Professional Documents
Culture Documents
FRIT 8435 Spring 2011 Georgia Southern University Dr. Randal D Carlson, Instructor
Contents
Executive Summary ............................................................................................................................................................. 3 Recommendations .............................................................................................................................................................. 3 Introduction ........................................................................................................................................................................ 3 Focus of the Evaluation ....................................................................................................................................................... 4 Brief Overview of Evaluation Plan and Procedures ............................................................................................................ 4 Presentation of Evaluation Results ..................................................................................................................................... 5 Appendix ................................................................................................................................................................................. 6 Student AIMS Scores ........................................................................................................................................................... 6 Students in Reading EIP Receiving the Read Naturally Program ........................................................................................ 6 Read Naturally Average ...................................................................................................................................................... 8 Interview: ............................................................................................................................................................................ 8 Read Naturally Versus EIP Alone......................................................................................................................................... 9
Executive Summary
The purpose of this evaluation is to describe the effectiveness of the reading intervention program, Read Naturally. The program evaluation focused on the increase in reading fluency among students currently struggling with reading fluency, resulting in their placement in the Reading Early Intervention Program (EIP). In order to evaluate the successfulness of Read Naturally the evaluation sought to answer the following questions:
How do the benchmark scores of reading fluency among 3rd graders receiving the Read Naturally intervention program increase from the beginning of the year until the end of the year? How do third grade students in the reading Early Intervention Program (EIP) receiving the Read Naturally remediation compare to the student in reading EIP not receiving the Read Naturally intervention? What measurable growth have the target students exhibited? What unique challenges were encountered when integrating Read Naturally into the normal curriculum? What are the current instructional techniques and applications within this program?
Recommendations
While the students enrolled in Read Naturally exhibited significant gains in reading speed, the stated goals for success were not reached. Therefore, we cannot recommend the continuation of the program.
Introduction
Becoming a skilled reader is a multifaceted task which involves the mastery of many concepts, such as word recognition, reading fluency, and comprehension skills. The reading process is compiled of layered building blocks in which one must master word recognition before mastering reading fluency; consequently, they must master reading fluency before the student can understand or comprehend a story. When a student struggles with any of these tasks the reading process becomes tedious and frustrating for the reader. If a student is not reading fluently, or at a decent pace, then the attention of the student is lost thus making it nearly impossible to comprehend or understand a story. No longer can the student focus on reading for meaning, because he or she must concentrate on tackling each individual word. The Read Naturally (SE Version 2.1) program is an AYP initiative used to assist struggling readers and help develop reading fluency skills and comprehension skills. Read Naturally, Inc., was created in 2004, and this program offers a proven strategy to help struggling readers increase the pace of words read per minute, thus assisting with the comprehension or understanding of the story. A rural school in Forsyth County chose to use funds from the Parent-Teacher Association (PTA) to adopt the Read Naturally program with hopes to assist struggling readers. This school has decided to use Read Naturally in the Reading EIP program in third grade through fifth grade. This evaluation will formally assess the effectiveness in increasing reading fluency among struggling readers receiving the Read Naturally program. It
will also compare the increase in reading rate of students in Reading EIP receiving the Read Naturally program, and those in Reading EIP not receiving the program. The results will evaluate the overall effectiveness and usefulness of Read Naturally and will also highlight the opinions of the Reading EIP teachers that administer the program.
1. How many times a week do you implement RN or for what duration? 2. How convenient and user friendly is the program? 3. Have you seen a change in the students since starting the program? 4. What are the program's strengths? 5. What are the program's weaknesses? 6. What unique challenges are encountered when integrating Read Naturally with the existing curriculum? 7. What are the current instructional techniques and applications within the program? The results from this interview and opinions of the EIP teachers administering Read Naturally (Appendix B) combined with the Aims Web results (Appendix A) will provide a clear picture for the stakeholders as to whether Read Naturally is an effective and useful program.
Work Cited
Naturally Read, Inc. (2004). Read naturally se version 2.1: Teachers guide [computer software and manual]. Retrieved from http://www.readnaturally.com/index.htm.
Appendix
Student AIMS Scores
Students in reading EIP receiving the Read Naturally Program Name Andrew Blakelyn Daniel Hannah Madison Mehmed Summer Name Briana Brooks Caleb Daniel Garrett Jonathan Logan Olav 9/16/10 56 100 78 44 57 111 103 9/16/10 18 65 70 114 90 59 101 83 10/8/10 47 114 109 53 58 109 98 10/8/10 19 67 70 114 109 87 104 87 11/5/10 46 114 74 60 48 119 115 11/5/10 13 57 67 112 75 68 109 95 12/3/10 39 100 97 60 62 120 88 12/3/10 15 49 90 122 92 83 104 83 1/7/11 45 110 114 60 58 135 98 1/7/11 23 34 124 120 91 80 103 98 2/4/11 72 112 120 74 60 140 114 2/4/11 27 98 130 125 98 117 110 91 109 3/4/11 19 50 80 109 88 80 111 88 122 3/18/11 35 68 110 124 84 123 120 92 3/4/11 63 120 110 77 67 3/18/11 72 131 136 82 80
56 72 16 55 29% Fails
Initial AIMS Score Final AIMS Score WPM Improvement AVG WPM Gain 120 WPM
Initial AIMS Score Final AIMS Score AVG WPM WPM Improvement Gain 120 WPM
Initial AIMS Score Final AIMS Score AVG WPM WPM Improvement Gain 120 WPM
44 82 64 38 86% Fails
Initial AIMS Score Final AIMS Score AVG WPM WPM Improvement Gain 120 WPM
57 80 61 23 40% Fails
Initial AIMS Score Final AIMS Score AVG WPM WPM Improvement Gain 120 WPM
Initial AIMS Score Final AIMS Score AVG WPM WPM Improvement Gain 120 WPM
Initial AIMS Score Final AIMS Score AVG WPM WPM Improvement Gain 120 WPM
30.6
Average WPM Increase from September 16 to March 18 Interview:
44%
Average Percentage Increase from September 16 to March 18
1. How many times a week do you implement RN or for what duration? 4 times a week, 30 minutes each session 2. How convenient and user friendly is the program? Very easy to use once someone has been trained properly. Doesnt demand much teacher instructional time/student works mostly independent. 3. Have you seen a change in the students since starting the program? Most students show growth in about 4-6 weeks of using the program. For those students that do not show growth, we use the RN data as a means of support for screening for other disabilities that may be present. 4. What are the program's strengths? Fluency practice, repetitive reading, choral reading, echo reading, and tracking data points 5. What are the program's weaknesses? Comprehension and the lack of instructional comprehension pieces that could be used with each non-fiction passage. 6. What Unique challenges are encountered when integrating Read Naturally with the existing curriculum? Finding time is the hardest challenge to face. Most students use RN outside of their classroom with support staff. This is the easiest option. For those teachers that use it in their classroom, they must organize time around whole group and small group lessons to implement this intervention on a regular basis. This can be hard to maintain for a long period of time. 7. What are the current instructional techniques and applications within the program? Fluency practice, repetitive reading, vocabulary practice, summarization, and prediction
Read Naturally
78.4 103.8 30.6 44% Average Score 9/16/10 Average Score 3/18/11 Average WPM Increase Average % Increase
EIP
75 79.3 18 36%