Post on 25-Aug-2019
qwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmrtyuiopasdfghjklzxcv
ISD463,EVWLocalLiteracyPlan
2017-2018
LiteracyPlanDevelopmentTeam:KarenBuermann,CassyLahr,HeidiKuechle,SharonBorgert,
SusanKnutsonandHeatherNathanElementaryPrincipal:RobPederson
2
District 463, Eden valley-watkins public schools
Local Literacy plan
Approved May 14, 2012 by EVW’s Board of Education. Updated May 2, 2018.
The purpose of this literacy plan is to ensure that ALL students will achieve grade-level proficiency and read well by Grade 3.
Literacy Plan Summary: Reading development is one of the most important goals of Eden Valley Watkins School District 463 (EVW). Every staff member at EVW is committed to building and sustaining a school culture in which high quality reading instruction for all students is our most important priority. We believe reading is a lifelong process of learning to read and reading to learn. Our primary reading goal is to implement the six areas of literacy development which include: oral language development, phonemic awareness, phonics, fluency, vocabulary development and comprehension. It is our goal to develop intervention plans that lead all students to meet the literacy demands of the 21st century. Reading proficiency develops over time and students of all abilities need sustained and intentional reading instruction throughout their PreK-12 education. We will consistently implement research and evidence based reading instruction that is data driven, sustainable and incorporates a multi-tiered system of instruction and support. Our district is currently using Journeys, a balanced literacy program, aligned with state and local standards, to teach reading in kindergarten through grade 6. Included in this program are components for guided reading, read aloud, shared reading and independent reading. To enhance this curriculum, our district has an elementary library with a variety of fiction and nonfiction reading materials, covering a wide range of reading levels. Each classroom also has its own reading center where students can enjoy books and other resources selected by their classroom teacher. Sufficient time for language arts instruction is necessary for children to read at grade level. Students in K-6 will receive 90 minutes of language arts instruction each day. Children not reading at grade level will receive supplemental reading instruction. Students in grades 7-10 receive 52 minutes of language arts instruction each day. Students in grade 11-12 receive 52 minutes of language arts instruction each day, for one or two semesters a year, depending on their individual schedules. Students who are not proficient in reading will receive reading instruction during the 52 minute time period. Relevant technology engages students in meaningful learning activities. A variety of technologies have been integrated into the curriculum and instruction to meet the needs of the district’s diverse learners. The district also uses Accelerated Reader (AR), which is a computerized program that tests basic reading comprehension. Students select books from their
3
reading level, read independently or with a buddy and take an independent comprehension test on the computer. Each book is worth a certain number of points based on its length and reading level. All students in grades K-8 are given the FAST screening/benchmarking assessment three times throughout the course of the year in fall, winter, and spring. Using this data, struggling and at-risk students are identified and referred for interventions. Specific interventions are based on further assessments, and the interventions are implemented through the collaborative efforts of the classroom teacher, other specialists and paraprofessionals. Students K-3 identified for interventions are progress monitored weekly and if the intervention selected is not working, another intervention is selected and implemented. Upper grades are progress monitored as needed, depending on the intervention. Parents are kept informed of their child’s progress throughout the process. Students not responding to these interventions are referred for special education evaluation. Students in grades 9-11 who are not yet proficient in reading will be given the FAST screening/benchmarking assessment two - three times throughout the course of the year, depending on the student’s response to intervention. This process will begin in the 2018-19 school year. The goal of the EVW district is to ensure that all learners successfully achieve the Minnesota K-12 Academic Standards in English Language Arts (2010) for their grade level. The standards are aligned with the district’s curriculum and a map is in place to ensure that the standards are taught within the time available. Specific information is included in the K-3 Literacy Plan that follows this summary. For those who are interested in learning more about EVW literacy program, please contact: Rob Pederson at 320-453-2900 ext. 2132 (phone) or rpederson@evw.k12.mn.us (email). The district would appreciate stakeholder feedback on the following questions:
1. Was the information easy to find?
2. Is this document useful?
3. Did you feel supported by the school district to help your child read well by 3rd grade?
4. Comments and/or suggestions.
4
Literacy Plan Goals and Objectives: Commitment/Goal: We are committed to having our students reading at or above grade level by the end of 3rd grade, as determined by the Reading Minnesota Comprehensive Assessments (MCA’s.) The EVW Literacy Plan outlines methods and procedures that are based on current reading research. Objectives: Each year educators will review and disaggregate reading data at grade level teams K-11. Proficiency, growth and trend data will be analyzed and used to set specific learning targets for students. Pre-K data will be accessed and utilized, when available. Grade level teams annually review the effectiveness of current pedagogical practices including core instruction, differentiation, remediation and intervention. Curriculum resources will be aligned to the most current standards. Standards will be prioritized. Formative assessments will be used to modify instruction and to identify students who are not on pace to meet proficiency. Students not on track will follow the local intervention plan. Proficiency, based on spring MCA scores, is reflected in the chart below.
