7/30/2019 35163383

1/12

7/30/2019 35163383

2/12

546 K. Edwards

the difference in grades between the fifth hour class and the other classes taught by the

same teacher, the principal asked the teacher and me to meet with him to investigate thisdiscrepancy.

At our initial meeting, we discussed the lower grades of the fifth hour class. In this

high school students attended six different classes each day. The teacher had one period

for preparation and taught four sections of ninth-grade English and one Journalism class.

Each day was the same schedule with the same students during the same time block. Thefifth hour class was after lunch and many teachers feel that teaching students in this time

block is a challenging time to engage students in learning. When students are scheduled

there is consideration given to the other classes that they will take, and every teacher has a

class during this time block unless it is their preparation hour. The teacher, the principal,and I brainstormed what would account for the difference in the grades of this class as

compared to the other three English classes. Although these students were in fifth hour,

which can be a challenging time period, the teacher felt the time period was not the prob-

lem, but the students skills were below those of other classes. The teachers learning

goals in the classroom were to introduce students to interesting texts and authors. Heexpected students to be able to discuss and explore an authors purpose, style, message,

and other English Language Arts Content Standards identified by the State of Michigan as

appropriate for the grade level. Our concern was that the students in this class were not

doing what was expected of good readers and the students were not able to discuss thetexts studied in the class. They were not doing the assignments and even if the teacher

modified the assignments and had more active activities they were not able or willing to

participate in classroom discussions and activities related to the material being studied. We

wondered if the problem was that the students could not read, or was the problem that the

students wouldnot read? After much discussion I volunteered to examine the curriculum

files and testing information on each of the students in the class. I would additionally giveeach student a reading assessment and a reading interview. Data were collected from the

students cumulative files or CA60s. Those data included past test scores from the state-

wide testing instrument, the Michigan Educational Assessment Profile (MEAP), district-wide norm-referenced testing data from the California Achievement Test (CAT), and the

Pre-Stanford Achievement Test (PSAT). Data also included grades from past years and

grades from the other ninth-grade English classes for the first marking period. After this

information was collected and organized, we scheduled a second meeting to discuss the

findings.At the second meeting, the findings from the testing and the past performances of the

students were shared. Based on the data we saw two things. Firstly, the testing showed thatthe students as a whole were below grade level readers. Many students did not have basic

decoding skills needed to sound out unknown words. Secondly, the survey showed that thestudents did not like to read. The students liked to listen to books, but did not want to read

them. When asked what their favorite book was, they most often mentioned a book read

aloud to them by their sixth-, seventh- or eighth-grade classroom teacher.

After reviewing these results we talked about what we could do to address their weak-

nesses. If students could not read the texts, what skills and strategies did they need to learnin order to improve their reading abilities so they could read and discuss the class assign-

ments? Would the strategy of whole class reading make a significant difference? Would small

group work be the most beneficial approach? Would adding a phonics review help improve

student reading skills? If they were able to read the text, would they be more interested indiscussing the text?

7/30/2019 35163383

3/12

Educational Action Research 547

Action research project

The research undertaken in this Action Research project involved the following question:

If struggling high school English students received a review of phonics, would this interven-tion improve their reading as measured by a standardized assessment tool and would improve-ment continue over time?

The definition of phonics used in this research was the concentrated study of the sound-

symbol relationships in order to learn to read and spell. The purpose of phonics in this

project was to increase accuracy of decoding and increase fluency in word recognition.

The debate over the most effective method to use for early reading instruction has a longhistory. To assist in that debate several educators have summarized the research on early

reading strategies. They have reviewed a plethora of research that identifies the teaching of

phonics as an important component of early reading instruction that benefits students

ability to read and write.

The review of the research summarized by Jeanne Chall (1967, 1983, 1996), the Commis-sion on Reading (Anderson 1985), and Marilyn Jager Adams (1990) confirms that empha-

sizing the relationship between letters and sounds resulted in better learning for students. The

summary of the research continually confirmed that although reading for meaning is impor-

tant and should not be ignored, the early reading approaches that emphasize phonics and thefocus on decoding in early reading instruction have been shown to be more effective in help-

ing children learn to read than those that do not emphasize phonics.

In support of the importance of phonics in reading instruction the International Reading

Association (IRA) wrote a Position Statement on The Role of Phonics in Reading Instruction(1997). The statement identified three assertions related to phonics and its role in reading.

