The Impact of Literacy Support Services on Reading Achievement Gains
On April 11, 1965, President Lyndon Johnson signed public law 89-10 (PL 89-10), otherwise known as the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) (U.S. Congress, 1965). The ESEA was one of a number of Johnson administration domestic policy measures known as the Great Society program (Califano, 1999). Johnsons Great Society was designed to strengthen executive cabinet positions to address several domestic issues such as civil rights, health care, and education. According to Califano, the former Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare under the Jimmy Carter administration, health and education was the cornerstone of the Great Society concept (para 6). Johnson himself expressed the need to re-vitalize public education in the U.S. in his 1964 Great Society Speech
We must seek an educational system which grows in excellence as it grows in size. This means better training for our teachers. It means preparing youth to enjoy their hours of leisure as well as their hours of labor. It means exploring new techniques of teaching, to find new ways to stimulate the love of learning and the capacity for creation. (Johnson, 1964, sec. 29)
Johnsons domestic policy centered on the belief that if cabinet-level departments were adequately funded, beginning with health, education, and civil rights, the human condition in America itself would improve and continue to flourish in generations to come. Since its initial enactment, the 1965 ESEA has undergone three re-authorizations to include the 2001 version known as the No Child Left behind Act.
Today, the Johnson speech and the philosophies of the Great Society are rarely mentioned in discussions of public education although one component of the 1965 ESEA continues to receive attention as it relates to higher learning outcomes. Title 1, section 101 of the 1965 ESEA is headed Improving the Academic Achievement of the Disadvantaged (89th Congress, 1965). According to the ESEA, the purpose of Title 1 is to ensure that all children have a fair, equal, and significant opportunity to obtain a high-quality education and reach, at a minimum, proficiency on challenging State academic achievement standards and state academic assessments (89th Congress, 1965, PL 89-10, sec. 1001). This purpose of Title 1 was originally designed to be accomplished through sub-objectives. Among these objectives, item 8 states, Providing children an enriched and accelerated educational program, including the use of school-wide programs or additional services that increase the amount and quality of instructional time (89th Congress, 1965, PL 89-10, sec. 1001, para 8).
Regardless of federal funding, student support and other remedial academic programs are used in all or nearly all public schools in the United States. Although the American overseas school included in this study does not fall under the Title 1 program, Johnsons speech and the essence of why Title I was created is the American overseas school systems inspiration to offer the remedial support program to be studied. Students who perform below the standard are offered the remedial reading program, in an effort to improve student reading comprehension.
This concept paper will examine the effects of a particular support program, Literacy Support Services LSS, on substandard readers, which is in jeopardy of being canceled due to budget constraints within the American overseas school system. Without data to support the programs need, the program may be terminated (Degalis, 2009). Thus, the sample will be drawn from one American overseas school. Literature reviews on the topic of literacy and reading support programs, examples of various programs in schools across the United States and abroad, and the results of local assessments disaggregated by student achievement levels will be the basis by which the problem and purpose of this concept paper are addressed.
Statement of the Problem
tc Statement of the problem f C l 2tc Statement of the problem f C l 2
The American overseas school systems 2006 Community Strategic Plan (CSP) states 100 percent of students will perform At the Standard level or higher on system-wide, criterion-referenced assessments aligned to the ReadingEnglishLanguage Arts, Math, Science, Social Studies, and Technology performance standards (DoDEA, 2006, p. 2). The term at the standard is defined later in this concept paper. System-wide assessments, include the Scholastic Reading Inventory (SRI) and the TerraNova second edition, both of which are defined later. In one American overseas intermediate school serving third-grade through fifth-grade students, 100 of students did not meet the standard. The percentage of students who did not meet the standard in reading was 30, 23, and 18 for third through fifth grade, respectively (AEIS, 2009 p. 11).
While the literature review suggests there have been many attempts to improve reading performance through student support programs stateside, none have reviewed reading performance data paired with (LSS) within this particular American overseas school system. The failure of 100 of American overseas school system students to achieve the standard is further compounded by the overseas school systems recent cutbacks to the Pacific Literacy Project and Reading Recovery slots in Europe. These slots fund literacy facilitators and reading coaches who provide in classroom reading support to teachers and work directly with substandard readers (Degalis, 2009). Europe had recently discovered their Reading Recovery slots were canceled and would not receive funding by the school systems headquarters. The teachers union, The Federal Education Association (FEA) has challenged this move (Degalis, 2009). Headquarters in Alexandria, Virginia has recently enforced data-driven decisions and removed several programs and services that lack data to support the benefits of these programs (Degalis, 2009). Therefore, this study will provide data to determine whether students in the LSS program have higher growth on the scholastic reading inventory (SRI) than their non-LSS counterparts receiving only general classroom instruction. The findings of this study could determine the future of the LSS program in the American overseas system schools.
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this quantitative study is to determine whether students receiving Literacy Support Services (LSS) have a greater percentage of growth than non-LSS students on the SRI exam as well as to compare LSS students end-of-year TerraNova scores to non-LSS students. Determining whether LSS students achieved greater growth than non-LSS students on the SRI could support a data-driven decision as to whether or not to continue the LSS program or to sacrifice it with the PLP and Reading Recovery programs to support other programs that data have proven successful. Determining whether LSS students performed the same as their non-LSS peers on the end-of-year TerraNova assessment may also indicate the benefits of the LSS program. The findings from this study may indicate that the reduction of student support programs in literacy skills impedes students meeting the standards required in the CSP. For instance, CSP goal 1 states educators must ensure the highest academic achievement and 100 of students must meet the standard (DoDEA, 2006) thus, we must ensure all students achieve the SRI standard at the end of the year. Students take the SRI in August and retake the end-of-year exam in May. If LSS students earned a higher percentage of growth than non-LSS this may be the data headquarters needs to determine whether to continue funding the LSS program. Therefore, the independent variables are LSS and non-LSS students and the dependent variables are their SRI and TerraNova scores.
The setting of the study is in a United States military community in Okinawa, Japan. Specifically, the study will occur at an American Intermediate School, one of 13 schools on the island of Okinawa serving over 8000 K-12 students primarily from U.S. military and Department of Defense families (DoDEA, 2007). The intermediate school is comprised of 540 third through fifth-grade students. As mentioned later in this concept paper, the students of interest are those who score in the third quartile of the math and reading subtests on the TerraNova Multiple Assessments and are therefore classified as LSS students. These students receive supplemental educational services in math, reading, and written language. The number of students receiving supplemental support is approximately 90. The sample size will include 128 students, half will be LSS students and half are non-LSS students (Cohen, 1992).
Definition of Key Termstc Definition of Key Terms f C l 1tc Definition of Key Terms f C l 1
At-the-standard-The SRI standard for third graders is 500 and above for fourth grade the standard is 600 and above, and for fifth grade the standard is 700 and above (AEIS, 2009).
Substandard Student-Students who scored in the third quartile (26th 50th percentiles) on the TerraNova Multiple Assessments (TNMA) particularly (but not exclusively) on the math andor reading subtests and are not receiving special education services are considered at risk of not meeting academic standards and are therefore enrolled in the LSS program (Alderman, 2008).
Lexile. This term refers to pre-defined levels or at the standard of performance on the SRI of 500 for third-grade students, 600 for fourth-grade students, and 700 for fifth-grade students according the Scholastic Reading Inventory (AEIS, 2009).
Literacy Support Services. These are services (including Read 180) for substandard students, as defined above, who perform below the 50th percentile on the TerraNova reading and language subtests, but higher than the 10th percentile (which is a possible indicator of a need for special education services) (AEIS, 2009).
Mean percentile rank. Mean percentile rank is the relation of a students score on a given assessment according to the average scores of all students in a norma group. A higher percentile ranking indicates higher performance according to peer scores (Pearson, 2008).
READ 180. READ 180 is developed by the Scholastic corporation as a comprehensive reading intervention program for fourth- through twelfth-grade students reading below proficiency levels. READ 180s design of independent, small group, and whole group instruction is aligned with findings from research of effective reading interventions including decoding skills to reading comprehension strategies (Mayer et al., 2006).
Scholastic Reading Inventory (SRI). The SRI is a research-based, computer-based reading assessment for K12 grade students that measures reading comprehension levels and reports it according to lexile (Scholastic, 2009). The SRI is administered at the beginning and end of each school year but may also be given throughout the year within system-defined intervals. (DoDEA, 2009)
Student Support Services (SSS). These are provided for those students who need specially designed instruction that is beyond what can be provided through the general education program. SSS are provided to assist students in reaching their full developmental and academic potential. SSS are part of general education services and should not be confused with special education services for students identified with specific learning disabilities and provided an individualized education plan (IEP) (IDRA, 2009).
System-Wide Assessment. These assessments are those used by an entire school system and administered under consistent conditions between each school. For the overseas American school system, the system-wide assessments used are the TerraNova Multiple Assessments (TNMA) Third Edition and the Scholastic Reading Inventory (SRI). The TNMA Third edition was initially administered for the first time in the spring of 2009. The second edition was used from 2002 to 2008. Because of the change in edition, no data will be collected from the TNMA (DoDEA, 2009).
Research Questionstc Research Questions f C l 1tc Research Questions f C l 2
Limited data is collected directly on the topic of improving American overseas students reading comprehension through the American overseas school systems LSS program. The research in reading support programs did not discover supporting data for middle school students reading achievement after receiving LSS services. Therefore, the research questions below are necessary in order to determine the value of continuing the LSS program. The research questions for this study are as follows
Q1 How does the rate of growth in reading comprehension, as measured by SRI scores, significantly compare between students who receive LSS and their peers who do not receive LSS
Q2 How do LSS students perform on the TerraNova second edition reading subtest as compared to non-LSS students
Hypotheses
tc Hypotheses f C l 2tc Hypotheses f C l 2
This study will examine the literacy skills growth rate between students who receive LSS and their counterparts who receive only general classroom instruction. Each group will include intermediate school third through fifth grade students. Each research question will be supported by a null and alternative hypothesis. Since past research indicates support services should improve student achievement, the hypotheses are stated in terms of expected gains.
The null hypothesis and alternative hypotheses are as follows
H10 The average gain in SRI scores of students receiving LSS will be equal to or less than those of students receiving only general classroom instruction after one year of this support service.
H1a The average gain in SRI scores of students receiving LSS will be greater than those of students receiving only general classroom instruction after one year of this support service.
H20 After one year of LSS services, the mean TerraNova 2nd reading subtest score of students receiving LSS will be equal to or less than the mean score of non-LSS students.
H1a After one year of LSS services, the mean TerraNova 2nd reading subtest score of students receiving LSS will be greater than the mean score of non-LSS students.
tc Setting f C l 2tc Setting f C l 2Brief Review of the Literature
There is a need for increased support services for students who perform at decreased academic standards (Cabell, Justic, Zucker, Kilday, 2009). Student support services of various designs have existed since before the days of ESEA and will likely continue beyond its next re-authorization. Using a quantitative design, this study will compare the growth rate of substandard readers (those enrolled in the LSS program) and their achievement on system-wide assessments in literacy skills against the rate of students who are not identified as LSS students. The literature review will examine the results of previous academic program studies.
On June 8, 2009, during a conference at the Institute of Educational Sciences (IES), U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan was asked what role the Department of Education could play in utilizing resources outside of the classroom to promote higher student achievement. In his response, Duncan expressed a desire to see U.S. schools adopt practices of public schools internationally such as longer school days and extended school calendars (Duncan, 2009).
While Duncans comments may not suggest any specific shift in school district policies, they do reinforce the conclusion of many education professionals that U.S. schools and students require immediate interventions to raise their performance to that of their international peers. Marcotte and Hemelt (2007) attempted to correlate the varied length of school days and school calendars with the student achievement at public and charter schools across the country. While the results of their study are not entirely conclusive, such studies of these and other interventions are likely to continue as long as U.S. students do not perform according to the standards expected from teachers, parents, and future employers.
Reading assessment is a key avenue to determining the level of retention and academic development. It is worth noting that though reading assessment scores are important in determining development in cognition, language, and articulation skills, it does not develop a holistic picture of the development made by a student in other important aspects of learning. Other critical issues like behavioral development and social interaction skills must be considered in determining the efficiency of a measure or a system to student development (Terry, 2009). Nevertheless literacy services have shown considerable impact on the academic development of grade-level students. However, no studies have been conducted specifically on LSS students and their SRI and TerraNova scores leading to the possible demise of the LSS program.
There has been minimal emphasis on the need for early literacy intervention at an individualized level. This is an observation in a backdrop of an educational system where gaps in performance are rising by the minute. However, studies have shown that reading achievement in primary grades is associated with the nature of instructions used and are considerably affected by use of early intervention systems. Early identification and interventions are important in ensuring that the deficit areas are addressed to prevent later difficulties and improve children skills (Cabell, Justice, Zucker, Kilday, 2009). School-based, group-level interventions have been proven successful in ensuring that substandard students performance is corrected to average levels with respect to reading outcomes. However, the success of such a program largely depends on the level of organization and objectivity to addressing specific areas where students encounter difficulty. This has led to an increase in awareness of the need for teachers to carefully diagnose the challenges that students face, the areas where they find difficulty, and timeliness of the intervention. Failure to meet these requirements may result in failure of intervention systems in their entirety. A key risk in implementing intervention systems that often include literacy support systems is focusing more on the content rather than guiding both the students and teachers who deliver to the substandard student. This brings about literacy supports as one of the key factors that may affect the efficiency with which substandard students needs are met and ensure that they benefit from the school system. Other areas that have proven to be quite deterministic of the efficiency of support services is the accuracy with which teachers can identify students that have problems in their academic development but do not qualify or are yet to qualify for special classes.