2013 2014 2015 2016 2017EVW 61.8 64.6 67.9 55.4 55.1
STATE 57.4 58.2 59.6 58.1 56.5
01020304050607080
Grade3MCAReading
EVW STATE
5
Process of Assessment: EVW administers the following screening and diagnostic assessments listed below. Screening tools Age/Grade Range Timeline
ESI-P Early Screening Inventory Revised
3-4 1/2 Pre-K Once
FASTBridge K-8
9-11
3 times a year
2-3 times per year based on student need.
Minnesota Comprehensive Assessment (MCA)
3-10 Once a year
Work Sampling PreK-2 Up to 3 times a year
Minnesota Test of Academic Skills (MTAS)
Students grades 3-10 with special needs
Once a year
ACCESS ELL students Once a year
Reading assessments are necessary to determine if children are reading at grade level, monitor reading progress and plan instruction. All children in grade levels K-3 will be assessed at the beginning, middle and end of the year to determine if they are reading at grade level. Children not reading at grade level will be assessed regularly to monitor their reading progress. Assessments to monitor reading progress will be brief and take little time away from reading instruction. Two disorders of special consideration when it comes to reading literacy are congruency insufficiency disorder and dyslexia. In response to MN legislation, 2016, the district is including language in this literacy plan to address those 2 disorders. Convergence Insufficiency Disorder Convergence insufficiency occurs when the student’s eyes don't work together while trying to focus on a nearby object. Our school nurse uses MDH's vision screening procedure, the Bioncular Fix and Follow, on all students when their vision is tested. Students are tested at Early
6
Childhood Screening, and grades 1,3,5,7,8,10 and 11. If a student exhibits symptoms such as poor tracking, or states that he or she gets headaches or eye strain while reading for extended periods the nurse will retest the student and share results with the parents. Parents are encouraged to bring the results to an eye care professional. If a student receives a diagnosis of Convergence Insufficiency Disorder the district will review the information provided and assist that student through the Multi-tiered systems of support already in place at EVW. Additional assistance through a 504 referral or special education referral will take place if appropriate. As we learn more about this disorder, further staff development will be provided. Dyslexia In response to the legislative requirement that districts identify efforts to screen for dyslexia, the literacy team reviewed current procedures. Since determination of dyslexia is a clinical diagnosis, the district cannot make this determination, however, the district uses an early reading screener (FASTBridge) with all students in K-1 designed to assess phonemic memory (rhyme and sound) and rapid naming of objects and letters. A phonics screener is used for all students in K-1 (FASTBridge) as well as any students in grades 1-3 who exhibit phonics difficulties. A diagnostic tool (CoolTools) is used for further screening. Students in grades 1-4 are also screened with a fluency assessment from FASTBridge. If a student falls below benchmark, further analysis takes place through the Multi-tiered systems of support already in place at EVW. An intervention plan is put in place if the student exhibits consistent reading difficulty. If the student does not respond to the interventions and exhibits additional symptoms consistent with dyslexia, that student will be referred to the ADSIS administrator who will use an evidence based indicator checklist for further screening. Parents are notified of results and a referral may be made for a 504 plan or special education services if there is a clinical diagnosis of dyslexia. If a student comes into the district with a determination of dyslexia, that student is usually referred to TAT and a 504 plan is created with TAT, the school nurse, and cooperating teachers. The district has provided staff development for teachers re: symptoms consistent with dyslexia, and instructional strategies to assist students with those symptoms. In spring of 2016, 24 individual staff members from grades K- 12 were trained to use the Barton System of Reading and Spelling as a tool to assist students with reading difficulties and potential dyslexia. This group of trained staff members have implemented part or all of the Barton System into their intervention practice. Further staff development will be provided for district intervention teams.
7
FAST is used as a screening/benchmark assessment. The target scores for each grade level are listed in the following charts:
Kindergarten FAST Assessments Fall
Assessment Name [Target Score] Winter
Assessment Name [Target Score] Spring
Assessment Name [Target Score]
Concepts of Print [8] Onset Sounds [16] Letter Sounds [41]
Onset Sounds [12] Letter Sounds [29] Word Segmenting [30]
Letter Names [20] Word Segmenting [26] Nonsense Words [12]
Letter Sounds [5] Nonsense Words [8] Sight Words [20]
aReading [387] aReading [417] aReading [435]
First Grade FAST Assessments
Fall Assessment Name [Target Score]
Winter Assessment Name [Target Score]
Spring Assessment Name [Target Score]
Word Segmenting [27] Word Segmenting [31] Word Segmenting [32]
Nonsense Words [9] Nonsense Words [16] Nonsense Words [21]
Sight Words [17] Sight Words [50] Sight Words [67]
Sentence Reading [14] CBM Reading [43] CBM Reading [71]
aReading [435] aReading [454] aReading [471]
Second Grade FAST Assessments
Fall Assessment Name [Target Score]
Winter Assessment Name [Target Score]
Spring Assessment Name [Target Score]
CBM Reading [58] (Oral Reading Fluency)
CBM Reading [87] (Oral Reading Fluency)
CBM Reading [106] (Oral Reading Fluency)
aReading [469] aReading [481] aReading [489]
Third Grad FAST Assessments
Fall Assessment Name [Target Score]
Winter Assessment Name [Target Score]
Spring Assessment Name [Target Score]
CBM Reading [90] (Oral Reading Fluency)
CBM Reading [116] (Oral Reading Fluency)
CBM Reading [131] (Oral Reading Fluency)
aReading [487] aReading [497] aReading [503]
8
Our commitment is to challenge all children in a multi-tiered system of support. Students performing below grade level benchmarks will receive some combination of the core reading program with additional scientifically and evidence based interventions. The combination of materials used will be based on the learning needs of students.