Phonics was identified as an important component of beginning reading instruction and thestatement suggested that classroom teachers in the early grades need to be teaching phonics

as part of their reading program. The statement also suggested that phonics instruction must

be embedded in the context of the total reading program.This research on the importance of phonics for beginning readers influenced our deci-

sion to focus on a phonics intervention for our older students in this high school classroom.

If it was important for early readers to learn phonics, and if our students as early readers did

not learn some of the phonics skills, would they benefit from an intervention that taughtthem the phonics they missed in the earlier grades? With phonetic knowledge, our hypoth-

esis was that the targeted high school students reading levels would improve. Additionally,

phonics along with strategies such as finding roots, affixes, small words within largerwords, and context clues were all tools that students should be encouraged to use when theyattempt to decode an unknown word. This is not suggesting that phonics is the only or most

important component of reading, but in conjunction with the reading of engaging pieces of

literature and the learning of comprehension strategies it is an assist that would give

students concrete strategies to decode unknown words they encounter.

In view of the fact that the classroom teacher felt he had tried several different strategiesand they had not made a difference, we decided a phonics intervention would be the best

approach to try to improve students reading ability in this class. Other interventions could

have been implemented, but we decided based on the data collected and analyzed that a

phonics-based intervention was appropriate. We knew that the students had been taught

phonics skills at some time in their earlier schooling, but believed they had forgotten themor had not been ready to integrate the information into their reading repertoire at the time

7/30/2019 35163383

4/12

548 K. Edwards

intervention would be a review for many of the students and an opportunity to learn specific

phonetic information they were lacking. Since I was the district curriculum director, had anoffice in the high school building, and had been a classroom teacher, remedial reading

teacher, and reading consultant, it would be feasible for me to teach a phonics component

in the form of mini-lessons in this English class.

Based on my experience with struggling readers at all grade levels and based on the

research supporting the use of phonics, I felt that these high school students would benefitfrom phonetic knowledge. Through experience working in the district with the elementary

teachers, I knew that phonics skills were a part of the early reading program. The high school

students in this class were from the district and so had been taught phonics in the lower

grades when they were learning to read. Reviewing phonics with these students would bereintroducing them to the phonics skills they had already been introduced to in their past

schooling. The lessons would be a review and we were hopeful that students would pick up

and integrate the forgotten information quickly. Any new phonics information learned

would be small but significant skills that the student had missed during initial instruction in

previous grades. Learning these skills would add to their ability to be independent readers.Also working closely with the classroom teacher would help embed the phonics in the total

reading program. Students would make use of the skills they were learning as they went

about the reading tasks in their English class. In order to make this phonics knowledge

useful, I knew that the content needed to be taught quickly, that the lessons needed to be funto learn, that the students needed the opportunity to practice the skills with me, and that

students needed opportunities for practice with their classroom teacher. The practice in their

classroom would help the students appreciate the value of the skills they were learning, as

they became more competent and capable readers.

Participants

The students in the fifth hour ninth-grade English class were the participants in this study.

There were 16 students in the class. Eleven of the students were boys and five of the

students were girls. The students ranged in age from 14 to 16 years old at the time the studybegan. The intervention took place in the second semester of their ninth-grade year, which

was half way through the grade level. These students were the target group that received the

phonics intervention because of the lower grades earned by the class members as compared

to the other three ninth-grade English classes taught by the same first year teacher.

Data collection and findings

The Slosson Oral Reading Test (SORT) was the assessment tool used to monitor progressand identify areas of need. The SORT is a norm-referenced test that results in a Reading

Grade Level score. Test results correlate highly to reading comprehension test results. It is

a word-calling test with graded word lists. The greater the number of words the student

can read fluently, the higher the Reading Grade Level score. The test determines each

students Reading Grade Level. The Reading Grade Level is stated in years and months.For example, 5.2 Reading Grade Level means the second month of the fifth grade. The test

has a reliability coefficient of .99 (test-retest interval of one week) therefore the SORT can

be used at frequent intervals. The SORT was used to determine baseline data on each

student so that we could later test to determine growth. An analysis of the words missedon the SORT revealed diagnostic information which was used to determine instructional

7/30/2019 35163383

5/12

Educational Action Research 549

A miscue analysis resulted in the following findings: when reading words from the

word list most students did not know how to sound these endings /ance/, /ine/, /ion/, /ous/,/ious/, /que/, /ence/, /ment/. Students did not know when the c and g were sounded either hard

or soft. Data showed us that students did not know the sounds associated with vowel combi-

nations (vowel diphthongs and diagraphs) /ai/, /ay/, /au/, /aw/, /augh/, /ei/, /eigh/, /ey/, /eu/,