The increase in research on the applicability of literacy support services to substandard students has raised awareness of U.S. educators of the special needs required by this group. The adoption of literacy support services is increasing mainly due to appreciation of the impact that it has on the level of academic performance, an increase in awareness of the potential that the substandard students have, and appreciation of the ability to realize this potential if relevant strategies are adopted (Cabell, Justice, Zucker, Kilday, 2009). Moreover, there has been an increase in emphasis on early education and grade-level intervention owing to increase in awareness of the importance of early intervention and the role played by early education in determining the performance at latter stages of education. Children who experience and have difficulty in mastering the reading process and skills are at greater risk of academic failure (Cabell, Justice, Zucker, Kilday, 2009). This relays the importance of development of literacy skills at grade level and the need to ensure that such students catch up with other students.
Research-based practice in dealing with the challenges that substandard students face has been shown to impact positively on the development of language and reading skills among substandard students. Literacy support services are among the research-based approaches that can be used in ensuring that the reading challenges faced by substandard students are carefully and comprehensively addressed (Cabell, Justice, Zucker, Kilday, 2009). Various perspectives have been adopted in seeking to determine the impact of literacy support on reading achievement.
Even before the era of the 1965 ESEA, U.S. educators continuously sought strategies to narrow the growing gap in reading proficiencies between U.S. students and their peers in classrooms abroad (Field, Kuczera, Pont, 2003). These strategies include both those in the general educational environment as well as special literacy support services for substandard readers. American entrepreneur, Jim Rohn, was once quoted as saying, A good objective of leadership is to help those who are doing poorly to do well and to help those who are doing well to do even better (Rohn, 1996, p. 46). Rohn directed his remarks primarily to those in the business community, although this philosophy applies no less to educational leaders as well. In order to help schools reach their ultimate vision, effective educational leaders should understand that tomorrows business leaders are todays students. Gerry Houses view of substandard learners is bleaker
A stark failure of our education system to prepare all of our children for productive futures attributable to several factors, among them low expectations, traditional organizational structures and poor instruction, resistance to change, lack of leadership, the shortage of quality teachers and a failure to recognize the remarkable resilience and dreams of even those students who struggle the most. (House, 2005, p. 137)
According to a June 2009 report, over half of all eighth-grade students at one Chicago school did not meet the standards to move on to high school (CBS, 2009). Considering also the significantly below-average performance of U.S. students on the 2006 Programme of International Student Assessments (PISA), Houses comments are perhaps not only grim, but relevant as well (OECD, 2006).
Although U.S. students strive to achieve the level of classroom excellence their future work centers will demand, many of them have difficulty maintaining academic standards in core curricula independently. In these situations, mostif not allpublic schools utilize student support services and academic interventions outside of the regular classroom. Combine these future challenges for todays learners with federal mandates for adequate yearly progress for children academically left behind, and it becomes necessary to establish effective student support programs in key curricular areas. However, even with evidence to support the benefits of student support programs in math and literacy skills, to operate within the constraints of a diminishing budget, DoDEA Headquarters did not approve staffing slots in 2009 for the Pacific Literacy Program (PLP) or the Reading Recovery program (Degalis, 2009).
Reading Recovery has already been recognized as one of the top-rated reading intervention programs the outcome of its elimination has yet to be determined (Slavin et al., 2009). As of the writing of this concept paper, neither program is offered at one intermediate school overseas. Without the added interventions of special support programs such as the PLP, Reading Recovery, or the currently used LSS, it will be unrealistic to expect all students to meet the demands of the American overseas school systems CSP.
Effects of Planning
Although few studies have been conducted to determine the efficiency of literacy support services in its entirety on reading assessment scores in grade-level education, numerous studies have intended to determine the effects of various aspects of literacy support services on reading development. One of the areas that have been centered on is the effect of pre-planning and post-planning on the efficiency of the literacy support service design adopted. Nearly 35 of reported cases of failure of literacy support services are a result of failure in designing (Sloat, Beswick, Willms, 2007). The use of backward design where services are continually improved is hindered by lack of teacher skills to effectively redesign and handle the challenges that are associated with this approach. Efficiency in designing a literacy support service program can result in up to a 78 increase in improvement of reading scores recorded by substandard students (Sloat, Beswick, Willms, 2007).
Diversity
The diversity of the literacy support service has also been analyzed and its impact on reading achievement noted. It is important to note that the individual strategies that are adopted in literacy support services vary a great deal. However, management of diverse literacy support services is complex, which may limit its efficiency. On the other hand, the inclusion of diverse activities for instance play, storytelling, narration, and interaction between students has been shown to be highly effective in maximizing the benefits that substandard students gain from the literacy support services (Sloat, Beswick, Willms, 2007). Depending on the diversity of the literacy support services, their efficiency can be improved by up to 140 (Gayla, 2008). However, studies have shown that benefits obtained by diversity depend on the grade level being referenced. First-grade and second-grade students benefit more from the diversity of the literacy support service than students in the higher grades in the K-12 range (Gayla, 2008). This phenomenon has been described as being in part a result of the nature of the syllabus where reading development is emphasized in early grade levels whereas the later grades are mainly concerned with application of the reading skills to other subjects.
Another factor that has been posited by researchers as central to this observed phenomenon is the natural development cycle within humans. Language development is at its peak at childhood. Additionally, as children age they tend to be more effective in understanding high-level abstraction concepts. This means students at low grade levels are likely to gain more from interaction and employment of diverse methods in literacy support service than students at higher grades due to their level of development. Another issue that has been highlighted as potentially influential on the differential effects of diversity of the strategies on the efficiency of the literacy support services is the nature of the educational curriculum and general practices in education (Sloat, Beswick, Willms, 2007). Lower grades are generally associated with the adoption of interactive systems to learning thus, lower grade teachers are more effective in developing and designing diverse literacy support services. On the other hand, learning at higher grades tends to be individualized with emphasis on structured group interaction or team work. This reduces the efficiency with which higher grade teachers can coordinate and manage the various strategies if diversity is adopted.
Assessment
Another area that has been pinpointed as influential on the efficiency displayed by literacy support services is the approaches used in their assessment. Assessment of the programs should be a continuous process and starts with setting clear goals and strategies that are aimed at ensuring that these goals are met (Craig, Lingling, Hensel, Quinn, 2009). Goal setting as a critical requirement in long-term and short-term planning plays a vital role in justifying the time and material resources that are directed to literacy support services. This is important in ensuring that school management and other educational stakeholders develop appreciation and therefore support the inclusion of literacy support services in the curricula. However, assessment is more than just goal setting and has been noted as one of the key challenges in not only designing the programs but also in their implementation. There has been a continuous debate on whether students with special needs or reduced ability should be assessed under a similar framework as students with normal ability. The use of different frameworks has been painted unfair in the highly competitive educational environment because whether a child has special needs is basically determined subjectively by teachers and all students seek employment opportunities from the same environment. In designing the program teachers face challenges mainly due to their lack of competence in designing effective evaluation systems that would ensure that intangible benefits that result from the literacy support services are accurately perceived (Bailey Drummond, 2006). It is noteworthy that a large proportion of the benefits that result from the literacy support services are intangible and cannot be easily conceptualized even with the use of standardized tests. The failure to read may result from shyness and other factors that may not necessarily be due to a students cognitive abilities improvement in such areas cannot be easily articulated under the assessments systems that are developed by teachers, which undermines the perception that is developed of literacy support services and may be influential on the support that it receives from educational stakeholders (Craig, Lingling, Hensel, Quinn, 2009).
Use of standardized means (e.g., employing the aid of organizations like the literacy support system) is one of the avenues that schools can use to ensure that they develop literacy support systems that are well evaluated. Proper evaluation enables standardization as one of the avenues that schools have in ensuring that the literacy support systems are well assessed. However, this issue has been approached differently by other specialists who believe standardization and certification create a negative impact on the levels of flexibility that can be afforded by individual schools in developing their literacy support services and programs (Gyovai, Cartledge, Kourea, Yurick, Gibson, 2009). In essence, the need for individualized considerations in developing the literacy support services is posited as limiting the efficiency that can be attained in using standardization because it limits flexibility in ensuring that individual students needs are accurately addressed. However, the impact of this latter aspect on the efficiency of the literacy support services has not been researched, which presents an area that researchers must focus on in determining the new approaches that should be taken in literacy support services.
Management
Management is highly influential on value generation within organizations. This importance is also projected in the efficiency with which reading development is attained with the aid of well-managed literacy support programs. A key factor that is deterministic of the effect that schools management has on the efficiencies of the literacy support systems is their perception. A management that appreciates and understands the need for literacy support services improves the efficiency of such programs by a factor of up to 1.63 (Edmonds, ODonoghue, Spano, Algozzine, 2009). This is a value obtained after other factors that may affect the efficiency of the literacy support programs were held constant. Moreover, a negative perception has a boosting factor that is less than one (Edmonds, ODonoghue, Spano, Algozzine, 2009). This implies that it has a negative effect on the level of efficiency that can be attained in ensuring that the goals of the literacy support services are attained.
Numerous theories have been developed to try and formulate an understanding of the effects of the perceptions held by schools management in determining the success of the literacy support programs. One of the hypotheses is developed from the motivational role of leadership, which is one of the key roles in management. Poor perception is generally associated with display of negative attitude, which greatly affects the level of motivation that teachers display in designing the literacy support services (Craig, Lingling, Hensel, Quinn, 2009). The result in such a case can only be reduced performance and in some cases complete failure. Another approach through which poor perceptions by the management may affect literacy support services is through resource allocation. In general resource allocation is dependent on the perceptions that a management team has of the importance of a literacy support program. Poor perception is therefore highly correlated (0.65) with low resource allocation, which negatively impacts the efficiency of literacy services (Bauer, 2009).
Relevance to Inclusion Settings
In recent times there has been an increased awareness of the benefits that can be obtained in using inclusion settings to cater for special needs or substandard students. Studies show significant improvement in reading scores recorded by both normal and substandard students subjected to literacy support services. A study that sought to determine if there is any difference in benefits from literacy support services showed that though the substandard student gained more than normal students as a result of literacy support services the difference in gains was statistically insignificant. Moreover, the gains under inclusive settings were significantly greater than the reading gains under seclusion (Edmonds, ODonoghue, Spano, Algozzine, 2009). This has been identified as being primarily a result of the effect of interaction between students with varying language ability on the development of language skills in those students that are slow under inclusive and highly interactive settings.
Controversiestc Opposing research f C l 2
Although it would be difficult to find any dissenting perspectives on the value of added academic support for substandard students, opinions differ among researchers and scholars regarding which support services are the most effective. In a 2006 study by Lauer, Akiba, Wilkerson, Apthorp, Snow, and Martin-Glenn, the benefits of such programs are cautiously supported, but in a setting outside of the school time required by attendance (Lauer et al., 2006). The support services mentioned in this learners study are those that occur during the school day. Al Hazza and Gupta also discuss the advantages of using volunteer tutors to promote gains in student performance but with training for the tutors prior to the delivery of such services (Al Hazza Gupta, 2006, p. 15). At the intermediate school, no such training is provided for student mentors although this practice does not preclude the addition of checklists as suggested by such opposing perspectives.
Monitoring Student Achievement
tc Monitoring student achievement f C l 2tc Monitoring student achievement f C l 2
In 2008, the new director of the overseas American school system established an initiative to reconsider how scores on the system-wide TerraNova Multiple Assessments were analyzed. According to the overseas American school systems Community Strategic Plan (CSP), 75 of students are expected to score in the top two quartiles (51 99) of students scores across the United States while no more than 7 of students should score in the bottom quartile (1 25). Prior to the directors tenure, there had been no consideration for students who scored in the third quartile (26 50).
In a November 2008 memorandum, the director instructed all district superintendents to task their schools to develop an intervention for students who scored in the third quartile particularly, but not exclusively in math and reading (DoDEA, 2008). Fore, Hagan-Burke, Burke, Boon, and Smith (2008) also discussed identifying and placing substandard students in learning environments appropriate for their specific learning disabilities. In response to this directive, the intermediate school turned to the military community for volunteer tutors to assist substandard students in reading who were not currently receiving any other student support services. Pullen, Lane, and Monaghan researched the effects of volunteer tutor support for substandard first graders. Their study suggests reading tutor support can result in increased comprehension and fluency for substandard readers (Pullen et al., 2004). Although the results of the Fore et al. (2008) study showed no statistical evidence to suggest student placement as a definitively effective intervention, this study and the directors third-quartile initiative are examples of continuing research of the interventions substandard students require for success.
Gaps in the Research
In general few researchers directly seek to determine the effect of literacy support services on reading achievement at grade levels. Even fewer have conducted research specifically on the American overseas school systems LSS program and the impact on meeting the systems reading standards. Although a general consensus exists that literacy support services can potentially impact positively on grade-level students reading and literacy scores (Kamps Greenwood, 2005, p. 503), without data to support the LSS programs benefits, the school system with its data-driven endeavors may discontinue LSS and what little remains of the reading support programs in favor of funding on programs that are data supported.