Following the assessments, parents will receive a letter informing them of the results, supports, interventions and further diagnostic assessments that will be used to help their child meet the reading goals for their grade level. A complete outline of the parent communication and involvement section is below. Progress monitoring data will be collected weekly and analyzed on a monthly basis. The following process will be used:
A. Examine the student chart after 4-6 data points have been plotted and a trend line
has been generated. B. Consider changing the intervention or choose a new intervention if a student has 4
data points clearly and consistently below the aim line. C. Continue the intervention until the student meets the grade-level benchmark if the
student has 4 data points on or above the aim line. D. Student may be referred to TAT (Teachers Assisting Teachers) if the student has
4 data points below the goal line following the second intervention. E. Discontinue the intervention when the student has met the grade level benchmark.
Exit criteria: 3-4 data points above the aim line with one data point at or above the next benchmark target.
F. Continue progress monitoring at least three times following the discontinuation of the intervention to assure that progress has been maintained.
Parent Communication plan: EVW will create and maintain a plan for improving parent and community engagement by clearly defining communication systems, avenues for families and community members to express their needs and concerns and to identify clear pathways for families to stay informed of ways they can support their child’s literacy development. We will provide families with support, information, resources, and encouragement to promote literacy.
Parent Communication plan 1. In order to have all students reading well by third grade, the elementary utilizes the
FAST benchmarking and progress monitoring system. The Literacy Plan will be on the district website and will provide an explanation of the assessment practices and the multileveled systems of support as implemented in EVW’s literacy plan.
2. In order to assist students who are not proficient in reading beyond third grade, the elementary and the secondary schools utilize the FAST benchmarking system. Interventions will be provided based on benchmarking result and teacher input.
3. Parents will receive benchmark information at least once a year during conferences. 4. In addition, parents of students who are receiving supplemental instruction will be
informed of progress at least once a year.
9
The following are resources and tools for parents, caregivers, and/or community members to use in support of literacy practices at home:
• Parent Teacher Conferences • On-line Accelerated Reader Program • Title I Family Night • Access to Eden Valley Community Library • Grade level websites
Multi-Tiered Systems of Support:
A Model of School Supports and the Problem Solving Process
The first level of support occurs in the classroom with 90 minutes of core instruction delivered by the classroom teacher using the district’s language arts curriculum that is aligned with the 2010 English Language Arts Standards. Reading instruction will address the 6 areas of literacy development (oral language development, phonemic awareness, phonics, fluency, vocabulary, and comprehension). Based on screening and diagnostic assessments, the second level of support identifies students not meeting grade-level targets who are, then, provided supplemental research based reading interventions
ACADEMICSYSTEMS Tier3:Intensive,IndividualInterventionsStudentswhoneedindividualizedinterventions. Tier2:TargetedGroupInterventionsStudentswhoneedmoresupportinadditiontothecorecurriculum. Tier1:CoreCurriculumAllstudents,includingstudentswhorequirecurricularenhancementsforacceleration.
10
according to their skill deficit(s). The classroom teacher, specialists and paraprofessionals will provide this level of support. Students not responding well to the interventions provided at the second level are referred to and receive the most intensive and individualized level of support. Students receiving Special Education services are included at this level. The Multi-tiered systems of support can be traced to the work on data-based decision making by Deno and Mirkin (1977) and the US Department of Education’s report A Nation at Risk (1983). The framework is a systematic use of assessment data to efficiently allocate resources to improve learning for all students (Burns and VanDerHeyden, 2006). A meta-analysis of research found that multi-tiered systems of support led to improved outcomes such as fewer children referred to and placed into special education programs. Additionally, results included higher achievement scores and reduced behavioral difficulties among all students (Burns, Appleton, and Stehouwer, 2005). Children at-risk for reading failure demonstrated improved reading skills (Marston, Muyskens, Lau, Canter, 2003; Tilly, 2003). Professional Development: The EVW District has 5 days available for Professional Development. Professional Development is provided through:
• Grade-Level Planning Time • Regional Professional Development • Outside Resources/Consultants • Literacy Team • Grade level data-mining
English Learners and Other Diverse Populations: The district currently assesses all English Learners using ACCESS for ELL. ACCESS helps educators accurately assess the academic and social language skills of English language learners. The assessment provides detailed information on students' reading, writing, speaking, and listening skills. ACCESS provides reliable English language proficiency results to help educators make instructional decisions and allows districts to measure student growth. It measures both social and academic skills for a comprehensive view of language abilities and accurately meets the needs of all English language learners.
