Reading Fundamentals #3:

The Elements of Effective Reading Instruction & Assessment

 

Instructor Name:

Dr. Karen Lea

Phone:

509-891-7219

Office Hours:

8 a.m. to 5 p.m. PST Monday - Friday

Email:

karen_lea@virtualeduc.com

Address:

Virtual Education Software

 

23403 E Mission Avenue, Suite 220F

 

Liberty Lake, WA 99019

Technical Support:

support@virtualeduc.com

 

Introduction

This course will focus on grades K–3 and 4–12 reading instruction and an introduction to reading assessment. As part of these two key areas of reading instruction, the five elements of effective reading instruction for grades K–3 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. Additionally, the five elements of effective reading instruction for grades 4–12 will be highlighted, including definitions, implications for instruction, and future directions. These five elements include instruction in word study, fluency, vocabulary, comprehension, and motivation. The course will also provide information on important assessment terms and definitions and will explore how reading assessment fits within federally mandated programs. This analysis includes specific recommendations for understanding student reading needs using screening, diagnostic, and progress-monitoring assessments. Finally, the course describes how teachers can conduct and use pivotal curriculum-based measurement (CBM) 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 (Online)

Title:

Reading Fundamentals #3: The Elements of Effective Reading Instruction & Assessment

Author:

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

Publisher:

Virtual Education Software, inc. 2004, Revised 2010, Revised 2014, Revised 2017, Revised 2020,

Revised 2024

Instructor:

Dr. Karen Lea

 

 

 

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 reading programs for kindergarten through grade 12. 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 the final course in a three-course series. Although it is not mandatory to complete all three courses, VESi recommends completing the entire series before developing and implementing a evidence-based reading program in your school or classroom.

 

Expected Learning Outcomes

As a result of this course, participants will demonstrate their ability to:

  1. Describe the application of the Science of Reading.
  2. Describe learning to read and reading to learn.
  3. Discuss important aspects of phonemic awareness instruction.
  4. Identify important aspects of phonics instruction.
  5. Describe important aspects of fluency instruction.
  6. Note important aspects of vocabulary instruction.
  7. Discuss important aspects of text comprehension.
  8. Describe the major activities related to content-area reading instruction.
  9. Note how computer technology can be used in reading instruction.
  10. Outline the goals and approaches of RTI and MTSS, in general and with regard to reading remediation.
  11. Describe accomplishments that can be expected for students in grades K–3.
  12. Discuss important aspects of adolescent literacy instruction and assessment (grades 4–12).
  13. Discuss important aspects of word study and motivation.
  14. Describe reading remediation guidelines and interventions for students in grades K–12.
  15. Describe how to incorporate tutoring as an effective reading intervention.
  16. Define important assessment terms.
  17. Discuss technical quality, test interpretation, and assessment purposes.
  18. Note how assessment fits within federally mandated programs.
  19. Apply response to intervention (RTI) systems/multitier system of supports (MTSS) approaches to understand student reading needs, including screening, diagnosing where to focus instruction, and monitoring student reading progress.

 

Course Description

The Reading Fundamentals program focuses on implementing proven methods of reading instruction in classrooms. The No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 added two new reading programs to the Elementary and Secondary Education Act—Reading First and Early Reading First—both under the Bush Administration. Under the Obama Administration, the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) became the main educational law for public schools. The Striving Readers Comprehensive Literacy program provided funding focused on advancing literacy skills for children from birth through grade 12. An emphasis was placed on evidence-based classroom instruction and assessment and targeted interventions for those reading below grade level. Race to the Top was another initiative offering funding. Under the Trump Administration, the Striving Readers Comprehensive Literacy program was renamed the Literacy Education for All, Results for the Nation (LEARN).

This course will focus on grades K–3 and grades 4–12 and the Science of Reading. As part of these two key areas of reading instruction, prereading skills for preschoolers will be briefly described. Additionally, the five elements of effective reading instruction will be highlighted, including definitions, implications for instruction, and future directions. These five elements are instruction in phonemic awareness, phonics, fluency, vocabulary, and text comprehension (grades K–3); and word study, fluency, vocabulary, comprehension, and motivation (grades 4–12).

We conclude with information on important assessment terms and definitions. Further, we provide information on how reading assessment fits within the Reading First Program. We include detailed information on the Analysis of Reading Assessment Instruments for K–3 (Institute for the Development of Educational Achievement, 2002) completed by key leaders in the assessment field. This analysis includes specific recommendations on 29 reading assessments. We describe how response to intervention (RTI) and multitier system of support (MTSS) are used to understand student reading needs, including screening, diagnosing where to focus instruction, and monitoring student reading progress over time. We demonstrate how teachers can link assessment with instruction and data-based decision making in classroom settings, with particular focus on pivotal curriculum-based measurement procedures.