Summary
Among the trends of U.S. public education at the time, the commissioned panel who authored the 1983 report, A Nation at Risk, found that time spent in the classroom and on homework is often used ineffectively and schools are not doing enough to help students develop either the study skills required to use time well or the willingness to spend more time on school work (DOE, 1983, p. 6). Recent literature reviews of student support interventions continue to call for reforms in interceptive services for students who perform below the standard although no single model has yet been identified as most effective. In summary, under the current studies it is apparent that literacy support services are highly influential on literacy levels of both substandard performers and average students. However, the effect that the literacy support services have on students wanes as they progress up the K-12 system and is largely dependent on the design and implementation of the associated programs (Kane Greenwood, p. 504). The American overseas school system has a need for data specific to the school system and LSS program to support the continuation of the LSS program. Yet no preexisting studies have compared the school systems SRI and TerraNova scores for third through fifth graders after one year of LSS and no LSS services. Data analyzed from SRI and TerraNova will play a key role in determining the impact and ultimate continuance of LSS for American overseas school system students.
Research Method
Using the SRI as the primary data collection instrument, this study will utilize a quantitative experimental ex post facto method to compare the rate of reading gains between LSS students and those who receive only general education interventions. Because the variables and the constructs used to measure them (Table 1) have been identified in advance, a quantitative design will be the most effective method to compare the gains in the test scores between control and subgroups. If constructed properly, this type of study should eliminate some of the external factors influencing both groups in order to minimize any bias (Gall, 2007, p.33).
Operational definition of variables
Lexile Score. This dependent variable refers to pre-defined levels of performance on the SRI of 500 for third-grade students, 600 for fourth-grade students, and 700 for fifth-grade students according to the Scholastic Reading Inventory (AEIS, 2009).
Literacy Support Services. This independent variable is services (including Read 180) for students performing below the 50th percentile on the TerraNova reading and language subtests, but higher than the 10th percentile, which is a possible indicator of a need for special education services (AEIS, 2009).
READ 180. READ 180 is an independent variable in this study developed by the Scholastic corporation as a comprehensive reading intervention program for fourth through twelfth grade students reading below proficiency levels. READ 180s design of independent, small group and whole group instruction is aligned with findings from research of effective reading interventions including decoding skills to reading comprehension strategies (Mayer et al., 2006).
Data Collectiontc Data Collection f l 2tc Data Collection f C l 2
The American overseas school system will require advanced approval prior to accessing any student data for this study. Preliminary investigation in this matter suggests a high level of confidence this request will be approved. As chairperson for the intermediate school improvement program, this learner can confirm the required SRI data already exists across each grade level. Because the data are currently used for school improvement reporting purposes only, it will be necessary to secure approval to use this data for research as well. The SRI and TerraNova assessment scores will be the only instrument by which data are collected for this study. Therefore, a list of students who are receiving LSS services and access to SRI and TerraNova scores for all students in third through fifth grades will be requested.
Data Analysis
tc Data Analysis f C l 2tc Data Analysis f C l 2
Because the data are derived from predetermined instrument based questions, performance data, and statistical analysis (Creswell, 2009, p. 17), a quantitative research method will be applied. The results from the SRI and TerraNova assessments have already been disaggregated by grade levels third through fifth. The data will be analyzed using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) software, with participants in the 3rd, 4th, and 5th grades assigned according to those identified as substandard performers (LSS students) or otherwise not identified for reading interventions (non LSS students) .
The operational levels of the variables and the research questions to be addressed by statistical analysis are specified in Table 1
Table 1 Operational level of the variables and the research questions
Dependent variableIndependent variablesResearch questions to be addressedGain in the SRI score in one year (between 2008 and 2009)Instruction method LSS or non-LSS
Grade 3rd, 4th, and 5th gradeHow does the rate of growth in reading comprehension, as measured by SRI scores, significantly compare between students who receive LSS and their peers who do not receive LSS
Mean TerraNova 2nd subtest score
(2009 only)Instruction method LSS or non-LSS
Grade 3rd, 4th, and 5th gradeHow do LSS students perform on the TerraNova 2nd edition reading subtest as compared to non-LSS studentsUnder the proposed null hypothesis the gain in the SRI score in one year between 2008 and 2009 for the LSS students will be the same (or less than) that of the non-LSS students in the 3rd, 4th, and 5th grades (illustrated by the conceptual model in Figure 1).
Under the proposed alternative hypothesis, the gain in the SRI score in one year between 2008 and 2009 will be greater for the LSS students than the non-LSS students in the 3rd, 4th, and 5th grades (illustrated by the conceptual model in Figure 2).
ANOVA is not appropriate to test the hypotheses because the relationship between the dependent variable (Gain in SRI score) and the independent variable (Instruction method) is confounded by a covariate (Grade). Analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) which is a combination of Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) and regression analysis will be used since ANCOVA is the most appropriate method for comparing mean values when a dependent variable and an independent variable are confounded by a covariate (Field, 2009). The null hypothesis of ANCOVA is that the slopes of the two regression lines (depicted conceptually in Figure 1) are equal. The alternative hypothesis is that the slopes of the two regression lines (depicted conceptually in Figure 2) are not equal. The decision rule will be to reject the null hypothesis if the p value of the F statistic to compare the regression slopes is .05. ANCOVA assumes that the residuals (the differences between the observed scores and the mean scores) are normally distributed. This assumption will be checked using the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test for normality, which is supported by SPSS (Field, 2009). ANCOVA also assumes that the variances in the scores for each group are equal. This assumption will be checked using Levenes test, which is also supported by SPSS (Field, 2009). If the raw scores violate the theoretical assumptions of ANCOVA then appropriate data transformations (e.g., square roots, powers, or logarithms) may be necessary.
Under the proposed null hypothesis the mean TerraNova 2nd subtest score for the LSS students in 2009 will be the same (or less than) that of the non-LSS students in the 3rd, 4th, and 5th grades (illustrated by the conceptual model in Figure 3). Under the proposed alternative hypothesis the mean TerraNova 2nd subtest score of the LSS students in 2009 will be greater than that of the non-LSS students in the 3rd, 4th, and 5th grades (illustrated by the conceptual model in Figure 4).
Multiple independent sample t tests could potentially be used to compare the mean TerraNova scores between the LSS and non-LSS students with respect to each of the three grades however the use of multiple hypothesis tests would increase the probability of Type I errors (falsely rejecting the null hypotheses when they are, in fact, true) and would also preclude the analysis of interactions between the independent variables. Since there are two independent variables in this study (Table 1) the most appropriate method to analyze the data is two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA). The advantage of ANOVA in preference to multiple t tests is that the probability of Type I errors is reduced, and the analysis of interactions between independent variables is permitted (Field, 2009). If there is no interaction, then the mean TerraNova scores will increase consistently between the 3rd, 4th, and 5th grades in both the LSS and non-LSS students. If interaction occurs, then the changes in the TerraNova scores between the 3rd, 4th, and 5th the grades will not vary consistently with respect to the two instruction methods. The decision rule of ANOVA will be to reject the null hypotheses of no differences between the mean scores, and no interactions between the independent variables if the p values of the F statistics are .05. ANOVA assumes that the residuals (the differences between the observed scores and the mean scores) are normally distributed, and the variances in the scores for each group are equal. These assumptions will be checked by SPSS using the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test for normality and Levenes test for equality of variance (Field, 2009). If the raw scores violate the theoretical assumptions of ANOVA then appropriate data transformations (e.g., square roots, powers, or logarithms) may be necessary.
A power analysis is applied to identify the appropriate sample size for groups (Creswell, 2009, p. 165). Statistical power is the probability of correctly rejecting a false null hypothesis, and a power of 0.8 is the conventionally accepted minimum level. Cohen (1992) published guidelines to compute the appropriate sample sizes to perform various statistical hypothesis tests with respect to different significance levels and effect sizes. At a significance level of .05 and a power level of 0.8 Cohen computed that the required sample size per group to perform ANOVA varies with respect to the number of groups and the effect sizes (Table 2).
Cohen (p. 157) considered a small effect size accounts for about 10 of the variance, a medium effect about 25, and a large effect about 40. Assuming the effect size between the two groups of students (LSS and non LSS) in this study will be medium then the required sample size in each group (according to Table 2) should be 64 and the total sample size should be 2 x 64 128 students. Since the target population is known to consist of about 540 students, of which about 90 are LSS students, it will be possible to select 64 LSS and 64 non LSS students to achieve the necessary power for statistical analysis however, since it is not known in advance what the effect size will be, the results of the power analysis are compromised. If the effect size turns out to be small then a sample size of 64 students in each group may be insufficient.
Limitations of the Study
There were a few potential threats to the internal validity of this study i.e., the extent to which the observed differences in the dependent variable could be directly related to the known intervention, and not to some other unknown or uncontrolled variable(s). These threats included the history effect, instrument decay, the Hawthorne effect, and mortality (Fraenkel Wallen, 2007). The history effect is the possibility that some event happened before the intervention that prejudiced the scores of the participants.
The history effect was a potential threat to the internal validity of this study, since the 2008-2009 school years brought several changes to the intermediate schools educational services. First, since its opening in the mid 1970s to the 2007-2008 school years, the intermediate school has served fourth through sixth intermediate grade students. The intermediate school is one of two intermediate schools in overseas military school system, the other being in Germany (DoDEA, 2009). Beginning with the 2008-2009 school year, in an effort to consistently align middle and high school grade levels to sixth through eighth, and ninth through twelfth respectively, the Okinawan Intermediate School and German Intermediate School were converted from fourth through sixth grades, to third through fifth. This conversion required fifth and sixth-grade students to advance to middle school at the end of the 2007-2008 school year leaving only fourth grade students to return for the 2008-2009 school year. Therefore, for example comparing 2008 sixth grade to 2009 sixth grade is no longer possible.
Instrument decay refers to changes in the test instruments that may influence the results. The inability to compare the scores from the TerraNova 3rd edition Multiple Assessments to the TerraNova 2nd edition was a form of instrument decay that posed a threat to the validity of this study. From 2002 through 2007, American overseas school system students were administered the TerraNova 2nd edition. During the 2008-2009 school years, the TerraNova 3rd edition was administered for the first time. Consequently, the conversion from the 2nd to the 3rd edition was a limitation to this study, since the 2008 TerraNova scores could not be compared to 2009 TerraNova scores. Only the 2009 TerraNova scores of the different groups of students could be statistically compared.
The Hawthorne effect was coined following the results of a survey at the Hawthorne Works (a manufacturing facility) which concluded that participants significantly improved their productivity simply as a result of feeling that they were part of an important experiment, but not directly because of the experimental intervention itself. Consequently, immediately after the experiment was over, productivity slumped. The term is now used to describe any short term reaction of participants to an intervention. The Hawthorne effect is taken into account by comparison of the responses of an experimental group (exposed to an intervention, such as the LSS students) with those of a control group (from whom the intervention is withheld, such as the non LSS students) as proposed in this study.
Mortality refers to the loss of participants during the term of a longitudinal study. Mortality is a validity issue only if the lost participants represent a distinct group who intentionally did not respond to the instrument for a particular reason, and whose scores are expected to be very different to those who continued to participate. Although a few students may have dropped out of school between 2008 and 2009 mortality is not considered to be a serious threat to the validity of the proposed study.
Ethical Assurancestc Ethical Assurances f C l 1tc Ethical Assurances f l 1tc Ethical Assurances f C l 1
Although this study will not involve human subject participation, there are still ethical considerations that must be observed when handling student data. The 1979 Belmont report addressed three ethical precepts that must be addressed prior to the commencement of this or any study involving human subject-derived data. These precepts are respect for persons, beneficence, and justice (U.S. Department of Health, Education, Welfare, 1979). Additionally, the American Psychological Association (APA) has established five principals of ethical assurances which this writer will strive to the utmost to uphold. These principals are beneficence and non-malevolence, fidelity and responsibility, integrity, justice, and respect for peoples rights and dignity (APA, 2009). Because this research will not require direct contact with human participants, no consent will be required. This does not eliminate the need to ensure student test data are protected via secure password-protected computer systems. Thus every precaution mandated by DoDEA and the Department of Health, Education and Welfare, and the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act Regulations (FERPA) will be observed.
Beneficence and non-malevolence
As mentioned numerous times, this study will not involve any human contact and does not pose any risk of or any unethical techniques. In studies that would involve human subjects, the APA suggests researchers must seek to safeguard the welfare and rights of those with whom they interact professionally and other affected persons, and the welfare of animal subjects of research (APA, 2009). Maintaining these assurances will assist in setting the overarching tone of positive ethical practices throughout the study.
Fidelity and responsibility
APA suggests the researcher should exercise fidelity and responsibility by being aware of their professional and scientific responsibilities to society and to the specific communities in which they work (APA, 2009). Although there are no specific commitments required to any individuals, this writer will ensure all promises are kept and to avoid unclear commitments. There will be no situations in which justifiable deceptions are required or unethical research techniques (APA, 2009).
Integrity
As suggested by the APA, this study will not engage in fraud, subterfuge, or intentional misrepresentation of fact (APA, 2009). As this study requires only collection of student test scores and will not address specific students, there is little risk of a violation of integrity toward individuals. This does not preclude the need to protect the integrity of professionals assisting in this study.
Justice
The APA (2009) requires justice in research. Justice is a lack of bias. Because this is a quantitative study, there will be no bias in the reported results and thus, every element of justice is ensured. For the same reason, it will be easy to exercise reasonable judgment and equality when analyzing student test scores. Finally, the results will be accurately reported to all institutions involved to ensure honesty.
