response_to_intervention

Document Sample
response_to_intervention Powered By Docstoc
					                  Summary of Curriculum-Based Assessment and Intervention

Name: Joshua C                                       Grade: 8
Age: 13 years                                        Teacher: Mr. Brian Landrigan
Report Date: April 30th 2009                         School: V C Secondary
UBC Practicum Student: Kavita V. Kamat                       School

Purpose of Assessment and Intervention

The primary purpose of the assessment and intervention process was to use assessment results
to design and monitor an individual tutoring intervention in the area of reading. A secondary
purpose was to provide training opportunities in direct academic assessment and intervention
planning for the graduate student. This assessment was conducted by Kavita V. Kamat, a
student at the University of British Columbia, under the supervision of Dr. Kent McIntosh and
doctoral student Theresa Andreou, from UBC. Written parental permission was obtained by
school personnel prior to student involvement.

All activities that occurred during the process were consistent with activities that typically occur
during the school day (e.g., observation of class activities, examination of work samples,
teacher report of student performance, direct assessment of reading, and individual reading
tutoring).

Reason for Involvement

Joshua was identified by his teacher, Mr. Landrigan, for additional reading support. Joshua’s
scores on a class-wide reading assessment indicated that intensive reading support was
necessary for improved literacy outcomes.

Assessment Methods

      Teacher interview: February 2nd, 2009
      Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills (DIBELS) Survey – Beta Version: February
       13th, 2009
      Student interview: February 13th, 2009
      Review of work samples: February 13th, 2009
      Direct Classroom Observation: February 26th , 2009
      DIBELS Oral Reading Fluency (ORF) Progress Monitoring: March 4th –April 8th , 2009


                                                                                                   1
      AIMSweb Maze Reading Comprehension Progress Monitoring : March 4th –April 8th,
       2009

Background Information

Joshua is a grade 8 student from the Philippines. Mr. Landrigan reported that he is polite,
sociable, shows an interest in learning and enjoys going to school. Joshua was selected by Mr.
Landrigan to participate in the reading intervention because he had a good attendance record
and was a motivated learner. Joshua has been diagnosed with a learning disability and
experiences continued difficulty in reading, mathematics and writing. Mr. Landrigan reported
that Joshua’s instructional level was at a grade 5 to 6 level. During the student interview, Joshua
reported that he liked to watch sports and movies. He also reported that he enjoyed reading
the newspaper at school and comics at home.

Current Level of Support

At the time of the report, Joshua was enrolled in the Secondary Learning Support Program,
offered by Vancouver School Board, for grade 8 students at risk for academic failure. He was in
a class of 15 students, many of whom have been diagnosed with a learning disability. Mr.
Landrigan was their primary teacher, and on occasion, student volunteers from Grade 11/12
provided teacher support.

Assessment

       Survey Level Assessment

DIBELS Survey. Reading skills were assessed using DIBELS Survey, a set of research-based,
standardized, norm-referenced measures for screening and monitoring progress of reading
skills. DIBELS Survey is a tool that allows the consultant to “back-test” from a student’s current
level of expected performance on grade level reading passages by dropping back to earlier
levels of skills to determine the student’s Instructional level. At the Mastery level, the student is
reading in the low risk range with greater than 95% accuracy, indicating that he or she has
mastered that level of material and is ready to move on to the next level or skill. The
Instructional level is the level at which the student is able to read a passage with 90-94%
accuracy. When accuracy is below 90%, the student is reading at the Frustrational level,
indicating that the material is too difficult for instruction to be effective. The student is asked to
read aloud from three separate grade-level passages for one minute each, and the median
score is used to determine the instructional level of the student.

