Planned Variation: Developing an Effective Literacy Instructional Format for First Graders With Individualized Education Programs for Reading

• In Event: What Works for Beginning Readers With Individualized Education Programs? Recent Findings From a Large, Multisite Development Project

Abstract

Objectives
The purpose of the internal study was to examine the instructional components that were linked to student achievement growth during the year and to ascertain if the results from Year 1 could be replicated. Findings are reported in this session.

Theoretical Frame
Though teachers were provided professional development in a consistent manner, the intervention is not scripted, and thus, requires considerable teacher decision-making. Thus, we assumed that teachers would tailor instruction to best meet the needs of the individual student. Assuming natural variation in experiences across children, we sought to understand the instructional components that best promoted growth in the intervention.

Data Sources
Treatment teachers (n=65) completed weekly logs that included measures of progress, the number of one-to-one lessons in the given week, which lesson components were taught and how many minutes were spent on each component. The two weekly measures were the Word Identification Fluency (WIF; the number of high frequency words read in one minute) and Text Reading Level (TRL; the text level obtained with a running record). We then computed the total amount of time spent with each student each week, and the proportion of time spent on each lesson component. These variables were then averaged across all of the weeks that each student received the intervention. There were 149 students with sufficient data to conduct the analysis.

Method
We used hierarchical linear modeling (HLM) to examine student Text Level and WIF growth during the intervention. Student scores on each outcome were modeled over time at Level One, and at Level Two, student and instructional characteristics were used to predict baseline and growth rates on each of the two outcomes.

Results
The typical Text Level and WIF growth was cubic—students accelerated at a faster pace at the beginning of the treatment, then tapered off slightly in the middle weeks, and accelerated again and the end of the treatment. Following a linear growth pattern, students typically gained about .30 text levels per week, and were able to read .40 more words a week in one minute. There were no differences in TRL growth across grade levels or in special education classification, but for WIF, students in the older grades (3 and 4) gained less per week. More time and more lessons significantly and positively predicted TRL and WIF growth, as was the proportion of time spent on children reading new books.

Significance
Following two years of development work we have decided that in Year 3, the Replication Phase, the lesson design will focus on introducing and reading a new book each lesson, and that students will have a minimum of three lessons each week. Teacher professional development will focus on preparing teachers to become experts with this one lesson component, as well as learning how to analyze running records to inform text selection and teaching decisions while reading a new book.

Authors

• Jerome V. D'Agostino, The Ohio State University

• Emily M. Rodgers, The Ohio State University