edilla.weebly.comedilla.weebly.com/uploads/4/5/2/4/45240087/action_rese… · Web viewStudents who struggle with reading often read one word at a time. The use of repeated readings

Running head: REPEATED READINGS OF POETRY TO IMPROVE FLUENCY 1

Repeated Readings of Poetry to Improve Fluency in

Second Grade English Language Learners

Erin K. Dilla

University of New England

December 17, 2014

REPEATED READINGS OF POETRY TO IMPROVE FLUENCY 2

Repeated Reading of Poetry to Increase Fluency in English Language Learners

Fluency is the ability to read words with automaticity. Reading fluency is used as one

indicator of student reading achievement. Fluent readers read with expression and proper

phrasing (Hicks, 2010). Reading fluency is often an area of difficulty for English Language

Learners. Increasing reading fluency can positively impact reading achievement for students.

Reading poetry has been shown to improve fluency and provides opportunity for students

to read with expression and proper phrasing. Students who struggle with reading often read one

word at a time. The use of repeated readings of text is a strategy that is used to promote fluency

(Gorsuch & Taguchi, 2010; Thomas & Healy, 2012). Choral reading and repeated reading can

help students to be more confident oral readers and to become more fluent readers (Poore &

Ferguson, 2008).

The setting for the research is in a rural, private elementary school with one class of each

grade, Pre-K3- 5th. The school primarily serves the children of immigrants. The school

population, 140 students, is approximately 95% English Language Learners, who receive free or

reduced lunch. This school has 8 classroom teachers, 3 aides (Pre-K3-K), and part-time related

arts teachers. There is a Title I program that offers services to 6 students from each grade, grades

K-5, four days a week. This program provides a part-time Title I teacher and aide, who

specifically work on reading remediation. The school does not have additional support staff to

assist teachers and work on remediation.

Because of the correlation of fluency and reading achievement, the researcher will

implement a strategy shown to improve fluency. The researcher, an administrator at the school,

will work with a group of 2nd grade students in the afterschool program. This program is offered

3 days a week to assist students with homework and provide remediation, as needed. Regular


classroom teachers are also the afterschool program teachers, and they provide assistance and

remediation to the students in their own classrooms. For this study, the researcher will work with

the small group in a separate classroom during this afterschool program.

The researcher will work with the 6 students identified for Title I services from the 2nd

grade. Data will be used from the STAR reading assessments. Also, fluency tests will be

administered by the researcher to be used for data to serve as a baseline and to show results at the

end of the strategy implementation.

Problem Statement

Reading achievement is an area for improvement at this school. Many English Languages

Learners struggle with oral reading fluency, which has an effect on overall reading achievement.

In general, the students have lower scores for reading on STAR reading assessments, including

the scores for estimated ORF (Oral Reading Fluency). The reading scores on the standardized

tests (IOWA Test) each year are traditionally below average school wide. An additional area of

concern is that most students are unable to receive any reading assistance at home, so effective

instructional and reading practice at school is imperative.

The students that will participate in this research study have been identified, through the

screening process used for Title I service, to be in need of remediation in reading. The screening

process included reading and language assessments, a teacher checklist, and teacher

recommendations.

Research Questions

Two strategies that are used to improve students’ oral reading fluency are repeated

readings of the same text and reading poetry aloud, both chorally and independently. This study

will examine the implementation of repeated and choral readings of poetry to help improve


reading fluency with English Language Learners (ELLs). In addition, the researcher wonders if

reading comprehension scores will improve in conjunction with improved oral reading fluency

for the ELLs.

Hypothesis

By participating in repeated readings of poetry, the students will improve their fluency

scores on the individual fluency tests and the Estimated Oral Reading Fluency (ORF) score on

the STAR reading assessments. Because of the impact of fluency on comprehension, the students

will also show improvement in the area of comprehension on the STAR reading assessments.

Literature ReviewReading is a complex process and an area of difficulty for a great number of students.