Respect for peoples rights and dignity
The final APA principal is respect for peoples rights and dignity (APA, 2009). As an educator, this writer makes every effort to ensure student safety. As a researcher the same precautions will also be taken to ensure all rights and dignities are protected. Once again, this writers study of the value of LSS will not involve direct contact with actual people so the risk of violating such rights and dignities are negligible. Additionally, student test score data will remain anonymous to ensure privacy.
Adult literacy practices
Majority of the students in the literacy support programs have struggled to read once in awhile in their life time. This applies to those who are between grade four and twelve. Majority of them are not adequately prepared to read new and unfamiliar words neither can they try to figure out their meaning. For those who can read, they do it but would not comprehend what exactly it means. In some cases students are able to read certain words, but when asked to write them, they are not in a position to do that. The problem may even be more complex for students who are at a higher level of schooling. Reading is aimed at improving understanding. This can only achieved by learning from the written word. Its of great important to come up with programs that adequately promote this goal. Its necessary that schools create an environment that is conducive to support the students in attaining hisher goal, which is to understand what heshe reads. Majority of the literacy support programs put in place tend to favour the younger learner and ignoring the older students who have difficulties in reading. There is an assumption that older students should be better placed to learn reading by hisher initiative. With this in mind, programs have been put in place to address adult education. This has gained popularity and it has high demand. There is a paradigm shift, from focusing mainly to younger students to trying to balance between the two groups. Research is continuously being done to provide teachers with necessary resources and opportunities to aid struggling student at all levels of learning. The efforts should be moved to other parts. This is a good sign of things to come. This paper is aimed at assisting all the stakeholders in the education sector with necessary skills to deal with both the young and older students. Adults need proper reading skills to aid them attain a productive future. The adolescent reading mentioned in this paper refers to a group of students who are between grade four and 12th. Early reading on the other hand refers to reading that occurs in kindergarten and normally ends in third grade.
Essentials of reading components
There are about five areas of reading essentials that are necessary when coming up with literacy support programs. Each of these areas equally contributes immensely in the reading process. These areas include
Phonemic awareness this involves students being made to hear sounds that make up words. Wiley Blevins (1997) maintains that, phonemic awareness is the understanding that words are made up of sounds. It is also the ability to pick out and manipulate sound in spoken words (p.4). Its referred to as the auditory process. Students at this stage of the literacy support program are able to identify words that rhyme, putting words or syllables together to come up with word, and another important skill is to break a word into syllables. This is an important step for students learning to read.
Phonics- this stage is important in making students understand that words are made up letters, this letters can be recognized by certain sounds. This is important for learner to read and spell words. They should understand patterns of words that represent words.
Fluency- this is the ability to without struggling to pronounce words. This should be done effortlessly and automatically. Words are easily recognized by students. It is important to be fluent because this is the only way that a link can be created between word recognition and its understanding. The reader should recognize the words and what exactly those words mean within a very short time. Being fluent does not necessarily mean that comprehension is guaranteed, but without fluency, it is very difficult to comprehend anything. It would be boring when a reader constantly stops to try to understand what every word means. Zvia Breznitz (2005) says that, a child that encounters the printed materials at the initial stages of reading acquisition deciphers the text in a non automatic manner while ignoring punctuation marks which exhibiting monotonous expression (p.1). This would lead in meaning of the text. This makes the process long and tiring. Fluent students are able to channel their energy in trying to improve comprehension.
Vocabulary- in literacy support programs, vocabulary these are a set of words that are known to a person in a certain language. This involves comprehending and properly using words while making speech or writing down. Every area has specific words that are used. This passing of time, this vocabulary expands. This is because people learn more words on that specific language. It can therefore be inferred that more words one knows the better he knows the language. Prober understanding of the vocabulary is important because it aids in expressing and proper communication and one may be judged according to her vocabulary.
Comprehension- literacy support programs emphasize the ability to grasp something and understand facts. Reading is aimed at assisting the reader to decipher the meaning in the written word. It is important to help him make proper judgment considering any misunderstanding. This is process that is complex and should be properly dealt with. For proper comprehension to be achieved, it is important to realize that reading makes sense, knowledge already held by users is important, the ideas that the text is addressing and use and of words putting them in context.
Reading instructions
Slight differences exist between instructions for the younger readers and those of the older ones. Literacy support programs provide that the instructions can be broken down into five categories. These broad categories are
word study
fluency
vocabulary
comprehension and
Motivation.
Its not necessary for older readers to be made to go through the elementary stages of learning how to read. A few of them however may benefit from fundamentals of readings. The older students have a range of skills that makes it not necessary for them not to go through the fundamental stages of reading. Each of the components above is well explained in the paragraphs that follow.
Word study
This is an opportunity that students have to manipulate words. This poses a great challenge for students. Whenever students see anew word, they are supposed to look at it and try to figure out if they know anything about the word and if there is anything that can assist them read the word well. Word study focuses on reading at word level. It assists students read words more efficiently and effectively hence making herhis understanding of issues very easy. Different students have different needs, this is unlike the common systems that lumps students together according to grade and ignoring a very important aspect that, every student has hisher special need. Word study would be most effective for older students who experience problems reading. This should be done regardless of her grade.
It important for readers to understand the relationship between letters, letter patterns and sounds associated with them. With this knowledge, they are able to unravel meaning in difficult words during the reading process. The reading process involves breaking words down into small but meaningful sections that would aid them comprehend the words. Table below explains the concept
Successful ReadersStruggling Readers Read multisyllabic words and use strategies to figure out unknown words.
Make connections between letter patterns and sounds and use this understanding to read words.
Break unknown words into syllables during reading.
Use word analysis strategies to break difficult or long words into meaningful parts such as inflectional endings, prefixes, suffixes, and roots.May read single-syllable words effortlessly but have difficulty decoding longer multisyllabic words.
May lack knowledge of the ways in which sounds map to print.
Have difficulty breaking words into syllables.
Often do not use word analysis strategies to break words into syllables.Adapted from Bhattacharya Ehri, 2004 Nagy, Berninger, Abbott, 2006
With proper understanding of word study, students are able to create syllables from words, and reading words by bringing the syllables together. This would ensure success of literacy support programs. Another concept that they are able to learn is analyzing words by meaning and its structure. Long and difficult words are broken down into smaller units that they know. The recommended ways of teaching students are
Students should be taught to identify syllables and break them into smaller parts.
Teach students how to understand complex words by bring the known parts of syllables together.
They should be taught to learn words that do not have any pattern.
Students should use structural analysis to create meaning in words.
Fluency
Fluent readers have mastered the art of reading words continuously without repetition. They read words automatically and they put words together in a way that would enhance understanding. This is important during word reading and when understanding is necessary. Fluent readers have more time to understand the meaning of the word because they have the ability to identify a word by just seeing it. Fluency can best be improved by frequent reading of words. This creates familiarity with the words. Slow readers are not doing well because they do not read more frequently.
Vocabulary
For overall academic success and proper comprehension, it is of great importance to understand meaning of words. With proper understanding of words, and proper mechanisms to decipher the unknown words, there is no reason why students would fail to understand the content of the text they are reading. Students have to understand that words may at times have more than one meaning. Depending with the circumstances, words may mean different things at different times. It is obvious that struggling readers know very few words compared to those who can read well. This is attained because good reader read widely and more frequently. By so doing, they are able to learn so many words. On the other hand, poor readers read less as a result they are exposed to very few words. The result of this is that they fail to be accomplished readers. Words are not only learnt through reading, they can also be learnt through, good conversations, experience. Developing word consciousness is as a result of proper vocabulary teaching that has been undertaken. Deep knowledge of words is paramount in this process.
Comprehension
There are so many reasons for reading. These purposes include, reading to learn, enjoyment and obtain information. Learning requires that the reader should be able to comprehend and recall what been read.
It is important to monitor comprehension while reading. The reader must ask hisher self questions while reading. It is normal to read through text even for experienced readers only to find out they did not understand anything. When this occurs, a good reader is advised to stop reading and try to remind hisher self what heshe has so far read. This is called recalling. If there is nothing heshe can remember, it is useless to continue reading because it amounts to time wasting. No value addition is taking place. For struggling readers this is difficult because they dont have sufficient skills necessary to determine if they understand anything. It is not easy for them to monitor their comprehension.
Many instructors expect their students to use the above skills while tackling comprehension issues but they do not adequately address and teach their students how to use the skill. Students may be asked by their teacher to highlight the main issues in a passage without actually telling them how they can do it. This amounts to expecting too much from the students. Students require adequate preparation to perform their tasks properly. Comprehension would then be easy.
It is important for teachers to focus on assisting students on reading and understanding passage. This is the only way they can assist understanding in all other area. Students will record an increased ability in reading if proper strategies are given to them. Teaching students to have proper reading skills will make them better readers. These readers will reduce literacy levels.
Students have prior knowledge about certain topics. It is called prior knowledge. For proper understanding of the unknown, it is important for learners to activate this knowledge. It assists them by creating a missing link between many tasks. This prior knowledge is not readily accessible for struggling students. They are not able to access facts to aid in proper decision making.
Graphic organizers
These are visual aids that assist students to pick out, organize, and recall main ideas that are important in the text that they had just read. The examples of visuals aids are concept maps, Venn diagrams etc. They may be used before an introduction of the topics. This is used to assist students remember anything that they may know about the topic. They may assist them to guess what the subject in discussion may all be about. These diagrams are used during reading to prove right or wrong predictions that had earlier been made. Information deemed important is therefore recorded. After the reading process, the graphics may be used to write summaries, and to make any forms of correlations that exist between facts.
Summary writing skills
When reading a large amount of information, it is important to consolidate it into smaller chunks that make sense to the people reading it. Only important elements of the text are highlighted, less important parts are ignored. The following steps are important in trying to come up with good summary
Students should be made to start by summarizing smaller bits of work before larger parts are introduced. They can start by one paragraph then move to two paragraph, then with time we can move to one page and finally whole chapter. This is actually meant to give them endurance to handle larger jobs and build confidence in them.
Its important to use one that group together many teams. This would reduce the number of words that may be used if the process of writing. There are words that may be used in place in place of many words. This reduces the number of words used and still maintains the meaning initially intended to contain.
Information that is trivial should be eliminated. It is important to carry only item and ideas that carry weight. Picking trivial issues is likely to cause repetition. This would make the work shorter. These issues can be picked from the main ideas found in rest of the text. The main aim of summary writing is to high main ideas without losing the original meaning.
Proof reading the work after writing it to ensure that it makes senses is important. Summaries that make sense are necessary. Writing summary and leaving out some concepts is not good practice. It is possible to write summary that would not make sense at all. This is because the main ideas are not captured in the summary. Another reason that would make summaries not to make sense is the lack of links between the ideas that are being communicated in the passage. It dilutes the whole passage.
Asking and answering question
Students should learn to ask themselves questions about what they have read. After this, they should try to answer these questions more accurately. To support understanding, students should ask questions before, during and after reading the text. This practice can be done by
Students should be taught to ask specific type of questions. Some of the questions may have their answers in the text.
Question generation should be used as a strategy to improve reading. By so doing, they are able to read a piece of writing trying to find solution to specific questions they have in mind. This enhances understanding.
Students should have proper strategy to answer teacher generated questions. Students should find out if the answers are found in the text or if they are to be concluded. There are some questions that would require that the readers look at the text to find answers. On the other hand, some questions require that students have to read and make their own inferences.
Motivation
Readers should be given texts to read to that gives them the need and drive to continue reading. This is important to ensure that heshe does not shift focus. Lack of focus makes students reading very little. They would have to struggle to comprehend what the text means. With proper interest, its easy to understand the text. It makes reading enjoyable. This therefore explains why those who enjoy reading will always keep reading. This continued reading improves the skill at the end of the end. Struggling students do not read for pleasure. They normally read for examinations or when they are asked to. They do not have the initiative to do it on their own. This would make it embarrassing for their weaknesses to be exposed in public. They would want to hide it all cost. This reduces people as self esteems.
In the table below we summarize features of successful and poor readers.
Successful readersStruggling readersInteract with text in a motivated and strategic way.
Have improved comprehension and reading outcomes when engaged with text.
Read more and thus have more access to a variety of topics and text types.
Are interested and curious about topics and content in texts and read to find out more.May engage in reading as a passive process without giving effortful attention to activating prior knowledge, using reading strategies, or employing other strategic thought processes.
Often have low comprehension of text.
Fail to access a variety of wide reading opportunities. Given the choice, prefer not to read.
May not be interested in or curious about exploring topics or content through reading.
Students should be given the freedom to choose what they want to read, who they would want to read together with. This gives them more motivation to continue doing it. Putting them in groups that they do not like may likely reduce the learning process.
This can be made better by doing the following
Giving students freedom to choose what they want to read. This is by offering a list of what they can choose from. They can choose their own literature develop ways that can improve their understanding.
Let students have control over aspects of the job that they are doing. This includes deciding where to work from, subjects to study, etc.
Selections of partners, groups should be entirely left to them. They should decide partners they can blend well this. This is the only way to maximize the learning process. Forcing them into groups may make them not realize their full potential.
Students enjoy reading what they find to be interesting. They would do it even outside class if they enjoy it. Our brains work in a way that, it always remembers things that are interesting rather than those that are not. There are guidelines that are of great importance for students and teachers to decide the interesting the materials to use. These guidelines are
Choose topics that students have knowledge on. Having knowledge on certain topic makes the text more interesting and it boosts confidence. Its however important that students are provided with literature that is not familiar. This provides an opportunity for learning. This is not meant to discourage new learning but ensure that students enjoy what they are reading and at the same time they are learning new time.