This district has 4 English language learners and 37 students that are non-white. Based on these demographics, resources will be allocated and professional development will be determined annually. Instructional materials will be analyzed for its culturally appropriate content and purchased during the district’s curriculum cycle for core subjects. EL curriculum materials and interventions, used to develop language skills, will be updated as needed or developed on-site. Communication system for annual reporting: The literacy plan developed by the district will be posted on the EVW district website. Data for the district will be sent to the Minnesota Department of Education commissioner.
EVWInterventionInventory
12
Intervention
Name
Grade Reading
Strand
PA,Ph,F,
V,C
Objective/TargetedSkills Group
Size
Time Location/
Trained
ResearchorEvidence
Based?
Need
PD?
CorrectiveReading
(SRA)
3-12 PA,Ph,F,V,C CorrectiveReadingprovidesintensive,sustaineddirectinstructiontoaddressdeficienciesindecodingandcomprehensionResearch-baseddirectinstructionteachingmodel.Directteachingofcriticalskillsandstrategiestoaccelerateprogress.Frequentinteractionsbetweenteacherandstudentstomaximizetimespentlearning.Teachermodelinganddemonstrationtobooststudentconfidenceandsuccess.GuidedandindependentpracticeandapplicationtograduallytransferresponsibilityforlearningAdequatepracticeandreviewtodevelopdeepmasteryofskillsandconcepts
SmallGroup,
Individual
30min SpEd- FCRR“comprehensiveintervention
programconsistentwith
ScientificallyBasedReading
Research.
However,theexistingresearch
baseprovidesonlypreliminary
supportfortheprogram’s
efficacy”.
WWC–potentiallypositiveeffects
BestEvidence.org
EdmarkReading
Program
Level1and2 phonics Widelyregardedasthe"onethatworks,"theEdmarkReadingProgramhaslonghelpedstudentswhoneedanalternativetophonics.Thekeytothissuccessistheprogram’suseofacarefullysequenced,highlyrepetitivewordrecognitionmethodcombinedwitherrorlesslearning.Thisapproacheliminatesincorrectresponsesandhelpsstudentsviewthemselvesasreaders.TheEdmarkReadingProgramensuressuccesstostudentsofallageswhohavenotyetmasteredbeginningreading.
individual 5-15min SpEd FCRR-theEdmarkReadingProgramprovidesinstructioninsightwordvocabularythatis
consistentwiththeprinciplesof
behavioralpsychologyanddirect
instruction.Onestudyproduced
largeeffectsforwordidentification
butmorewelldesigned
experimentalstudieswith
randomizedtreatmentandcontrol
groupsareneededtoverifythis
beginninglevelofsupport.Future
studiesshouldinclude
measuresofcomprehension.
IncrementalRehearsal K-6 F Practiceletternames,lettersounds,
sightwords,
Smallgroup
orindividual
10min Title1 EdwardFry,ProfessorofEducation
andDirectoroftheReadingCenter
atRutgersUniversityandLoyola
UniversityinLosAngeles
EVWInterventionInventory
13
Lindamood-BellLiPS K-12 PA,Ph Stimulatesphonemicawareness.
Individualsbecomeawareofthe
mouthactionswhichproducespeech
sounds.Thisawarenessbecomesthe
meansofverifyingsoundswithin
wordsandenablesindividualsto
becomeself-correctinginreadingand
spelling,andspeech
Individual 60
minutes
Tammy,Karen FCRR–overallpositiveresultsbut
studiesareconfoundedby
examiningseveralLindamood-Bell
productstogether
WWCpotentiallypositiveeffects
ReadingMastery
(formerlyDirect
Instruction/DISTAR)
K-6 All ReadingMasteryisavailableintwoversions,ReadingMasteryClassiclevelsIandII(foruseingradesK–3)
andReadingMasteryPlus,anintegratedreadinglanguageprogram
forgradesK–6.Theprogrambeginsby
teachingphonemicawarenessand
sound-lettercorrespondenceand
progressestowordandpassage
reading,vocabularydevelopment,
comprehension,andbuildingoral
readingfluency.Laterlessons
emphasizeaccurateandfluent
decodingwhileteachingstudentsthe
skillsnecessarytocomprehendand
learnfromexpositorytext.
Whole
Group,Small
Group,
individual
30
minutes
Patty •Bock,G.,Stebbins,L.,&Proper,E.
