|
Reading
Fundamentals #2: Laying
the Foundation for Effective Instructor
Name: Mick R. Jackson MS/ED Phone: 509-891-7219 Office
Hours: 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. PST Monday - Friday Email: mick@virtualeduc.com Fax: 509-926-7768 Address: Virtual
Education Software 16201
E Indiana Ave, Suite 1450 Spokane,
WA 99216 Technical
Support: support@virtualeduc.com Introduction
The
federal legislation enacted in 2001 mandates the use of scientifically-based
research in programs receiving federal funding that deal with remedial
readers. The concept of scientifically-validated methods is so prevalent in
the legislation that it appears 110 times in these documents. This
three-course Reading Fundamentals series will help improve your knowledge of
science and the scientific process suggested for development of remedial
reading programs. This knowledge will make you a more informed consumer and
an even better advocate for students. The
purpose of this second course in this three-course series is to lay the
foundation for effective reading instruction. As part of this course, you
will learn about the elements of effective instruction. It is important that
all teachers have a firm understanding of effective instructional procedures.
Teachers benefit, and more importantly, students benefit, both in terms of
their behavior and their academic performance, from effective instruction.
Further, you will learn about the importance of reading instruction and read
some sobering statistics on reading performance in this country and what
happens when individuals are not proficient in reading. This computer-based instruction course
is a self-supporting program that provides instruction, structured practice,
and evaluation all on your home or school computer. Technical support information can be found,
in the Help section of your course. Course
Materials Title: Reading Fundamentals #2:
Laying the Foundation for Effective Reading Instruction Authors: Nancy Marchand-Martella, Ph.D. Publisher: Virtual
Education Software, inc. 2004, Revised
2010 Instructor: Mick Jackson MS/ED Academic Integrity Statement
The structure and format of
most distance-learning courses presumes a high level of personal and academic
integrity in completion and submission of coursework. Individuals enrolled in
a distance-learning course are expected to adhere to the following standards
of academic conduct.
Academic Work
Academic
work submitted by the individual (such as papers, assignments, reports,
tests) shall be the student’s own work or appropriately attributed in part or
in whole to its correct source. Submission of commercially prepared (or group
prepared) materials as if they are one’s own work is unacceptable. Aiding Honesty in Others The individual will encourage honesty in others by refraining from
providing materials or information to another person with knowledge that
these materials or information will be used improperly. Violations
of these academic standards will result in the assignment of a failing grade
and subsequent loss of credit for the course. Level
of Application
This course
is designed to be an informational course with application to educational
settings. The curriculum suggestions and teaching strategies explained here
were designed to be used for the teaching and remediation of students in
kindergarten through sixth grade and an age range from approximately five
years to twelve years of age. Some alterations may be needed if working with
specific populations such as gifted, ESL, or special education. Course Objectives:
1. Describe the
elements of effective instruction. 2.
Discuss the importance of reading instruction. 3.
Describe the reading theories/models. 4.
Differentiate between basal (core/comprehensive), supplemental, and
intervention reading programs. 5.
Provide information on reading psychology and development. 6. Trace the
evolution of reading from 7. Describe
key legislation that affects reading. 8. Discuss what key legislation means
to educators. Course
Description
Further,
a report of the Commission on Economics research has established
that schooling is an investment that forms human capital—that is, knowledge,
skill, and problem-solving ability that have enduring value. While a country
receives a good investment in education at all levels from nursery school and
kindergarten through college, the research reveals that the returns are highest
from the early years of schooling when children are first learning to read.
(p. 1) Unfortunately,
a vast number of our students are failing to learn to read in our schools in
grades K-3. The problem does not go away over time. In fact, the majority of these
students continue a trend of failure in reading. This problem has not gone
without notice. Reading initiatives such as the federal legislation of 2001
have tried to tackle this critical academic area “head on” by focusing on
scientifically-based reading programs. Further, five essential components of
effective reading programs have been identified and are key focal areas of
the 2001 federal legislation. These areas are phonemic awareness, phonics,
fluency, vocabulary, and text comprehension. Research has shown that students
need to master skills in these areas to become proficient readers. The cry
now heard is “every child a reader by the end of third grade.” It’s about
time. Student
Expectations
As a student you will be expected
to... ·
Complete all 4 information chapters covering The Foundations for Effective Reading Instruction,
showing a competent understanding of the material presented. ·
Complete all 4 chapter examinations, showing a
competent understanding of the material presented. ·
Complete a review of any
chapter on which your examination score was below 70%. ·
Retake any examination, after
completing an information review, to increase that examination score to a
minimum of 70% (maximum of 3 attempts). ·
Complete a course evaluation
form at the end of the course. Course
Overview
Chapter
1: Importance of Effective
Instruction
This course will shed some
light on effective instruction by breaking it down into parts. Figure I.1
shows how three critical elements of effective instruction lead to student
success in the classroom. These include: (a) the organization of instruction;
(b) curriculum design; and (c) instructional delivery as noted by Carnine,
Silbert, & Kame’enui (1997).