Visually pleasing texts are interesting and motivates students. Text should be of high quality.
We must seek an educational system which grows in excellence as it grows in size. This means better training for our teachers. It means preparing youth to enjoy their hours of leisure as well as their hours of labor. It means exploring new techniques of teaching, to find new ways to stimulate the love of learning and the capacity for creation. (Johnson, 1964, sec. 29)
Johnsons domestic policy centered on the belief that if cabinet-level departments were adequately funded, beginning with health, education, and civil rights, the human condition in America itself would improve and continue to flourish in generations to come. Since its initial enactment, the 1965 ESEA has undergone three re-authorizations to include the 2001 version known as the No Child Left behind Act.
Today, the Johnson speech and the philosophies of the Great Society are rarely mentioned in discussions of public education although one component of the 1965 ESEA continues to receive attention as it relates to higher learning outcomes. Title 1, section 101 of the 1965 ESEA is headed Improving the Academic Achievement of the Disadvantaged (89th Congress, 1965). According to the ESEA, the purpose of Title 1 is to ensure that all children have a fair, equal, and significant opportunity to obtain a high-quality education and reach, at a minimum, proficiency on challenging State academic achievement standards and state academic assessments (89th Congress, 1965, PL 89-10, sec. 1001). This purpose of Title 1 was originally designed to be accomplished through sub-objectives. Among these objectives, item 8 states, Providing children an enriched and accelerated educational program, including the use of school-wide programs or additional services that increase the amount and quality of instructional time (89th Congress, 1965, PL 89-10, sec. 1001, para 8).
Regardless of federal funding, student support and other remedial academic programs are used in all or nearly all public schools in the United States. Although the American overseas school included in this study does not fall under the Title 1 program, Johnsons speech and the essence of why Title I was created is the American overseas school systems inspiration to offer the remedial support program to be studied. Students who perform below the standard are offered the remedial reading program, in an effort to improve student reading comprehension.
This concept paper will examine the effects of a particular support program, Literacy Support Services LSS, on substandard readers, which is in jeopardy of being canceled due to budget constraints within the American overseas school system. Without data to support the programs need, the program may be terminated (Degalis, 2009). Thus, the sample will be drawn from one American overseas school. Literature reviews on the topic of literacy and reading support programs, examples of various programs in schools across the United States and abroad, and the results of local assessments disaggregated by student achievement levels will be the basis by which the problem and purpose of this concept paper are addressed.
Statement of the Problem
tc Statement of the problem f C l 2tc Statement of the problem f C l 2
The American overseas school systems 2006 Community Strategic Plan (CSP) states 100 percent of students will perform At the Standard level or higher on system-wide, criterion-referenced assessments aligned to the ReadingEnglishLanguage Arts, Math, Science, Social Studies, and Technology performance standards (DoDEA, 2006, p. 2). The term at the standard is defined later in this concept paper. System-wide assessments, include the Scholastic Reading Inventory (SRI) and the TerraNova second edition, both of which are defined later. In one American overseas intermediate school serving third-grade through fifth-grade students, 100 of students did not meet the standard. The percentage of students who did not meet the standard in reading was 30, 23, and 18 for third through fifth grade, respectively (AEIS, 2009 p. 11).
While the literature review suggests there have been many attempts to improve reading performance through student support programs stateside, none have reviewed reading performance data paired with (LSS) within this particular American overseas school system. The failure of 100 of American overseas school system students to achieve the standard is further compounded by the overseas school systems recent cutbacks to the Pacific Literacy Project and Reading Recovery slots in Europe. These slots fund literacy facilitators and reading coaches who provide in classroom reading support to teachers and work directly with substandard readers (Degalis, 2009). Europe had recently discovered their Reading Recovery slots were canceled and would not receive funding by the school systems headquarters. The teachers union, The Federal Education Association (FEA) has challenged this move (Degalis, 2009). Headquarters in Alexandria, Virginia has recently enforced data-driven decisions and removed several programs and services that lack data to support the benefits of these programs (Degalis, 2009). Therefore, this study will provide data to determine whether students in the LSS program have higher growth on the scholastic reading inventory (SRI) than their non-LSS counterparts receiving only general classroom instruction. The findings of this study could determine the future of the LSS program in the American overseas system schools.
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this quantitative study is to determine whether students receiving Literacy Support Services (LSS) have a greater percentage of growth than non-LSS students on the SRI exam as well as to compare LSS students end-of-year TerraNova scores to non-LSS students. Determining whether LSS students achieved greater growth than non-LSS students on the SRI could support a data-driven decision as to whether or not to continue the LSS program or to sacrifice it with the PLP and Reading Recovery programs to support other programs that data have proven successful. Determining whether LSS students performed the same as their non-LSS peers on the end-of-year TerraNova assessment may also indicate the benefits of the LSS program. The findings from this study may indicate that the reduction of student support programs in literacy skills impedes students meeting the standards required in the CSP. For instance, CSP goal 1 states educators must ensure the highest academic achievement and 100 of students must meet the standard (DoDEA, 2006) thus, we must ensure all students achieve the SRI standard at the end of the year. Students take the SRI in August and retake the end-of-year exam in May. If LSS students earned a higher percentage of growth than non-LSS this may be the data headquarters needs to determine whether to continue funding the LSS program. Therefore, the independent variables are LSS and non-LSS students and the dependent variables are their SRI and TerraNova scores.
The setting of the study is in a United States military community in Okinawa, Japan. Specifically, the study will occur at an American Intermediate School, one of 13 schools on the island of Okinawa serving over 8000 K-12 students primarily from U.S. military and Department of Defense families (DoDEA, 2007). The intermediate school is comprised of 540 third through fifth-grade students. As mentioned later in this concept paper, the students of interest are those who score in the third quartile of the math and reading subtests on the TerraNova Multiple Assessments and are therefore classified as LSS students. These students receive supplemental educational services in math, reading, and written language. The number of students receiving supplemental support is approximately 90. The sample size will include 128 students, half will be LSS students and half are non-LSS students (Cohen, 1992).
Definition of Key Termstc Definition of Key Terms f C l 1tc Definition of Key Terms f C l 1
At-the-standard-The SRI standard for third graders is 500 and above for fourth grade the standard is 600 and above, and for fifth grade the standard is 700 and above (AEIS, 2009).
Substandard Student-Students who scored in the third quartile (26th 50th percentiles) on the TerraNova Multiple Assessments (TNMA) particularly (but not exclusively) on the math andor reading subtests and are not receiving special education services are considered at risk of not meeting academic standards and are therefore enrolled in the LSS program (Alderman, 2008).
Lexile. This term refers to pre-defined levels or at the standard of performance on the SRI of 500 for third-grade students, 600 for fourth-grade students, and 700 for fifth-grade students according the Scholastic Reading Inventory (AEIS, 2009).
Literacy Support Services. These are services (including Read 180) for substandard students, as defined above, who perform below the 50th percentile on the TerraNova reading and language subtests, but higher than the 10th percentile (which is a possible indicator of a need for special education services) (AEIS, 2009).
Mean percentile rank. Mean percentile rank is the relation of a students score on a given assessment according to the average scores of all students in a norma group. A higher percentile ranking indicates higher performance according to peer scores (Pearson, 2008).
READ 180. READ 180 is developed by the Scholastic corporation as a comprehensive reading intervention program for fourth- through twelfth-grade students reading below proficiency levels. READ 180s design of independent, small group, and whole group instruction is aligned with findings from research of effective reading interventions including decoding skills to reading comprehension strategies (Mayer et al., 2006).
Scholastic Reading Inventory (SRI). The SRI is a research-based, computer-based reading assessment for K12 grade students that measures reading comprehension levels and reports it according to lexile (Scholastic, 2009). The SRI is administered at the beginning and end of each school year but may also be given throughout the year within system-defined intervals. (DoDEA, 2009)
Student Support Services (SSS). These are provided for those students who need specially designed instruction that is beyond what can be provided through the general education program. SSS are provided to assist students in reaching their full developmental and academic potential. SSS are part of general education services and should not be confused with special education services for students identified with specific learning disabilities and provided an individualized education plan (IEP) (IDRA, 2009).
System-Wide Assessment. These assessments are those used by an entire school system and administered under consistent conditions between each school. For the overseas American school system, the system-wide assessments used are the TerraNova Multiple Assessments (TNMA) Third Edition and the Scholastic Reading Inventory (SRI). The TNMA Third edition was initially administered for the first time in the spring of 2009. The second edition was used from 2002 to 2008. Because of the change in edition, no data will be collected from the TNMA (DoDEA, 2009).
Research Questionstc Research Questions f C l 1tc Research Questions f C l 2
Limited data is collected directly on the topic of improving American overseas students reading comprehension through the American overseas school systems LSS program. The research in reading support programs did not discover supporting data for middle school students reading achievement after receiving LSS services. Therefore, the research questions below are necessary in order to determine the value of continuing the LSS program. The research questions for this study are as follows
Q1 How does the rate of growth in reading comprehension, as measured by SRI scores, significantly compare between students who receive LSS and their peers who do not receive LSS
Q2 How do LSS students perform on the TerraNova second edition reading subtest as compared to non-LSS students
Hypotheses
tc Hypotheses f C l 2tc Hypotheses f C l 2
This study will examine the literacy skills growth rate between students who receive LSS and their counterparts who receive only general classroom instruction. Each group will include intermediate school third through fifth grade students. Each research question will be supported by a null and alternative hypothesis. Since past research indicates support services should improve student achievement, the hypotheses are stated in terms of expected gains.
The null hypothesis and alternative hypotheses are as follows
H10 The average gain in SRI scores of students receiving LSS will be equal to or less than those of students receiving only general classroom instruction after one year of this support service.
H1a The average gain in SRI scores of students receiving LSS will be greater than those of students receiving only general classroom instruction after one year of this support service.
H20 After one year of LSS services, the mean TerraNova 2nd reading subtest score of students receiving LSS will be equal to or less than the mean score of non-LSS students.
H1a After one year of LSS services, the mean TerraNova 2nd reading subtest score of students receiving LSS will be greater than the mean score of non-LSS students.
tc Setting f C l 2tc Setting f C l 2Brief Review of the Literature
There is a need for increased support services for students who perform at decreased academic standards (Cabell, Justic, Zucker, Kilday, 2009). Student support services of various designs have existed since before the days of ESEA and will likely continue beyond its next re-authorization. Using a quantitative design, this study will compare the growth rate of substandard readers (those enrolled in the LSS program) and their achievement on system-wide assessments in literacy skills against the rate of students who are not identified as LSS students. The literature review will examine the results of previous academic program studies.
On June 8, 2009, during a conference at the Institute of Educational Sciences (IES), U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan was asked what role the Department of Education could play in utilizing resources outside of the classroom to promote higher student achievement. In his response, Duncan expressed a desire to see U.S. schools adopt practices of public schools internationally such as longer school days and extended school calendars (Duncan, 2009).
While Duncans comments may not suggest any specific shift in school district policies, they do reinforce the conclusion of many education professionals that U.S. schools and students require immediate interventions to raise their performance to that of their international peers. Marcotte and Hemelt (2007) attempted to correlate the varied length of school days and school calendars with the student achievement at public and charter schools across the country. While the results of their study are not entirely conclusive, such studies of these and other interventions are likely to continue as long as U.S. students do not perform according to the standards expected from teachers, parents, and future employers.
Reading assessment is a key avenue to determining the level of retention and academic development. It is worth noting that though reading assessment scores are important in determining development in cognition, language, and articulation skills, it does not develop a holistic picture of the development made by a student in other important aspects of learning. Other critical issues like behavioral development and social interaction skills must be considered in determining the efficiency of a measure or a system to student development (Terry, 2009). Nevertheless literacy services have shown considerable impact on the academic development of grade-level students. However, no studies have been conducted specifically on LSS students and their SRI and TerraNova scores leading to the possible demise of the LSS program.
There has been minimal emphasis on the need for early literacy intervention at an individualized level. This is an observation in a backdrop of an educational system where gaps in performance are rising by the minute. However, studies have shown that reading achievement in primary grades is associated with the nature of instructions used and are considerably affected by use of early intervention systems. Early identification and interventions are important in ensuring that the deficit areas are addressed to prevent later difficulties and improve children skills (Cabell, Justice, Zucker, Kilday, 2009). School-based, group-level interventions have been proven successful in ensuring that substandard students performance is corrected to average levels with respect to reading outcomes. However, the success of such a program largely depends on the level of organization and objectivity to addressing specific areas where students encounter difficulty. This has led to an increase in awareness of the need for teachers to carefully diagnose the challenges that students face, the areas where they find difficulty, and timeliness of the intervention. Failure to meet these requirements may result in failure of intervention systems in their entirety. A key risk in implementing intervention systems that often include literacy support systems is focusing more on the content rather than guiding both the students and teachers who deliver to the substandard student. This brings about literacy supports as one of the key factors that may affect the efficiency with which substandard students needs are met and ensure that they benefit from the school system. Other areas that have proven to be quite deterministic of the efficiency of support services is the accuracy with which teachers can identify students that have problems in their academic development but do not qualify or are yet to qualify for special classes.