Nearly one third of fourth graders in the United States have not mastered basic skill levels in

reading, and reading is the most addressed area for at-risk student within the Response to

Intervention frameworks (Therrien, Kirk & Woods-Groves, 2012). Because of inconsistency in

nationwide data, accurate numbers of English Language Learners (ELLs) with reading

difficulties may underestimated, but statistics show that more than 50% score below grade level

in reading (Bowman-Perrott, Herrerra & Murry, 2010, p.93). The researcher looked for studies,

recent and peer-reviewed, that specifically looked at fluency as one of the main components of

effective reading instruction. The other focus was the ELL population and the challenges they

face in reading, and what research has been done in the area of ELLs and fluency.

Reading FluencyIn recent years, the topic of reading fluency has been an area of interest and research. The

National Reading Panel Report includes fluency as one of the five components of effective

reading instruction, in addition to phonemic awareness, alphabetic principle, vocabulary, and

comprehension (Musti- Rao, Hawkins & Barkley, 2009; Schrauben, 2010). Studies have shown a


strong correlation between reading fluency rates and overall reading achievement, and

researchers and educators count fluency as one of the main components of reading instruction

(Musti-Rao et al., 2009). Reading fluency is defined as reading with speed, accuracy, and good

expression (Ross & Begeny, 2011). Fluency is the ability to read with automaticity, which is to

be able to read effortlessly and quickly. In fluency research, much of the focus is on reading rate.

Automaticity theorist state that when a student reads with automaticity, the brain does not need

to struggle with decoding each word but instead is able to focus on comprehending text (Musti-

Rao et al., 2009). Fluency has an impact on comprehension. When working memory is free from

simply decoding text, readers will have memory left for understanding what they are reading

(Schrauben, 2010). Faver (2008) tells us that “A non-fluent reader reads slowly, paying the most

attention to the decoding of words and therefore his or her fluency, and comprehension is

affected” (p.350).

Although the focus of fluency is often reading rate, accuracy and prosody are two other

important components to consider in the area of reading fluency. Accuracy refers to the student’s

ability to correctly read words by sight or with decoding strategies (Hicks, 2009). Murray,

Munger and Clonan (2012) warn that a common flaw of fluency interventions and assessments is

a focus specifically on reading rate, often overlooking accuracy.

Prosody is to read with proper expression and phrasing, and the ability to group words

into meaningful phrases is important for comprehension (Hicks, 2009). Rasinski, Rikli, and

Johnston (2009) tell us that prosody is sometimes called the melodic element of fluency. Prosody

can be an indicator of students’ understanding. Without understanding of text, students are not

able to apply the elements of prosodic reading, which include pitch, stress, and phrasing

(Rasinski et al., 2009).


Although researchers agree that prosodic skills impact reading achievement, these skills

are complex and may be more difficult to teach and assess (Schrauben, 2010). Schrauben (2010)

states, “The debate continues because prosodic skills provide seemingly invisible clues that

historically have been technically difficult to measure” (p. 86).

Assessments for fluency. Murray et al.(2012) share that the most popular assessment for

fluency is the use of timed, short passages but caution that these assessments focus on reading

speed more than accuracy and prosody. Murray et al.(2012) tell us that these types of timed

assessments do not provide any information on reasons for slow reading rate.

Another assessment used to measure fluency is the Test of Word Reading Efficiency or

TOWRE. The TOWRE measures reading fluency using two subtests, which test sight word

knowledge and decoding skills (Ross and Begeny, 2011).

DIBELS, the Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills, is a commonly-used test

for oral reading. DIBELS is not designed to measure overall reading ability, but instead it

measures the skills needed for reading comprehension, including ORF- Oral Reading Fluency

(Salvador, Schoenberger, Tingle, & Algoznne, 2012). The ORF section gives a correct number

of words per minute, using a standardized set of passages, which is converted to a “level of risk”

for each student (Salvador et al., 2012).

Many schools are turning to technology-based reading assessments, and some of these

will give an estimated fluency level. The STAR is a norm-referenced reading test with

established reliability and validity, and this test gives an estimated Oral Reading Fluency level

and an instructional level for each student (Frye & Gosky, 2012). Some teachers use a computer-

based word recognition test for fluency. Using the computer to “flash” the words to the students


adds to the validity of this assessment, over manually administering this test (Frye & Gosky,

2012).

Strategies for increasing fluency. Fluency can be modeled for students through read-

alouds, shared reading, think-alouds, and choral readings (Hicks, 2009). Choral reading is a tool

for modeling and practicing prosody (Poore & Ferguson, 2008). Readers gain understanding by

how words are expressed (Hicks, 2009). Fluency interventions can also include paired reading

and Readers Theater (Murray et al., 2012).