When
we look at how reading curricula or programs are designed, we must examine
six curricular variables. These variables include: (a) specifying objectives,
(b) devising strategies, (c) developing teaching procedures, (d) selecting
examples, (e) sequencing skills, and (f) providing practice and review. In
addition to examining the organization of instruction and how our reading
program is designed, we should view our instructional delivery techniques.
That is, how do we actually provide instruction to our students? Remember, we
can have good classroom organization and an effective reading program, but if
we do not have the skills to deliver the program in an effective manner, we
will struggle to teach our students at high levels. Instructional delivery
techniques include: (a) small group instruction, (b) unison oral responding,
(c) appropriate instructions, (d) signals, (e) pacing, (f) monitoring, (g)
diagnosis and correction, (h) teaching to criterion, and (i) motivation. Chapter 2: An Overview of Reading Instruction This
chapter details staggering statistics that describe the failure we see in our
society. These statistics note the progression of failure if we do not teach
reading effectively and early in school. Further, phenomena such as
reification and the Matthew Effects are described. The chapter describes
various reading models. A continuum of effective instructional practices as
they relate to reading is proposed to help draw light on using both
approaches—but it is a matter of when
each should be done. Additionally, information is provided on basal (core/comprehensive)
reading programs as well as on supplemental and intervention programs, given
their emphasis in our schools. The chapter also provides
important information on reading psychology and development. It is important
for teachers to have this background to be better prepared to provide
instruction in the classroom so that every
child learns to read at a proficient level. Chapter 3: The Evolution of Chapter
3 details the two reports that set the stage for the National Reading Panel
(2000) report. These included the In
1997, Congress asked the National Institute of Child Health and Human
Development (NICHD), in concert with the Secretary of Education, to convene a
national panel to assess the effectiveness of various approaches to teaching
children to read. That report is discussed in this chapter. Chapter 4: Key Legislation Affecting In
1998, Congress enacted the Reading Excellence Act (REA), an amendment to Title
II of ESEA. This Act paved the way for classroom instruction using
scientifically-based reading research to help all children learn to read by
the end of the third grade. Chapter 4 describes this important amendment to
ESEA. It also discusses the changes that were implemented when President Bush
signed the No Child Left Behind Act into
law on January 8, 2002 and gives details about the act. An
important program within the NCLB Act is Reading First. Reading First is the
largest and most focused early reading initiative this country has ever
undertaken. Again, an emphasis is placed on scientifically-based reading
research for students in grades K-3. This chapter describes this important
program within the NCLB legislation. Examinations
At the end of each chapter, you will be expected
to complete an examination designed to assess your knowledge. You may take
these exams a total of three times. Your last score will save, not the
highest score. After your third
attempt, each examination will lock and not allow further access. Your final grade for the course will be
determined by calculating an average score of all exams. This score will be printed on your final certificate. As this is a self-paced computerized instruction
program, you may review course information as often as necessary. You will
not be able to exit any examinations until you have answered all questions.
If you try to exit the exam before you complete all questions, your
information will be lost. You are expected to complete the entire exam in one
sitting. Instructor
Description Reading
Fundamentals #2: Laying the Foundation for Effective Reading Instruction
has been
developed by a team of professionals with educational backgrounds in the
areas of clinical psychology, direct reading, and phonetic instructional
practices. Mick Jackson, the instructor of record, is a Behavioral
Intervention Specialist with a Master's Degree in Special Education with a
focus on Behavioral Theory and a minor in Reading Remediation. He has 15 years’ combined experience in
self-contained special education classrooms, resource rooms, and a hospital
day treatment setting. He has
conducted oral seminars, presenting to school districts and teacher groups,
as well as at educational conferences.
Contacting
the Instructor
You may
contact the instructor by emailing Mick at mick@virtualeduc.com or calling
him at 509-891-7219 Monday through Friday, 8:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m. PST. Phone
messages will be answered within 24 hours.
