Introduction

This course will focus on learning to read, reading to learn, and an introduction to reading assessment. As part of these two key areas of reading instruction, the five elements of effective reading instruction will be highlighted, including definitions, implications for instruction, and future directions. These five elements include instruction in: phonemic awareness, phonics, fluency, vocabulary, and text comprehension. Further, we discuss information on teacher preparation in learning about comprehension strategy instruction and reading instruction, as well as how to integrate computer technology into the classroom. Additionally, the course will provide information on important assessment terms and definitions and will explore how reading assessment fits within the Reading First Program. This analysis includes specific recommendations on 29 reading assessments. Finally, the course describes how teachers can conduct pivotal curriculum-based measurement procedures in their classrooms.

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

Reading Fundamentals #3: The Elements of Effective Reading Instruction & Assessment (software package)

Authors: Greg Benner, Ph.D., Nancy Marchand-Martella, Ph.D., and Ronald Martella, Ph.D.

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 CBI 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 reading programs for kindergarten through third grade. The course is designed for both regular and exceptional education teachers and support staff who teach reading and reading remediation to public and private school students. This is a three-course series and teacher should complete the entire three-course series before developing and implementing a phonetically-based reading program in their school or classroom.

Course Objectives:

1. Describe learning to read and reading to learn.

2. Discuss important aspects of phonemic awareness instruction.

3. Identify important aspects of phonics instruction.

4. Describe important aspects of fluency instruction.

5. Note important aspects of vocabulary instruction.

6. Discuss important aspects of text comprehension.

7. Describe various aspects of teacher preparation and education in comprehension strategy instruction and reading instruction.

8. Note how computer technology can be used in reading instruction.

9. Provide details on the Consumer’s Guide to Evaluating a Core Reading Program by Simmons and Kame’enui (2003) and the Planning and Evaluation Tool for Effective Schoolwide Reading Programs by Kame’enui and Simmons (2000).

10. Describe accomplishments that can be expected for students in grades K-3.

11. Describe reading remediation guidelines and interventions for students in grades K-12.

12. Describe how to incorporate tutoring as an effective reading intervention.

13. Define important assessment terms.

14. Discuss technical adequacy, test interpretation, and assessment purposes.

15. Note how assessment fits within Reading First.

16. Describe the findings of the Reading First Assessment Committee (2002).

17. Discuss important ways to link assessment with instruction.

18. Detail the use of data-based decision making in classroom settings, with particular focus on various types of curriculum-based measurement procedures.

Course Description

The Reading First program focuses on implementing proven methods of early reading instruction in classrooms. Through Reading First, states and districts will receive support to apply scientifically based reading research—and the proven instructional and assessment tools consistent with this research—to ensure that all children learn to read well by the end of third grade. The Reading First program will provide the necessary assistance to states and districts to establish research-based reading programs for students in kindergarten through third grade. Funds will also support a significant increase in professional development to ensure that all teachers have the skills they need to teach these reading programs effectively. Additionally, the program provides assistance to states and districts in preparing classroom teachers to screen, identify, and eliminate reading barriers facing their students (U.S. Department of Education, 2002, p. 1).

Reading First not only specifies that an effective reading program should include phonemic awareness, phonics, fluency, vocabulary, and text comprehension instruction, but also notes that “an effective reading program is one that coherently integrates: screening, diagnostic and classroom-based assessments that are valid and reliable” (U.S. Department of Education, 2002a, p. 2). Accountability is the cornerstone of the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act (U.S. Department of Education, 2002b) that includes Reading First. Throughout the NCLB legislation, reference is made to helping students meet high academic standards and to measuring what they know and can do. If we are to ensure that all children can read by grade 3, as the legislation suggests, we must provide some way of measuring children’s performance. This assessment holds us accountable for what instruction and programs we provide in the classroom.