Because of the emphasis of many on the reading rate aspect of fluency, many of the

strategies focus on improving reading speed (Murray et al., 2012). One popular strategy for

improving fluency is repeated readings of text. Repeated reading is a process of reading the same

text several times. Thomas and Healy (2012) tell us that reading time decreases when rereading a

text, because the reader transfers memory of the first reading to later readings allowing for a

faster reading rate. The evidence of many studies shows repeated reading to be an effective

strategy, especially when used consistently and for an extended period of time (Gorsuch &

Taguchi, 2010). Faver (2008) tells us that several studies have shown repeated readings to be a

beneficial strategy for improving reading fluency. There is some discussion on how to implement

the repeated reading strategy. Tam, Heward, and Heng (2006) tell us that research has shown that

seven readings improve fluency more than three readings, but the difference was specifically in

fluency and not in retelling and comprehension measures. Tam et al. (2006) suggest that more

research is needed to determine the most effective number for rereading interventions.

Not all studies have shown the benefits of repeated readings over other fluency strategies.

Ari (2011) found that implementing strategies of repeated reading and wide reading, spending

time reading a wider amount one time, had very similar results. Critics of the repeated reading


strategy argue that it may be the extra time spent reading and receiving feedback and not the

“rereading” itself that is beneficial to students (Therrien et al., 2012). Therrien et al. (2012)

found in their research that it was the reading with feedback and not just repeated reading that

was most beneficial.

Another strategy is the use of poetry to increase fluency. Faver (2008) tells us, “Poetry is

a good choice for fluency practice because of its rich and playful language” (p. 351). Because of

the length of many poems, poetry is also suitable for repeated readings. Students may also be

motivated by the humor and rhyme of some poetry. Hicks (2009) suggests choosing text that

have repetitive phrases and are slightly below the instructional level of the students. This will

allow the students the opportunity to practice rereading without getting frustrated.

A fluency strategy that is popular in many classrooms is Readers Theater. Hicks (2009)

tells us that Readers Theater offers authentic practice for rehearsing and rereading, and this

technique can encourage students’ motivation for reading.

English Language Learners

Calderon, Slavin, and Sanchez (2011) tell us that the fastest growing group of students in

our schools today is the children of immigrants, and over half of those students do not speak

English fluently. With these rapidly increasing numbers coming into classrooms, teachers need

professional development to know how to help ELLs close achievement gaps (Calderon et al.,

2011). Bowman-Perrott et al. (2010) tell us that ELLs have the difficulty of learning a new

language at the same time of learning grade-level expectations, and many will only receive

language support through third grade though challenges remain for years.

Students who are linguistically diverse and face the challenges of poverty are more at risk

for learning difficulties in reading, and these students are disproportionately being served in


special education programs (Tam, Heward, & Heng, 2006). Students who live in poverty often

have lower verbal abilities. Calderon et al. (2011) report, “Young children in poverty hear an

average of 615 words an hour; middle-class about 1,251; and children of professionals, about

2,153.” A child’s vocabulary in kindergarten and first grade is an important predictor of later

reading achievement (Calderon et al., 2011). The numbers of ELLs, particularly the Hispanic

population, who struggle with reading, are higher than the national averages (Ross & Begeny,

2011). In 2007, 50% of Latino students in the fourth grade were reading below average, and

growing numbers of ELLs are in classrooms today (Ross & Begeny, 2011). Because of these

many school challenges, ELLs have the highest rate of dropping out of school (Bowman-Perrott

et al., 2010). Because small gaps at the elementary level become bigger gaps in secondary

school, early interventions for ELLs are crucial (Bowman-Perrott et al., 2010).

Reading fluency is an area of difficulty for many ELLs. Quirk and Beem (2012) state that

many ELLs are word callers, who may sound fluent and be able to decode well but have limited

comprehension skills.

Although there is research showing the value of fluency interventions for native English

speakers, there has been little research focused on fluency interventions for ELLs (Quirk and

Beem, 2012). With growing number of ELLs and the disproportionate number identified as

struggling readers, a greater focus should be on interventions for improved reading achievement.