 

Student Expectations

As a student you will be expected to:

·         Complete all six information sections showing a competent understanding of the material presented in each section.

·         Complete all six section examinations, showing a competent understanding of the material presented. You must obtain an overall score of 70% or higher, with no individual exam score below 50%, and successfully complete ALL writing assignments to pass this course. *Please note: Minimum exam score requirements may vary by college or university; therefore, you should refer to your course addendum to determine what your minimum exam score requirements are.

·         Complete a review of any section on which your examination score was below 50%.

·         Retake any examination, after completing an information review, to increase that examination score to a minimum of 50%, making sure to also be achieving an overall exam score of a minimum 70% (maximum of three attempts). *Please note: Minimum exam score requirements may vary by college or university; therefore, you should refer to your course addendum to determine what your minimum exam score requirements are.

·         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: Reading Instruction

The purpose of this course is to consider what we can do in school to promote effective reading instruction. In this chapter, we discuss Science of Reading and focus on two elements of effective reading instruction. These are phonemic awareness and phonics.

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

In this chapter, we focus on additional elements of the Science of Reading: fluency, vocabulary, and comprehension. Additionally we look at applying the Science of Reading in content-area reading activities and instruction.

Chapter 3: Further Examination of Reading Programs & 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) and the Rubric for Evaluating Reading/Language Arts Instructional Materials for Kindergarten to Grade 5 by Foorman, Smith, and Kosanovich (2017), which are used to assess 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 for remedial reading programs. We 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: Best Practices for 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 about how assessment fits within Reading First. Additionally, this chapter details the findings of the Reading First Assessment Committee. It also provides important information about how assessment currently fits within the Striving Readers Comprehensive Literacy program. Additionally, this chapter details the best practices from the Reading First Assessment Committee, the Florida Center for Reading Research, and the National Center for Intensive Intervention (NCII). Response to intervention (RTI) practices for understanding the literacy needs of students through screening, diagnostic, and progress-monitoring assessments are detailed.

Chapter 6: Linking Assessment With Instruction

This chapter lays out how to link reading assessment with instruction, meaning how to use assessment information to meet individual students’ literacy needs every day. It describes the ever-important link between assessment and instruction and how to problem-solve when student literacy needs are not being met. 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 in addition to teacher-developed CBM practices that can serve as criterion-referenced tests when student data are compared with performance criteria. We highlight best practices for understanding the reading comprehension and motivation of striving readers (grades 4–12).

 

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

All assignments are reviewed and may impact your final grade. Exceptionally or poorly written assignments, or violation of the Academic Integrity Policy (see course syllabus for policy), will affect your grade. Fifty percent of your grade is determined by your writing assignments, and your overall exam score determines the other fifty percent. Refer to the Essay Grading Guidelines, which were sent as an attachment with your original course link. You should also refer to the Course Syllabus Addendum, which was sent as an attachment with your original course link, to determine if you have any writing assignments in addition to the Critical Thinking Questions (CTQ) and Journal Article Summations (JAS). If you do, the Essay Grading Guidelines will also apply.

Your writing assignments must meet the minimum word count and are not to include the question or your final citations as part of your word count. In other words, the question and citations are not to be used as a means to meet the minimum word count.

Critical Thinking Questions

There are four CTQs that you are required to complete. You will need to write a minimum of 500 words (maximum 1,000) per essay. You should explain how the information that you gained from the course will be applied and clearly convey a strong understanding of the course content as it relates to each CTQ. To view the questions, click on REQUIRED ESSAY and choose the CTQ that you are ready to complete; this will bring up a screen where you may enter your essay. Prior to course submission, you may go back at any point to edit your essay, but you must be certain to click SAVE once you are done with your edits.

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

Journal Article Summations

You are required to write, in your own words, a summary on a total of three peer-reviewed or scholarly journal articles (one article per JAS), written by an author with a Ph.D., Ed.D., or similar, on the topic outlined within each JAS section in the “Required Essays” portion of the course (blogs, abstracts, news articles, or similar are not acceptable). Your article choice must relate specifically to the discussion topic listed in each individual JAS. You will choose a total of three relevant articles (one article per JAS) and write a thorough summary of the information presented in each article (you must write a minimum of 200 words with a 400 word maximum per JAS). Be sure to provide the URL or the journal name, volume, date, and any other critical information to allow the facilitator to access and review each article.

To write your summary, click on REQUIRED ESSAYS and choose the JAS that you would like to complete. A writing program will automatically launch where you can write your summary. When you are ready to stop, click SAVE. Prior to course submission you may go back at any point to edit your summaries but you must be certain to click SAVE once you are done with your edits. For more information on the features of this assignment, please consult the HELP menu.