This course will describe the elements of effective reading instruction in some detail. Two primary sources were used in developing this course. First, the National Reading Panel Report (2000) was used. This Report serves as the most current “evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction” (note title of the National Reading Panel Report). Second, the Put Reading First document (Armbruster, Lehr, & Osborn, 2001a), a well-respected and easy-to-read publication on the research building blocks for teaching children to read, was used. “The findings and conclusions in this publication were drawn from the 2000 report of the National Reading Panel” (Armbruster et al., p. i).

Educational assessment involves gathering, interpreting, and synthesizing information to help teachers make important decisions about student performance (Airasian, 2001). It involves everything from scores on projects, papers, and exams to how children perform on school, district, state, or national evaluations (such as standardized tests). Educational assessment can be teacher-designed or publisher/researcher-based. It can be centered on the curriculum in the school or district, or based on what children across the country should know in a particular academic subject area, such as reading.

Student Expectations

As a student you will be expected to...

· Complete all 6 information chapters covering The Elements of Effective Reading Instruction & Assessment, showing a competent understanding of the material presented.

· Complete all 6 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 all course journal article and essay writing assignments with the minimum word count shown for each writing assignment.

· Complete a course evaluation form at the end of the course.

Course Overview

Chapter 1: An Overview of Reading Assessment

The purpose of this course is to consider what we can do in school to promote effective reading instruction. In this chapter we focus on three elements of effective reading instruction. These are phonemic awareness, phonics and fluency building. We have labeled these elements under the heading Learning to Read. Learning to Read emphasizes decoding skills.

Chapter 2: Reading to Learn and Other Important Areas of Reading Instruction

In this chapter, we focus on reading to learn or comprehension of text materials. Two elements of effective reading instruction must be conducted to improve reading comprehension in the classroom. These include vocabulary instruction and text comprehension instruction.

Chapter 3: Further Examination of Reading Programs and Skills

In this chapter, we provide further examination of reading programs and skills. We discuss how to evaluate core or comprehensive reading programs using the Consumer’s Guide developed by Simmons and Kame’enui (2003). We also discuss the Planning and Evaluation Tool (Kame’enui & Simmons, 2000) that is used to assess schoolwide reading programs. We conclude by discussing the important accomplishments by grade level as identified by Armbruster, Lehr, and Osborn (2003) in their booklet, A Child Becomes a Reader: Proven Ideas from Research for Parents: Kindergarten through Grade 3.

Chapter 4: Reading Remediation

In this chapter, we will describe interventions for students in Grades K-12. We offer important guidelines on remedial reading programs. We will also focus on the importance of tutorial programs in schools. Tutorial programs are considered one of the best ways of providing reading instruction to struggling readers.

Chapter 5: Reading Assessment

This chapter describes relevant assessment terms and purposes. It is critical to understand the types of tests available to teachers and what information can be gathered from them. It also provides important information on how assessment fits within Reading First. Additionally, this chapter details the findings of the Reading First Assessment Committee. It also provides important information on how assessment fits within Reading First. Additionally, this chapter details the findings of the Reading First Assessment Committee.

Chapter 6: Recommended Classroom Practices

This chapter lays out recommended classroom practices in terms of assessment. It describes the ever-important link between assessment and instruction. An outcomes-driven model is discussed. Additionally, the chapter explores data tracking and data-based decision making with particular focus on CBM and its derivatives (i.e., measures not based directly on a particular curriculum, but integrating CBM elements such as frequent progress monitoring). It discusses the DIBELS and MASI-R as well as teacher-developed CBM practices that can serve as criterion-referenced tests when student data are compared to performance criteria.

Examinations

At the end of each course 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. The average from your exam scores will be printed on your certificate. However, this is not your final grade since your required writing assignments have not been reviewed. Exceptionally written or poorly written required writing assignments, or violation of the academic integrity policy in the course syllabus, will affect your grade. 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.

_________________________________________________________________________________________________

Writing Assignments

This course has two required writing components.

To save your essays:

When you select the question or article you wish to write on, simple text or text edit will

automatically be launched. When you are finished, simply click SAVE.

You must SAVE before you write another essay or move on to another part of the course.

1) Essay Requirement: Critical Thinking Questions

There is a Critical Thinking Question for each chapter. You will do research on the question and write a brief essay relating it to the course content (and your personal experiences when possible). To view the questions, click on REQUIRED ESSAY and choose the Critical Thinking Question that you would like to complete; this will bring up a screen where you may enter your essay. You must write a minimum of 500 words per essay.

You must SAVE before you write another essay or move on to another part of the course.

2) Essay Requirement: Journal Articles

This task requires you to write a review of three journal articles of your choice on a topic related to this course. You may choose your topic by entering the Key Words (click on the Key Words button) into a search engine of your choice (Google, Dogpile, Yahoo, etc.). Choose three relevant articles and write a 200-word review of each. You may also access the ERIC system and choose a related topic from a journal listed in that system. Or you can access www.scholar.google.com or www.findarticles.com .Write a critical summary of the information given in each article, explaining how the information relates to, supports, or refutes information given in this course. Conclude your paper with your thoughts and impressions. (200 words per journal article minimum, 400 words maximum.) Be sure to provide the journal name, volume, date, and any other critical information to allow the instructor to access and review that article.

To write your essays, click on REQUIRED ESSAY and choose the Journal Article that you would like to complete; this will bring up a screen where you can write your review. When you are ready to stop, click SAVE. You may go back at any point to edit your essays. For more information on the features of this assignment, please consult the HELP menu.

You must SAVE before you write another essay or move on to another part of the course.

Instructor Description

Reading Fundamentals #3: The Elements of Effective Reading Instruction & Assessment 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 and 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, teacher groups, and at educational conferences.

Contacting the Instructor

You may contact the instructor by emailing Mick at mick@virtualeduc.com or calling him at 800-313-6744 Monday through Friday, 9:00 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 (Suggested Readings)

Adams, M. J. (1990). Beginning to read: Thinking and learning about print. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.

Archer, A. L., Gleason, M. M., & Vachon, V. (2001). REWARDS. Longmont, CO: Sopris West.

Archer, A. L., Gleason, M. M., & Vachon, V. (2003). REWARDS Plus. Longmont, CO: Sopris West.

Armbruster, B. B., Lehr, F., & Osborn, J. (2001a). Put reading first: The research building blocks for teaching children to read: Kindergarten through grade 3. Jessup, MD: National Institute for Literacy.

Armbruster, B. B., Lehr, F., & Osborn, J. (2001b). Put reading first: Helping your child learn to read: A parent guide: Preschool through grade 3. Jessup, MD: National Institute for Literacy.

Armbruster, B. B., Lehr, F., & Osborn, J. (2002). A child becomes a reader: Proven ideas from research for parents: Birth to preschool. Jessup, MD: National Institute for Literacy.

Armbruster, B. B., Lehr, F., & Osborn, J. (2003). A child becomes a reader: Proven ideas from research for parents: Kindergarten to grade 3. Jessup, MD: National Institute for Literacy.

Beck, I. L., & McKeown, M. G. (2002). Comprehension: The sin qua non of reading. In S. Patton & M. Holmes (Eds.), The keys to literacy (2^nd ed., on-line version) (pp. 43-51). Washington, DC: Council for Basic Education.

Burns, M. K., MacQuarrie, L. L., & Campbell, D. T. (2002). The difference between curriculum-based assessment and curriculum-based measurement: A focus on purpose and result. NASP Communique’, 27(6), 1-5. Retrieved July 14, 2003 from nasponline.org/publications/cq276cba.html

Byrne, B., & Fielding-Barnsley, R. (1989). Phonemic awareness and letter knowledge in the child's acquisition of the alphabetic principle. Journal of Educational Psychology, 81, 313-321.

Carnine, D., Silbert, J., & Kame’enui, E. (1997). Direct instruction reading (3^rd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill/Prentice Hall.