                                                                                                    2
       Assessment of Oral Reading Fluency: DIBELS

DIBELS Oral Reading Fluency (ORF). Research suggests that the number of words a student
reads correctly per minute is predictive of his or her future reading fluency and comprehension.
Research also suggests that those who are not yet fluent readers can improve with proper
intervention. To assess ORF, Joshua was asked to read aloud for 1 minute from three grade
level reading passages taken from the DIBELS winter benchmark materials. For each passage,
the number of correct words per minute was calculated. The median (middle) of the three
scores across the passages was determined and recorded as the DIBELS (ORF) score for Joshua.
The number of errors per minute was also recorded to calculate percent accuracy.

DIBELS provides research-based criteria for placing students into one of three categories of risk
for reading problems (see Table 1). Criteria exist for beginning, middle, and end of year goals
for each grade level. At the middle of grade 6, for example, students reading 120 or more
correct words per minute are considered to be on target and at ‘Low Risk’ for having reading
difficulties. Students reading between 99 and 120 correct words per minute are considered to
be at ‘Some Risk’ for later reading problems and it is recommended they receive additional
intervention. Students reading fewer than 99 correct words per minute are considered to be
performing at a level that places them in the category of ‘At Risk’ for reading problems and are
in need of more intensive intervention.

Table 1. DIBELS Grade 6 Criteria for Correct Words per Minute (CWPM)

    DIBELS Oral            Beginning of Year          Middle of Year             End of Year
  Reading Fluency             Month 1-3                Month 4-6                 Month 7-10
       (ORF)
     Low Risk                CWPM ≥109                 CWPM ≥ 120                CWPM ≥ 125
     Some Risk            83 ≤ CWPM < 109            99≤ CWPM <120            104 ≤ CWPM < 125
       At Risk                CWPM < 83                 CWPM < 99                CWPM < 104


       Assessment of Reading Accuracy: DIBELS

Another method used to assess a student’s reading skills is reading accuracy. Accuracy is
calculated by dividing the median number of words read correctly by the total number of words
read in one minute for the median passage. Accuracy represents student performance at the
reading level of materials used. DIBELS identifies three levels of accuracy across all grade levels
(see Table 2). 95% accuracy or above indicates that the student is reading at the Mastery level;


                                                                                                  3
90-94% accuracy indicates that the student is reading at the Instructional level; and less than
90% accuracy indicates that the student is reading at the Frustrational level. Provided that the
student is reading with adequate fluency, he or she can successfully read Mastery level material
independently. In contrast, a student at the Frustrational level is reading fewer than nine out of
every 10 words correctly, resulting in poor passage comprehension. One goal of reading
instruction is for all students in the classroom to read grade-level material at or above an
Instructional level (90-94% accuracy).

Table 2. DIBELS Criteria for Accuracy
                           DIBELS Reading Accuracy
   Mastery Level                    > 94%
 Instructional Level              90% - 94%
 Frustrational Level                < 90%

       Assessment of Reading Comprehension: Maze

Reading comprehension refers to how well a student understands the material he or she reads.
Reading comprehension was measured using a grade 6 AIMSweb Maze passage
(http://www.aimsweb.com/measures-2/maze-cbm/). AIMSweb Maze is a standardized,
research validated assessment of reading comprehension. The student has three minutes to
silently read a passage in which every seventh word is replaced by a choice of three words, only
one of which is correct. The final score is the number of correct choices made within three
minutes.

To facilitate this test interpretation, a Percentile Rank (PR) is used. A percentile describes a
student’s position on a scale of 1 to 99 in comparison to a grade or age-reference group. For
instance, a percentile ranking of 50 reflects that the student performed better than 50% of
students at his/her grade level. AIMSweb provides standardized norms of student performance
in the form of percentiles. Approximately half of the students should fall between the 25th and
75th percentiles for that grade level. Students below the 25th percentile should be monitored
for progress and provided additional opportunities to practice reading and comprehending
material. Students who fall below the 10th percentile are scoring in the bottom 10 percent of
the children in their grade, and would benefit from additional instruction in reading
comprehension strategies, including extra reading practice to build reading fluency. Research
shows that repeated practice with corrective feedback improves reading fluency, and that
fluent readers are better able to comprehend the material they read.