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

 

Instructor Description

Karen Lea holds a Ph.D. in education. Dr. Lea has 15 years’ experience teaching at the K–12 level and another 14 years’ experience teaching education courses at the undergraduate and post-graduate level. Currently she is an assessment developer at Western Governors University. Dr. Lea has been professionally published over 15 times and has served on over a dozen panels and boards, including serving on the NCATE (CAEP) Board of Examiners.

 

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. The addendum will also note any additional course assignments that you may be required to complete that are not listed in this syllabus.

 

Bibliography (Suggested Readings)

Academy of Scholars (2024). Ready, set, read: 10 strategies for building phonemic awareness. https://academyofscholars.com/ready-set-read-10-strategies-for-building-phonemic-awareness/

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

Adams, M. J., Fillmore, L. W., Goldenberg, C., Oakhill, J., Paige, D. D., Rasinski, T., & Shanahan, T. (2020, January). Comparing reading research to program design: An examination of teachers college units of study. Student Achievement Partners. https://achievethecore.org/page/3240/comparing-reading-research-to-program-design-an-examination-of-teachers-college-units-of-study

Armbruster, B. B., Lehr, F., & Osborn, J. (2006a). A child becomes a reader: Proven ideas from research for parents: Birth to preschool (3rd ed.). National Institute for Literacy.

Armbruster, B. B., Lehr, F., & Osborn, J. (2006b). A child becomes a reader: Proven ideas from research for parents: Kindergarten to grade 3 (3rd ed.). National Institute for Literacy.

Armbruster, B. B., Lehr, F., & Osborn, J. (2006c). Put reading first: The research building blocks for teaching children to read: Kindergarten through grade 3 (3rd ed.). National Institute for Literacy.

ASCD. (2015). Elementary and secondary education act: Comparison of the No Child Left Behind Act to the Every Student Succeeds Act. Author. http://www.ascd.org/ASCD/pdf/siteASCD/policy/ESEA_NCLB_ComparisonChart_2015.pdf

Ascend Smarter Intervention. (2023). How to teach phonics using a research-based approach. https://www.ascendlearningcenter.com/blog-highlights/research-based-phonics-instruction

Ascend Smarter Intervention. (2023). How to teach reading fluency using a research-based approach. https://www.ascendlearningcenter.com/blog-highlights/research-based-fluency-instruction

Baker, S., Geva, E., Kieffer, M. J., Lesaux, N., Linan-Thompson, S., Morris, J., Proctor, C. P., & Russell, R. (2014). Teaching academic content and literacy to English learners in elementary and middle school (NCEE No. 2014–4012). National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance (NCEE), Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. http://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED544783

Barshay, J. (2024). New reading research shows the power of connecting letters and sounds. https://www.future-ed.org/new-reading-research-shows-the-power-of-connecting-letters-and-sounds/

Blume, H. (2023). Stanford study wades into reading wars with high marks for phonics-based teaching. https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2023-12-04/stanford-study-wades-into-reading-wars-with-strong-evidence-that-phonics-works

Boardman, A. G., Roberts, G., Vaughn, S., Wexler, J., Murray, C. S., & Kosanovich, M. (2008). Effective instruction for adolescent struggling readers: A practice brief. RMC Research Corporation, Center on Instruction.

Bogaerds-Hazenber, S. T. M., Evers-Vermeul, J., & van den Bergh, H. (2020). A meta-analysis on the effects of text structure instruction on reading comprehension in the upper elementary grades. Reading Research Quarterly, 1–28. https://doi.org/10.1002/rrq.311

Bowers, J. S. (2023). There is still little or no evidence that systematic phonics is more effective than common alternative methods of instruction: Response to Brooks. Review of Education, 11(3). https://doi.org/10.1002/rev3.3432

Carnine, D., Silbert, J., Kame’enui, E., Slocum, T. A., & Travers, P. (2017). Direct instruction reading (6th ed.). Pearson.

Castles, A., Rastle, K., & Nation, K. (2018). Ending the reading wars: Reading acquisition from novice to expert. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 19, 5–51. https://doi.org/10.1177/1529100618772271

Cervetti, G., & Hiebert, E. H. (2015). The sixth pillar of reading instruction: Knowledge development. The Reading Teacher, 68, 548–551. https://doi.org/10.1002/trtr.1343

Chong, J. (2021). 10 tips for teaching phonological awareness. LD@School. https://www.ldatschool.ca/10-tips-for-teaching-phonological-awareness/

Ciancio, D. (2023, July 18). The importance of comprehension in the science of reading. https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/rel/Products/Region/west/Blog/107263

Ciesielski, E. J. M., & Creaghead, N. A. (2020). The effectiveness of professional development on the phonological awareness outcomes of preschool children: A systematic review. Literacy Research and Instruction, 59(2), 121–147. https://doi.org/10.1080/19388071.2019.1710785

Ciullo, S., Ely, E., McKenna, J. W., Alves, K. D., & Kennedy, M. J. (2019). Reading instruction for students with learning disabilities in grades 4 and 5: An observation study. Learning Disability Quarterly, 42, 67–79. https://doi.org/10.1177/0731948718806654

Common Core State Standards Initiative website. (2015). http://www.corestandards.org/ELA-Literacy/CCRA/R/

Consortium on Reading Excellence (2008). Assessing reading: Multiple measures for all educators working to improve reading achievement. Arena Press.

