qwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqw ertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwert ... fileKaren Buermann, Cassy Lahr, Heidi Kuechle, Sharon Borgert, Susan Knutson and Heather Nathan Elementary Principal:

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 [email protected] (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]


Second Grade FAST Assessments




CBM Reading [58] (Oral Reading Fluency)




Third Grad FAST Assessments








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.

11

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


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


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


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


16

andclinic,34(5),271-277.

PhonemeBlending

K&1 PhonemicAwareness Toincreaseskillinphoneme

blendingforstudentswhohavenot

yetmasteredtheskillofblending

soundstomakewords

Individual 15min Patty,Paras •Adams,M.J.(1990..Beginning



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


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



MITPress.

•Blachman,B.A.(1991..Early

interventionforchildren’s

readingproblems:Clinical

applicationsoftheresearchon

phonologicalawareness.Topics

inLanguageDisorders,12,51–

65.

•Bos,C.D.,&Vaughn,S.(2002..


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


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’


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.


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


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.,&


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


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

Documents

qwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqw ertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwert ... fileKaren Buermann, Cassy Lahr, Heidi Kuechle, Sharon Borgert, Susan Knutson and Heather Nathan Elementary Principal: