Pennington Publishing Blog

Teaching remedial reading is one of the most challenging yet enriching tasks. Reading is the key to learning. With the evolving Response to Intervention (RtI) process, special education and classroom teachers are scurrying to find appropriate resources to differentiate reading instruction. What these teachers are finding is that one-size-fits-all canned reading programs are not matching the needs of all of their students. Additionally, many intervention teachers are feeling that scripted programs are ignoring teacher experience, judgment, and expertise. What is needed are resources that will allow trained professionals to differentiate reading instruction within flexible learning structures. The three-tiered RtI model looks good on paper, but quality resources are essential in these delivery models.

Most special education and classroom teachers are quite prepared to teach the reading and writing content of their courses. Their undergraduate and graduate courses reflect this preparation. However, most are less prepared to teach reading intervention. Most credential programs require only one or two reading strategy courses. Expertise is critical because the research shows that only one-in-six students reading two or more grade levels behind by middle school will ever catch up to grade level reading.

Following are articles, free resources (including reading assessments), and teaching tips regarding how to teach remedial readers and reading intervention from the Pennington Publishing Blog. Bookmark and visit us often. Oh, and don’t forget to copy down the 10% discount code found only on this blog to purchase the quality curricula and resources offered by Pennington Publishing.

Reading Intervention

Free Whole Class Diagnostic ELA/Reading Assessments

http://penningtonpublishing.com/assessments.php

Download free phonemic awareness, vowel sound phonics, consonant sound phonics, sight word, rimes, sight syllables, fluency, grammar, mechanics, and spelling assessments. All with answers and recording matrices. A true gold mine for the teacher committed to differentiated instruction!

How to Teach Reading Intervention

http://penningtonpublishing.com/blog/reading/how-to-teach-reading-intervention/

Teaching reading intervention is qualitatively different from teaching beginning reading. By definition, the initial reading instruction did not “take” to a sufficient degree, so things must be done differently this time around to improve chances for success. This article defines the key ingredients for a successful reading intervention program and provides an instructional template.

Remedial Reading Intervention Placement: What Does Not and What Does Make Sense

http://penningtonpublishing.com/blog/reading/remedial-reading-intervention-placement-what-does-and-does-not-make-sense/

Placing students in remedial reading intervention classes is certainly a challenge. By understanding what does and does not make sense in the selection process, educators will be able to avoid many of the usual pitfalls of these types of programs and have a greater chance at success.

Top Ten Reasons to Teach Phonics

http://penningtonpublishing.com/blog/reading/top-ten-reasons-to-teach-phonics/

Reading is not a developmentally acquired skill. In other words, children and adults do not learn to read by simply being read to or exposed to a literate environment. Learning the sound-spelling system and applying the alphabetic code is what we call phonics instruction. Acquiring this skill will allow readers to attend to the real purpose of reading—understanding what the author says.

Should We Teach Phonics to Remedial Readers?

http://penningtonpublishing.com/blog/reading/should-we-teach-phonics-to-remedial-readers/

Although most students learn to read in their early years of school, some students experience significant reading problems. Almost always, the cause is the same. Struggling readers have not learned the sound-spelling system we call phonics. With the right diagnostic assessments and instruction, remedial readers can make significant gains.

Should We Teach Phonemic Awareness to Remedial Readers?

http://penningtonpublishing.com/blog/reading/should-we-teach-phonemic-awareness-to-remedial-readers/

Phonemic awareness is the key predictor of reading success. Many students with reading problems have not acquired this ability. This article suggests that phonemic awareness should be taught, not just caught, and provides the how’s and when’s to inform remedial reading instruction.

How and When to Teach Phonemic Awareness

http://penningtonpublishing.com/blog/reading/how-and-when-to-teach-phonemic-awareness/

Phonemic awareness is the key predictor of reading success. However, is it a pre-requisite skill or a by-product of reading? This article suggests that phonemic awareness should be taught, not caught, and provides the how’s and when’s to inform instruction.

How to Teach Sight Words

http://penningtonpublishing.com/blog/reading/how-to-teach-sight-words/

Although not a substitute for systematic phonics instruction, memorizing key sight words does makes sense to promote reading automaticity. In fact, many of the high frequency words are not phonetically decodable and must be memorized as sight words. This article details who should learn sight words and how to best teach them.