Compton, C. (n.d.). The art & science of vocabulary instruction. Center for Professional Education of Teachers.

Continental. (2023). Science of reading 101: Build fluency with evidence-based instruction. https://www.continentalpress.com/blog/reading-fluency/

Coyne, M. D., & Koriakin, T. A. (2017). What do beginning special educators need to know about implementing intensive reading interventions for students with disabilities? Teaching Exceptional Children, 49, 239–248. https://doi.org/10.1177/0040059916688648

Coyne, M. D., Zipoli, R. P., & Ruby, M. F. (2006). Beginning reading instruction for students at risk for reading disabilities: What, how, and when. Intervention in School and Clinic, 41(3), 161–168. https://doi.org/10.1177/10534512060410030601

Davis, J. (2021, March 30). What is “scientific literacy”? Jason Learning. https://jason.org/what-is-scientific-literacy/

Deans for Impact. (2019). The science of early learning. Author.

Duke, N. K., Ward, A. E., & Pearson, P. D. (2021). The science of reading comprehension instruction. The Reading Teacher, 74(6), 663–672. https://doi.org/10.1002/trtr.1993

Edmentum. (2023, October 24). The science of reading explained: Vocabulary. https://www.edmentum.com/articles/the-science-of-reading-explained-vocabulary/

Ehri, L. C. (2020). The science of learning to read words: A case for systematic phonics instruction. Reading Research Quarterly, 55(S1), S45–S60. https://doi.org/10.1002/rrq.334

Every Student Succeeds Act, S.1177, 114th Cong. (2015). http://edworkforce.house.gov/uploadedfiles/every_student_succeeds_act_-_conference_report.pdf

Farrall, M. L. (2012). Reading assessment: Linking language, literacy, and cognition. John Wiley & Sons.

Foorman, B., Beyler, N., Borradaile, K., Coyne, M., Denton, C. A., Dimino, J., Hayes, L., Justice, L., Lewis, W., Wagner, R., Furgeson, J., Henke, J., Keating, B., Sattar, S., Streke, A., & Wissel, S. (2016). Foundational skills to support reading for understanding in kindergarten through 3rd grade (NCEE 2016-4008). National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance (NCEE), Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/WWC/Docs/PracticeGuide/wwc_foundationalreading_040717.pdf

Foorman, B. R., Lee, L. & Smith, K. (2020). Implementing evidence-based reading practices in K–3 classrooms. Education and Treatment of Children, 43, 49–55. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s43494-020-00005-3

Foorman, B. R., Smith, K. G., & Kosanovich, M. L. (2017). Rubric for evaluating reading/language arts instructional materials for kindergarten to grade 5 (REL 2017–219). U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Regional Educational Laboratory Southeast. https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/rel/regions/southeast/pdf/REL_2017219.pdf

Fuchs, D., & Fuchs, L. S. (2007). Responsiveness to intervention [Special issue]. Teaching Exceptional Children, 39(5). http://www.centeroninstruction.org/files/TEC-vol.39no.52007.pdf

Fuchs, L. S., & Fuchs, D. (2007). A model for implementing responsiveness to intervention. Teaching Exceptional Children, 39(5), 14–20. https://doi.org/10.1177/004005990703900503

Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., & Malone, A. S. (2017). The taxonomy of intervention intensity. Teaching Exceptional Children, 50(1), 35–43. https://doi.org/10.1177/0040059917703962

Gersten, R., Compton, D., Connor, C. M., Dimino, J., Santoro, L., Linan-Thompson, S., & Tilly, W. D. (2008). Assisting students struggling with reading: Response to Intervention and multi-tier intervention for reading in the primary grades. National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/Docs/PracticeGuide/rti_reading_pg_021809.pdf

Gomes, M. and Hirata. G. (2023). Developing reading fluency in primary school: Evidence from an RCT. Education Economics, 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1080/09645292.2024.2322535

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. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168809346494

Graham, S., Bollinger, A., Booth Olson, C., D’Aoust, C., MacArthur, C., McCutchen, D., & Olinghouse, N. (2012). Teaching elementary school students to be effective writers: A practice guide (NCEE No. 2012–4058). National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance (NCEE), Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. http://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED533112

Hanford, E. (2018). Hard words: Why aren’t kids being taught to read? APM Reports. https://www.apmreports.org/episode/2018/09/10/hard-words-why-american-kids-arent-being-taught-to-read

Hanford, E. (2019, August 22). At a loss for words: How a flawed idea is teaching millions of kids to be poor readers. APM Reports. https://www.apmreports.org/story/2019/08/22/whats-wrong-how-schools-teach-reading

Hall, S. L. (2018). 10 success factors for literacy intervention: Getting results with MTSS in elementary schools. ASCD.