The increase in research on the applicability of literacy support services to substandard students has raised awareness of U.S. educators of the special needs required by this group. The adoption of literacy support services is increasing mainly due to appreciation of the impact that it has on the level of academic performance, an increase in awareness of the potential that the substandard students have, and appreciation of the ability to realize this potential if relevant strategies are adopted (Cabell, Justice, Zucker, Kilday, 2009). Moreover, there has been an increase in emphasis on early education and grade-level intervention owing to increase in awareness of the importance of early intervention and the role played by early education in determining the performance at latter stages of education. Children who experience and have difficulty in mastering the reading process and skills are at greater risk of academic failure (Cabell, Justice, Zucker, Kilday, 2009). This relays the importance of development of literacy skills at grade level and the need to ensure that such students catch up with other students.
Research-based practice in dealing with the challenges that substandard students face has been shown to impact positively on the development of language and reading skills among substandard students. Literacy support services are among the research-based approaches that can be used in ensuring that the reading challenges faced by substandard students are carefully and comprehensively addressed (Cabell, Justice, Zucker, Kilday, 2009). Various perspectives have been adopted in seeking to determine the impact of literacy support on reading achievement.
Even before the era of the 1965 ESEA, U.S. educators continuously sought strategies to narrow the growing gap in reading proficiencies between U.S. students and their peers in classrooms abroad (Field, Kuczera, Pont, 2003). These strategies include both those in the general educational environment as well as special literacy support services for substandard readers. American entrepreneur, Jim Rohn, was once quoted as saying, A good objective of leadership is to help those who are doing poorly to do well and to help those who are doing well to do even better (Rohn, 1996, p. 46). Rohn directed his remarks primarily to those in the business community, although this philosophy applies no less to educational leaders as well. In order to help schools reach their ultimate vision, effective educational leaders should understand that tomorrows business leaders are todays students. Gerry Houses view of substandard learners is bleaker
A stark failure of our education system to prepare all of our children for productive futures attributable to several factors, among them low expectations, traditional organizational structures and poor instruction, resistance to change, lack of leadership, the shortage of quality teachers and a failure to recognize the remarkable resilience and dreams of even those students who struggle the most. (House, 2005, p. 137)
According to a June 2009 report, over half of all eighth-grade students at one Chicago school did not meet the standards to move on to high school (CBS, 2009). Considering also the significantly below-average performance of U.S. students on the 2006 Programme of International Student Assessments (PISA), Houses comments are perhaps not only grim, but relevant as well (OECD, 2006).
Although U.S. students strive to achieve the level of classroom excellence their future work centers will demand, many of them have difficulty maintaining academic standards in core curricula independently. In these situations, mostif not allpublic schools utilize student support services and academic interventions outside of the regular classroom. Combine these future challenges for todays learners with federal mandates for adequate yearly progress for children academically left behind, and it becomes necessary to establish effective student support programs in key curricular areas. However, even with evidence to support the benefits of student support programs in math and literacy skills, to operate within the constraints of a diminishing budget, DoDEA Headquarters did not approve staffing slots in 2009 for the Pacific Literacy Program (PLP) or the Reading Recovery program (Degalis, 2009).
Reading Recovery has already been recognized as one of the top-rated reading intervention programs the outcome of its elimination has yet to be determined (Slavin et al., 2009). As of the writing of this concept paper, neither program is offered at one intermediate school overseas. Without the added interventions of special support programs such as the PLP, Reading Recovery, or the currently used LSS, it will be unrealistic to expect all students to meet the demands of the American overseas school systems CSP.
Effects of Planning
Although few studies have been conducted to determine the efficiency of literacy support services in its entirety on reading assessment scores in grade-level education, numerous studies have intended to determine the effects of various aspects of literacy support services on reading development. One of the areas that have been centered on is the effect of pre-planning and post-planning on the efficiency of the literacy support service design adopted. Nearly 35 of reported cases of failure of literacy support services are a result of failure in designing (Sloat, Beswick, Willms, 2007). The use of backward design where services are continually improved is hindered by lack of teacher skills to effectively redesign and handle the challenges that are associated with this approach. Efficiency in designing a literacy support service program can result in up to a 78 increase in improvement of reading scores recorded by substandard students (Sloat, Beswick, Willms, 2007).
Diversity
The diversity of the literacy support service has also been analyzed and its impact on reading achievement noted. It is important to note that the individual strategies that are adopted in literacy support services vary a great deal. However, management of diverse literacy support services is complex, which may limit its efficiency. On the other hand, the inclusion of diverse activities for instance play, storytelling, narration, and interaction between students has been shown to be highly effective in maximizing the benefits that substandard students gain from the literacy support services (Sloat, Beswick, Willms, 2007). Depending on the diversity of the literacy support services, their efficiency can be improved by up to 140 (Gayla, 2008). However, studies have shown that benefits obtained by diversity depend on the grade level being referenced. First-grade and second-grade students benefit more from the diversity of the literacy support service than students in the higher grades in the K-12 range (Gayla, 2008). This phenomenon has been described as being in part a result of the nature of the syllabus where reading development is emphasized in early grade levels whereas the later grades are mainly concerned with application of the reading skills to other subjects.
Another factor that has been posited by researchers as central to this observed phenomenon is the natural development cycle within humans. Language development is at its peak at childhood. Additionally, as children age they tend to be more effective in understanding high-level abstraction concepts. This means students at low grade levels are likely to gain more from interaction and employment of diverse methods in literacy support service than students at higher grades due to their level of development. Another issue that has been highlighted as potentially influential on the differential effects of diversity of the strategies on the efficiency of the literacy support services is the nature of the educational curriculum and general practices in education (Sloat, Beswick, Willms, 2007). Lower grades are generally associated with the adoption of interactive systems to learning thus, lower grade teachers are more effective in developing and designing diverse literacy support services. On the other hand, learning at higher grades tends to be individualized with emphasis on structured group interaction or team work. This reduces the efficiency with which higher grade teachers can coordinate and manage the various strategies if diversity is adopted.
Assessment
Another area that has been pinpointed as influential on the efficiency displayed by literacy support services is the approaches used in their assessment. Assessment of the programs should be a continuous process and starts with setting clear goals and strategies that are aimed at ensuring that these goals are met (Craig, Lingling, Hensel, Quinn, 2009). Goal setting as a critical requirement in long-term and short-term planning plays a vital role in justifying the time and material resources that are directed to literacy support services. This is important in ensuring that school management and other educational stakeholders develop appreciation and therefore support the inclusion of literacy support services in the curricula. However, assessment is more than just goal setting and has been noted as one of the key challenges in not only designing the programs but also in their implementation. There has been a continuous debate on whether students with special needs or reduced ability should be assessed under a similar framework as students with normal ability. The use of different frameworks has been painted unfair in the highly competitive educational environment because whether a child has special needs is basically determined subjectively by teachers and all students seek employment opportunities from the same environment. In designing the program teachers face challenges mainly due to their lack of competence in designing effective evaluation systems that would ensure that intangible benefits that result from the literacy support services are accurately perceived (Bailey Drummond, 2006). It is noteworthy that a large proportion of the benefits that result from the literacy support services are intangible and cannot be easily conceptualized even with the use of standardized tests. The failure to read may result from shyness and other factors that may not necessarily be due to a students cognitive abilities improvement in such areas cannot be easily articulated under the assessments systems that are developed by teachers, which undermines the perception that is developed of literacy support services and may be influential on the support that it receives from educational stakeholders (Craig, Lingling, Hensel, Quinn, 2009).
Use of standardized means (e.g., employing the aid of organizations like the literacy support system) is one of the avenues that schools can use to ensure that they develop literacy support systems that are well evaluated. Proper evaluation enables standardization as one of the avenues that schools have in ensuring that the literacy support systems are well assessed. However, this issue has been approached differently by other specialists who believe standardization and certification create a negative impact on the levels of flexibility that can be afforded by individual schools in developing their literacy support services and programs (Gyovai, Cartledge, Kourea, Yurick, Gibson, 2009). In essence, the need for individualized considerations in developing the literacy support services is posited as limiting the efficiency that can be attained in using standardization because it limits flexibility in ensuring that individual students needs are accurately addressed. However, the impact of this latter aspect on the efficiency of the literacy support services has not been researched, which presents an area that researchers must focus on in determining the new approaches that should be taken in literacy support services.
Management
Management is highly influential on value generation within organizations. This importance is also projected in the efficiency with which reading development is attained with the aid of well-managed literacy support programs. A key factor that is deterministic of the effect that schools management has on the efficiencies of the literacy support systems is their perception. A management that appreciates and understands the need for literacy support services improves the efficiency of such programs by a factor of up to 1.63 (Edmonds, ODonoghue, Spano, Algozzine, 2009). This is a value obtained after other factors that may affect the efficiency of the literacy support programs were held constant. Moreover, a negative perception has a boosting factor that is less than one (Edmonds, ODonoghue, Spano, Algozzine, 2009). This implies that it has a negative effect on the level of efficiency that can be attained in ensuring that the goals of the literacy support services are attained.
Numerous theories have been developed to try and formulate an understanding of the effects of the perceptions held by schools management in determining the success of the literacy support programs. One of the hypotheses is developed from the motivational role of leadership, which is one of the key roles in management. Poor perception is generally associated with display of negative attitude, which greatly affects the level of motivation that teachers display in designing the literacy support services (Craig, Lingling, Hensel, Quinn, 2009). The result in such a case can only be reduced performance and in some cases complete failure. Another approach through which poor perceptions by the management may affect literacy support services is through resource allocation. In general resource allocation is dependent on the perceptions that a management team has of the importance of a literacy support program. Poor perception is therefore highly correlated (0.65) with low resource allocation, which negatively impacts the efficiency of literacy services (Bauer, 2009).
Relevance to Inclusion Settings
In recent times there has been an increased awareness of the benefits that can be obtained in using inclusion settings to cater for special needs or substandard students. Studies show significant improvement in reading scores recorded by both normal and substandard students subjected to literacy support services. A study that sought to determine if there is any difference in benefits from literacy support services showed that though the substandard student gained more than normal students as a result of literacy support services the difference in gains was statistically insignificant. Moreover, the gains under inclusive settings were significantly greater than the reading gains under seclusion (Edmonds, ODonoghue, Spano, Algozzine, 2009). This has been identified as being primarily a result of the effect of interaction between students with varying language ability on the development of language skills in those students that are slow under inclusive and highly interactive settings.
Controversiestc Opposing research f C l 2
Although it would be difficult to find any dissenting perspectives on the value of added academic support for substandard students, opinions differ among researchers and scholars regarding which support services are the most effective. In a 2006 study by Lauer, Akiba, Wilkerson, Apthorp, Snow, and Martin-Glenn, the benefits of such programs are cautiously supported, but in a setting outside of the school time required by attendance (Lauer et al., 2006). The support services mentioned in this learners study are those that occur during the school day. Al Hazza and Gupta also discuss the advantages of using volunteer tutors to promote gains in student performance but with training for the tutors prior to the delivery of such services (Al Hazza Gupta, 2006, p. 15). At the intermediate school, no such training is provided for student mentors although this practice does not preclude the addition of checklists as suggested by such opposing perspectives.
Monitoring Student Achievement
tc Monitoring student achievement f C l 2tc Monitoring student achievement f C l 2
In 2008, the new director of the overseas American school system established an initiative to reconsider how scores on the system-wide TerraNova Multiple Assessments were analyzed. According to the overseas American school systems Community Strategic Plan (CSP), 75 of students are expected to score in the top two quartiles (51 99) of students scores across the United States while no more than 7 of students should score in the bottom quartile (1 25). Prior to the directors tenure, there had been no consideration for students who scored in the third quartile (26 50).
In a November 2008 memorandum, the director instructed all district superintendents to task their schools to develop an intervention for students who scored in the third quartile particularly, but not exclusively in math and reading (DoDEA, 2008). Fore, Hagan-Burke, Burke, Boon, and Smith (2008) also discussed identifying and placing substandard students in learning environments appropriate for their specific learning disabilities. In response to this directive, the intermediate school turned to the military community for volunteer tutors to assist substandard students in reading who were not currently receiving any other student support services. Pullen, Lane, and Monaghan researched the effects of volunteer tutor support for substandard first graders. Their study suggests reading tutor support can result in increased comprehension and fluency for substandard readers (Pullen et al., 2004). Although the results of the Fore et al. (2008) study showed no statistical evidence to suggest student placement as a definitively effective intervention, this study and the directors third-quartile initiative are examples of continuing research of the interventions substandard students require for success.
Gaps in the Research
In general few researchers directly seek to determine the effect of literacy support services on reading achievement at grade levels. Even fewer have conducted research specifically on the American overseas school systems LSS program and the impact on meeting the systems reading standards. Although a general consensus exists that literacy support services can potentially impact positively on grade-level students reading and literacy scores (Kamps Greenwood, 2005, p. 503), without data to support the LSS programs benefits, the school system with its data-driven endeavors may discontinue LSS and what little remains of the reading support programs in favor of funding on programs that are data supported.