                                                                                                4
Assessment Results

Oral Reading Fluency: DIBELS Survey. Joshua read aloud for one minute from three separate
reading passages starting at a grade 4 level. For each passage, the number of correct words per
minute was calculated. Joshua’s score placed him in the ‘Low Risk’ category for grade 4 and
grade 5. With grade 6 passages, Joshua received a median score of 115 correct words per
minute with 93% accuracy, which identified him to be in the ‘Some Risk’ category for reading
with reference to the grade 6 winter benchmark goal.

During the baseline phase, Joshua was asked to read a grade 6 level DIBELS progress monitoring
passage for 1 minute. On the first day of baseline monitoring, Joshua read 115 correct words in
1 minute. On the second day of baseline monitoring, Joshua read 114 correct words in 1
minute. Because there were only two baseline data points, it was not possible to determine a
trend or a growth rate of Joshua’s reading in response to the current level of support. The
baseline was considered to be stable and in the following session, the intervention was
introduced.

During both baseline points, Joshua read 97% of the words correctly (at a Mastery level),
indicating that he was able to read individual words accurately and independently. From the
baseline data, it was clear that Joshua was able to read individual words accurately but needed
to improve his overall reading fluency.

Maze Reading Comprehension: AIMSweb. In keeping with the DIBELS grade level for
assessment, the grade 6 AIMSweb passages and norms were used to assess Joshua’s reading
comprehension. Two probes were administered and Joshua’s average score was 19.5 responses
correct in three minutes. This score placed Joshua in the average range for reading
comprehension for grade 6 materials. The results indicated that his reading comprehension of
grade 6 material was average, but this material was two grades below his current grade level.

Skills Targeted for Intervention

Based on the DIBELS assessment of Oral Reading Fluency and AIMSweb Maze assessment of
reading comprehension, two skills were targeted for support:

   1. Oral Reading Fluency
   2. Reading Comprehension




                                                                                              5
Intervention

       Oral Reading Fluency Intervention

Repeated Reading. Repeated Reading was the intervention selected to increase reading
fluency. Repeated Reading is a strategy in which the student reads aloud through a passage
repeatedly while being timed. This strategy was chosen as it is simple and straightforward to
administer, requires minimal intervention materials, and is research-validated for improving
students’ reading fluency. Joshua read a grade 6 level progress monitoring passage from the
DIBELS website (http://dibels.uoregon.edu). The number of words he read correctly in one
minute was calculated and recorded on his progress monitoring graph (Figure 1).

To keep Joshua’s interest level high, he chose the book to read for the repeated intervention.
He selected a book from the library and another book was suggested by Mr. Landrigan. Both
books selected were confirmed to be at the grade 6 level. At the start of the repeated reading
intervention Joshua selected a passage from the book. The number of words he read correctly
in one minute during his first reading was referred to as the ‘cold probe’. Joshua’s ‘cold probe’
score was noted on the repeated reading chart (see Appendix A). At this point, Joshua was
asked to set a new goal. He was encouraged to set a goal by adding 10-15 additional words
from where he stopped. This point became Joshua’s new reading goal. Joshua then repeatedly
read this passage each time for 1 minute. Following each reading, Joshua marked his score on
the repeated reading chart and received feedback on the errors he made. Feedback included
drawing attention to the words Joshua skipped or read incorrectly. He was asked to re-read the
sentence in which these errors were made. Readings continued until Joshua reached the new
goal, usually within three to four reads. The final number of correct words per minute was his
‘hot read’ score. The intervention process took between 15 and 20 minutes to complete from
start to finish. Joshua received this intervention twice per week. Please refer to the Appendix B
for a step-by-step outline of this intervention strategy.

