| Home |
Tutoring improves reading among stru . . .
| |
Tutoring improves reading among struggling first graders
Fifty-seven first-grade students scoring in the bottom 25 percent for reading
skills received either regular classroom reading instruction or tutoring in
either word study or word study with reading decodable texts.
Patricia F. Vadasy and Elizabeth A. Sanders from the Washington Research
Institute and Julia A. Peyton from the University of Washington studied the
effects of phonics instruction with or without oral reading practice provided by
paraprofessionals.
Since supplementary tutoring is costly for schools to provide, tutoring
activities must be carefully selected for easy and reliable use by
paraprofessionals, and for evidence of treatment effectiveness.
In this study, all tutors used Sound Partners as the core phonics-based
program. It is a one-toone supplementary intervention for use by
paraprofessional tutors with low-skilled first graders. Instruction includes
letter-sound correspondence, decoding and spelling instruction, and reading
practice in decodable texts. Tutors met with students for a half hour four days
a week from October through May.
Word study vs. reading
Dividing the students into two groups, these researchers compared 30 minutes
of daily word study to 15 minutes of word study combined with 15 minutes of
reading. They sought to determine the effects of phonics-based supplemental
reading interventions and, in addition, what adding oral reading practice
contributes to the effects of word study.
All students who scored in the bottom quartile on reading tests at the
beginning of the school year, including students identified for limited English
proficiency or special education services participated in the study. Tutors
received two to four hours of initial training depending on their experience.
View recent issues of Educational Research Newsletter.
Researchers modeled each instructional component and supervised tutors as
they practiced the components. Training included explicit correction procedures.
After training, tutors were provided with weekly on-site coaching and modeling
throughout the year, during which researchers observed tutors for their fidelity
to treatment procedures.
Word-study group
Letter-sound correspondence was taught explicitly for about seven minutes per
lesson. A new letter sound was introduced and modeled in almost every lesson,
beginning with single consonants and vowels, then two-letter vowel teams and
consonant digraphs. Students also practiced the alphabetic principle with
picture cards. Using word lists, they practiced phoneme segmentation for one
minute.
For another 10 minutes they practiced decoding words, sounding them out
without stopping between sounds. For this decoding practice, only letter sounds
that had been previously taught were used in phonetically regular words.
Students received extra practice on three to six words that they found
difficult. They wrote these words from dictation. For about three minutes,
students practiced reading irregular words from a list of common sight words.
The last five to seven minutes of each word-study session was spent reading
lists of 10 words to develop automatic word recognition.
The reading-practice group
Students in this group spent the first 15 to 20 minutes on almost the same
word-study skills as the word-study group. Afterward, they spent 10 minutes
reading aloud from storybooks selected to match the sequence of sounds and sight
words introduced in the word-study lessons. There was a new book for every two
lessons. (These books contained a total of 1200 words, of which three-quarters
were decodable and the rest were sight words.) The student read the new book
twice and then reread previously read books of their choice.
The tutor selected the most appropriate reading method for each student:
independent reading, with the student reading most of the words with occasional
help from the tutor; partner reading, with the student and tutor reading
together; or echo reading, with the tutor reading one line of text and the
student reading the same line after the tutor. Students read for 10 minutes a
day for the first half of the year, increasing to 15 minutes in the second half
of the year.
Click here to subscribe to Educational Research
Newsletter
Tutored reading students improved
All students were pre- and post-tested using a range of tests covering
receptive vocabulary, letter knowledge, phonological awareness, reading
accuracy, word attack skills, spelling and reading comprehension. Reading
passages were drawn from two decodable phonics books and one less-predictable
end-of-first-grade book.
There were no significant differences in classroom reading instruction or the
number of minutes spend on reading instruction in the classrooms involved in
this study. There were no significant differences between the two tutoring
treatments in terms of the number or length of lessons. On average, each tutor
was observed 20 times during the year, with six observations per student.
Tutored students in both treatments outperformed non-tutored peers in reading
accuracy, comprehension, and fluency as well as spelling. On most post-treatment
measures, the tutored groups performed comparably. The exceptions were
significantly higher reading accuracy and fluency for the Reading-Practice
group. Word Study students who received more intensive phonics and word analyses
instruction did not show advantages in reading or spelling accuracy. This study
was limited to the use of decodable texts by the Reading-Practice group and
researchers say outcomes might have differed if nondecodable tests had been
used.
Practice in oral reading
These findings suggest that supplementary tutoring in oral reading
significantly improves reading fluency and produces equivalent reading and
spelling accuracy as compared with students who spent equivalent time on
individual word study. After the initial 15 minutes per day of individual word
study, additional word study did not increase reading accuracy or spelling
skills. Scaffolded oral reading practice produced significantly higher fluency
than word study alone.
The effectiveness of oral reading practice may depend on the type of support
provided by trained tutors. Tutors in this study were taught to consistently
observe two rules: students should always track the words they are reading with
their finger and they must always reread a sentence in which they make a
mistake.
To receive free monthly
research updates, please
click here.
Tutors routinely corrected students by: isolating the difficult sound in a
word, directing the student to any familiar letter combination or feature,
alerting them to sight words, reminding them to notice a final "e", and by
switching from independent reading to partner or echo reading as necessary. The
decodable text in Sound- Partners offered students many opportunities to
practice their emerging decoding skills and it consistently prompted
paraprofessional tutors to provide appropriate assistance and cues to practice
their new skills.
Tutors and parents might use these simple yet instructionally specific
strategies to support oral reading practice for beginning readers. These
researchers conclude that there are benefits of explicit training in word
reading for low-skilled first graders and that this phonics instruction should
be accompanied by oral reading practice in matched texts. They point out that
although students showed significant improvement after tutoring, only about
one-third of these students were performing at grade level by the end of the
year. It is not known how much supplemental tutoring would be needed to raise
the rest of the students to grade level. "Relative Effectiveness of
Reading Practice or Word-Level Instruction in Supplemental Tutoring: How Text
Matters" Journal of Learning Disabilities, August 2005, Volume 38, Number 4, pp.
364-380.
Published in ERN September 2005 Volume 18 Number 6
|