Phone conferences will be limited to ten minutes per student, per day, given
that this is a self-paced instructional program. Please do not contact the
instructor about technical problems, course glitches, or other issues that
involve the operation of the course. Technical Questions
If you have questions or problems
related to the operation of this course, please try everything twice. If the
problem persists please check our support pages for FAQs and known issues at
www.virtualeduc.com and also the Help section of your course. If you need personal assistance then
email support@virtualeduc.com or
call (509) 891-7219. When contacting
technical support, please know your course version number (it is located at
the bottom left side of the Welcome Screen) and your operating system, and be
seated in front of the computer at the time of your call. Minimum
Computer Requirements Please
refer to VESi’s website: www.virtualeduc.com
or contact VESi if you have further questions about the compatibility of your
operating system. Refer to the addendum
regarding Grading Criteria, Course Completion Information, Items to be
Submitted, and how to submit your completed information. Bibliography
Adams,
M. J. (1990). Beginning to read:
Thinking and learning about print. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press. Atkinson,
P., & Hammersley, M. (1994). Ethnography and participant observation. In
N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook
of qualitative research (pp. 248-261). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Barlow,
D. H., & Hersen, M. (1984). Single
case experimental designs: Strategies for studying behavior change (2nd
ed.). New York: Pergamon. Bornstein,
R. F. (1990). Publication politics, experimenter bias and the replication
process in social science research. Journal
of Social Behavior and Personality, 5(4), 71-81. Bogdan,
R. C., & Biklen, S. K. (1992) Qualitative
research for education: An introduction to theory and methods (2nd ed.).
Boston: Allyn and Bacon. Chambless,
D. L., & Ollendick, T. H. (2001). Empirically supported psychological
interventions: Controversies and evidence. Annual Review of Psychology, 52, 685-716. Feldt,
L. S., & Brennan, R. L. (1989). Reliability. In R. L. Linn (Ed.), Educational measurement (3rd ed.) (pp.
235-271). Washington, DC: The American Council on Education and the National
Council on Measurement in Education. Fetterman,
D. M. (1989). Applied social research
methods series: Vol. 17. Ethnography step by step. Newbury Park, CA:
Sage. Fleishman,
S., Kohlmoos, J. W., & Rotherham, A. J. (2003). From research to
practice. Education Week, March 12.
Gall,
M. D., Borg, W. R., & Gall, J. P. (1996). Educational research: An introduction (6th ed.). White Plains,
NY: Longman. Gilgun,
J. F. (1994). A case for case studies in social work research. Social Work, 39, 371-380. Gould,
S. J. (1981). The mismeasure of man.
New York: Norton. Graziano,
A. M., & Raulin, M. L. (1993). Research
methods: A process of inquiry (2nd ed.). New York: Harper Collins. Hempenstall, K. (2004). The importance of
effective instruction. In N.
Marchand-Martella, T. Slocum, & R. Martella (Eds.), Introduction to direct instruction (pp. 1-27). Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon. Hendrick, C. (1990).
Replications, strict replications, and conceptual replications: Are they
important? Journal of Social Behavior
and Personality, 5(4), 41-49. Howe,
K., & Eisenhart, M. (1990). Standards for qualitative (and quantitative)
research: A prolegomenon. Educational
Researcher, 19(5), 2-9. Kazdin,
A. E. (1977). Artifact, bias, and complexity of assessment: The ABCs of
reliability. Journal of Applied
Behavior Analysis, 10, 141-150. Kilpatrick,
J. (2003). Leave no teacher behind.
Education News.org. http://www.educationnews.org/writers/jimmy/Leave-No-Teacher-Behind.htm Korat, O. (2010). Reading
electronic books as a support for vocabulary, story comprehension and word
reading in kindergarten and first grade. Computers
& Education, 55(1), 24-31. Gorsuch, G., & Taguchi, E. (2010). Developing reading fluency and comprehension using Repeated Reading:
Evidence from longitudinal student reports. Language Teaching Research, 14(1), 27-59. Knopf, H. T.,
& Brown, H. M. (2009). Lap reading with kindergartners: Nurturing
literacy skills and so much more. Young Children, 64(5),
80-87. Lamal,
P. A. (1990). On the importance of replication. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 5(4), 31-35. Martella,
R. C., Nelson, R., & Marchand-Martella, N. E. (1999). Research methods: Learning to become a
critical research consumer. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon. Meier,
K. (1997, February 7). The value of replicating social-science research. The Chronicle of Higher Education, p.
B7. Moats,
L. C. (1999). Teaching reading is
rocket science: What expert teachers of reading should know and be able to
do. Washington, DC: American Federation of Teachers. Moats, L.