A commonly used strategy used for ELLs is choral reading. Choral reading is when two

or more speakers try to read in unison. Choral reading is used to model for ELLs and allows

students to practice without the anxiety of reading independently (Poore and Ferguson, 2008).


Summary

The literature reviewed emphasized the importance of fluency as one of the main

components of effective reading instruction, and also the difficulties that ELLs face with reading

achievement. Fluency is measured in several ways, but one of the most common is having the

students read brief, timed passages. Many educators are also turning to technology-based reading

assessments. Strategies include opportunities for fluent reading to be modeled for students,

practicing with partner reading, and choral reading. One of the most researched strategies for

improvement in fluency is the use of repeated reading of text.

The planned strategy for implementation is to use repeated, choral readings of poetry to

improve fluency. According to the literature reviewed, this plan will put into use the effective

strategy of repeated reading with choral reading. Choral reading offers modeling for students,

along with time for practice that is non-threatening, especially for ELLs.

Methodology

The purpose of this action research is to implement a strategy to improve fluency. The

targeted population is a small group of 6 second graders. The school, where these students

attend, serves immigrant children in a rural location. The school’s population is almost entirely

ELLs, who receive free or reduced lunch. At this school, reading achievement is lower than

average, as evidenced from yearly standardized testing and on-going STAR reading testing.

Research shows the correlation between fluency and reading achievement. The students

identified for this action research receive Title I services for reading remediation. All students in

the school in grades K-5 were screened in the beginning of the school year, and the 6 with the

lowest reading and language scores from each class are selected for the Title I services. For this


study, the researcher will implement the strategy with the 6 students in the afterschool program.

The afterschool program is offered 3 days a week for 2 hours a day and is used for homework

assistance and remediation.

Repeated readings of text is one of the most popular and researched strategies used to

improve fluency. Another strategy is to use poetry to improve fluency. Choral reading, reading in

unison, is an effective way for ELLs to practice reading. This approach can be less intimidating

for ELLs, who may be uncomfortable reading out loud independently. The researcher plans to

implement the strategy of putting these researched practices together. The strategy will be for the

students to participate in repeated readings of poetry, using the choral reading approach. This

study will examine if this strategy will improve reading fluency for the second grade ELLs. The

researcher will also look for improved reading comprehension with improved reading fluency,

because of the correlation between fluency and comprehension.

The researcher believes that the students will improve their reading fluency by

participating in repeated readings of poetry. The students will be assessed using the STAR

reading test, which will show both fluency and comprehension scores. Because of this

correlation of fluency and comprehension, the researcher believes these fluency strategies will

have a positive impact on reading comprehension as well. Timed fluency passages that provide a

fluency rate and student self-evaluations for fluency (Appendix A) will also be used.

This study will be a mixed methods approach. The quantitative part of the research will

look at the timed fluency assessment to look at fluency rates. The STAR testing will show a

fluency score and a comprehension grade level. Data used for quantitative measurements will

show pre and post fluency levels. This will allow the researcher to look for changes at the end of


the study. The qualitative data will be the student self-assessments for fluency. Self-evaluations

will also be given at the beginning and end of the study.

In earlier planning stages, the researcher considered only using quantitative data but

wanted to include an opportunity for the students to be part of assessing their fluency. The

researcher believes that using both quantitative and qualitative will provide a more

comprehensive look at the effectiveness of the fluency strategy.

Research Design

Using the researched strategies of repeated readings of text and choral reading to improve

fluency is the plan for this research. The text used for the repeated readings will be poetry. The 6

students will meet with the researcher 3 days a week in the afterschool program for 30 minutes

each day. The researcher and students will work in a separate classroom from the rest of the

afterschool group.

At the beginning of the study, the researcher will evaluate each student. The students

will take the computerized STAR reading assessment. This test is an adaptive diagnostic test, and

students take it independently. The researcher will also administer individual timed reading

fluency tests. In addition, students will also be asked to complete a fluency self-evaluation.

These measurements will serve as a baseline for the stud y and will all be completed before

implementing the strategy.

To begin the implementation of the strategy, each student will have a poetry folder with

poems that are grade-level appropriate. Each session will begin with the researcher and students

choral reading poems three times each. This group activity will last for the first 15 minutes of

each session. The remaining 15 minutes will be spent with students practicing choral and

repeated readings of the poems with a partner.