Cunningham, A. E., & Stanovich, E. K. (2001). What reading does for the mind. Journal of Direct Instruction, 1(2), 137-149. Reprinted with permission from The American Federation of Teachers. (1998). American Educator, 22 (1), 8-15.

Deno, S. L. (1989). Curriculum-based measurement and special education services: A fundamental and direct relationship. In M. R. Shinn (Ed.), Curriculum-based measurement: Assessing special children (pp. 1-17). New York: Guilford Press.

Deno, S. L., Fuchs, L. S., Marston, D., & Shinn, M. (2001). Using curriculum-based measurement to establish growth standards for students with learning disabilities. School Psychology Review, 30(4), 507-524.

Dewitz, P., & Dewitz, P. K. (2003). They can read the words, but they can't understand: Refining comprehension assessment: Comprehension problems can be difficult to detect and treat. Here are some suggestions for catching these problems and addressing students’ shortcomings. The Reading Teacher, 56(5), 422-435.

Engelmann, S., Haddox, P., & Bruner, E. (1983). Teach your child to read in 100 easy lessons. New York: Simon & Schuster.

Engelmann, S., Hanner, S., & Johnson, G. (1999). Corrective reading series guide. Columbus, OH: McGraw-Hill/SRA.

Foorman, B. R., Fletcher, J. M., & Francis, D. J. (2002).Preventing reading failure by ensuring effective reading instruction. In S. Patton & M. Holmes (Eds.), The keys to literacy (2^nd ed., on-line version) (pp. 36-42). Washington, DC: Council for Basic Education.

Fuchs, L. S. (1995). Connecting performance assessment to instruction: A comparison of behavioral assessment, mastery learning, curriculum-based measurement, and performance assessment. ERIC Digest E530. ERIC Clearinghouse on Disabilities and Gifted Education, Reston, VA: ERIC Document No. ED381984.

Fuchs, L. S., Hamlett, C. L., & Fuchs, D. (1997). Monitoring basic skills progress: Basic reading (2^nd ed.). Austin, TX: PRO-ED.

Gersten, R., Keating, T., & Irvin, L. K. (1995). The burden of proof: The validity as improvement of instructional practice. Exceptional Children, 61(6), 510-519.

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

Goodman, K. (1969). Analysis of oral reading miscues: Applied psycholinguistics. Reading Research Quarterly, 5, 9-30.

Goodman, K. (1973). Theoretically based studies of patterns of miscues in oral reading performance. Detroit: Wayne State University. Educational Resources Information Center, ED 079 708.

Groff, P. (2001). Decodable words versus predictable text. National Right to Read Foundation. Accessed June 19, 2003. Available from: http://www.nrrf.org/decodable_vs_predictable.htm

Hall, S. L., & Moats, L. C. (1999). Straight talk about reading: How parents can make a difference during the early years. Lincolnwood, IL: Contemporary Books.

Hempenstall, K. (2003). Miscue analysis: A critique. ReadbyGrade3.com: Reading and Reading Disabilities. Retrieved July 7, 2003 from http://www.readbygrade3.com/miscue.htm.

Howell, K. W., Zucker, S. H., & Morehead, M. K. (1982). Multilevel academic skills inventory—Revised. Columbus, OH: Merrill.

Kame’enui, E., & Simmons, D. (2000). Planning and evaluation tool for effective schoolwide reading programs. Eugene, OR: Institute for the Development of Educational Achievement (IDEA).

Kamps, D., Locke, P., Delquadri, J., & Hall, R. V. (1989). Increasing academic skills of students with autism using fifth grade peers as tutors. Education & Treatment of Children, 12, 38-51.

Leu, D. J., Jr. (1982). Oral reading error analysis: A critical review of research and application. Reading Research Quarterly, 17, 420-437.

Lie, A. (1991). Effects of a training program for stimulating skills in word analysis in first-grade children. Reading Research Quarterly, 26, 234-250.

Marchand-Martella, N. E., Blakely, M., & Schaefer, E. (2004). Aspects of schoolwide implementations. In N. E. Marchand-Martella, T. A. Slocum, & R. C. Martella (Eds.), Introduction to direct instruction. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.

