Teacher Research: Guided Reading Colleen Brieck Kindergarten Teacher/Teacher Researcher Arlington Science Focus School

Rationale Our school dedicates over 3 hours per day to language arts instruction in kindergarten. With the existing language arts schedule, each guided reading group was only receiving instruction every other day.

Research Questions In restructuring my language arts block so that I may meet with every guided reading group everyday, will students make more substantial growth in their DRA levels throughout the second half of the school year? Will providing a stronger connection between reading and writing during guided reading instruction help contribute to an increase in student reading achievement?

Relevant Literature Students need differentiated instruction in order to have their learning needs met. Nash (2010) suggests that in a typical heterogeneous classroom, approximately 1/3 of the students are performing on grade level, 1/3 are performing below grade level, and 1/3 are performing above grade level. If educators only provided a single-plane of instruction, essentially 2/3 of students would not be effectively reached by instruction.

Relevant Literature (cont.) Students need differentiated instruction in order to have their learning needs met. Allington and Walmsley (2007) state that more focused instruction will lead to greater learning gains. Small-group, differentiated instruction allows for more individualized and “focused” instruction. Kamps (2008) found highly-explicit, differentiated, small-group instruction to have a significant impact on learning gains for struggling readers in kindergarten.

Relevant Literature (cont.) Literacy instruction should be balanced. Koons (2008) stresses the importance of a connection between reading and writing instruction, allowing for students to write more broadly and effectively in a variety of discourse modes. Berninger, Abbott, Abbott, Graham, and Richards (2002) found there to be a very strong relationship between reading and writing, but also between reading, writing, listening, and speaking. These four processes should be integrated in order to best meet the needs of our diverse body of learners.

Research Methods- Participants With the support of the school principal, reading specialist, and the other kindergarten teachers, we decided to restructure our language arts block for all five kindergarten classes for the 2nd half of the school year. Participants: 100+ kindergarten students _28_ ESOL/HILT students __5_ Special Education students

Research Methods- Procedure Restructuring our language arts block: every student receives small group reading instruction everyday. Utilizing Jan Richardson’s (2009) two-day guided reading lesson format; focuses on reading the same text for two consecutive days, integrating writing.

Research Methods-Procedure (cont.) Previous Language Arts Schedule Guided Reading/Work Stations/Shared Reading- Written Response: 40 minutes Rotations: 60 minutes (20 min. per group) Word Study* Phonemic Awareness** Handwriting* Adjusted Language Arts Schedule Work Stations/Shared Reading-Written Response: 40 minutes Rotations: 60 minutes (15 min. per group) Guided Reading** Word Study* Phonemic Awareness/Sight Words (Independent Table) Handwriting* **Teacher Instructed *Instructional Assistant Instructed ***Independent Reading, Read Aloud, and Writing- Not Shown

Data- Teacher 1

Data- Teacher 2

Data- Teacher 3

Data- Teacher 4

Data- Teacher 5

Preliminary Findings The average increase in reading level growth under the previous language arts model was 2.42 DRA levels for kindergarten overall. The average increase in reading level growth under the new language arts model was 2.26 DRA levels for my class (as of April). The average increase in reading level growth under the new language arts was 2 DRA levels for kindergarten overall. *All data examining the DRA level growth in the 2nd half of the school year **Data from Jan. to April accounts for 60% of the 2nd half of the school year

Projected DRA Growth for the Remainder of the School Year With rate of growth of last year (for kindergarten overall), currently students would only have gained 1.45 DRA levels of growth If this year’s rate of growth continues, average growth will be a total of 2.8 DRA levels (from Jan. to June) Difference in growth between previous and new language arts models: .38 DRA levels

Discussion of Preliminary Findings Data from last year: January and June DRA; Reading level data no longer available for April, 2012. Data from this year is examines the growth made thus far from January to April, 2013 (60% of the 2nd half of the school year); Formal DRA will be given in June. Data for current DRA levels is based on anecdotal records, informal assessments (e.g. running records) The new language arts model, providing daily guided reading instruction to every student and integrating writing with guided reading, allows for greater reading gains.

Professional/Personal Reflections I found this new language arts structure to better meet the needs of my students. I felt it dedicated more time to differentiated and effective literacy instruction. Anecdotal records showed that the integration of writing and reading helped students grow as writers- thinking about their own writing, ensuring their writing was on topic and made sense, and strengthening their mechanics of writing.

Professional/Personal Reflections (cont.) Due to time constraints of our schedule and the schedule of the other instructional assistants (who push-in for language arts rotations): limited to 60 minutes for language arts rotations Ideally, I would like to add on 12 minutes to our language arts rotations. This would allow for each group to meet for 18 minutes, rather than 15. At times, 15 minutes for a guided reading lesson felt rushed.

(*own adaptation other formats) Artifacts Previously Used Guided Reading Lesson Plan (*own adaptation other formats) Lesson Objective Book Introduction Vocabulary Word Work Comprehension/Discussion Questions Follow-Up Activity Objectives for Next Lesson

Artifacts (continued) Jan Richardson’s Two-Day Guided Reading Lesson Plan Day 1: Sight Word Review Book Introduction; Vocabulary Teaching Points/Prompts Read Text Discussion Prompt Teach 1 Sight Word Word Work Day 2: Reread Text Teach Same Sight Word Guided Writing

References Allington, R. L., & Walmsley, S. A. (2007). No quick fix, the RTI edition: Rethinking literacy programs in America’s elementary schools. New York, NY: Teachers College Press. Berninger, V. W., Abbott, R. D., Abbott, S. P., Graham, S., & Richards, T. (2002). Writing and reading: Connections between language by hand and language by eye. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 35, 39-56. Eastman, V. L. (2010). Small group instruction: Reading instruction utilizing learning style preferences and the reading achievement of first grade students. Ann Arbor, MI: UMI Dissertation Publishing. Fitzgerald, J., & Shanahan, T. (2000). Reading and writing relations and their development. Educational Psychologist, 35, 39-50. Kamps, D., Abbott, M., Greenwood, C., Wills, H., Veerkamp, M., & Kaufman, J. (2008). Effects of small-group reading instruction and curriculum differences for students most at risk kindergarten. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 41(2), 101-114.

References (continued) Koons, H. H. (2008). The reading-writing connection: An investigation of the relationship between reading ability and writing quality across multiple grades and three writing discourse modes. Ann Arbor, MI: UMI Dissertation Publishing. Mayo, L. (2000). Making the connection: Reading and writing together. English Journal, 89(4), 74-77. Nash, V. L. (2010). Improving reading instruction through research-based instructional strategies. Ann Arbor, MI: UMI Dissertation Publishing. Richardson, J. (2009). The Next Step in Guided Reading: Focused Assessments and Targeted Lessons for Helping Every Student Become a Better Reader. New York, NY: Scholastic, Inc. Rickards, D., & Hawes, S. (2006) Connection reading and writing through author’s craft. The Reading Teacher, 60(4), 370- 373.