic learners. Guidance and feedback, being critical parts of the “scientific” fluency model, must be amplified and relentless when dealing with a dyslexic’s neurological system for transforming print into language.

The Shaywitzs speak resoundingly of vital nature of modeling and feedback for children with severe disabilities such as this. They also recognize the need for early intervention in order for the dyslexic child to ever master the ability to read with speed accuracy and with good expression.

Wren, Ph.D., S. (n.d.). Developing research-based resources for the balanced reading teacher: fluency. Retrieved Apr. 19, 2005, from Balanced Reading Web site: .

In this summation of the research on fluency instruction, Wren discusses the definition of fluency and the manner in which to make it a component of a balanced reading program. He finds that quality fluency instruction begins with adequate, individualized assessment and reminds the reader that it is from this assessment that the teacher plans lessons combining a variety of fluency exercises. Some of the exercises Wren suggests are repeated oral reading with feedback as to the rate and style of reading, sustained silent reading with conferencing, and the development of sight vocabulary.

Research has not indicated a direct correlation between sustained silent reading and growth in fluency; however, Wren supports the theory that readers learn to read better by spending more time reading. He remedies the problem of skilled “pretend readers” by having teachers spend time conferencing with students about choosing the appropriate level of text for fluency practice and monitoring progress so that children are held accountable for the time spent in silent reading.

Synthesis of Research

The research and studies based on reading fluency as well as the report published by the National Reading Panel prove that fluent reading does not occur spontaneously in most individuals. With the evidence correlating fluency and comprehension, educators must realize that pervasive action has to be taken to ensure fluency instruction for all readers, especially those who struggle with reading in general (Lyon, 1998; NRP, 2000).

Upon investigating the research on effective fluency instruction, I have found numerous commonalities and a variety of insightful procedures to use in creating an accomplished framework for future teaching.

Early Detection/Intervention

As with any inadequacy, be it related to one’s health, job or other issue, early detection and intervention are key to correction. In order to detect and remedy the problem of disfluent reading, one must conduct individualized assessments to gain knowledge of the students’ underlying deficits. With the data collected he/she is better prepared to begin administration of interventions that match the needs of the students.

Modeling

It is evident that in order to become fluent readers, students must experience fluent reading. In order to mimic this type of reading, students must have multiple opportunities within the learning setting to listen to adults and other students model reading that is connected with appropriate phrasing, speed, accuracy, and intonation. Read Aloud is one effective method mentioned in the above articles; however, modeling may also take form in tutorial situations, conferencing, shared/buddy reading, and numerous others.

Guidance with Extended Practice

There is a demand for students to be actively engaged in reading tasks in order to foster reading fluency. Many times students are not allowed sufficient time to practice the skills that teachers so desire they acquire. Affording students ample time to put newly acquired fluency techniques into practice, along with guidance and corrective feedback will sharpen the fluency continuum.

Reinforcement

The studies all point to the need for reinforcement during fluency instruction due to its relationship to the more timely acquisition of the skills. Reinforcement was presented in the studies by the presence of both verbal and tangible rewards. It is important to notice how students’ responses to instruction were altered by the availability (or lack thereof) of these stimuli.

The Future

Most of the research that I found on reading fluency consisted of materials that focused the attention of fluency measurement solely on computing correct words read per minute. Further research must be conducted revealing a valid and effective way of measuring fluency in terms of prosody. Though a few studies leaned toward branching away from strictly graded passages for fluency practice and assessment, I believe that it is crucial for practitioners to begin analyzing transfer of fluency features to cross-curricular materials.

Works Cited

Lyon, G. R. (1998, March ). Why reading is not a natural process. Educational Leadership, 55. Retrieved Apr 15, 2005, from

National Reading Panel. (2000). Report of the national Reading Panel: Teaching children to read. Bethesda, MD: National Institute of Child Health and Human Development

The End

Fluency is without question an essential part of successful reading because it provides a bridge between word recognition and comprehension. Because fluent readers do not have to concentrate on decoding the words, they can focus their attention on what the text means. For struggling readers, fluency will only develop with direct instruction. Educators serving such children must carefully evaluate the strategies used in the classroom to foster high levels of student engagement in the learning task. Involving readers in fluency practices that are viewed as redundant and neglecting the elements of feedback and positive reinforcement will have harmful repercussions on the reading experience.

Based on the data, it is evident that students view oral reading as successful and meaningful when there is consistent feedback in the form of peer helpers, teacher input, and having an audience. I will continue to use all components represented in this study by making adjustments to Timed-Repeated Reading and Taped-Assisted Reading. Pre-recorded tapes will be used only to supplement fluency instruction in cases where students lack good reading models at home or in the development of independent learning centers. Consideration will also be taken with the continuation of Timed Repeated Reading. External motivation is one way to elicit motivation and engagement during this activity. Both Reader’s Theater and Poetry Alive showed high indications of student engagement and will be implemented in the Reading Lab and suggested for use across the curriculum.

This study has opened my eyes as to how I should go about conducting classroom research. Though many times data recorded in the Reading Lab (i.e.: scores from reading inventories, SLOSSONs, etc.) depicts in students’ oral reading abilities and comprehension, it does not consider elements such as student engagement and attitude towards practices. Henceforth, I will look to my students’ reflections, journal responses, and conversations to gain insight on how interventions used in the Reading Lab are working.

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download