Reading
Fundamentals #3: The
Elements of Effective Instructor Name: Mick R. Jackson 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
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 Authors:
Greg Benner, Ph.D., Nancy
Marchand-Martella, Ph.D., and Ronald Martella, Ph.D. Publisher:
Virtual Education Software, inc. © 2004 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 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 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: 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 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 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 (2nd 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 (3rd 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 (2nd
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 (2nd
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 (2nd
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 (2nd 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 3/4/10 JN |