        Reading Comprehension Intervention

Text Lookback. Text Lookback was the intervention selected to increase reading
comprehension. Following discussion with Mr. L, a grade 6 level text “Weaving it Together –
Connecting Reading and Writing” by Milada Broukal was selected for the intervention. The text
had short passages on a wide range of topics. Each chapter contained comprehension exercises
at the end of the unit. The comprehension review questions focused on main ideas of the
passage, to determine the student’s general understanding of the passage and other details.
Each chapter also had discussion questions that focused on student opinion, thought, belief or

                                                                                                6
idea related to the subject. During each session, Joshua chose a unit that he wanted to read.
After reading each unit he verbally summarized the main idea of the unit and sought
clarification of words that he did not understand. Joshua then completed the review questions
at the back of the unit. All review questions were answered verbally. Each session took 15-20
minutes. Joshua received this intervention approximately twice per week. Please refer to the
Appendix C for a step-by- step outline of this intervention strategy.

Measurement Strategy

DIBELS Oral Reading Fluency (ORF). The ORF score was recorded twice per week for five weeks
to monitor Joshua’s progress and to ensure the repeated reading intervention adequately
supported Joshua in meeting his goals. At the beginning of each session, the tutor administered
a one minute ORF probe. This ‘cold probe’ score was recorded onto Joshua’s progress
monitoring graph.

AIMSweb Maze. Joshua’s correct responses on the grade 6 Maze were also recorded twice per
week for five weeks to monitor his progress and ensure the Text Lookback intervention was
adequately supporting Joshua in meeting his goals for reading comprehension. The responses
correct score was recorded on Joshua’s progress monitoring graph for reading comprehension.

All progress monitoring probes were administered by the tutor. The school provided access to a
quiet room opposite the student’s classroom for the sessions.

Goal Setting

       Oral Reading Fluency (ORF)

The ORF goal was for Joshua to read 125 correct words per minute by the end of 5 weeks (first
week of April), which would have him reading at the Low Risk level for grade 6. An aimline was
drawn from the average score of the two baseline data points (114.5 correct words per
minute), to the end goal of 125 correct words per minute. The aim line represents the expected
rate of improvement that would allow Joshua to reach the goal of 125 correct words per
minute by the first week of April. The growth rate needed for Joshua to achieve this goal was
calculated using the following equation:

                Median Baseline Score + ([Growth Rate] x [# of Weeks]) = Goal

                                    (114.5 + [n x 5]) = 125

                                                                                                7
                                       n= 2.1 (growth rate)

The growth rate of 2.1 represents an ambitious growth rate. A target goal was set for Joshua to
achieve the end of the year benchmark goal for the grade 6 level (125 correct words per
minute) on the ORF measure by April 8th, 2009.

       Reading Comprehension

The reading comprehension goal was for Joshua to obtain 24 responses correct in three
minutes on the AIMSweb grade 6 progress monitoring Maze passage by the end of five weeks
(first week of April). Joshua’s median baseline score was 19.5, which placed him in the average
range (near the 25th percentile) for grade 6. To move from near the 25th percentile to above the
50th percentile, a goal of 24 responses correct would need to be obtained. The aimline was
drawn from the average score of the two baseline data points (19.5 responses correct in three
minutes), to the end goal of 24 responses correct in three minutes. The aimline represents the
expected rate of improvement that would allow Joshua to reach the goal of 24 responses
correct by the first week of April. The growth rate needed for Joshua to achieve this goal was
calculated using the following equation:

                Median Baseline Score + ([Growth Rate] x [# of Weeks]) = Goal

                                      (19.5 + [n x 5]) = 24

                                      n= 0.9 (growth rate)

The target goal for Joshua was set at 24 responses correct in three minutes using the AIMSweb
grade 6 progress monitoring passages. For him to achieve this goal, the growth rate was
established at 0.9 or approximately 1 response correct per week.