/ew/, /eau/, /ea/, /ie/, /y/, /oo/, /oe/, /oi/, /oy/, /ou/, /ow/, /ough/, /ui/, /ue/. They did not know the

sounds consonant teams made. The assessments also showed that students did not knowhow to break down a larger word into syllables or how to sound the vowel in a syllable

based on the type of syllable. Additionally, when taking the SORT, it was evident that

students did not practice many basic reading skills. Most students did not track to the end of

the word before determining a word. They saw the beginning letter and guessed at any wordthat might start with the initial letter. Students did not know to look for known words within

a larger word or to look for a base word. The diagnostic information gained from the SORT

confirmed that students had little knowledge about what to do when they came to an unknown

word.

In addition to the SORT, a reading attitude interview was given to the students. The one-on-one interview included the following questions: Do you usually read the class assign-

ments? Do you think you are a good reader? Do you like reading? When is the last time you

read a book for pleasure? What is your favorite book and why did you choose it?

The interview questions were summarized and revealed some interesting informationabout their reading habits. Most students were not reading their assignments. The students

did not consider themselves to be good readers, did not like to read, and were not reading

on their own for pleasure. When asked about their favorite book and why they chose it, most

students identified their favorite book was one read aloud to them by a sixth-, seventh- or

eight-grade teacher. They commented that they liked the teachers oral interpretation of the

different characters and use of voice to emphasize actions taking place in the book. InAmerican schools in first grade through eighth grade a popular practice is a daily teacher

Read Aloud time of about 10 to 20 minutes. The book read aloud by the teacher during this

Read Aloud time was the one most students mentioned as their favorite book.With information about their interests from the interview questions and the analysis of

their areas of need from the SORT we thought about the following questions. What was the

best teaching plan going to be to address their deficits? How would the instructional plan be

implemented? What was a reasonable improvement goal?

Action plan

As the intervention plan evolved I worked closely with the classroom teacher. We determined

that phonics lessons would be done in the classroom three times per week during the first15 minutes of the class period. We planned on the intervention lasting seven weeks. Teaching

small increments and giving students time between sessions to integrate the information and

to practice in class with the teacher was our intent. The content taught would relate directly

to the assessment data analyzed on the SORT. At the end of the seven weeks, we would again

test the students. Our goal was a gain of half a grade level on the reading assessment.That would mean that each student would read correctly and fluently 10 additional words

on the SORT.

On the first day of the phonics intervention I went into the classroom and explained what

we were going to do and why we were doing it. I shared with students what the testingresults revealed, and that they were going to learn some strategies to help them be successful

7/30/2019 35163383

6/12

550 K. Edwards

the project when the intervention was finished to determine if they thought it was an effec-

tive process that would benefit others.Each student was given an individual notebook with all the supplies needed for activities

during the project. The notebook was referred to it as their Tool Kit or Tip Kit. This kit

included a three-ringed notebook, paper, dividers, pencil case, pencil, pen, highlighter, file

card, and post-it notes. The students were told that they would practice the things learned in

the mini-class with their regular teacher. The most important thing we wanted these studentsto know was that we were going to be reviewing many things about reading that they had

heard before, but based on the testing many of them did not remember how or when to use

that knowledge. If the mini-lesson information was new information or clarified something

for them they should grab the new information or the tip and add it to their knowledgeof reading. I shared that we knew from their testing that they were smart people and just had

some phonics pieces that they needed to add to their conscious level so they could purposely

use that information to improve their reading fluency. If they were reading the words

correctly and fluently, it would improve their comprehension level. This improved ability

would make reading in their English class and their other classes easier.After the stage was set for the use of the Tool Kit or Tip Kit, students designed a

nametag using the large file card in their Tool Kit. They were asked to print their name on

the card and to draw a picture of their favorite book, a favorite place to read, and a tip

about reading that they would share with the class. As students introduced themselves tome, we determined how many syllables were in their name and how to decide how many

syllables were in any word. The tip was that a syllable is a group of letters with at least

one vowel. We reviewed the vowel names with a chant to make it fun. I shared the tip that

the easiest and quickest way to determine the number of syllables in a word they were

saying, was to touch their chin with their fingertips and count the movements as they

pronounced the word. Each movement was a syllable. The syllable that dropped the mostwas the accented syllable (another tip). After the introductions, I gave the students a fun

and easy pretest. We started the intervention sessions in a motivating way and imbedded

some phonics information in the initial activity. It was a positive beginning that continuedthroughout the seven weeks.