Hall, C., Roberts, G. J., Cho, E., McCulley, L. V., Carroll, M., & Vaughn, S. (2017). Reading instruction for English learners in the middle grades: A meta-analysis. Educational Psychology Review, 29, 763–794. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-016-9372-4

Hempenstall, K. (2004). The importance of effective instruction. In N. Marchand-Martella, T. Slocum, & R. Martella (Eds.), Introduction to direct instruction (pp. 1–27). Allyn & Bacon.

Henry, E. (2020). A systematic multisensory phonics intervention for older struggling readers: Action research study. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1243065.pdf

Honig, B., Diamond, L., & Gutlohn, L. (2018). The core reading sourcebook. Arena Press.

Indiana University (2023, October 27). How to develop phonological and phonemic awareness during the early reading and writing stage. https://blogs.iu.edu/earlyliteracy/2023/10/27/how-to-develop-phonological-and-phonemic-awareness-during-the-early-reading-and-writing-stage/

International Literacy Association. (2018). Explaining phonics instruction: An educator’s guide. Author.

International Literacy Association. (2019). Right to knowledgeable and qualified literacy educators. Author.

Iris Center. (2024). Phonemic awareness. https://iris.peabody.vanderbilt.edu/module/rti03/cresource/q3/p04/

Jenkins, J. R., Hudson, R. F., & Lee, S. H. (2007). Using CBM-reading assessments to monitor reading progress. Perspectives on Language and Literacy, 33(2), 11–16.

Jiban, C. (2024, February 15). The science of reading explained. https://www.nwea.org/blog/2024/the-science-of-reading-explained/

Jiban, C. (2022). What the science of reading tells us about how to teach decoding—including phonics. https://www.nwea.org/blog/2022/what-the-science-of-reading-tells-us-about-how-to-teach-decoding-including-phonics/

Johnson, K., & Street, E. M. (2013). Response to intervention and precision teaching: Creating synergy in the classroom. Guilford Press.

K12 Reader. (n.d.). Effective strategies for teaching phonemic awareness. https://www.k12reader.com/effective-strategies-for-teaching-phonemic-awareness/

Kame’enui, E. J., & Simmons, D. C. (2000). Planning and evaluation tool for effective schoolwide reading programs – Revised (PET-R). Institute for the Development of Educational Achievement, College of Education, University of Oregon. https://idahotc.com/Portals/0/Resources/403/PET-R%20Planning%20and%20Evaluation%20Tool%20for%20Effective%20Schoolwide%20Reading%20Programs.pdf

Kamil, M. L., Borman, G. D., Dole, J., Kral, C. C., Salinger, T., & Torgesen, J. (2008). Improving adolescent literacy: Effective classroom and intervention practices: A practice guide (NCEE No. 2008–4027). National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance (NCEE), Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED502398.pdf

Kharbach, M. (2024) The 5 stages of reading development. Educators Technology. https://www.educatorstechnology.com/2023/04/the-5-stages-of-reading-development.html

Kilpatrick, D. A. (2015). Essentials of assessing, preventing, and overcoming reading difficulties. John Wiley & Sons.

Korte, G. (2015, December 15). The Every Student Succeeds Act vs. No Child Left Behind: What’s changed? USA Today. http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2015/12/10/every-student-succeeds-act-vs-no-child-left-behind-whats-changed/77088780/

Kress, J. E., & Fry, E. (2016). The reading teacher’s book of lists. Jossey-Bass.

Kritikos, E. P., McLoughlin, J. A., & Lewis, M. B. (2018). Assessing students with special needs (8th ed.). Pearson.