Plan for Monitoring and Decision Making

The aimlines were used to help monitor Joshua’s response to intervention. Data were plotted
on the progress monitoring graphs each session. Two decision rules were used to analyse the
data and modify the intervention accordingly. First, three consecutive data points below the
aimline would indicate that an instructional change was required, as it would indicate, that the
intervention was not supporting Joshua to meet his goal. Second, if there were two data points



                                                                                               8
above the final benchmark goal, it would be assumed that Joshua had mastered that grade level
material and could move up to the next grade level.

Response to Intervention:

Oral Reading Fluency. Joshua’s ORF scores before (baseline phase) and during intervention are
illustrated in Figure 1. The vertical dotted line indicates the beginning of the intervention phase.
The solid horizontal line represents the aimline, or the expected rate of improvement, of 2
words per week.

Figure 1. DIBELS Oral Reading Fluency Grade 6 Winter 2009




As Figure 1 shows, majority of the progress monitoring data scores were close to the aimline
which indicates that Joshua was responding to the intervention. Joshua scored above the goal
on one probe (March 10th) and the following probes were on or below the aimline. The trend of
Joshua’s data indicates that he was responding to the intervention but had not yet met the final
goal of 125 correct words per minute. Overall, Joshua responded well to the repeated reading
intervention and the current data suggest that if he continues to progress at the same rate,
Joshua will reach his goal by the end of April and can move to grade 7 level materials.

Reading Comprehension: Two baseline data points were collected. The average score placed
Joshua in the 25th percentile for grade 6 materials and norms. Joshua’s scores in reading
comprehension before (baseline phase) and during intervention are illustrated in Figure 2. The
vertical dotted line indicates the beginning of the intervention phase. The solid horizontal line
on the graph represents the aimline of 0.9 responses correct per week.


                                                                                                    9
Figure 2. AIMSweb Reading Comprehension, Grade 6 Winter, 2009




As Figure 2 shows, the majority of the progress monitoring data scores were close to the
aimline, which indicates that Joshua was responding to the intervention. Joshua scored above
the goal on one of the probes and the following probes were above the aimline, but below the
final goal. These data indicated that Joshua was responding to the intervention but had not yet
met the final goal of 24 responses correct on AIMSweb progress monitoring passages. Using the
decision rules mentioned in the previous section, no changes were made to the instruction, or
the aimline. Overall, Joshua responded well to the Repeated Reading and Text Lookback
interventions and the current data suggest that if he continues to progress at the same rate,
Joshua will reach his goal by the last week of April.

Summary

Overall, Joshua is on track to meet the DIBELS Oral Reading Fluency benchmark goal for the end
of grade 6 and the AIMSweb reading comprehension goal for grade 6. The progress monitoring
data shows that the combination of reading fluency instruction and reading comprehension
strategies, along with many opportunities to read, have provided Joshua with adequate practice
to help him reach the grade 6 reading goals and progress to the next grade level.

Recommendations

Based on the findings of this assessment and intervention, the following recommendations are
suggested to assist Joshua with his reading development. This list is not meant to be exhaustive,
comprehensive, or predictive of all barriers for success Joshua will encounter.
Recommendations should be selected for implementation in consultation with Joshua, his



                                                                                              10
parents, his teachers and school team. The practicum student is also available to consult on
selection and implementation of recommendations.

       Reading Fluency

Repeated Reading Intervention: It is recommended that Joshua continue to participate in the
repeated reading exercises at least twice per week with the support of the teacher or Grade
11/12 student volunteers.

Increase Opportunities to Read: It is also recommended that Joshua continue to have many
opportunities to read. Currently, Joshua demonstrates an interest in reading newspapers and
comic books. Joshua should be encouraged to read books that are at his instructional level
(currently grade 6). The school and his parents can further support his interest in reading by
asking him to read and review books on subjects that are of interest to him. When Joshua reads
a word incorrectly, the adult or peer reader can correct Joshua immediately and have Joshua
re-read the sentence with the word at least two times. Joshua can be encouraged to maintain a
list of new words and their meanings as he reads. These words can be reviewed regularly at
school and at home. Building his vocabulary will help Joshua decode words while reading and
will enable him to read more fluently. The adult or peer reader can also model how to read the
passage or page of the book fluently. Also, Joshua could continue to visit the library at school
and in the community. These strategies can provide him with the opportunities to explore new
books and choose books of interest.