(1977).Educationas
experimentation:Aplanned
variationmodel
(VolumeIV-A&B)Effectsoffollow
throughmodels.Washington,D.C.:
AbtAssociates.
•FCRRpositivereview(priorto
ratingsystem)•BestEvidence.org
ReadNaturally/Read
Live
1-6 Fluency
Toincreasefluentreadingand
comprehensiononpassagesfor
studentswhoreadwithhighaccuracy,
showbenefitfromrepeatedpractice
onthesamepassage,&demonstrate
poorcomprehensionofpassagesread
Individual 20-30
minutes
Title FCRR-butnonearecontrolled
studies
RepeatedReadingof
highfrequencyword
phrases
K-6 Fluency readphraseswithexpression,and
ultimatelyimprovecomprehension
Smallgroup,
Individual
10min Classroom
teacher
Rasinski,Tim
TrophiesIntervention
Kit(Harcourt)
K-6 Ph,F,V,C TrophiesInterventionKitsareacomponentoftheHarcourtCore
ReadingProgramandaredesignedto
provideadditionalintensivereading
instructiontoat-riskstudents.
Smallgroup,
individual
30min Title,Heather FCRR-Consistentwithcurrent
readingresearch,theprogram
offersamplestudentpractice
opportunitiesandalignedstudent
materials.Ofconcernisthelackof
systematicinstruction
EVWInterventionInventory
14
Visualizing/Verbalizing K-6 C TheVisualizingandVerbalizing®programdevelopsconceptimageryfor
bothoralandwrittenlanguage.
Throughaseriesofsteps,students
learntocreateanimagedgestaltand
integratethatimagerywithlanguage
asabasisforlanguagecomprehension
andthinking.
Whole
group,
Smallgroup,
individual
varies Title1- FCRR–“Ourconclusionfrom
reviewingthisstudyontheLBLP
programsisthatwhileitis
consistentwiththethatthe
programscanbeusedeffectively
tohelp“closethegap”inreading
skillsforstrugglingreaders;itis
difficulttoknowwhichofseveral
aspectsofthetotalschool
interventionprogramwere
responsiblefortheimproved
performanceofthestudents.”
S.P.I.R.E. K-6 All S.P.I.R.E.isacomprehensiveand
multisensoryreadingsystemthat
integratesphonologicalawareness,
phonics,handwriting,fluency,
vocabulary,spelling,and
comprehensioninaninstructional
designthatisbasedonhowstruggling
readerslearn.
Smallgroup,
individual
varies Room139 S.P.I.R.E.isbasedonOrton-
Gillinghammethodologies,and
incorporatesthemostrecent
researchregardingbestpractices
inreadingandlanguagearts
instruction.Itaddressesallskills
recommendedbytheNational
ReadingPanelandfollowsa10-
steplessonplanthatensuresthat
studentsexperiencecontinuous
andvisiblesuccess.
P.A.L.S K-6 PALSReadingisstructured,peer-
mediatedreadingactivitiesappropriate
forstudentsinpreschoolthrough
grade6andhighschool.
Smallgroup varies Room139 Fuchs,D.,&Fuchs,L.S.(l998).Researchersandteachersworkingtogethertoadaptinstructionfordiverselearners.LearningDisabilitiesResearchandPractice,13,126-137.SummarizestheresearchprogramonreadingPALS,alongwiththeresearch-to-practicemodel,bywhichresearchersandteacherscollaborativelydevelopedandtestedPALS.
Fuchs,D.,Fuchs,L.S.,&Burish,P.(2000).Peer-AssistedLearningStrategies:Anevidence-basedpracticetopromotereadingachievement.LearningDisabilitiesResearchandPractice,15,85-91.DescribesthereadingPALSproceduresforstudentsatgrades2-6.http://kc.vanderbilt.edu/pals/resea
EVWInterventionInventory
15
rch.html
JourneysToolkit K-6 All TheReadingToolKitforGrades1–3is
filledwith15-minutelessonsthat
target,apply,andpracticekeyreading
foundationalskillsforstudentsinthe
primarygrades.Designedasskills
intervention,theReadingToolKit
providesinstructionalroutinesthat
closethegapsinseveralkey
developmentalareas.TheLiteracyTool
KitforGrades4–6isacomprehensive
setofteachingtoolsandLeveled
Readersdesignedtodifferentiate
literacyandlanguageinstructionfor
intermediatestudents.
Smallgroup varies Sped LinkforResearchbase:
http://www.hmhco.com/~/media/
sites/home/educators/education-
topics/hmh-
efficacy/journeys_cc_2014_nation
al_research_base_k-6.pdf?la=en
ResourcestousewithExplicitInstruction
FloridaCenterfor
ReadingResearch
K-5 All EmpowerTeacherexplicitinstruction
lessonsforK-3,ActivitiesinPhonemic
Awareness,Phonics,Fluency,
Vocabulary,andComprehension
Whole
group,small
group,
individual
varies On-line
www.fcrr.org
Research–basedactivities
MNReadingCorpsInterventions
Letter/Sound
Correspondence
K&1 PhonemicAwareness
&Phonics
Toincreasefluentidentificationof
lettersoundsforstudentswhohave
notyetmasteredalllettersoundsor
whoknowlettersoundsbutdonot
identifythemwithhighratesof
automaticity
Individual 15min Patty,Paras •Adams,M.J.(1990).Beginning
toread:Thinkingandlearning
aboutprint.Cambridge,MA:
MITPress.