How to Teach the Alphabet

http://penningtonpublishing.com/blog/reading/how-to-teach-the-alphabet/

The alphabet is the key to reading. These twenty-six symbols combine to form a rich lexicon of 800,000 English words. The key to learning the alphabet has been the traditional “Alphabet Song.” However beneficial, this song has created significant problems for young readers and English-language learners. A few twists eliminates these issues.

How to Do Sound-by-Sound Spelling Blending

http://penningtonpublishing.com/blog/reading/how-to-do-sound-by-sound-spelling-blending/

Help your students to read in the most efficient way possible. This article gives the reading teacher or parent the exact sequence of sounds to introduce to help students learn to read. A step-by-step blending model is demonstrated with clear examples.

What’s Right and Wrong about Read Naturally?

http://penningtonpublishing.com/blog/reading/whats-wrong-with-read-naturally/

Read Naturally is a hugely successful reading fluency program. The program’s proponents have been many, including “top name” reading researchers, especially those hired on as Read Naturally presenters, and countless teacher testimonials. The program’s detractors have been few. This article will summarize the program for the uninitiated, discuss the controversies regarding the program’s research base, and analyze the pros and cons of the program.

Reading Intervention: How to Beat the Odds

http://penningtonpublishing.com/blog/reading/reading-intervention-how-to-beat-the-odds/

To beat the odds indicating that only one-in-six remedial readers will ever “catch up” to grade level, we need to analyze what has not worked and what will work. As we move in the direction of affirming teacher professionalism with the evolving RtI process, we emphasize a collaborative approach to determine how to best meet student needs. Here’s hoping that we reduce the odds of failure and increase the odds of success.

Four Critical Components to Successful Reading Intervention

http://penningtonpublishing.com/blog/reading/four-critical-components-to-successful-reading-intervention/

According to research, only one of six remedial reading students will ever progress to grade-level reading ability. However, the odds can increase dramatically when the critical components for a successful literacy intervention are addressed. How schools plan reading intervention programs is just as important as what program they use.

What Remedial Reading Teachers Want (A Manifesto)

http://penningtonpublishing.com/blog/reading/what-remedial-reading-teachers-want-a-manifesto/

Remedial reading (reading intervention) teachers of upper elementary, middle school, high school, and adult students all share the same instructional goal: help their students become fluent readers who understand what they read. Teachers want to achieve this goal in the shortest amount of instructional time. A Remedial Reading Teacher’s Manifesto will help teachers teach students, as opposed to teaching a “canned program.”

More Articles, Free Resources, and Teaching Tips from the Pennington Publishing Blog

English-language Arts Standards

English-language Arts Instruction

Essay Strategies

The Writing Process/Writers Workshop

Writing Style

Grammar and Mechanics

Spelling

Vocabulary

Structural Analysis/Syllabication/Oral Language

Teaching Reading in the ELA Classroom

ELA/Reading Assessments

Reading Intervention

Independent Reading

Response to Intervention

EL/ESL

Differentiated Instruction (RtI)

Critical Thinking

Study Skills

Test Preparation

Educational Issues and Teaching Trends

Developmental Characteristics

Professional Development

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

Mark Pennington, MA Reading Specialist, is the author of the comprehensive reading intervention curriculum, Teaching Reading Strategies. Designed to significantly increase the reading abilities of students ages eight through adult within one year, the curriculum is decidedly un-canned, adaptable to various instructional settings, and simple to use. Get multiple choice reading assessments on two CDs, formative assessments, blending and syllabication activities, phonemic awareness and phonics workshops, comprehension worksheets, multi-level fluency passages on eight CDs, 390 flashcards, posters, activities, and games. Everything teachers need to teach a diagnostically-based reading intervention program for struggling readers at all reading levels is found in this comprehensive curriculum. Perfect for Response to Intervention (RtI). ESL and Special Education students, who struggle with language/auditory processing challenges will particularly benefit. Simple directions and well-crafted activities truly make this an almost no-prep curriculum. Works well as a half-year intensive program or full-year program, with or without paraprofessional assistance. 364 pages

Reading, Spelling/Vocabulary breaking the code, diagnostic reading assessments, differentiated reading instruction, Hooked on Phonics, Language!, phonics, pull-out programs, reading assessments, reading intervention, reading intervention programs, reading mastery, reading programs, remedial reading, remedial reading programs, response to intervention, rewards, RTI, special education

As the mandates of the Response to Intervention (RtI) process continue to transfer to public schools, special education and classroom teachers are hurrying to find appropriate resources to differentiate literacy instruction for their students. What these teachers find is that one-size-fits-all canned reading, writing, and math programs simply do not match the needs of all of their students. Additionally, many intervention teachers find that scripted programs tend to ignore teacher experience, judgment, and expertise. Instead, RtI teachers need the resources that will allow them  to differentiate literacy instruction without becoming robots. The three-tiered RtI model looks good in the triangle diagram, but quality resources are essential to make these delivery models address the needs of their students.