Data Collection Plan

Overall reading achievement has been traditionally lower with the population of this

school. Standardized testing, ITBS, show reading scores that are below the average of the other

Diocesan Schools and also lower than the national average. Reading fluency is an area for

school-wide improvement and specifically an area of difficulty for ELLs. The need for

improvement for this specific group has been shown in the screening process for Title I services

and the beginning of the year STAR tests.

The targeted population of second graders has been shown to have lower reading ability.

Beginning of the school year screening showed results that were lower in language and reading

and the need for this intervention. These students area all receiving Title I services for reading.

For this study, the researcher will use three measurements for baseline data. The STAR

testing, the timed fluency passages, and the student self-evaluation will all be administered at the

start of this study. The STAR tests will be independently administered on the computer. The

results from the STAR test offer a great deal of data, and the researcher will look specifically at

reading grade level and estimated fluency rates. The timed fluency passages will be administered

one-on-one by the researcher. Each student will be tested at the beginning of the study. The

students will also complete the fluency self-evaluation before beginning the intervention.

The fluency self-evaluations will be simple and age appropriate. The researcher believes

that the numerical ratings would be difficult for this group of students. Instead the evaluations

will have a choice of three colors: green, yellow, or red for the students to color in for their

response of the form.

The researcher believes that the measurements used will meet the requirements for

validity and reliability. The STAR test is a standardized test and the timed passages are a


commonly-used fluency test that offers grade-level passages. Because these same tests will

provide quantitative data at the beginning and end of the study, the researcher believes that these

tests are appropriate to show differences in fluency and comprehension. The student evaluations

have been created with age-appropriate language and will be explained to the students. These

will also be used at the beginning and the end to show differences.

Data Analysis

Two of the measurements used for this study will provide quantitative data. The STAR

testing provides a lot of information. The researcher will use the GE, grade level equivalency for

reading and the ORF, oral reading fluency rate. The timed passages will also provide numerical

data, and the test will give a WCPM, words correct per minute fluency rate. Both of these tests

will provide a pre and post number, and the researcher plans to organize and display these results

in tables and bar graphs, showing the pre and post numbers for each student on both assessments.

The students’ self-evaluation will be used as this study’s qualitative data. The students will

assess their fluency skills at the beginning of the study and again at the end. Because this is early

in second grade, the self-evaluation fluency form needs to be very simple.

Triangulation Matrix

Data Source

Research Question 1 2 3

1. Will Fluency STAR Timed Passages Self-Improve? Evaluations

2. Will Comprehension STAR Improve?


Sample Selection

The participants of this study will be 6 students from the 2nd grade of a small, rural school

in Indiantown, Fl. The population of this school is almost entirely ELLs and receives free or

reduced lunch. Fluency is an area of difficulty for many ELLs and would be considered an area

of improvement for many students at this school. The 6 students who will be in the study were

identified for lower reading achievement and are receiving Title I services. The students in the

study attend an afterschool program to receive assistance with homework and remediation. The

researcher is currently an administrator at the school and will be able to work with students in the

afterschool program. Because remediation and reading are two focuses for the afterschool

program, this study would be appropriate and keeping with the goals of the program.

Results

The purpose of this action research project was to evaluate a strategy for improving

reading fluency. The targeted population was a group of 6 students, who were both ELLs and

receiving Title I services for reading. Reading fluency is an area of concern for this group. The

strategy being investigated was the use of repeated readings of poetry to improve reading

fluency.

The teacher researcher administered the same three assessments to obtain before and after

data. Before beginning the implementation of the strategy with the students, the researcher

administered the STAR reading test, two timed fluency tests from the Florida Department of

Education, and the fluency self-evaluations. These three pre-assessments were given on 10/27

and 10/28/14 for the six students in the study group. The strategy of using repeated readings of

poetry was implemented with the small group 3 days a week for 30 minutes each session in the

afterschool program. This reading fluency strategy was practiced for 4.5 weeks. At the end of the


strategy implementation, the post-assessments were administered. These tests were given on

11/25, 12/1, and 12/2/14.