•Adams,M.J.(2001).Alphabetic
anxietyandexplicit,systematic
phonicsinstruction:Acognitive
scienceperspective.InS.B.
Neuman&D.K.Dickinson(eds.),
HandbookofEarlyLiteracy
Research(pp.66-80).NewYork:
GuilfordPress.
•Chard,D.J.,&Osborn,J.
(1999).WordRecognition:
Pavingtheroadtosuccessful
reading.Interventioninschool
EVWInterventionInventory
16
andclinic,34(5),271-277.
PhonemeBlending
K&1 PhonemicAwareness Toincreaseskillinphoneme
blendingforstudentswhohavenot
yetmasteredtheskillofblending
soundstomakewords
Individual 15min Patty,Paras •Adams,M.J.(1990..Beginning
toread:Thinkingandlearning
aboutprint.Cambridge,MA:
MITPress.
•Bos,C.D.,&Vaughn,S.(2002..
Strategiesforteachingstudents
withlearningandbehavioral
problems(5thEd.).Boston:
Allyn&Bacon.
•Ehri,L.C.,Nunees,S.R.,&
Willows,D.M.(2001..Phonemic
awarenessinstructionhelps
childrenlearntoread:Evidence
fromtheNationalReading
Panel’smeta-analysis.Reading
ResearchQuarterly,36(3..250-
287.
•Elkonin,D.B.(1973..U.S.S.R.In
J.Downing(Ed.),Comparative
Reading(pp.551-579..New
York:MacMillan.
•NationalReadingPanel.
(2000..Teachingchildrento
read:Anevidence-based
assessmentofthe
scientificresearchliteratureon
readinganditsimplicationsfor
readinginstruction.Bethesda,
MA:NationalInstitutesof
Health.
•Santi,K.L.,Menchetti,B.M.,&
Edwards,B.J.(2004..A
comparisonofeight
kindergartenphonemic
awarenessprogramsbasedon
EVWInterventionInventory
17
empiricallyvalidated
instructionalprincipals.
RemedialandSpecialEducation,
Vol25(3.189-196.
•Smith,C.R.(1998..From
gibberishtophonemic
awareness:Effectivedecoding
instruction.Exceptional
Children,Vol30(6.20-25
•Smith,S.B.,Simmons,D.C.,&
Kame’enui,E,J.(1998..
PhonologicalAwareness:
Researchbases.InD.C.
Simmons&E.J.Kame’enui
(Eds.),WhatReadingresearch
tellsusaboutchildrenwith
diverselearningneeds:Bases
andbasics.Mahwah,NJ:
LawrenceErlbaumAssociates.
•Snider,V.E.(1995..Aprimer
onphonemicawareness:What
itis,whyitisimportant,and
howtoteachit.School
PsychologyReview,24,443–
455.
Phoneme
Segmenting
K&1 PhonemicAwareness Toincreaseskillinphoneme
segmentingforstudentswhohave
notyetmasteredtheskillofsaying
theindividualsoundsinwords
Individual 15min Patty,Paras •Adams,M.J.(1990..Beginning
toread:Thinkingandlearning
aboutprint.Cambridge,MA:
MITPress.
•Blachman,B.A.(1991..Early
interventionforchildren’s
readingproblems:Clinical
applicationsoftheresearchon
phonologicalawareness.Topics
inLanguageDisorders,12,51–
65.
•Bos,C.D.,&Vaughn,S.(2002..
EVWInterventionInventory
18
Strategiesforteachingstudents
withlearningandbehavioral
problems(5thEd.).Boston:
Allyn&Bacon.
•Ehri,L.C.,Nunees,S.R.,&
Willows,D.M.(2001..Phonemic
awarenessinstructionhelps
Childrenlearntoread:Evidence
fromtheNationalReading
Panel’smeta-analysis.Reading
ResearchQuarterly,36(3..250-
287.
•NationalReadingPanel.
(2000..Teachingchildrento
read:Anevidence-based
assessmentofthescientific
researchliteratureonreading
anditsimplicationsforreading
instruction.Bethesda,MA:
NationalInstitutesofHealth.
•Santi,K.L.,Menchetti,B.M.,&
Edwards,B.J.(2004..A
comparisonofeight
kindergartenphonemic
awarenessprogramsbasedon
empiricallyvalidated
instructionalprincipals.
RemedialandSpecialEducation,
Vol25(3.189-196.