Kuhn, M. R., Schwanenflugel, P. J., & Meisinger, E. B. (2010). Aligning theory and assessment of reading fluency: Automaticity, prosody, and definitions of fluency. Reading Research Quarterly, 45, 232–253. https://doi.org/10.1598/RRQ.45.2.4

Latham, S. (2024, June 14). Memo to faculty: AI is not your friend. Inside Higher Ed. https://www.insidehighered.com/opinion/views/2024/06/14/memo-faculty-ai-not-your-friend-opinion

LD Center in Teacher's Corner. (2023). Five research-based ways to teach vocabulary. https://texasldcenter.org/teachers-corner/five-research-based-ways-to-teach-vocabulary/s

Learning Without Tears. (2021, June 17). Why is literacy development important for children? https://www.lwtears.com/blog/literacy-development-stages

Lemons, C. J., Kearns, D. M., & Davidson, K. A. (2014). Data-based individualization in reading: Intensifying interventions for students with significant reading disabilities. Teaching Exceptional Children, 46(4), 20–29. https://doi.org/10.1177/0040059914522978

Leonard, K. M., Coyne, M. D., Oldham, A. C., Burns, D., & Gillis, M. B. (2019). Implementing MTSS in beginning reading: Tools and systems to support schools and teachers. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 34, 110–117. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/ldrp.12192

Liben, D., & Liben, M. (2019). Know better, do better: Teaching the foundations so every child can read. Learning Sciences International.

Lindström‐Sandahl, H., Elwér, Ĺ., Samuelsson, S., & Danielsson, H. (2023). Effects of a phonics intervention in a randomized controlled study in Swedish second‐grade students at risk of reading difficulties. Dyslexia: An International Journal of Research and Practice, 29(4), 290–311. https://doi.org/10.1002/dys.1751

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 (Chapter 10). Allyn & Bacon.

Marchand-Martella, N. E., Ruby, S., & Martella, R. C. (2007, May). A three-tier strategic model of intensifying reading instruction. Teaching Exceptional Children Plus, 3, Article 2. http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ967459.pdf

Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education. (n.d.). Phonics and decoding. https://www.doe.mass.edu/massliteracy/skilled-reading/fluent-word-reading/phonics-decoding.html

Mather, N., & Wendling, B. J. (2012). Essentials of dyslexia assessment and intervention. John Wiley & Sons.

McIntosh, K., & Goodman, S. (2016). Integrated multi-tiered systems of support: Blending RTI and PBIS. Guilford.

McKenna, M. C., & Stahl, K. A. D. (2015). Assessment for reading instruction. Guilford Press.

Messer, D., & Nash, G. (2017). An evaluation of the effectiveness of a computer‐assisted reading intervention. Journal of Research in Reading, 41, 140–158. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9817.12107

Miller, C. (2024, updated). How kids learn to read. Child Mind Institute. https://childmind.org/article/how-kids-learn-to-read/

Moats, L. C. (2020). Teaching reading IS rocket science: What expert teachers of reading should know and be able to do. American Educator, 44(2), 4–9, 39. https://www.readingrockets.org/sites/default/files/guide/teaching-reading-is-rocket-science-2020.pdf

NAEYC [National Association for the Education of Young Children]. (n.d.). Learning to read and write: What research reveals. Reading Rockets. https://www.readingrockets.org/topics/early-literacy-development/articles/learning-read-and-write-what-research-reveals

National Carolina Department of Public Instruction. (n.d.). Phonological awareness for Pre-K. https://www.dpi.nc.gov/students-families/parents-corner/literacy-home-digital-childrens-reading-initiative/pre-kindergarten/phonological-awareness-pre-k

National Center on Improving Literacy. (n.d.). Learning to read: The simple view of reading. https://improvingliteracy.org/brief/learning-read-simple-view-reading/index.html

National Center on Improving Literacy. (n.d). The educator's science of reading toolbox: Explicit vocabulary instruction to build equitable access for all learners. https://improvingliteracy.org/brief/educators-science-reading-toolbox-explicit-vocabulary-instruction-build-equitable-access-all/index.html

National Center on Improving Literacy (2022). Phonological awareness: What is it and how does it relate to phonemic awareness? U.S. Department of Education, Office of Elementary and Secondary Education, Office of Special Education Programs, National Center on Improving Literacy. https://improvingliteracy.org/brief/phonological-awareness-what-it-and-how-does-it-relate-phonemic-awareness/index.html

National Center to Improve the Tools of Educators. (n.d.). Learning to read, reading to learn. https://www.readingrockets.org/topics/about-reading/articles/learning-read-reading-learn

National Center on Improving Literacy. (n.d.). The educator's science of reading toolbox: How to build fluency with text in your classroom. https://improvingliteracy.org/brief/educators-science-reading-toolbox-how-build-fluency-text-your-classroom/index.html

National Center on Improving Literacy. (n.d.). The educator’s science of reading toolbox: Explicit vocabulary instruction to build equitable access for all learners. https://improvingliteracy.org/brief/educators-science-reading-toolbox-explicit-vocabulary-instruction-build-equitable-access-all/index.html

National Center on Intensive Intervention. (2016). Tools chart user’s guide. U.S. Department of Education, Office of Special Education Programs, National Center on Intensive Intervention.