Summary
Among the trends of U.S. public education at the time, the commissioned panel who authored the 1983 report, A Nation at Risk, found that time spent in the classroom and on homework is often used ineffectively and schools are not doing enough to help students develop either the study skills required to use time well or the willingness to spend more time on school work (DOE, 1983, p. 6). Recent literature reviews of student support interventions continue to call for reforms in interceptive services for students who perform below the standard although no single model has yet been identified as most effective. In summary, under the current studies it is apparent that literacy support services are highly influential on literacy levels of both substandard performers and average students. However, the effect that the literacy support services have on students wanes as they progress up the K-12 system and is largely dependent on the design and implementation of the associated programs (Kane Greenwood, p. 504). The American overseas school system has a need for data specific to the school system and LSS program to support the continuation of the LSS program. Yet no preexisting studies have compared the school systems SRI and TerraNova scores for third through fifth graders after one year of LSS and no LSS services. Data analyzed from SRI and TerraNova will play a key role in determining the impact and ultimate continuance of LSS for American overseas school system students.
Research Method
Using the SRI as the primary data collection instrument, this study will utilize a quantitative experimental ex post facto method to compare the rate of reading gains between LSS students and those who receive only general education interventions. Because the variables and the constructs used to measure them (Table 1) have been identified in advance, a quantitative design will be the most effective method to compare the gains in the test scores between control and subgroups. If constructed properly, this type of study should eliminate some of the external factors influencing both groups in order to minimize any bias (Gall, 2007, p.33).
Operational definition of variables
Lexile Score. This dependent variable refers to pre-defined levels of performance on the SRI of 500 for third-grade students, 600 for fourth-grade students, and 700 for fifth-grade students according to the Scholastic Reading Inventory (AEIS, 2009).
Literacy Support Services. This independent variable is services (including Read 180) for students performing below the 50th percentile on the TerraNova reading and language subtests, but higher than the 10th percentile, which is a possible indicator of a need for special education services (AEIS, 2009).
READ 180. READ 180 is an independent variable in this study developed by the Scholastic corporation as a comprehensive reading intervention program for fourth through twelfth grade students reading below proficiency levels. READ 180s design of independent, small group and whole group instruction is aligned with findings from research of effective reading interventions including decoding skills to reading comprehension strategies (Mayer et al., 2006).
Data Collectiontc Data Collection f l 2tc Data Collection f C l 2
The American overseas school system will require advanced approval prior to accessing any student data for this study. Preliminary investigation in this matter suggests a high level of confidence this request will be approved. As chairperson for the intermediate school improvement program, this learner can confirm the required SRI data already exists across each grade level. Because the data are currently used for school improvement reporting purposes only, it will be necessary to secure approval to use this data for research as well. The SRI and TerraNova assessment scores will be the only instrument by which data are collected for this study. Therefore, a list of students who are receiving LSS services and access to SRI and TerraNova scores for all students in third through fifth grades will be requested.
Data Analysis
tc Data Analysis f C l 2tc Data Analysis f C l 2
Because the data are derived from predetermined instrument based questions, performance data, and statistical analysis (Creswell, 2009, p. 17), a quantitative research method will be applied. The results from the SRI and TerraNova assessments have already been disaggregated by grade levels third through fifth. The data will be analyzed using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) software, with participants in the 3rd, 4th, and 5th grades assigned according to those identified as substandard performers (LSS students) or otherwise not identified for reading interventions (non LSS students) .
The operational levels of the variables and the research questions to be addressed by statistical analysis are specified in Table 1
Table 1 Operational level of the variables and the research questions
Dependent variableIndependent variablesResearch questions to be addressedGain in the SRI score in one year (between 2008 and 2009)Instruction method LSS or non-LSS
Grade 3rd, 4th, and 5th gradeHow does the rate of growth in reading comprehension, as measured by SRI scores, significantly compare between students who receive LSS and their peers who do not receive LSS
Mean TerraNova 2nd subtest score
(2009 only)Instruction method LSS or non-LSS
Grade 3rd, 4th, and 5th gradeHow do LSS students perform on the TerraNova 2nd edition reading subtest as compared to non-LSS studentsUnder the proposed null hypothesis the gain in the SRI score in one year between 2008 and 2009 for the LSS students will be the same (or less than) that of the non-LSS students in the 3rd, 4th, and 5th grades (illustrated by the conceptual model in Figure 1).
Under the proposed alternative hypothesis, the gain in the SRI score in one year between 2008 and 2009 will be greater for the LSS students than the non-LSS students in the 3rd, 4th, and 5th grades (illustrated by the conceptual model in Figure 2).
ANOVA is not appropriate to test the hypotheses because the relationship between the dependent variable (Gain in SRI score) and the independent variable (Instruction method) is confounded by a covariate (Grade). Analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) which is a combination of Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) and regression analysis will be used since ANCOVA is the most appropriate method for comparing mean values when a dependent variable and an independent variable are confounded by a covariate (Field, 2009). The null hypothesis of ANCOVA is that the slopes of the two regression lines (depicted conceptually in Figure 1) are equal. The alternative hypothesis is that the slopes of the two regression lines (depicted conceptually in Figure 2) are not equal. The decision rule will be to reject the null hypothesis if the p value of the F statistic to compare the regression slopes is .05. ANCOVA assumes that the residuals (the differences between the observed scores and the mean scores) are normally distributed. This assumption will be checked using the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test for normality, which is supported by SPSS (Field, 2009). ANCOVA also assumes that the variances in the scores for each group are equal. This assumption will be checked using Levenes test, which is also supported by SPSS (Field, 2009). If the raw scores violate the theoretical assumptions of ANCOVA then appropriate data transformations (e.g., square roots, powers, or logarithms) may be necessary.
Under the proposed null hypothesis the mean TerraNova 2nd subtest score for the LSS students in 2009 will be the same (or less than) that of the non-LSS students in the 3rd, 4th, and 5th grades (illustrated by the conceptual model in Figure 3). Under the proposed alternative hypothesis the mean TerraNova 2nd subtest score of the LSS students in 2009 will be greater than that of the non-LSS students in the 3rd, 4th, and 5th grades (illustrated by the conceptual model in Figure 4).
Multiple independent sample t tests could potentially be used to compare the mean TerraNova scores between the LSS and non-LSS students with respect to each of the three grades however the use of multiple hypothesis tests would increase the probability of Type I errors (falsely rejecting the null hypotheses when they are, in fact, true) and would also preclude the analysis of interactions between the independent variables. Since there are two independent variables in this study (Table 1) the most appropriate method to analyze the data is two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA). The advantage of ANOVA in preference to multiple t tests is that the probability of Type I errors is reduced, and the analysis of interactions between independent variables is permitted (Field, 2009). If there is no interaction, then the mean TerraNova scores will increase consistently between the 3rd, 4th, and 5th grades in both the LSS and non-LSS students. If interaction occurs, then the changes in the TerraNova scores between the 3rd, 4th, and 5th the grades will not vary consistently with respect to the two instruction methods. The decision rule of ANOVA will be to reject the null hypotheses of no differences between the mean scores, and no interactions between the independent variables if the p values of the F statistics are .05. ANOVA assumes that the residuals (the differences between the observed scores and the mean scores) are normally distributed, and the variances in the scores for each group are equal. These assumptions will be checked by SPSS using the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test for normality and Levenes test for equality of variance (Field, 2009). If the raw scores violate the theoretical assumptions of ANOVA then appropriate data transformations (e.g., square roots, powers, or logarithms) may be necessary.
A power analysis is applied to identify the appropriate sample size for groups (Creswell, 2009, p. 165). Statistical power is the probability of correctly rejecting a false null hypothesis, and a power of 0.8 is the conventionally accepted minimum level. Cohen (1992) published guidelines to compute the appropriate sample sizes to perform various statistical hypothesis tests with respect to different significance levels and effect sizes. At a significance level of .05 and a power level of 0.8 Cohen computed that the required sample size per group to perform ANOVA varies with respect to the number of groups and the effect sizes (Table 2).
Cohen (p. 157) considered a small effect size accounts for about 10 of the variance, a medium effect about 25, and a large effect about 40. Assuming the effect size between the two groups of students (LSS and non LSS) in this study will be medium then the required sample size in each group (according to Table 2) should be 64 and the total sample size should be 2 x 64 128 students. Since the target population is known to consist of about 540 students, of which about 90 are LSS students, it will be possible to select 64 LSS and 64 non LSS students to achieve the necessary power for statistical analysis however, since it is not known in advance what the effect size will be, the results of the power analysis are compromised. If the effect size turns out to be small then a sample size of 64 students in each group may be insufficient.
Limitations of the Study
There were a few potential threats to the internal validity of this study i.e., the extent to which the observed differences in the dependent variable could be directly related to the known intervention, and not to some other unknown or uncontrolled variable(s). These threats included the history effect, instrument decay, the Hawthorne effect, and mortality (Fraenkel Wallen, 2007). The history effect is the possibility that some event happened before the intervention that prejudiced the scores of the participants.
The history effect was a potential threat to the internal validity of this study, since the 2008-2009 school years brought several changes to the intermediate schools educational services. First, since its opening in the mid 1970s to the 2007-2008 school years, the intermediate school has served fourth through sixth intermediate grade students. The intermediate school is one of two intermediate schools in overseas military school system, the other being in Germany (DoDEA, 2009). Beginning with the 2008-2009 school year, in an effort to consistently align middle and high school grade levels to sixth through eighth, and ninth through twelfth respectively, the Okinawan Intermediate School and German Intermediate School were converted from fourth through sixth grades, to third through fifth. This conversion required fifth and sixth-grade students to advance to middle school at the end of the 2007-2008 school year leaving only fourth grade students to return for the 2008-2009 school year. Therefore, for example comparing 2008 sixth grade to 2009 sixth grade is no longer possible.
Instrument decay refers to changes in the test instruments that may influence the results. The inability to compare the scores from the TerraNova 3rd edition Multiple Assessments to the TerraNova 2nd edition was a form of instrument decay that posed a threat to the validity of this study. From 2002 through 2007, American overseas school system students were administered the TerraNova 2nd edition. During the 2008-2009 school years, the TerraNova 3rd edition was administered for the first time. Consequently, the conversion from the 2nd to the 3rd edition was a limitation to this study, since the 2008 TerraNova scores could not be compared to 2009 TerraNova scores. Only the 2009 TerraNova scores of the different groups of students could be statistically compared.
The Hawthorne effect was coined following the results of a survey at the Hawthorne Works (a manufacturing facility) which concluded that participants significantly improved their productivity simply as a result of feeling that they were part of an important experiment, but not directly because of the experimental intervention itself. Consequently, immediately after the experiment was over, productivity slumped. The term is now used to describe any short term reaction of participants to an intervention. The Hawthorne effect is taken into account by comparison of the responses of an experimental group (exposed to an intervention, such as the LSS students) with those of a control group (from whom the intervention is withheld, such as the non LSS students) as proposed in this study.
Mortality refers to the loss of participants during the term of a longitudinal study. Mortality is a validity issue only if the lost participants represent a distinct group who intentionally did not respond to the instrument for a particular reason, and whose scores are expected to be very different to those who continued to participate. Although a few students may have dropped out of school between 2008 and 2009 mortality is not considered to be a serious threat to the validity of the proposed study.
Ethical Assurancestc Ethical Assurances f C l 1tc Ethical Assurances f l 1tc Ethical Assurances f C l 1
Although this study will not involve human subject participation, there are still ethical considerations that must be observed when handling student data. The 1979 Belmont report addressed three ethical precepts that must be addressed prior to the commencement of this or any study involving human subject-derived data. These precepts are respect for persons, beneficence, and justice (U.S. Department of Health, Education, Welfare, 1979). Additionally, the American Psychological Association (APA) has established five principals of ethical assurances which this writer will strive to the utmost to uphold. These principals are beneficence and non-malevolence, fidelity and responsibility, integrity, justice, and respect for peoples rights and dignity (APA, 2009). Because this research will not require direct contact with human participants, no consent will be required. This does not eliminate the need to ensure student test data are protected via secure password-protected computer systems. Thus every precaution mandated by DoDEA and the Department of Health, Education and Welfare, and the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act Regulations (FERPA) will be observed.
Beneficence and non-malevolence
As mentioned numerous times, this study will not involve any human contact and does not pose any risk of or any unethical techniques. In studies that would involve human subjects, the APA suggests researchers must seek to safeguard the welfare and rights of those with whom they interact professionally and other affected persons, and the welfare of animal subjects of research (APA, 2009). Maintaining these assurances will assist in setting the overarching tone of positive ethical practices throughout the study.
Fidelity and responsibility
APA suggests the researcher should exercise fidelity and responsibility by being aware of their professional and scientific responsibilities to society and to the specific communities in which they work (APA, 2009). Although there are no specific commitments required to any individuals, this writer will ensure all promises are kept and to avoid unclear commitments. There will be no situations in which justifiable deceptions are required or unethical research techniques (APA, 2009).
Integrity
As suggested by the APA, this study will not engage in fraud, subterfuge, or intentional misrepresentation of fact (APA, 2009). As this study requires only collection of student test scores and will not address specific students, there is little risk of a violation of integrity toward individuals. This does not preclude the need to protect the integrity of professionals assisting in this study.
Justice
The APA (2009) requires justice in research. Justice is a lack of bias. Because this is a quantitative study, there will be no bias in the reported results and thus, every element of justice is ensured. For the same reason, it will be easy to exercise reasonable judgment and equality when analyzing student test scores. Finally, the results will be accurately reported to all institutions involved to ensure honesty.
Respect for peoples rights and dignity
The final APA principal is respect for peoples rights and dignity (APA, 2009). As an educator, this writer makes every effort to ensure student safety. As a researcher the same precautions will also be taken to ensure all rights and dignities are protected. Once again, this writers study of the value of LSS will not involve direct contact with actual people so the risk of violating such rights and dignities are negligible. Additionally, student test score data will remain anonymous to ensure privacy.