       Reading Comprehension

The Text Lookback Intervention: It is recommended that Joshua continue to use the
Text Lookback strategy for improving reading comprehension with expository text. Given, that
Joshua does not have an assigned Student Education Assistant, the strategy can be modified
and administered to the general class. Providing more opportunities for students to practice
reading and answering the questions at the end of each unit independently or with a peer
buddy is likely to result in better reading comprehension outcomes for the entire class.

       Continued Progress Monitoring

Reading Fluency: It is recommended to continue to self-monitor Joshua’s progress in reading
fluency and comprehension (see Appendix D). Joshua can be encouraged to plot his ‘cold probe’
scores on a progress monitoring graph (see Appendix E) as a tool for him to self-monitor his
progress.

                                                                                               11
Reading Comprehension: Joshua can also continue to self-monitor his progress in reading
comprehension using the grade 6 expository text (see Appendix F). He can score the number of
questions correctly answered after each completed unit, and graph the score on a chart (see
Appendix G). Joshua can discuss the criteria for success with his teacher (% accuracy needed to
change to the next level of instructional material) It is important to adhere to the decision rules
mentioned above so adjustments to the goal and to the instruction can be made accordingly.

All efforts made by Joshua to improve his reading fluency and comprehension can be positively
reinforced both at home and at school. This will motivate Joshua to continue his efforts and will
more likely to result in positive reading outcomes.

It was a pleasure working with Joshua and other students in the class. We wish Joshua all the
best as he continues through his remaining years at VT Secondary School and beyond. If there
are any questions or if we can provide further assistance is needed, please do not hesitate to
contact the UBC Practicum Student Kavita V Kamat at 604-671-2972 or via e-mail at
kkamat@mapcl.org, the course supervisor, Dr. Kent McIntosh, at 604-822-6382 or via e-mail at
kent.mcintosh@ubc.ca, or the graduate student supervisor, Theresa Andreou, via e-mail at
tandreo@interchange.ubc.ca




________________________
Kavita V Kamat
Dept of Educational & Counselling Psychology
& Special Education
The University of British Columbia




________________________                    ________________________
Kent McIntosh, Ph.D., NCSP                    Theresa Andreou
Supervisor, Assistant Professor               Doctoral Student Supervisor
Dept of Educational & Counselling Psychology Dept of Educational & Counselling Psychology
& Special Education                           & Special Education
The University of British Columbia            The University of British Columbia




                                                                                                 12
References

      AIMSweb Progress Monitoring and Response to Intervention System
       http://www.aimsweb.com/measures-2/maze-cbm/

      Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literary Skills
       https://dibels.uoregon.edu/

      Intervention Central
       http://www.interventioncentral.org/htmdocs/interventions/rdngfluency/rptrdng.php

      Mather, N., Jaffe, L.E. (2002). Woodcock Johnson III reports, recommendations and
       strategies. John Wiley and Sons, Inc




                                                                                           13
Appendix A
Repeated Reading Chart
Name: _________________________            Date: __________________

Goal: ____ Correct words per minute   Reading Material: ___________________

Correct Words Per
     Minute
       140
       139
       138
       137
       136
       135
       134
       133
       132
       131
      130
       129
       128
       127
       126
       125
       124
       123
       122
       121
       120
       119
       118
       117
       116
       115
       114
       113
       112
       111
       110
       109
                       1          2       3           4       5
                                      Number of Trial

                                                                              14
Appendix B

Repeated Reading
The student reads through a passage repeatedly, silently or aloud, and receives help with
reading errors

Materials: Reading book and Stop watch (if readings are to be timed)

Preparation: The teacher, parent, adult tutor, or peer tutor working with the student should be
trained advance to use the listening passage preview approach.