•Smith,C.R.(1998..From
gibberishtophonemic
awareness:Effectivedecoding
instruction.ExceptionalChildren
Vol30(6.20-25.
•Smith,S.B.,Simmons,D.C.,&
Kame’enui,E,J.(1998..
PhonologicalAwareness:
Researchbases.InD.C.
Simmons&E.J.Kame’enui
(Eds.),WhatReadingresearch
EVWInterventionInventory
19
tellsusaboutchildrenwith
diverselearningneeds:Bases
andbasics.Mahwah,NJ:
LawrenceErlbaumAssociates.
•Snider,V.E.(1995..Aprimer
onphonemicawareness:What
itis,whyitisimportant,and
howtoteachit.School
PsychologyReview,24,443–
455.
BlendingWords
K&1 PhonemicAwareness
&Phonics
Toincreaseskillinblendingletter
soundstomakesimplewordsfor
studentswhohavemasteredletter
soundcorrespondencewiththe
lettersinthewordsyouwillbe
blending
Individual 15min Patty,Paras Adams,M.J.(2001).Alphabetic
anxietyandexplicit,systematic
phonicsinstruction:Acognitive
scienceperspective.InS.B.
Neuman&D.K.Dickinson(eds.),
HandbookofEarlyLiteracy
Research
(pp.66-80).NewYork:Guilford
Press.
•Goswami,U.(2000).Causal
connectionsinbeginning
reading:Theimportanceof
rhyme.JournalofResearchin
Reading,22(3)217-240.
Greaney,K.T.,Tunmer,W.E.,&
Chapman,J.W.,(1997).Journal
ofEducationalPsychology,
89(4)645-651.
Newscaster
1-5 Fluency-Prosody Toincreasefluencyandprosodyfor
studentswhohavedifficultywith
phrasingandexpressionwhobenefit
fromrepeatedmodelingtoincrease
accuracy
Individual
20min Patty,Paras •Armbruster,B.B.,Lehr,F.,&
Osborn,J.(2001..Putreading
first:Theresearchbuilding
blocksforteachingchildrento
read.Washington,DC:US
DepartmentofEducation,
NationalInstituteforLiteracy.
•Dowhower.S.L.(1987..Effects
ofrepeatedreadingonsecond-
gradetransitionalreaders’
EVWInterventionInventory
20
fluencyAndcomprehension.
ReadingResearchQuarterly.22,
389-406.(listeningtoatape.
•Heckelman,R.G.(1969..A
neurological-impressmethodof
remedialreadinginstruction.
AcademicTherapy,4,277-282.
•Rasinski,T.V.(2003..The
fluentreader:Reading
strategiesforbuildingword
recognition,fluency,
andcomprehension.NewYork,
NY:ScholasticProfessional
Books.
•Searfoss,L.(1975..Radio
Reading.TheReadingTeacher,
29,295-296.
•StahlS.(2004..Whatdowe
KnowAboutFluency?:Findings
oftheNationalReadingPanel.
InMcCardle,P.,&Chabra,V.
(Eds.TheVoiceofEvidencein
ReadingResearch.Brookes:AU.
DuetReading
1-5 Fluency Toincreasefluentreading
particularlyforstudentswhooften
losetheirspotwhenreadingwho
justdon’tgettothenextword
quicklyenough&whobenefitfrom
adelayedmodelforcorrectword
reading
Individual 20min Patty,Paras •Aulls,M.W.,(1982).
DevelopingReadersinToday’s
ElementarySchools.Allyn&
Bacon:Boston.
•Blevins,W.(2001).Building
Fluency:LessonsandStrategies
forReadingSuccess.NewYork:
ScholasticProfessionalBooks.
•Dowhower,S.L.(1991).
Speakingofprosody:Fluency’s
unattendedbedfellow.Theory
intoPractice,30(3),165-175.
EVWInterventionInventory
21
•Mathes,P.G.,Simmons,D.C.,&
Davis,B.I.(1992).Assisted
readingtechniquesfor
developingreadingfluency.
ReadingResearchand
Instruction,31,70-77.
•Weinstein,G.,&Cooke,N.L.
(1992).Theeffectsoftwo
repeatedreadinginterventions
ongeneralizationoffluency.
LearningDisabilityQuarterly,
15,21–27.
PencilTap
1-5 Fluency Toincreasereadingfluencyfor
studentswhomakemanyreading
errorswhichtheydonot
independentlyselfcorrect&who
demonstratetheskillstocorrect
wordsreadingerrorwhencuedto
doso
Individual 20min Patty,Paras •Hattie,J.,&Timperley,H.
(2007..Thepoweroffeedback.
ReviewofEducationResearch.
77(1.81-112.
•Howell,K.,W.,&Nolet.V.,
(2000..Curriculum-Based
Evaluation:Teachingand
DecisionMaking3rdEd.
Belmont,CA:Wadsworth.