(2007). Whole language high jinks: How
to tell when “scientifically-based reading instruction” isn’t. Baltimore,
MD: Thomas B. Fordham Foundation. National Joint
Committee on Learning Disabilities. (2005, June). Responsiveness to intervention and learning disabilities. National
Reading Panel. (2000). Teaching
children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research
literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction.
Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. National
Research Council. (2002). Scientific
research in education. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. Neuliep,
J. W., & Crandall, R. (1993a). Everyone was wrong: There are lots of
replications out there. Journal of
Social Behavior and Personality, 8(6), 1-8. Neuliep,
J. W., & Crandall, R. (1993b). Reviewer bias against replication
research. Journal of Social Behavior
and Personality, 8(6), 21-29. Patton,
M. Q. (1990). Qualitative evaluation
and research methods. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Popper,
K. R. (1957/1996). Philosophy of science: A personal report. In S. Sarkar
(Ed.), Science and philosophy in the
twentieth century: Decline and obsolescence of logical empiricism (pp.
237-273). New York: Garland. (Reprinted from British philosophy in the mid-century: A Cambridge symposium, pp.
155-191, by C.A. Mace, Ed., 1957, New York: Macmillan Norwood Russe). Potter,
W. J. (1996). An analysis of thinking
and research about qualitative methods. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates. Park, R. (2000). Voodoo science: The road from foolishness to fraud. New York:
Oxford. Rosenthal,
R. (1990). Replication in behavioral research. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 5(4), 1-30. Rosnow,
R. L., & Rosenthal, R. (1976). The volunteer subject revisited. Australian Journal of Psychology, 28,
97-108. Sagan,
C. (1996). The demon-haunted world:
Science as a candle in the dark. New York: Ballantine Books. Shaver,
J. P. (1983). The verification of independent variables in teaching methods
research. Educational Research, 12,
3-9. Silverman,
D. (1993). Interpreting qualitative
data: Methods for analysing talk, text, and interaction. London, Sage. Simmons,
D. C., & Kame’enui, E. J. (2003). A
consumer’s guide to evaluating a core reading program grades K-3: A critical
elements analysis. Eugene, OR: Institute for the Development of
Educational Achievement. Slavin,
R. E. (2003, February). A reader’s guide to scientifically based research:
Learning how to assess the validity of education research is vital for
creating effective, sustained reform. Educational
Leadership, 60(5), 12-16. Snow,
C. E., Burns, M. S., & Griffin, P. (Eds.). National Research Council.
(1998). Preventing reading difficulties
in young children. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. Spear-Swerling, L., Brucker, P. O., & Alfano, M. P.
(2010). Relationships between sixth-graders' reading comprehension and two
different measures of print exposure. Reading
and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 23(1), 73-96. Stanovich,
K. E. (1993/1994). Romance and reality. The
Reading Teacher, 47, 280-291. Strauss,
A., & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of
qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques. Newbury
Park, CA: Sage. Tawney,
J. W., & Gast, D. L. (1984). Single
subject research in special education. Columbus, OH: Merrill. The
1999 Omnibus Appropriations Bill. (1998). The
Reading Excellence Act, pp. 956-1007. http://www.nrrf.org/essay_ReadingExcel.html Torgesen, J.
K. (1998, Spring/Summer). Catch them before they fall: Identification and
assessment to prevent reading failure in young children. American Educator, 32-39. U.S. Department of
Education. (2002). No Child Left Behind
Act, 2001.
http://www.ed.gov/nclb/landing.jhtmlhttp://www.ed.gov/nclb/landing.jhtml Waldron, C. H. (2008). If I Read Better, Will I Score Higher?:
The relationship between oral reading fluency instruction and standardized
reading achievement test outcomes. Unpublished master’s thesis, Edinboro University
of Pennsylvania. Wills, H., Kamps, D., Abbott,
M., Bannister, H., & Kaufman, J. (2010). Classroom observations
and effects of reading interventions for students at risk for emotional and
behavioral disorders. Behavioral Disorders, 35(2), 103-119. Wren, S.
(2002). Ten myths of reading
instruction. Austin, TX: Southwest Educational Development Laboratory. Course content is updated every three years. Due to
this update timeline, some URL links may no longer be active or may have
changed. Please type the title of the organization into the command line of
any Internet browser search window and you will be able to find whether the
URL link is still active or any new link to the corresponding organization's
web home page. Updated 9/15/11 JN |