Intervention Script:

Step 1: Sit with the student in a quiet location without too many distractions. Position the book
selected for the reading session so that both you and the student can easily follow the text.

Step 2: Select a passage in the Grade level (appropriate to the student’s instructional level)
book of about 100 to 200 words in length.

Step 3: Have the student read the passage aloud for one minute. Count the number of correct
words per minute and mark it on the progress monitoring chart (“cold read” score).

Step 4:If the student is reading aloud and misreads a word or hesitates for longer than 3
seconds, read the word aloud and have the student repeat the word correctly before
continuing through the passage. If the student asks for help with any word, read the word
aloud. If the student requests a word definition, give the definition.

Step 5: When the student has completed the passage, have him or her read the passage again.
You can choose to have the student read the passage repeatedly until either the student
reaches his goal (of correct words per minute) or has read the passage a total of 4 times which
ever comes first.

Important Considerations

Take Steps to Keep the Student Invested in the Activity. Repeated reading is effective as an
intervention to build student reading fluency because it gives the student lots of reading
practice. However, this activity could become dull and uninteresting for the student over time.
If you find that the student is beginning to lose interest in repeated reading, consider:

      Provide praise to the student in specific terms for good reading.
      Allow the student to pick out high-interest books or articles to use for repeated reading.
      Using a stop-watch, monitor the student’s reading rate during each repeated
       reading and chart the results on a graph. (Appendix A)

                                                                                                 15
Appendix C

Text Lookback
Text Lookback is a simple strategy that students can use to boost their comprehension of the
expository prose by looking back in the text for important information. It improves their ability
to answer questions based on the text and also encourages them to relate their prior
knowledge to the text by answering what has been described as “think questions”

Materials: Expository text and lookback/think questions

Preparation: Create at least 3 lookback questions and one think question for each expository
text passage selected incise the text chose does not have these questions built into each lesson.

Intervention Script:

Step 1: Introduce the Text Lookback strategy by telling student that people cannot always
remember everything that they read. If we read an article or book chapter, though, and are
asked a ‘fact’ question about it that we cannot answer, we can always look back in the article to
find the information that we need.

Step 2: Describe for the class the difference between lookback and think questions. An
example of an explanation that you might use is: “When we are asked questions about an
article, sometimes the answer can be found directly in the article and sometimes it cannot be
found directly.”
     Lookback questions are those that tell us that the answer can be found right in the
         article. For example, if a question uses phrases such as in the article or in the author’s
         words, these phrases would be clues that the question is a lookup question and that we
         can find the answer in the article.
     Think questions are those that ask you to give your own opinion, beliefs, or ideas. Our
         answers to these questions are based on our own ideas or thoughts about the topic. For
         example, if a question uses phrases such as in your opinion or what do you think, these
         phrases would be clues that the question is a think question and that the answer cannot
         be found in the article.

Step 3: Read aloud through the sample expository passage. Then read the series of 4 text
lookback/think questions to the student. As you read each question, highlight for the student
the word clues that indicate whether the question is a think or Text Lookback question.



                                                                                                16
Step 4: Tell the student that they must re-read carefully to find the answer to a Text Lookback
question. However, he /she can save time by first skimming the article to get to the general
section where the answer to the question is probably located. To skim, the student should:

      Read the Text Lookback question carefully and underline the section that tells the
       reader what to look for.
      Look for titles, headings, or illustrations in the article that might tell the reader where
       the information that he or she is looking for is probably located
      Look at the beginning and end sentences in individual paragraphs to see if that
       paragraph might contain the desired information.

Step 5: ‘Thinking aloud’, demonstrate for students how to skim the example article to locate
efficiently the answer to each Text Lookback question.

Step 6: Present additional example articles with Text Lookback questions and monitor student
mastery of the technique. Assign students to use the strategy independently when, under your
supervision, they can distinguish reliably between think and Text Lookback questions and are
able to find the answers to Text Lookback questions in the text.