Most special education and classroom teachers are very prepared to teach the reading and writing content of their courses. They know how to teach. Their undergraduate and graduate courses have adequately prepared them for these tasks. However, most teachers are less prepared to teach reading, writing, and math intervention classes. For example, most credential programs require only one or two reading strategy courses. So, choosing appropriate instructional resources that will facilitate differentiated instruction, according to diagnostic and formative data are critically important.

Following are articles, free resources (including reading assessments), and teaching tips regarding how to teach reading and writing intervention within the RtI process from the Pennington Publishing Blog. Bookmark and visit us often. Oh, and don’t forget to copy down the 10% discount code found only on this blog to purchase the quality curricula and resources offered by Pennington Publishing.

Response to Intervention

Free Whole Class Diagnostic ELA/Reading Assessments

http://penningtonpublishing.com/assessments.php

Download free phonemic awareness, vowel sound phonics, consonant sound phonics, sight word, rimes, sight syllables, fluency, grammar, mechanics, and spelling assessments. All with answers and recording matrices. A true gold mine for the teacher committed to differentiated instruction!

What Effective and Ineffective RtI Look Like

http://penningtonpublishing.com/blog/reading/what-effective-and-ineffective-rti-look-like/

Response to Intervention (RtI) is a K-12 site-level decision-making process designed to facilitate and coordinate early and flexible responses to student’s learning and behavioral difficulties. RtI promotes data-based decision-making with respect to service placement and on-going progress monitoring. Following are a few indicators of what effective and ineffective RtI can look like.

Eight RtI-Reading Intervention Models

http://penningtonpublishing.com/blog/reading/eight-rti-reading-intervention-models/

As administrators, special education teachers, EL coordinators, reading specialists, and teachers are scrambling to see how new Response to Intervention (RtI) guidelines will work with resources, personnel, schedules, and student populations, it may be helpful to examine eight of the many intervention models with proven track records. After all, why re-invent the wheel? Each of the following models is described and analyzed in pro-con format.

Response to Intervention: What Just Won’t Work

http://penningtonpublishing.com/blog/reading/response-to-intervention-what-just-wont-work/

With the newly released RtI document and as states and districts scramble to conform to Race to the Top carrots and sticks, voices of experience need to begin shouting quickly and boldly to be heard. Although I commend the International Reading Association (IRA) for assigning reading assessment a prominent role in their Response to Intervention (RtI) document, the language of the document betrays certain pedagogical presuppositions and is, at points, flat unrealistic.

More Articles, Free Resources, and Teaching Tips from the Pennington Publishing Blog

English-language Arts Standards

English-language Arts Instruction

Essay Strategies

The Writing Process/Writers Workshop

Writing Style

Grammar and Mechanics

Spelling

Vocabulary

Structural Analysis/Syllabication/Oral Language

Teaching Reading in the ELA Classroom

ELA/Reading Assessments

Reading Intervention

Independent Reading

Response to Intervention

EL/ESL

Differentiated Instruction (RtI)

Critical Thinking

Study Skills

Test Preparation

Educational Issues and Teaching Trends

Developmental Characteristics

Professional Development

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

Mark Pennington, MA Reading Specialist, is the author of the comprehensive reading intervention curriculum, Teaching Reading Strategies. Designed to significantly increase the reading abilities of students ages eight through adult within one year, the curriculum is decidedly un-canned, adaptable to various instructional settings, and simple to use. Get multiple choice reading assessments on two CDs, formative assessments, blending and syllabication activities, phonemic awareness and phonics workshops, comprehension worksheets, multi-level fluency passages on eight CDs, 390 flashcards, posters, activities, and games. Everything teachers need to teach a diagnostically-based reading intervention program for struggling readers at all reading levels is found in this comprehensive curriculum. Perfect for Response to Intervention (RtI). ESL and Special Education students, who struggle with language/auditory processing challenges will particularly benefit. Simple directions and well-crafted activities truly make this an almost no-prep curriculum. Works well as a half-year intensive program or full-year program, with or without paraprofessional assistance. 364 pages