The mini-lessons continued to review the basic components of a systematic phonics

program. Each new component was embedded in activities so students were using and prac-

ticing the information in an enjoyable way. With the practice provided during the lessons

students quickly acquired the new skills. Some of the first things we reviewed were howmany letters were in the alphabet. Most of the students had never thought about the number

of letters in the alphabet. Once they knew there were 26 letters, they could always retrievethat information. They were surprised to know that there were 44 sounds. Knowing there

were 44 sounds helped them understand that in order to read, they had to know what lettercombinations made those 44 sounds. Students practiced the alphabet sounds and the combi-

nations. They moved on to the vowels and reviewed all the sounds they make. Students

practiced the sounds of all the vowels and vowel combinations. The use of charts and chants

avoided boredom. To move this knowledge to texts students searched for words in their

books that were examples of the vowel combinations and decoded the words. They learnedhow to break down or divide a large word into syllables and then how to sound the vowel

within the syllables. This skill gave students a powerful tool. Instead of being stuck on a big

word that they had no idea how to say, they now had a strategy to break down the word into

smaller parts. Another strategy we focused on was tracking through the entire word, break-ing the word into syllables, and thinking about what word would make sense in the sentence

7/30/2019 35163383

7/12

Educational Action Research 551

Moving the learning from isolated skills to real text was important for students so they could

practice the skills during the act of reading. Using real text to practice decoding large wordswas helpful. Teams of students tried to stump each other by finding words that were diffi-

cult. Eventually students began reading pieces of text. First the students would practice

reading the text by themselves, then with a partner, and then volunteers would read out loud.

They loved being successful and showing others in the class how well they read. Another

motivating strategy was to have students work with a partner to practice reading a selection.One student would read while a second student would use a stop watch to time how long it

took to read a chosen paragraph. Each reading took less time and was read with greater

fluency. As students became more skilled they began reading short plays and each person

practiced their part and then the play was shared with the class. By the end of the seven-week intervention students were using their new knowledge and confidence in the act of

reading real text.

ResultsThe SORT was the instrument used for each of the three assessments: one as a baseline

measure, the second after the seven-week intervention was completed, and the third was one

year after the completion of the initial intervention. The SORT has 200 words on the assess-

ment. The students Raw Score was used to establish their Reading Grade Level. The RawScore was the number of words the student reads fluently and correctly. Dividing the Raw

Score in half established the students Reading Grade Level. For example, if the Raw Score

was 184, half of that number would be 92. The Reading Grade Level would be 9.2 or the

second month of ninth grade. A student with a score of 200 would have a perfect test and

would score a 10.0 Reading Grade Level or tenth grade. Being on grade level at the time of

the original testing would have been 9.5. Students #5, #12, and #14 had scores that wereclosest to grade level.

Our initial goal was an improvement of half a year and that goal was met and exceeded.

Students had increased an average of 1.1 grade level in seven weeks. Individually the great-est increase was three grade levels. This was very rewarding data. The classroom teacher

shared that he had learned many phonics tips and students were using the tips during

class.

I met individually with each student to share both their initial score and their new score

as evidence of their hard work and learning. I asked them if they felt better about their read-ing abilities. They all reported that they thought the Tool Kit and phonics tips were helpful.

For our third data point we tested students again at the one-year anniversary of the initialintervention. They were now in their second semester of their tenth-grade year. What we

saw was that improvement continued.Again, I met with each student individually to share the testing results. Each was delighted

with their results. Students self-reported they liked reading better and they had been doing

some reading for pleasure. They also indicated they felt more confident and felt they had

the skills to break down an unknown word into its parts so that they could then combine

context clues in the text to determine the unknown word. Usually, if the unknown word wasin their speaking vocabulary, they were able to determine the word. This added to their

comprehension and they were feeling very confident about their reading ability. See Table 1.

Table 1 summarizes the results of the data. It includes the baseline test scores, the scores

after seven weeks of phonics intervention, and the scores one year later.The data showed that student scores did not regress, and all student scores continued to

7/30/2019 35163383

8/12

552 K. Edwards

ble1.