National Middle School Association. (2021). Vocabulary teaching and learning across disciplines. https://www.amle.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/Vocabulary.pdf

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. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED444126.pdf

Nese, J. F. T., Farley, D., & Anderson, D. (2019). Educator-reported instructional characteristics of grade 1 reading interventions within a CBM assessment system. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 34, 97–109. https://doi.org/10.1111/ldrp.12191

NICHD [National Institute of Child Health and Human Development]. (2000). Report of the National Reading Panel. Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction (NIH Publication, No. 00-4769). U.S. Government Printing Office. https://www.nichd.nih.gov/publications/pubs/nrp/smallbook

Njiru, F., & Nyanjugu Karuri, M. (2022). Phonemic awareness strategies used in teaching English language literacy skills to grade three pupils in public primary schools in Embu County, Kenya. International Journal on Studies in English Language and Literature, 10(10), 1–7. http://dx.doi.org/10.20431/2347-3134.1010001

Novicoff, S., & Dee, T. S. (2023). The achievement effects of scaling early literacy reforms. https://doi.org/10.26300/jnmt-2093

Opper, I. M. (2019, December 4). Teachers matter: Understanding teachers’ impact on student achievement. Rand Corporation. https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR4312.html

Paige, D. D. (2020). Reading fluency: A brief history, the importance of supporting processes, and the role of assessment. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED607625.pdf

Pazzanese, C. (2020, October 26). Great promise but potential for peril. Harvard Gazette. https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2020/10/ethical-concerns-mount-as-ai-takes-bigger-decision-making-role/

PBIS: Positive Behavioral Interventions & Supports, OSEP Technical Assistance Center. (2017). All publications. https://www.pbis.org/publications/all-publications

Peltier, T. (2024, April 18). The science of teaching reading comprehension. https://www.nwea.org/blog/2024/the-science-of-teaching-reading-comprehension/

Rasinki, T. (2024). Reading fluency: The neglected key to reading success. Education Week. https://www.edweek.org/teaching-learning/opinion-reading-fluency-the-neglected-key-to-reading-success/2024/04

Reading Rockets. (n.d.). Typical reading development. https://www.readingrockets.org/reading-101/how-children-learn-read/typical-reading-development

Really Great Reading. (n.d.). Top five reasons to teach vocabulary. https://www.reallygreatreading.com/%E2%80%8Bwhat-are-top-five-reasons-teach-vocabulary#:~:text=Research%20has%20shown%20that%20we,comprehension%20of%20novels%20and%20textbooks.

Relay Graduate School of Education. (n.d.). Science of teaching reading resource guide. https://relay.libguides.com/science-of-teaching-reading-resource-guide/vocabulary-instruction-methods

Reynolds, D. (2020). Of research reviews and practice guides: Translating rapidly growing research on adolescent literacy into updated practice recommendations. Reading Research Quarterly, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1002/rrq.314

Rehfeld, D. M., Kirkpatrickm M. O'Guinn, N., & Renbarger, R. (2022). A meta-analysis of phonemic awareness instruction provided to children suspected of having a reading disability. https://doi.org/10.1044/2022_LSHSS-21-00160

Robinson, J. M. (2018). Evaluation of teaching methods to improve reading performance of English language learners. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1209451.pdf

Richland, A. (2023, December 18). Cracking the code: How Science of Reading curriculum transforms struggling readers into confident learners. https://pridereadingprogram.com/cracking-the-code-how-science-of-reading-curriculum-transforms-struggling-readers-into-confident-learners/

Richland, K. (2023, October 18). Strategies for teaching phonological awareness. https://pridereadingprogram.com/strategies-for-teaching-phonological-awareness/

Russell, M. K., & Airasian, P. W. (2012). Classroom assessment: Concepts and applications (7th ed.). McGraw-Hill.

Salvia, J., Ysseldyke, J. E., & Witmer, S. (2017). Assessment in special and inclusive education (13th ed.). Cengage.

Schiller, E., Chow, K., Thayer, S., Nakamura, J., Wilkerson, S. B., & Puma, M. (2020). What tools have states developed or adapted to assess schools’ implementation of a multi-tiered system of supports/response to intervention frame-work? (REL 2020–017). U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences. National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional and Assistance, Regional Educational Laboratory Appalachia.