Reading, Spelling/Vocabulary, Study Skills, Writing diagnostic reading assessments, phonics, reading assessments, reading comprehension, reading intervention, reading programs, reading strategies, reading worksheets, remedial reading, resource teachers, response to intervention, RTI, Rti grammar, RtI organization, Rti spelling, RtI teams, special education, SST, three tier instruction, vertical teaming, writing strategies

Overview

Response to Intervention (RtI) is a K-12 site-level decision-making process designed to facilitate and coordinate early and flexible responses to student’s learning and behavioral difficulties. RtI promotes data-based decision-making with respect to service placement and on-going progress monitoring. RtI was introduced as special education policy in the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004 (IDEA 2004). It is the law of the land. However, how that law is implemented at school sites will differ widely. Following are a few indicators of what effective and ineffective RtI can look like.

What Effective RtI Looks Like

An RtI team meets regularly at a school site. Composed of resource specialists (special education, reading specialist, EL coordinator), teachers, counselors, psychologists, and administration, most teams designate (or hire at large schools) an RtI coordinator. Typical responsibilities include the following:

Gatekeeping/Decision-Making- The RtI team may review recommendations of Student Study Teams (SST), or replace the SST as program gatekeepers. The team attempts to reduce unnecessary referrals to special education by ensuring that all students in the general education setting have access to appropriate curriculum and instruction at their own levels of need.

Diagnostic Assessment- The RtI team approves appropriate academic and behavioral diagnostic assessments and develops a process for efficient implementation and evaluation of the diagnostic data.

Placement- The RtI team typically follows a three-tiered approach to service placement akin to the Pyramid Model (Fox, Dunlap, Hemmeter, Joseph, & Strain, 2003): Tier 3 includes students requiring intensive instruction; Tier 2 includes at-risk students requiring strategic small group instruction; Tier 1 includes students requiring differentiated instruction within the core class.

Progress Monitoring-RtI requires specific procedures for regular documentation of progress at each assigned level of placement. The RtI team approves appropriate formative assessments and develops a process for efficient implementation and evaluation of the formative data. The RtI team applies this data to adjust tiered placement of students and recommends specific interventions and/or instructional practices to service providers.

Instructional Materials-The RtI team recommends the purchase of instructional materials suitable to the three-tiered instructional design.

Instructional Coaching-The RtI team works with site and district administration to coordinate professional development to ensure that service providers are equipped to deliver the research-based interventions appropriate to student needs.

What Ineffective RtI Looks Like

RtI can certainly look like “the same old sow with new lipstick.” New terms can substitute for old ones and the process for delivering instructional and behavioral support to students can remain essentially the same. Following are a few pitfalls to avoid in developing the RtI process:

We’re Not on the Same Page-All team members need to be thoroughly acquainted with the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004 (IDEA 2004) and related research.

Not Everyone Is Involved-RtI will fail if it is or is perceived as a “top-down” decision-making entity. Teachers are key to RtI success. Parent buy-in is essential.

Too Much Time and Overwhelming Paperwork-RtI needs to be efficient. Ironically, many of the old, inefficient means of individual diagnostic and formative assessments and record-keeping for progress-monitoring are promoted in much of the RtI literature. To secure long-lasting support, time and paperwork have to be minimized without sacrificing accuracy.

No Professional Development-Without the investment of quality site-based in-service training and support, the RtI process will be compromised.

No Budgetary Support-The three-tiered model requires purchase of instructional materials appropriate to each intervention. Resource specialists and teachers cannot be expected to re-invent the wheel or simply “water-down” the core instructional materials for service delivery.

Following are free diagnostic reading assessments, created by a team of reading specialists, that are user-friendly, simple to score and analyze, and designed to enable resource specialists and teachers of all levels of expertise to differentiate reading instruction: http://penningtonpublishing.com/assessments.php.

Mark Pennington, MA Reading Specialist, is the author of the comprehensive reading and spelling/vocabulary intervention programs: Teaching Reading Strategies and Teaching Spelling and Vocabulary.