Testingdatagrowthatthreedatapo

ints.

hgrade

nglish

ass

DataCollectionI(priorto

implementationofphonics

intervention)

DataCollectionII(after

sevenweekinterventionwas

completed)

G

rowthafterseven-weeks

ofphonicsintervention

DataC

ollectionIII(oneyear

after

completionofinitial

intervention)

Growth

oneyearafter

completionofintervention

ame

BaselineRaw

Score

Baseline

GradeLevel

TwoMonth

RawScore

TwoMonth

GradeLevel

T

woMonth

RawScore

Gain

Two

Month

Grade

LevelGain

OneYear

RawScore

OneYear

GradeLevel

TotalRaw

ScoreGain

Total

Grade

LevelGain

91

4.5

113

5.6

22

1.1

151

7.5

60

3.0

118

5.9

128

6.4

10

0.5

162

8.1

44

2.2

114

5.7

174

8.7

60

3.0

186

9.3

72

3.6

155

7.7

174

8.7

19

1.0

184

9.2

29

1.5

192

9.6

197

9.8

5

0.2

200

10.0

8

0.4

132

6.6

157

7.8

25

1.2

169

8.4

37

1.8

173

8.6

195

9.7

22

1.1

200

10.0

27

1.4

173

8.6

183

9.1

10

0.5

190

9.5

17

0.9

107

5.3

153

7.6

46

2.3

161

8.0

54

2.7

0

175

8.7

191

9.5

16

0.8

191

9.5

16

0.8

1

153

7.6

177

8.8

24

1.2

187

9.3

34

1.7

2

189

9.4

191

9.5

2

0.1

197

9.8

8

0.4

3

164

8.2

188

9.4

24

1.2

195

9.7

31

1.5

4

187

9.3

196

9.8

9

0.5

200

10.0

13

0.7

5

153

7.6

176

8.8

23

1.2

196

9.8

43

2.2

6

157

7.8

185

9.2

28

1.4

190

9.5

33

1.7

VERAG

E

2433/16=152.1

121.1/16=7.6

2778/16=173.6

138.4/16=8.73

45/16=21.6

17.3/16=1.1

2959/16

=184.9

147.6/16=9.2

526/16=32

.9

26.5/16=1.6

7/30/2019 35163383

9/12

Educational Action Research 553

and the reading scores reflected the continued use of their new knowledge. The students

with the lowest scores of 4.5, 5.3, 5.7, and 5.9 were also the students with the most growth3.0, 2.7, 3.6, and 2.2. Although other learning events happened to these students during the

year and may have had an impact on their success on this test, we are proposing that the

seven-week phonics intervention made the difference.

Statistical significance

In this study we were trying to test the effect of the implementation of phonics intervention

on students that had reading difficulty. Students were tested three times over time: one as a

baseline measure, the second after seven weeks of intervention was completed, and the last

one was one year after completion of initial intervention. Data contain 16 students, fivefemale and 11 males. Two measures were recorded for each of the three time spots: the first

was Raw Score; the second was the Reading Grade Level. The Raw Score variable is a

linear function of the Reading Grade Level variable.

A general linear model was conducted twice using repeated measures analysis in SPSS(Statistical Package for Social Sciences). Results showed that there was a significant changeover time in the three measures for both the Raw Score and the Reading Grade Level and

that reading growth was significant. Results showed that gender was not significant

between subjects variables in both Raw Score and the Grade Level.

Reflection

The data were powerful indicators that the phonics intervention was effective. The contin-

ued growth seen at the one-year anniversary showed that students continued to show

improvement even after the intervention was completed and no additional phonics instruc-tion took place. I attribute the continued growth to the possibility that the more students

used the new phonics tips, the easier it was to read. The easier it was for students to read,

the more they read because they were having success. The more they felt success, the morethey read, and the better they became at reading. The one-year data indicated that the

students had the reading skills needed to read materials written at their grade level. The

phonics intervention made a significant difference in their reading fluency.

Upon conclusion of this project and in thinking about future projects, if this action

research were to be repeated, I would collect data on student grades in their English classand their other academic classes. I would want to see if their grades improved. If their

grades had improved would that indicate that the students improved reading ability affectedtheir classroom performance?

Discussion and conclusion

The results of this study indicate that high school students can benefit from a short intensive

phonics intervention. The most significant finding was that allstudents benefited from the

intervention and the improvement continued over time. The improvements were significantforallstudents in the study. If educators know that an intervention can benefit struggling

high school age readers, then it is our responsibility to give these students the tools they

need for success. The high school years are the last time students have the opportunity to be

given the tools to improve their reading through the formal educational process. It wouldbe prudent to identify those students who would benefit from a phonics review and to give

7/30/2019 35163383

10/12

554 K. Edwards

identified and supported, could their potential for success be affected? There is no single

magic intervention program that would fix all students, but if there is not the effort toassist students reading skills while in school, students will probably never get the help

needed to improve their ability to read fluently. Once the student can read the words, the

classroom teacher has the opportunity to focus on comprehension strategies.