Tips:
Have Students Write Text Lookback Questions for assigned reading. For homework, encourage
students to compose several challenging text lookback questions based on their assigned
reading. Use these questions later for class review. This strategy can be also be used effectively
as a general class strategy with all students.

The strategies described in Appendix B and C are modified versions of the same strategy as
described in “Reading Interventions That Work” by Jim Wright (www.interventioncentral.org)




                                                                                                     17
Appendix D

Self- Monitoring Strategy in Reading Fluency
This strategy teaches the student to independently monitor his or her progress on reading
fluency for better reading outcomes.

Material: A reading passage that is at the students’ instructional level and self-monitoring
graph.

Preparation: This strategy can be implemented when the student is in the fluency building
stage in the instructional hierarchy.

Procedure:

Step 1: Student chooses a passage that is of interest to him and is at his instructional level.

Step 2: The student reads the passage for one minute. The number of words read correctly in
        one minute is calculated by the tutor and student notes his score on the progress
        monitoring graph (see Appendix E).

Step 3: The student sets a new goal to increase fluency for the following day.

Step 4: The student continues to practice reading passages in school and at home.

Step 5: The student reads one passage for one minute with a tutor each day and notes his
        fluency score on the progress monitoring chart.

Step 6: If the student fails to demonstrate progress for a predetermined number of days or if
        the progress is slow then it indicates that student may need more explicit instruction in
        reading. It is also important to rule out other extraneous factors that may be
        contributing to the student’s poor progress.

Step 7: The tutor encourages and supports the student’s efforts. Other reinforcement strategies
        can also be used to motivate the student to use the self- monitoring strategy for better
        outcomes in reading fluency.




                                                                                                  18
Appendix E

Self-Monitoring Graph in Reading Fluency




                                           19
Appendix F

Self-Monitoring Strategy in Reading Comprehension
This strategy teaches the student to independently monitor his or her progress on reading
comprehension for better reading outcomes.

Material: Expository text and self-monitoring graph.

Preparation: This strategy can be implemented when the student is in the fluency building
stage in the instructional hierarchy. Therefore, this strategy follows explicit instruction in
reading comprehension.

Procedure:

Step 1: Identity an expository text that has review questions at the end of each unit.

Step 2: The student reads a unit and completes the questions at the end of the unit.

Step 3: The tutor corrects it and provides a percentage accuracy score.

Step 4: The student marks the score on his or her progress monitoring graph (see Appendix E).

Step 5: The student sets a new goal to increase accuracy.

Step 6: Each time the student reads a unit from the expository text and completes the
        questions, it is corrected by the tutor and he marks the accuracy score on the graph.

Step 7: Once the student achieves more than 95% accuracy for a predetermined number of
        days or units the tutor can present him the next grade level instructional material.

Step 8: If the student fails to demonstrate progress for a predetermined number of days or if
        the progress is slow then it indicates that student may need more explicit instruction in
        the skill. It is also important to rule out other extraneous factors that may be
        contributing to the student’s poor progress.

Step 9: The tutor encourages and supports the student’s efforts. Other reinforcement strategies
        can also be used to one, motivate the student to use the self-monitoring strategy and
        two for better outcomes on reading comprehension accuracy.

                                                                                                 20
Appendix G

Self-Monitoring Chart
Name: _________________________            Week of: _______________________________

Accuracy Goal: ___________________         Name of text: ____________________________

   Percentage        Monday          Tuesday     Wednesday     Thursday      Friday
    Accuracy
      100
       98
       96
       94
       92
       90
       88
       86
       84
       82
       80
       78
       76
       74
       70
       68
       66
       64
       62
       60




                                               Title of unit



Notes:________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________

                                                                                      21

				
DOCUMENT INFO
Shared By:
Categories:
Tags:
Stats:
views:3
posted:2/1/2012
language:
pages:21