Teaching Reading Strategies is designed to significantly increase the reading abilities of students ages eight to adult within one year, the curriculum is decidedly un-canned, adaptable to various instructional settings, and simple to use. With multiple choice reading assessments on two CDs, formative assessments, blending and syllabication activities, phonemic awareness and phonics workshops, comprehension worksheets, multi-level fluency passages on eight CDs, 390 flashcards, posters, activities, and games (364 pages), even novice reading teachers and para-professionals will be able to use these user-friendly resources to effectively differentiate reading instruction with minimal preparation. Appropriate for all three tiers of RtI instruction.

Teaching Spelling and Vocabulary is designed to remediate the vowel sound-spelling patterns that correspond with the comprehensive whole-class TSV Spelling Assessment, while teaching the advanced spelling rules and systematic vocabulary. The program includes assessments and memorable songs/raps on two CDs, spelling tests, Greek and Latin affixes/roots worksheets, syllable practice, spelling games, vocabulary games, and more to differentiate spelling and vocabulary instruction, please check out Teaching Spelling and Vocabulary. Appropriate for all three tiers of RtI instruction.

Reading, Spelling/Vocabulary, Study Skills IEP, intervention programs, math intervention, reading intervention, remedial reading, response to intervention, RTI, special education, SSTs, student study teams, vertical teaming

As administrators, special education teachers, EL coordinators, reading specialists, and teachers are scrambling to see how new Response to Intervention (RtI) guidelines will work with resources, personnel, schedules, and student populations, it may be helpful to examine eight of the many intervention models with proven track records. After all, why re-invent the wheel? Each of the following models is described and analyzed in pro-con format.

Mark Pennington, MA Reading Specialist, is the author of the comprehensive reading intervention curriculum, Teaching Reading Strategies. Designed to significantly increase the reading abilities of students ages eight through adult within one year, the curriculum is decidedly un-canned, adaptable to various instructional settings, and simple to use. Get multiple choice reading assessments on two CDs, formative assessments, blending and syllabication activities, phonemic awareness and phonics workshops, comprehension worksheets, multi-level fluency passages on eight CDs, 390 flashcards, posters, activities, and games. Everything teachers need to teach a diagnostically-based reading intervention program for struggling readers at all reading levels is found in this comprehensive curriculum. Perfect for Response to Intervention (RtI). ESL and Special Education students, who struggle with language/auditory processing challenges will particularly benefit. Simple directions and well-crafted activities truly make this an almost no-prep curriculum. Works well as a half-year intensive program or full-year program, with or without paraprofessional assistance. 364 pages

Reading, Spelling/Vocabulary, Study Skills, Writing EL reading, esl reading, intervention models, Language!, reading comprehension, reading intervention, reading programs, reading strategies, remedial reading, response to intervention, RTI

Teachers get into our profession for different reasons. Some of us truly enjoyed school and have always wanted to be teachers. Some of us value the independence of our own classrooms. Some of us like being part of a team. Some of us like the job security (true until recently). Some of us like the vacations. However, all of us share two common denominators: we enjoy working with students and we want to help make a difference in their lives.

These common denominators require some degree of compassion, empathy, and idealism. Admirable and necessary character traits for an educator, if you ask me. However, our penchant for helping individuals can work cross-purpose to our overall mission of helping all students. In fact, we often wind up teaching to the LCD (the Lowest Common Denominator). Perhaps I  had better explain…

Problems

• We may spend an inequitable amount of time, resources, and personal teacher attention on students who need instructional remediation. Our desire to see every student succeed often means that we give more to the neediest. Remedial instruction often includes more instructional time within the school day. “Early Bird” classes in primary, intervention classes in intermediate, middle, and high schools provide that additional time. Our schools fund these special classes, which often include lower teacher to student ratios and more supplies (such as remedial texts) to students who perform lower than grade-level norms. Within the “regular” class setting, students with instructional and/or behavioral challenges receive more personal teacher attention than do other students. Now, few teachers would argue that these students do not deserve this additional time, resources, and personal teacher attention. This would run counter to “who we are” as educators. However, in the real world there are fiscal, legal, and systemic constraints. All students can certainly be labeled as needy—think middle-performing and gifted students… Don’t these students deserve equitable time, resources, and teacher attention? Teachers are less comfortable with the concept of “taking away” instructional time, resources, and personal teacher attention. But, schools are reductive entities. Giving more there takes away from here.

