Implementing Fluency Interventions Identified through Brief Experimental Analysis Doug Penno, Ph.D. Pamela Fields, Ed.D. Michelle L. Hinzman, Ed.S. Barbara Pline, M.A. Keystone Area Education Agency

FAA Pilot Project Rationale Achievement Gap Interaction of academic difficulties and challenging behavior

Research base Functional approach to assessment Brief Experimental Analysis Instructional approaches to reading fluency instruction

Evolution of the project Staff involved in the project Current status  School districts involved  Students’ achievement What’s next?

Research Questions Can BEA procedures effectively identify evidence-based reading fluency interventions for struggling students? What are the effects of implementing BEA- identified interventions for an extended period in a special education classroom?

Procedures Selection of students Descriptive assessment Administer BEA conditions Implement intervention

Selection of Students High accuracy and low fluency Second & third graders (41-60 WCPM) History of fluency difficulties Receive support in Tier 2 or 3 Display high levels of engagement (Eckhart, 2008)

Selection of Students 3 fourth grade students Entitled for reading All students scored at or below 25 th percentile on fall AIMSweb benchmark (3 or less errors)

Descriptive Assessment Components of descriptive assessment  Targeted file review  Semi-structured teacher interviews  Targeted student interview  Observations

Conditions Baseline Contingent Reinforcement (CR) Repeated Readings (RR) (Samuels, 1979) Listening Passage Preview (LPP) (Daly & Martens, 1994; Jones et al., 2009) Listening Sentence Preview (LSP) (McComas et al., 2009) Error Correction (EC) (Daly, Persampieri, McCurdy, & Gortmaker, 2005; O’Shea, Munson, & O’Shea, 1984)

CASE STUDIES

Case Study - Abby Entitled reading (1 st grade) & mathematics Baseline: 66 WCPM, 0 errors  Below 25 th percentile Fall 2011 NWEA/MAP RIT reading score:  202 (56 th percentile)

Abby – BEA Results

Abby – Intervention January 2012-May minutes daily; 5 days week Read Naturally 4.0, 4.5, 5.0 materials Monitored weekly 4 th grade AIMSweb reading probe Implementation:  LPP/LSP/CR  Audiobooks on computer  LSP with peer  LPP/LSP with teacher  CR once weekly

Abby – Intervention Results

Case Study - George Entitled reading (2 nd grade) Baseline: 43 WCPM, 3 errors  Below 10 th percentile Fall 2011 NWEA/MAP RIT reading score:  179 (7 th percentile)

George – BEA Results

George – Intervention January 2012-May minutes daily; 5 days week Read Naturally 4.0, 4.5, 5.0 materials Monitored weekly with 4 th grade AIMSweb reading probe Implementation:  LPP  Audiobooks on computer  Read Naturally CDs  LPP with teacher

George – Intervention Results

Case Study – Heather Entitled reading (2 nd grade) Baseline: 70 WCPM, 2 errors  Slightly above 25 th percentile Fall 2011 NWEA/MAP RIT reading score:  196 (40 th percentile)

Heather – BEA Results

Heather – Intervention January 2012-May minutes daily; 5 days week Read Naturally 4.0, 4.5, 5.0 materials Monitored weekly with 4 th grade AIMSweb reading probe Implementation:  LSP  Audiobooks on computer  LSP with peer  LSP with teacher

Heather – Intervention Results

Summary Data StudentPre MAPPost MAPPre WCPMPost WCPM Abby 202 (56 th %ile) 202 (34 th %ile) 65 WCPM86 WCPM George 179 (7 th %ile) 200 (32 nd %ile) 43 WCPM88 WCPM Heather 196 (40 th %ile) 214 (70 th %ile) 70 WCPM91 WCPM

Summary Data Student MAP RIT (fall to spring) (expected 4 th grade growth RIT +7) WCPM (Jan to May) Words per Week Abby+0 RIT+20 WCPM+1.3 George+21 RIT+45 WCPM +3.0 (prior to BEA +1.07) Heather+18 RIT+21 WCPM +1.4 (prior to BEA +.36)

Next Steps Follow-up with case studies Provide professional development to colleagues Expand into other subject areas