Findings

The quantitative data included the STAR test and timed fluency tests. The STAR test is a

computer-based, adaptive assessment. For the second graders taking the test, it took

approximately 15 minutes per student. This assessment provides a lot of data, and for this study

the researcher used two scores from the STAR test. These included the Grade Level Equivalency

and the Oral Reading Fluency scores.

Tables 1 and 2 show the results from the STAR reading tests. The two tables below

include the pre-test and the post-test. Table 1 shows the results of the Grade Equivalency (G.E.)

level. For the G.E. score, each student made a gain in this area, and the difference is shown in the

last column. Table 2 shows the results of the Oral Reading Fluency (ORF) score. This score

gives the estimated number of words the student can read per minute. This table shows that all

students made gains in the ORF score, and this number is represented in the last column.

Table 1STAR Reading Test- Grade Level Equivalency (G.E.)

Students Pre-test Post-test DifferenceStudent 1 1.9 2.1 +.2Student 2 1.7 1.9 +.2Student 3 2.0 2.5 +.5Student 4 1.3 1.4 +.1Student 5 1.8 2.2 +.4Student 6 1.7 2.0 +.3


Table 2STAR Reading Test-Oral Reading Fluency (ORF)- Estimated Words per Minute

Students Pre-test Post-test DifferenceStudent 1 48 57 +9Student 2 38 48 +10Student 3 50 74 +24Student 4 27 31 +4Student 5 44 59 +15Student 6 38 52 +14

Figure 1

Student 1 Student 2 Student 3 Student 4 Student 5 Student 60

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

1.91.7

2

1.3

1.8 1.7

2.11.9

2.4

1.4

2.22

STAR Grade Equivalency (G.E.)

Pre STARPost STAR

Figure 1 shows the pre and post-test for the STAR Reading Test. These are the Grade

Equivalency (G.E.) Levels in reading. Each student showed progress in the G.E. scores of the

STAR.


Figure 2

Student 1 Student 2 Student 3 Student 4 Student 5 Student 60

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

48

38

50

27

44

38

57

48

74

31

59

52

STAR Fluency Test (ORF)

Pre-testPost-test

Figure 2 shows the pre and post-tests for STAR Reading. This graph shows the Oral Reading

Fluency scores. Each student showed progress in this area of the STAR test.

The next assessments used were timed fluency passages. These tests are from the Florida

Department of Education. The fluency tests take one minute to administer and are by grade level.

The researcher used Passages 1 and 2 from the 2nd Grade Assessment pack for both the pre-test

and the post-test. The results of these fluency tests provided a score that shows the number of

words a student reads correctly per minute. The tables below show the results of these

assessments. Table 3 shows the results from Passage 1. On this first fluency assessment, 4 out of

the 6 students made gains in the words correct per minute. One student remained the same and

one showed a decline of 5 words per minute.


Table 3Timed Fluency Test for Second Graders- Words Correct per Minute

Students Passage 1 Pre-test Passage 1 Post-test DifferenceStudent 1 59 60 +1Student 2 64 59 -5Student 3 64 83 +19Student 4 28 28 0Student 5 58 79 +21Student 6 44 58 +14

Table 4 shows the results from the pre and post-tests for Passage 2. For the second

fluency test, all six students made gains in the number of words read correctly. The words read

per minute increased by a range of 8-17 more words correctly for the post-test for Passage 2.

Table 4Timed Fluency Test for Second Graders- Words Correct per Minute

Students Passage 2 Pre-test Passage 2 Post-test DifferenceStudent 1 60 73 +13Student 2 64 72 +8Student 3 70 80 +10Student 4 19 34 +15Student 5 46 63 +17Student 6 34 59 +15

The researcher wanted to include some qualitative data in this study and created a fluency

self-evaluation form for the students. Students rated themselves in 4 areas of fluency, which

included using good expression, proper phrasing, appropriate speed, and paying attention to

punctuation when reading. Because the students were at the beginning of second grade, the

researcher wanted to use a scale that would be easy for them to understand. The researcher used

the visual of a stoplight and gave the students 3 choices for each of the 4 questions. The students

chose the ratings of Green: Going great, Yellow: Cautious and improving, or Red: This is hard

for me. The researcher explained each student and guided the students, as they filled out the self-


evaluations. This same fluency self-evaluation was used as a pre and post-test. (See Appendix

A)

Table 5

Results of Self-Evaluation for FluencyRate Expression Phrasing Speed Punctuation Difference