• We may slow down the instructional pace to ensure that all students have a greater chance at mastering our teaching objectives. Typically, this means that we repeat instruction, provide additional examples, and spend more time on guided practice. Increased success in mastery of the teaching objectives for remedial students often comes at the cost of boring middle-performing and gifted students to tears.

• We may cater to the perceived needs of remedial students. Beyond special classes, we spoon-feed alternative instruction (pre-teach/re-teach, TPR, student choice, learning styles, and more) within the classroom. Teachers may provide peer tutoring or use instructional aides to monitor progress of remedial students and especially special education students. Teachers repeat or re-explain whole-class instructions to individuals. In catering to the needs of some students, we may find ourselves unintentionally lowering expectations for these students. For example, we may be advised to reduce the class or homework for individual students. We may choose to ignore teaching certain challenging standards. We may adjust tests, grading scales, or the type of assigned work.

Solutions

• Commit to spending an equitable amount of time, resources, and personal teacher attention on all students. Often, this means middle-performing students who can get “lost in the shuffle.” Think of the student names that are hardest to learn. They belong to your middle-performing students. I will bet that you quickly and more easily learn the names of your students with instructional or behavioral challenges and the names of your brightest students.

• Be an anti-tracking advocate. Tracking students assumes that there is such a possibility of a homogeneous class. There is no such animal. For example, as a reading specialist I can assure you that lumping together a group of remedial readers into an intervention class does not make homogeneous instruction possible. Students are remedial readers for a wide-variety of reasons. At the other end of the spectrum, no two gifted students are gifted in the same way. Tracking costs additional money. Reducing class sizes for some raises class sizes for others. Scheduling tracked classes is a nightmare and involves real costs. We can also discuss the negative social stigma for some students that often derives from tracking.

• Differentiating instruction for all of your students means that all deserve your personal attention. All students need to be personally challenged at the points of their diagnostically assessed instructional needs. Affording equitable personal teacher attention does not necessarily mean that you interact in the same way with each student; however, assigning appropriate learning activities needs to reflect that goal.

• Speed up your instructional pace. You don’t have to become a “fast-talker,” but becoming consciously aware of how you manage class time, and especially how you deliver instruction, is essential to the success of all of your students. Counter-intuitively, remedial students benefit from a “hurried, yet relaxed” instructional pace. Setting a daily time for differentiated instruction will allow you to judiciously address students who need more time.

• Guard time-on-task zealously. Use the full amount of class time by designing effective “openers” and “closers.” Train your students to make quick instructional transitions. Know your own proclivities. If you are the “funny teacher,” tell fewer jokes. If you are the “share my personal life teacher,” tell less stories and spend more time on Facebook®. Having a peer observe your time-on-task instructional patterns can be an eye-opening experience. Advocate forcefully for fewer class interruptions.

• If two instructional activities or methodologies accomplish the same mastery, teach the one that takes less time. To tread on a few cherished traditions: sugar cube or toothpick forts and castles, dioramas, masks, oral book reports from every student, and quite a few science projects just have to go. Process and fun are fine, but we have choices to make as professionals.

• We know from years of educational research that maintaining high expectations for all students is essential to their success. Guard against those that would provide the “realistic” caveat to that statement. Maintain your idealism that all students can and must learn. Treat students as individuals and know their needs, but don’t cater to them and avoid spoon-feeding. Encourage independent learning and maximum effort from your students.

Teachers are habitual creatures, just as are our students. It takes time to change from teaching to the Lowest Common Denominator to differentiating instruction for all of your students.

Ready to teach all of your students? The author of this article, Mark Pennington, is an educational author in the ELA/reading fields of instruction. Check out his wonderful resources to efficiently differentiate instruction at www.penningtonpublishing.com.

Reading, Writing best teaching practices, differentiated instruction, differentiating instruction, equitable instruction, gifted students, learning centers, learning styles, reading fluency, reading intervention, reading programs, remedial reading, Rick Wormeli, RTI, special education, tracking

Although there is much that is “right” about Read Naturally for some students, there is much that is also “wrong” about the program and how it has been applied in our schools. By way of full disclosure, as a reading specialist, I have used Read Naturally in a variety of settings and found the program to be beneficial in some cases. Additionally, as an educational author, I have my own reading fluency program (described at the end of the article), so these being said upfront, “Let the buyer (reader) beware.”