Sedita, J. (2021, October 3). The science of reading comprehension. https://keystoliteracy.com/blog/the-science-of-reading-comprehension/

Shanahan, T. (2023). What about the new research that says phonics instruction isn't very important? https://www.readingrockets.org/blogs/shanahan-on-literacy/what-about-new-research-says-phonics-instruction-isnt-very-important

Shanahan, T. (n.d.). Five key principles for effective vocabulary instruction. https://www.readingrockets.org/topics/vocabulary/articles/five-key-principles-effective-vocabulary-instruction

Shanahan, T. (2020). Limiting children to books they can already read. AFT. https://www.aft.org/ae/summer2020/shanahan

Shanahan, T., Callison, K., Carriere, C., Duke, N. K., Pearson, P. D., Schatschneider, C., & Torgesen, J. (2010, September). Improving reading comprehension in kindergarten through 3rd grade: A practice guide (NCEE No. 2010–4038). National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance (NCEE), Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. http://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED512029

Shanahan, T., & Lonigan, C. J. (2013). Early childhood literacy: The National Early Literacy Panel and beyond. Paul H. Brookes.

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

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. Institute for the Development of Educational Achievement.

Simmons, D. C., & Kame’enui, E. J. (2006, August). A consumer’s guide to evaluating a core reading program grades K–3: A critical elements analysis. Institute for the Development of Educational Achievement, College of Education, University of Oregon.

Slavin, R. (2018, April 5). New findings on tutoring: Four shockers. https://robertslavinsblog.wordpress.com/2018/04/05/new-findings-on-tutoring-four-shockers/

Spear-Swerling, L. (2015a). The power of RTI and reading profiles: A blueprint for solving reading problems. Paul H. Brookes.

Spear-Swerling, L. (2015b). Common types of reading problems and how to help children who have them. Reading Teacher, 69(5), 513–522. https://doi.org/10.1002/trtr.1410

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. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-008-9152-8

Stecker, P. M., & Lemke, E. S. (2005). Advanced applications of CBM in Reading: Instructional decision-making strategies manual. National Center on Student Progress Monitoring. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED519250.pdf

Stein, M., Johnson, B., & Gutlohn, L. (1999). Analyzing beginning reading programs: The relationship between decoding instruction and text. Remedial and Special Education, 20(5). https://doi.org/10.1177/074193259902000503

Steiner, D. (2017, March). Curriculum research: What we know and where we need to go. Standards Work. https://standardswork.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/sw-curriculum-research-report-fnl.pdf

Stochard, J., Wood, T. W., Coughlin, C., & Khoury, C. R. (2018). The effectiveness of Direct Instruction curricula: A meta-analysis of a half century of research. Review of Educational Research, 88, 479–507. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654317751919

Swanson, E., Stevens, E. A., Scammacca, N. K., Capin, P., Stewart, A. A., & Austin, C. R. (2017). The impact of tier 1 reading instruction on reading outcomes for students in Grades 4–12: A meta-analysis. Reading and Writing, 30, 1639–1665. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-017-9743-3

Talbot, C. (2020, December 28). The important of teaching phonemic awareness: Teaching strategies. https://www.highspeedtraining.co.uk/hub/phonemic-awareness-teaching-strategies/

Texas Education Agency. (n.d.). Fluency: Instructional guidelines and student activities. https://www.readingrockets.org/topics/fluency/articles/fluency-instructional-guidelines-and-student-activities

Torgesen, J. K. (2006) A comprehensive K–3 reading assessment plan: Guidance for school leaders. RMC Research Corporation, Center on Instruction.

Toste, J. R., Didion, L., Peng, P., Filderman, M. J., & McClelland, A. M. (2020). A meta-analytic review of the relations between motivation and reading achievement for K–12 students. Review of Educational Research, 90, 420–456. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654320919352

Tucker, B. (2023). Research on pre-teaching vocabulary: Benefits and drawbacks. https://labtoclass.com/research-on-pre-teaching-vocabulary-benefits-and-drawbacks/

U.S. Department of Education. (2002). No Child Left Behind Act, 2001. http://www2.ed.gov/nclb/landing.jhtml

U.S. Department of Education. (2002). Reading First program state application. Author.

U.S. Department of Education. (2008). Reading First impact study final report. Author.

Vaughn, S., & Roberts, G. (2007). Secondary interventions in reading: Providing additional instruction for students at risk. Teaching Exceptional Children, 39(5), 40–46. https://doi.org/10.1177/004005990703900506

Vincent, K. (2020). Closing the gap: Supporting literacy through a computer-assisted-reading-intervention. Support for Learning, 35, 68–82. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9604.12286

Wang, Q., & Will, K. (2024, February 29). Research article of the month: February 2024. Iowa Reading Research Center. https://irrc.education.uiowa.edu/blog/2024/02/research-article-month-february-2024

Weiss, S. L. (2013). Learning-related behaviors: Small group reading instruction in the general education classroom. Intervention in School and Clinic, 48, 294–302. https://doi.org/10.1177/1053451212472231

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. https://doi.org/10.1177/1063426613476092

Woodbury, L. (2024, March 5). The role of phonemic and phonological awareness skills in pre-reading. https://www.procaresoftware.com/blog/phonemic-phonological-awareness-pre-reading/

 

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.

3/28/25 JN