Adult literacy practices
Majority of the students in the literacy support programs have struggled to read once in awhile in their life time. This applies to those who are between grade four and twelve. Majority of them are not adequately prepared to read new and unfamiliar words neither can they try to figure out their meaning. For those who can read, they do it but would not comprehend what exactly it means. In some cases students are able to read certain words, but when asked to write them, they are not in a position to do that. The problem may even be more complex for students who are at a higher level of schooling. Reading is aimed at improving understanding. This can only achieved by learning from the written word. Its of great important to come up with programs that adequately promote this goal. Its necessary that schools create an environment that is conducive to support the students in attaining hisher goal, which is to understand what heshe reads. Majority of the literacy support programs put in place tend to favour the younger learner and ignoring the older students who have difficulties in reading. There is an assumption that older students should be better placed to learn reading by hisher initiative. With this in mind, programs have been put in place to address adult education. This has gained popularity and it has high demand. There is a paradigm shift, from focusing mainly to younger students to trying to balance between the two groups. Research is continuously being done to provide teachers with necessary resources and opportunities to aid struggling student at all levels of learning. The efforts should be moved to other parts. This is a good sign of things to come. This paper is aimed at assisting all the stakeholders in the education sector with necessary skills to deal with both the young and older students. Adults need proper reading skills to aid them attain a productive future. The adolescent reading mentioned in this paper refers to a group of students who are between grade four and 12th. Early reading on the other hand refers to reading that occurs in kindergarten and normally ends in third grade.
Essentials of reading components
There are about five areas of reading essentials that are necessary when coming up with literacy support programs. Each of these areas equally contributes immensely in the reading process. These areas include
Phonemic awareness this involves students being made to hear sounds that make up words. Wiley Blevins (1997) maintains that, phonemic awareness is the understanding that words are made up of sounds. It is also the ability to pick out and manipulate sound in spoken words (p.4). Its referred to as the auditory process. Students at this stage of the literacy support program are able to identify words that rhyme, putting words or syllables together to come up with word, and another important skill is to break a word into syllables. This is an important step for students learning to read.
Phonics- this stage is important in making students understand that words are made up letters, this letters can be recognized by certain sounds. This is important for learner to read and spell words. They should understand patterns of words that represent words.
Fluency- this is the ability to without struggling to pronounce words. This should be done effortlessly and automatically. Words are easily recognized by students. It is important to be fluent because this is the only way that a link can be created between word recognition and its understanding. The reader should recognize the words and what exactly those words mean within a very short time. Being fluent does not necessarily mean that comprehension is guaranteed, but without fluency, it is very difficult to comprehend anything. It would be boring when a reader constantly stops to try to understand what every word means. Zvia Breznitz (2005) says that, a child that encounters the printed materials at the initial stages of reading acquisition deciphers the text in a non automatic manner while ignoring punctuation marks which exhibiting monotonous expression (p.1). This would lead in meaning of the text. This makes the process long and tiring. Fluent students are able to channel their energy in trying to improve comprehension.
Vocabulary- in literacy support programs, vocabulary these are a set of words that are known to a person in a certain language. This involves comprehending and properly using words while making speech or writing down. Every area has specific words that are used. This passing of time, this vocabulary expands. This is because people learn more words on that specific language. It can therefore be inferred that more words one knows the better he knows the language. Prober understanding of the vocabulary is important because it aids in expressing and proper communication and one may be judged according to her vocabulary.
Comprehension- literacy support programs emphasize the ability to grasp something and understand facts. Reading is aimed at assisting the reader to decipher the meaning in the written word. It is important to help him make proper judgment considering any misunderstanding. This is process that is complex and should be properly dealt with. For proper comprehension to be achieved, it is important to realize that reading makes sense, knowledge already held by users is important, the ideas that the text is addressing and use and of words putting them in context.
Reading instructions
Slight differences exist between instructions for the younger readers and those of the older ones. Literacy support programs provide that the instructions can be broken down into five categories. These broad categories are
word study
fluency
vocabulary
comprehension and
Motivation.
Its not necessary for older readers to be made to go through the elementary stages of learning how to read. A few of them however may benefit from fundamentals of readings. The older students have a range of skills that makes it not necessary for them not to go through the fundamental stages of reading. Each of the components above is well explained in the paragraphs that follow.
Word study
This is an opportunity that students have to manipulate words. This poses a great challenge for students. Whenever students see anew word, they are supposed to look at it and try to figure out if they know anything about the word and if there is anything that can assist them read the word well. Word study focuses on reading at word level. It assists students read words more efficiently and effectively hence making herhis understanding of issues very easy. Different students have different needs, this is unlike the common systems that lumps students together according to grade and ignoring a very important aspect that, every student has hisher special need. Word study would be most effective for older students who experience problems reading. This should be done regardless of her grade.
It important for readers to understand the relationship between letters, letter patterns and sounds associated with them. With this knowledge, they are able to unravel meaning in difficult words during the reading process. The reading process involves breaking words down into small but meaningful sections that would aid them comprehend the words. Table below explains the concept
Successful ReadersStruggling Readers Read multisyllabic words and use strategies to figure out unknown words.
Make connections between letter patterns and sounds and use this understanding to read words.
Break unknown words into syllables during reading.
Use word analysis strategies to break difficult or long words into meaningful parts such as inflectional endings, prefixes, suffixes, and roots.May read single-syllable words effortlessly but have difficulty decoding longer multisyllabic words.
May lack knowledge of the ways in which sounds map to print.
Have difficulty breaking words into syllables.
Often do not use word analysis strategies to break words into syllables.Adapted from Bhattacharya Ehri, 2004 Nagy, Berninger, Abbott, 2006
With proper understanding of word study, students are able to create syllables from words, and reading words by bringing the syllables together. This would ensure success of literacy support programs. Another concept that they are able to learn is analyzing words by meaning and its structure. Long and difficult words are broken down into smaller units that they know. The recommended ways of teaching students are
Students should be taught to identify syllables and break them into smaller parts.
Teach students how to understand complex words by bring the known parts of syllables together.
They should be taught to learn words that do not have any pattern.
Students should use structural analysis to create meaning in words.
Fluency
Fluent readers have mastered the art of reading words continuously without repetition. They read words automatically and they put words together in a way that would enhance understanding. This is important during word reading and when understanding is necessary. Fluent readers have more time to understand the meaning of the word because they have the ability to identify a word by just seeing it. Fluency can best be improved by frequent reading of words. This creates familiarity with the words. Slow readers are not doing well because they do not read more frequently.
Vocabulary
For overall academic success and proper comprehension, it is of great importance to understand meaning of words. With proper understanding of words, and proper mechanisms to decipher the unknown words, there is no reason why students would fail to understand the content of the text they are reading. Students have to understand that words may at times have more than one meaning. Depending with the circumstances, words may mean different things at different times. It is obvious that struggling readers know very few words compared to those who can read well. This is attained because good reader read widely and more frequently. By so doing, they are able to learn so many words. On the other hand, poor readers read less as a result they are exposed to very few words. The result of this is that they fail to be accomplished readers. Words are not only learnt through reading, they can also be learnt through, good conversations, experience. Developing word consciousness is as a result of proper vocabulary teaching that has been undertaken. Deep knowledge of words is paramount in this process.
Comprehension
There are so many reasons for reading. These purposes include, reading to learn, enjoyment and obtain information. Learning requires that the reader should be able to comprehend and recall what been read.
It is important to monitor comprehension while reading. The reader must ask hisher self questions while reading. It is normal to read through text even for experienced readers only to find out they did not understand anything. When this occurs, a good reader is advised to stop reading and try to remind hisher self what heshe has so far read. This is called recalling. If there is nothing heshe can remember, it is useless to continue reading because it amounts to time wasting. No value addition is taking place. For struggling readers this is difficult because they dont have sufficient skills necessary to determine if they understand anything. It is not easy for them to monitor their comprehension.
Many instructors expect their students to use the above skills while tackling comprehension issues but they do not adequately address and teach their students how to use the skill. Students may be asked by their teacher to highlight the main issues in a passage without actually telling them how they can do it. This amounts to expecting too much from the students. Students require adequate preparation to perform their tasks properly. Comprehension would then be easy.
It is important for teachers to focus on assisting students on reading and understanding passage. This is the only way they can assist understanding in all other area. Students will record an increased ability in reading if proper strategies are given to them. Teaching students to have proper reading skills will make them better readers. These readers will reduce literacy levels.
Students have prior knowledge about certain topics. It is called prior knowledge. For proper understanding of the unknown, it is important for learners to activate this knowledge. It assists them by creating a missing link between many tasks. This prior knowledge is not readily accessible for struggling students. They are not able to access facts to aid in proper decision making.
Graphic organizers
These are visual aids that assist students to pick out, organize, and recall main ideas that are important in the text that they had just read. The examples of visuals aids are concept maps, Venn diagrams etc. They may be used before an introduction of the topics. This is used to assist students remember anything that they may know about the topic. They may assist them to guess what the subject in discussion may all be about. These diagrams are used during reading to prove right or wrong predictions that had earlier been made. Information deemed important is therefore recorded. After the reading process, the graphics may be used to write summaries, and to make any forms of correlations that exist between facts.
Summary writing skills
When reading a large amount of information, it is important to consolidate it into smaller chunks that make sense to the people reading it. Only important elements of the text are highlighted, less important parts are ignored. The following steps are important in trying to come up with good summary
Students should be made to start by summarizing smaller bits of work before larger parts are introduced. They can start by one paragraph then move to two paragraph, then with time we can move to one page and finally whole chapter. This is actually meant to give them endurance to handle larger jobs and build confidence in them.
Its important to use one that group together many teams. This would reduce the number of words that may be used if the process of writing. There are words that may be used in place in place of many words. This reduces the number of words used and still maintains the meaning initially intended to contain.
Information that is trivial should be eliminated. It is important to carry only item and ideas that carry weight. Picking trivial issues is likely to cause repetition. This would make the work shorter. These issues can be picked from the main ideas found in rest of the text. The main aim of summary writing is to high main ideas without losing the original meaning.
Proof reading the work after writing it to ensure that it makes senses is important. Summaries that make sense are necessary. Writing summary and leaving out some concepts is not good practice. It is possible to write summary that would not make sense at all. This is because the main ideas are not captured in the summary. Another reason that would make summaries not to make sense is the lack of links between the ideas that are being communicated in the passage. It dilutes the whole passage.
Asking and answering question
Students should learn to ask themselves questions about what they have read. After this, they should try to answer these questions more accurately. To support understanding, students should ask questions before, during and after reading the text. This practice can be done by
Students should be taught to ask specific type of questions. Some of the questions may have their answers in the text.
Question generation should be used as a strategy to improve reading. By so doing, they are able to read a piece of writing trying to find solution to specific questions they have in mind. This enhances understanding.
Students should have proper strategy to answer teacher generated questions. Students should find out if the answers are found in the text or if they are to be concluded. There are some questions that would require that the readers look at the text to find answers. On the other hand, some questions require that students have to read and make their own inferences.
Motivation
Readers should be given texts to read to that gives them the need and drive to continue reading. This is important to ensure that heshe does not shift focus. Lack of focus makes students reading very little. They would have to struggle to comprehend what the text means. With proper interest, its easy to understand the text. It makes reading enjoyable. This therefore explains why those who enjoy reading will always keep reading. This continued reading improves the skill at the end of the end. Struggling students do not read for pleasure. They normally read for examinations or when they are asked to. They do not have the initiative to do it on their own. This would make it embarrassing for their weaknesses to be exposed in public. They would want to hide it all cost. This reduces people as self esteems.
In the table below we summarize features of successful and poor readers.
Successful readersStruggling readersInteract with text in a motivated and strategic way.
Have improved comprehension and reading outcomes when engaged with text.
Read more and thus have more access to a variety of topics and text types.
Are interested and curious about topics and content in texts and read to find out more.May engage in reading as a passive process without giving effortful attention to activating prior knowledge, using reading strategies, or employing other strategic thought processes.
Often have low comprehension of text.
Fail to access a variety of wide reading opportunities. Given the choice, prefer not to read.
May not be interested in or curious about exploring topics or content through reading.
Students should be given the freedom to choose what they want to read, who they would want to read together with. This gives them more motivation to continue doing it. Putting them in groups that they do not like may likely reduce the learning process.
This can be made better by doing the following
Giving students freedom to choose what they want to read. This is by offering a list of what they can choose from. They can choose their own literature develop ways that can improve their understanding.
Let students have control over aspects of the job that they are doing. This includes deciding where to work from, subjects to study, etc.
Selections of partners, groups should be entirely left to them. They should decide partners they can blend well this. This is the only way to maximize the learning process. Forcing them into groups may make them not realize their full potential.
Students enjoy reading what they find to be interesting. They would do it even outside class if they enjoy it. Our brains work in a way that, it always remembers things that are interesting rather than those that are not. There are guidelines that are of great importance for students and teachers to decide the interesting the materials to use. These guidelines are
Choose topics that students have knowledge on. Having knowledge on certain topic makes the text more interesting and it boosts confidence. Its however important that students are provided with literature that is not familiar. This provides an opportunity for learning. This is not meant to discourage new learning but ensure that students enjoy what they are reading and at the same time they are learning new time.
Visually pleasing texts are interesting and motivates students. Text should be of high quality.