Upon seeing the improved scores and the improved class participation after the seven-

week intervention, the teacher and I were anxious to share the results of this project with theprincipal and the rest of the buildings teachers. At a staff meeting in May of the interven-

tion year, the classroom teacher and I presented an overview of the seven-week project

along with the pre-testing and post-testing data. The teacher shared that students were more

engaged in the lessons which resulted in better grades. He stated that he had learned manynew skills during the mini-lessons and that he was able to use these skills with students to

assist them as they became more skilled readers. He shared that as a teacher he was an excel-

lent reader and had not thought about what specific skills students needed to know to help

them decode words. Learning the skills with the students helped him see how the skills

helped the students to be better readers. He felt the learning skills with the students gavehim knowledge of their usefulness as he saw how the learning impacted their reading

ability. He also practiced the new skills with his students during regular class time. He felt

that the students knew he was learning with them and then practicing the new skills with

them. The students knew he wanted them to be successful and these skills were some of thetools to help with that success. He shared that not only was he using the skills with his

current students, but that they would be skills that he would share with future students. The

staff saw his joy that he was now able to focus on comprehension and other content area

objectives with his students. The students were reading assignments and engaging produc-

tively in the class discussions.

The staff was impressed with the findings from this project. When names of the studentsin this class were shared with the staff, comments from teachers included observations that

they had seen a difference in some of the students work, and they had seen improved

behavior of some of these students in their classrooms. Teachers wondered if the phonicsintervention would continue. If it were to continue, what students would benefit the most

from this support? How would the students be identified? What format could be used to

teach the components? The teachers wondered if students who were struggling in reading

should be identified and then grouped for a phonics intervention class. In other words, this

project could be something done with all struggling ninth graders as they began their highschool experience. These were all good thoughts that we were glad to hear mentioned.

Because several teachers were interested in learning some of the most useful phonics skillsthat would help students we did do a phonics workshop with high school teachers at the

beginning of the next school year. The teachers were receptive and reported that they putsome of this knowledge to use with their students. No specific phonics intervention

program was implemented for identified struggling students. Although no program was

implemented, I did feel that the workshop was useful and that teachers learned some of the

phonics skills that could benefit students when they came to an unknown word. I also felt

that when all teachers were willing to learn and implement some of the phonics skills, thatthey were not leaving the job to some special program that was there to fix the struggling

readers, but were willing to be a part of the solution to help students.

In an effort to additionally share the information with other teachers, the following

spring the action research project and results were shared at a statewide reading conference.At that time all three data points were available and these data added strength to the project

7/30/2019 35163383

11/12

Educational Action Research 555

conference were interested in this type of project and hopefully have implemented some

type of support program in their buildings. In many districts throughout the US strugglingreaders in grades 1 through 8 are identified and given additional support including phonics,

but few high schools have determined this need or implemented any such support program.

This is disappointing given the research support for such a program that can make a differ-

ence for struggling students.

This action research project was an example that had positive effects on student readinglevels. A phonics intervention should be considered when secondary age students are read-

ing below grade level. It is especially effective for the lowest performing students as they

had the greatest grade level growth. With improved skills students have the opportunities

afforded the more successful readers in our schools. A phonics intervention may not be thetotal answer to student reading problems, but it will give students additional skills and tools

to use. Our job as teachers is to help students. We are remiss if we ignore this way of

redressing inequality of achievement. Some may argue that just because students can read

the words, does not mean they comprehend the text. I agree, however, if students cannot

read the words, they definitely cannot comprehend the meaning of a passage. It is theresponsibility of the educational community to give students the tools they need to be

successful. This research suggests that older students who are not reading fluently would

benefit from an intensive phonics intervention.

References

Adams, M.J. 1990. Beginning to read: Thinking and learning about print. Cambridge: MIT Press.Anderson, R.E. 1985. Becoming a nation of readers: The report of the commission on reading.

Washington, DC: National Institute of Education, US Department of Education.Chall, J.S. 1996. Learning to read: The great debate. 3rd ed. San Diego: Harcourt Brace.

Chall, J.S. 1967, 1983. Learning to read: The great debate. New York: McGraw-Hill.International Reading Association. 1997. The role of phonics in reading instruction: A position

statement. Newark, Delaware: IRI.

7/30/2019 35163383

12/12