•Lysakowski,R.S.,&Walberg,
H.J.(1982..Instructionaleffects
ofcues,participation,and
correctivefeedback:A
quantitativesynthesis.American
EducationalResearchJournal
Vol19(4.559-578
•Tenenbaum,G.,&Goldring,E.
(1989..Ameta-analysisofthe
effectsofenhancedinstruction:
Cues,participation,
reinforcementandfeedback
andcorrectivesonmotorskill
learning.JournalofResearch&
DevelopmentinEducation.Vol
22(3.53-64.
Stop/Go 1-5 Fluency Toincreasereadingfluencyfor
studentswhoappeartoignore
Individual 20min Patty,Paras •Blevins,W.(2001..Building
Fluency:LessonsandStrategies
EVWInterventionInventory
22
sentenceendmarksorother
punctuation&whodemonstrate
poorphrasingormanywordor
phraserepetitionsinoralreading
forReadingSuccess.New
York:ScholasticProfessional
Books.
•Rasinski,T.,&Padak,N.
(1994..Effectsoffluency
developmentonurbansecond-
graders.Journal
ofEducationResearch,87.
•Rasinski,T.V.(2003..The
fluentreader:Reading
strategiesforbuildingword
recognition,fluency,and
comprehension.NewYork,NY:
ScholasticProfessionalBooks.
RepeatedReading
w/Comprehension
2–5 Fluency/
Comprehension
Toincreasefluentreadingand
comprehensiononpassagesfor
studentswhoreadwithhigh
accuracy,showbenefitfrom
repeatedpracticeonthesame
passage,&demonstratepoor
comprehensionofpassagesread
Individual 20min Patty,Paras •Moyer,S.B.(1982).Repeated
reading.JournalofLearning
Disabilities,45,619-623
•Rasinski,T.V.(1990).Effectsof
repeatedreadingandlistening–
while-readingonreading
fluency.JournalofEducational
Research,83(3),147-150.
•Rashotte,C.A.,&Torgeson,
J.K.(1985).Repeatedreading
andreadingfluencyinlearning
disabledchildren.Reading
ResearchQuarterly.20,180-188
•Samuels,S.J.(1979).The
methodofrepeatedreading.
TheReadingTeacher,32,403-
408.
•Samuels,S.J.,(1987).
Informationprocessingabilities
andreading.JournalofLearning
Disabilities,20(1),18-22.
•Sindelar,P.T.,Monda,L.E.,&
EVWInterventionInventory
23
O’Shea,L.J.(1990).Effectsof
repeatedreadingon
instructionalandmasterylevel
readers.JournalofEducational
Research,83,220-226.
•Therrien,W.J.(2004).Fluency
andcomprehensiongainsasa
resultofrepeatedreading:A
metaanalysis.Remedialand
SpecialEducation.25(4)252-
261
SoundPartners 1-3 PA,P Toincreasephonemicawarenessandphonics.Usinginitialsound,phonemesegmentation,nonsenseword,andletternamingfluencies,tutorshelpstudentsbuildfundamentalreadingskills.
Individual 30min Karen,Rm139 Mooney,P.J.(2003).Aninvestigationoftheeffectsofacomprehensivereadinginterventiononthebeginningreadingskillsoffirstgradersatriskforemotionalandbehavioraldisorders(Doctoraldissertation,UniversityofNebraska–Lincoln,2003).DissertationAbstractsInternational,64(05A),85–1599.
Vadasy,P.F.,Jenkins,J.R.,Antil,L.R.,Wayne,S.K.,&O’Connor,R.E.(1997a).Theeffectivenessofone-to-onetutoringbycommunitytutorsforat-riskbeginningreaders.LearningDisabilityQuarterly,20(1),126–139.
*Vadasy,P.F.,&Sanders,E.A.(2008).Code-orientedinstructionforkindergartenstudentsatriskforreadingdifficulties:Areplicationandcomparisonofinstructionalgrouping.ReadingandWriting:AnInterdisciplinaryJournal,21(9),929–963.
*Vadasy,P.F.,Sanders,E.A.,&Peyton,J.A.(2006).Code-orientedinstructionfor
EVWInterventionInventory
24
kindergartenstudentsatriskforreadingdifficulties:Arandomizedfieldtrialwithparaeducatorimplementers.JournalofEducationalPsychology,98(3),508–528.
BartonReadingand
SpellingSystem
K-12 PA,P,F,C Toincreasereading,spellingandwritingskills.ItisstructuredliteracyprogramthatisOrton-Gillinghaminfluenced.Themulti-sensory,direct,explicit,structuredandsequentialintenseinterventionprogramteachesphonemicawarenessaswellasphonics.
Individual 40min Bygradeleveland
Sped
Pennsylvania3yearstudy-
https://bartonreading.com/wp-
content/uploads/2015/01/PA-
3YearStudyResults1.pdf
ArkansasRTIStudy-
https://bartonreading.com/wp-
content/uploads/2015/01/AR-
RTIStudy1.pdf