Student 1 G/G Y/G G/Y G/G +1, -1Student 2 G/G Y/Y R/R G/G 0Student 3 Y/G G/Y Y/G G/G +2, -1Student 4 R/G Y/Y R/Y G/Y +3, -1Student 5 Y/G G/Y Y/Y G/G +1, -1Student 6 G/G Y/Y R/R Y/G +1

KeyGreen (G) = Doing GreatYellow (Y) = Cautious and ImprovingRed (R) = Hard for Me

For the self-evaluation of fluency, the surveys showed mixed results. Three students rated

themselves as improving in one or more areas. Two students rated themselves as improving and

declining in one are. One student rated the fluency self-evaluation exactly the same in the pre

and post-evaluation.

Discussion

From the first assessment, the STAR reading test, the researcher had two scores to

compare for pre and post-test results. As seen on Table 1 and Figure 1, the G.E. levels from the

STAR reading test showed an increase for each student. The minimum gain was .1 or a one

month gain. The maximum gain was .5 or a 5 month gain. Two students had .2 gain, one had a.3

gain, and one had a .4 gain. The length of the implementation was about 1 month, so 4 students

made more of gain than might be expected.

The second score from the STAR was the ORF, which estimates the number of words a

student can read correctly per minute. As seen on Table 2 and Figure 2, the students all increased


in this area also. The scores improved by a range of 4 point- 24 point increase. This was a

positive result for showing improvement in reading fluency.

The researcher used two timed passages from the Florida Department of Education for

testing fluency. Each student was given Passage 1 and 2, as both a pre and post-test. The total of

the fluency tests administered was 12. Of the 12 tests, 10 showed an increase. As seen on Table

3, one student decreased by 5 points on Passage 1, one student remained the same, and four

improved by 1-21 points.

On Passage 2, shown on Table 4, every student increased in their fluency score,

improving 8-17 points. This test allowed the researcher to listen to the students reading and

provided an opportunity to hear the improvement in fluency for this group. It was interesting for

the students to be evaluated on the same 2 passages at the beginning an end, and there was a

noticeable improvement even before scoring the passages.

The students’ self-evaluations provided qualitative data and gave the students an

opportunity to rate their fluency. For the researcher, this was an interesting process that

encouraged the students to pay attention and evaluate their fluency. The students have had little

to no experience in any kind of formal self-evaluations. Although the researcher worked to use

age-appropriate language and explained the evaluation, the researcher was not sure how well the

students really understood each of the areas of fluency being rated. The students did not look at

the pre-evaluation when completing the post-evaluation forms. It was interesting that the results

were fairly similar. In fact, one student completed the evaluation exactly the same for both one

month later. But overall, the students did rate themselves with better fluency scores at the end of

the implementation. Three students rated themselves as improving in one or more areas, and two

students rated one area as improving and one declining. In retrospect, the researcher is not sure if


this data provided as much accurate data but was happy that the students were involved in the

process. In doing this, the students might have a better understanding of what it means to be a

fluent reader.

Limitations

The limitations of this study would include the small size of the test group and the limited

time to implement the strategy. Because the researcher is working in administration, the

researcher was not able to implement the strategy with a whole class, but instead chose to

implement the fluency strategy in the afterschool program. Because this aftercare program is

offered on three afternoons a week, there was limited time to implement the strategy. But of the

limited schedule of 3 days a week, the researcher chose to use 30 minutes for each session and

did feel that this allowed for some quality time to focus on the strategy.

Summary and Further Research

Overall, the results of the three assessments were very positive. The research questions

asked were if repeated reading of poetry would improve fluency and would an improvement in

fluency have a positive effect on comprehension. After analyzing the data, the researcher

believes that this strategy did improve fluency. The ORF scores from the STAR test improved

for all 6 students. The timed passages showed gains in 10 out of 12 tests. According to the STAR

reading test, each student made improvements in their grade level equivalency, which correlates

with an improvement in reading comprehension.

Fluency is an important part of reading achievement, but it is often an overlooked

component of good reading. As we practiced the repeated readings of poetry, the students

noticed how some poems “were like songs” and noticed how the words sounded better when


read together in a certain way. The researcher was interested in some of the informal results of

the repeated readings of poetry and maybe more anecdotal records would have been interesting

to keep. The students did seem to be more aware of phrasing, expression, and speed while

reading the poems. For these students, who are ELLs and struggling readers, this could be an

important part of the process of improving fluency.