Martella, R. C., Marchand-Martella, N. E., Miller, T., Young, R., & Macfarlane, C. (1995, Winter). Teaching instructional aides and peer tutors to decrease problem behaviors in the classroom. Teaching Exceptional Children, 53-56.

Marchand-Martella, N. E., Martella, R. C., Nelson, J. R., Waterbury, L., Shelley, S., Cleanthous, C., & Hatfield, D. (2002). Implementation of the Sound Partners reading program. Journal of Behavioral Education, 11, 117-130.

Marchand-Martella, N. E., Martella, R. C., & Waldron-Soler, K. (2000). Implementation manual for Project PALS (Peer Assisted Learning System): Delivering Corrective Reading through peer-delivered instruction. Eugene, OR: Association for Direct Instruction.

Martino, L. R. (1994). Peer tutoring classes for young adolescents: A cost-effective strategy. Middle School Journal, 25, 55-58.

Moats, L. (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. C. (2002). Teachers: A key to helping America read. In S. Patton & M. Holmes (Eds.), The keys to literacy (2^nd ed., on-line version) (pp. 27-35). Washington, DC: Council for Basic Education.

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. Reports of the subgroups. Jessup, MD: National Institute for Literacy.

National Research Council. (1999). Starting out right: A guide to promoting children’s reading success. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

Nelson, J. R., Cooper, P., & Gonzalez, J. E. (2004). Stepping stones to literacy. Denver, CO: Sopris West.

Orton Dyslexia Society. (1997). Informed instruction for reading success: Foundations for teacher preparation. Baltimore, MD: Author.

Pemberton, J. B. (2003). Communicating academic progress as an integral part of assessment. Teaching Exceptional Children, 35(4), 16-20.

Shapiro, E. S. (1996a). Academic skills problems: Direct assessment and intervention (2^nd ed.). New York: Guilford Press.

Shapiro, E. S. (1996b). Academic skills problems workbook. New York: Guilford Press.

Shinn, M. R. (Ed.). (1989). Curriculum-based measurement: Assessing special children. New York: Guilford Press.

Short, C., Marchand-Martella, N. E., Martella, R. C., Ebey, T., & Stookey, S. (1999). The benefits of being high school Corrective Reading peer instructors. Effective School Practices, 18(2), 23-29.

Sibley, D., Biwer, D., & Hesch, A. (2001). Establishing curriculum-based measurement of oral reading fluency performance standards to predict success on local and state tests of reading achievement. Unpublished data. Arlington Heights, IL: Arlington Heights School District 25.

Simmons, D. C., & Kame’enui, E. J. (2003, March). 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, College of Education, University of Oregon.

Snow, C. E., Burns, M. S., & Griffin, P. (Eds.). National Research Council. (1998). Preventing reading difficulties in young children. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

Stein, M., Johnson, B., & Gutlohn, L. (1999). Analyzing beginning reading programs: The relationships between decoding instruction and text. Remedial and Special Education, 20(5), 275-287.

Tindal, G. A., & Marston, D. B. (1990). Classroom-based assessment. New York: Merrill/Macmillan.

U.S. Department of Education. (2002). Reading First program state application. Washington, DC: Author.

U.S. Department of Education. Office of the Under Secretary. (2002b). No child left behind: A desktop reference. Washington, DC: Author.

Utley, C., Mortweet, S., & Greenwood, C. (1997). Peer-mediated instruction and interventions. Focus on Exceptional Children, 29, 1-23.

Vadasy, P. (2004). Sound Partners reading program. Denver, CO: Sopris West.

Wildman Longwill, A., & Kleinert, H. L. (1998, May/April). The unexpected benefits of high school peer tutoring. Teaching Exceptional Children, 60-65.

Wright, J. (1992). Curriculum-based measurement: A manual for teachers. Available online at www.interventioncentral.org.

Updated 1/22/10 JN