Because of the positive results, the researcher does believe that this strategy would be

beneficial to study with other students. For further research, it would be useful to implement this

strategy with a larger group. At this school, where almost all are English Language Learners, this

could be a strategy that is implemented school-wide. It would also be interesting to see, if the

same results would be seen with the students who are native English speakers.


Appendix A

Student Self-Evaluation for Reading

Name: __________________________________ Date: ________________________

I Think… Green

“Going Great”

Yellow

“Cautious and Improving”

Red

“This is Hard forMe”

I read with good expression.

I phrase words together.

I read just right- not toofast and not too slow.

I pay attention to punctuation when reading.


References

Ari, O. (2011). Fluency interventions for developmental readers: repeated readings and wide

reading. Research & Teaching in Developmental Education, 28(1), 5-15.

Bowman-Perrott, L. J., Herrera, S., & Murry, K. (2010). Reading difficulties and grade retention:

what's the connection for English language learners? Reading & Writing

Quarterly, 26(1), 91-107.

Calderon, M., Slavin, R., & Sanchez, M. (2011). Effective instruction for English

learners. Future of Children, 21(1), 103-127.

Faver, S. (2008). Repeated reading of poetry can enhance reading fluency. Reading Teacher,

62(4), 350-352.

Frye, E. M., & Gosky, R. (2012). Rapid word recognition as a measure of word-level

automaticity and its relation to other measures of reading. Reading Psychology, 33(4),

350-366.

Gorsuch, G., & Taguchi, E. (2010). Developing reading fluency and comprehension using

repeated reading: evidence from longitudinal student reports. Language Teaching

Research, 14(1), 27-59.

Hicks, C. P. (2009). A lesson on reading fluency learned from "the tortoise and the

hare". Reading Teacher, 63(4), 319-323.

Murray, M. S., Munger, K. A., & Clonan, S. M. (2012). Assessment as a strategy to increase oral

reading fluency. Intervention in School and Clinic, 47(3), 144-151.


Musti-Rao, S., Hawkins, R. O., & Barkley, E. A. (2009). Effects of repeated readings on the oral

reading fluency of urban fourth-grade students: implications for practice. Preventing

School Failure, 54(1), 12-23.

Poore, M. A., & Ferguson, S. (2008). Methodological variables in choral reading. Clinical

Linguistics & Phonetics, 22(1), 13-24.

Quirk, M., & Beem, S. (2012). Examining the relations between reading fluency and reading

comprehension for English language learners. Psychology in the Schools, 49(6), 539-553.

Rasinski, T., Rikli, A., & Johnston, S. (2009). Reading fluency: more than automaticity? more

than a concern for the primary grades? Literacy Research and Instruction, 48(4), 350-

361.

Ross, S. G., & Begeny, J. C. (2011). Improving Latino, English language learners' reading

fluency: the effects of small-group and one-on-one intervention. Psychology in the

Schools, 48(6), 604-618.

Salvador, S., Schoeneberger, J., Tingle, L., & Algozzine, B. (2012). Relationship between

second grade oral reading fluency and third grade reading. Assessment in Education:

Principles, Policy & Practice, 19(3), 341-356.

Schrauben, J. E. (2010). Prosody's contribution to fluency: an examination of the theory of

automatic information processing. Reading Psychology, 31(1), 82-92.

Tam, K., Heward, W. L., & Heng, M. (2006). A reading instruction intervention program for

English-language learners who are struggling readers. Journal of Special

Education, 40(2), 79-93.


Therrien, W. J., Kirk, J. F., & Woods-Groves, S. (2012). Comparison of a reading fluency

intervention with and without passage repetition on reading achievement. Remedial and

Special Education, 33(5), 309-319.

Thomas, H., & Healy, A. F. (2012). A comparison of rereading benefits in first and second

language reading. Language Learning, 62(1), 198-235.

Documents

edilla.weebly.comedilla.weebly.com/uploads/4/5/2/4/45240087/action_rese… · Web viewStudents who struggle with reading often read one word at a time. The use of repeated readings