Read Naturally is a hugely successful reading fluency program, developed in 1991 by Candyce Ihnot. The program’s proponents have been many, including “top name” reading researchers, especially those hired on as Read Naturally presenters, and countless teacher testimonials. The program’s detractors have been few. This article will summarize the program for the uninitiated, discuss the controversies regarding the program’s research base, and analyze the pros and cons of the program from the perspective of an MA reading specialist who has personally used Read Naturally with students and also supervised Read Naturally intervention programs at several elementary schools.

What is Read Naturally?

As http://readnaturally.com/ defines its program focus: “Fluency is the ability to read as well as we speak, and make sense of the text without stopping to decode each word. Read Naturally develops fluency using products that increase accuracy, speed, and vocal expression.”

The company describes the components of its program as follows: “Read Naturally’s structured intervention programs combine teacher modeling, repeated reading, and progress monitoring — three strategies that research has shown are effective in improving students’ reading proficiency. Using audio support and graphs of their progress, students work with high-interest material at their skill level.

Teacher Modeling: With teacher modeling, a proficient reader models good, correct reading for a less able reader. In Read Naturally, students read along while listening to a recording of a fluent reader. This helps students learn new words and encourages proper pronunciation, expresson, and phrasing.

Repeated Reading: Repeated reading is another strategy that research has shown improves fluency. In Read Naturally, students practice reading a story until they can read it at a pre-determined goal rate. Mastering a story helps students build fluency and confidence.

Progress Monitoring: Daily monitoring of student progress has also been shown to improve student achievement. Students become more involved in the learning process, and teachers remain aware of each student’s progress. In Read Naturally, students monitor their progress by graphing the number of words read correctly before practicing and then again after practicing. The graph shows the students’ progress, motivating them to continue to read and improve.” http://www.readnaturally.com/approach/default.htm

Program Nuts and Bolts

To be a bit more specific, Read Naturally is designed to improve reading fluency using a combination of books, audiotapes, and computer software… Students work at a reading level appropriate for their achievement level, progress through the program at their own rate, and work, for the most part, on an independent basis. The program has two versions. In one, students use audiocas­settes or CDs in conjunction with hard-copy reading materials. In the second version, students use the Read Naturally computer program alone. The Read Naturally program is designed to increase time spent reading. http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/pdf/WWC_Read_Naturally_071607.pdf

The Read Naturally Reading Research Issues

Countless testimonials attest to the efficacy of this reading fluency program. However, the research base for these glowing reports has been mixed. The research studies cited on the Read Naturally website show impressive gains in fluency for children from kindergarten to seventh grade. However, according to the United States Department of Education What Works Clearinghouse (WWC), researchers evaluated 14 of the research studies involving the use of Read Naturally and came to these conclusions:

“One study of Read Naturally met the What Works Clearinghouse (WWC) evidence standards, and one study met WWC evidence standards with reservations. The two studies included 106 students from first and second grades in two elementary schools in Arizona and Georgia. Based on these two studies, the WWC considers the extent of evidence for Read Naturally to be small for fluency and comprehension. No studies that met WWC evidence standards with or without reservations addressed alphabetics or general reading achievement.

Read Naturally was found to have no discernible effects on fluency and reading comprehension.” http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/pdf/WWC_Read_Naturally_071607.pdf

Of course, no publisher wants the effectiveness of its program to be labeled as having “no discernible effects on fluency and reading comprehension,” especially by the United States Department of Education. In response, Read Naturally has dismissed the conclusions reached by the WWC regarding these two research studies by commenting as follows:

“By not using Read Naturally materials as intended, the Hancock and Denton studies reviewed by WWC did not assess the effectiveness of the strategy.” In digging a bit deeper, I found the Read Naturally’s complaints about the two studies that met the WWC criteria and the WWC analyses of these studies. The Read Naturally complaints involve what I would consider to be relatively insignificant variables: 1. the failure of the researchers to pre-teach vocabulary 2. the failure of the researchers to continue fluency practice until the students’ goals were attained and 3. the fact that the researchers used some word recognition flashcards as part of the dedicated Read Naturally intervention time, thus minimally reducing the Read Naturally recommended intervention time. In my view, Read Naturally is certainly being a bit nick-picky in their dismissal of the WWC educational research findings.

In fact, Read Naturally goes even further to dismiss the WWC conclusions. Read Naturally turns the tables on the WWC and criticizes the expertise and credibility of these United States Department of Education researchers:

“An analysis of the What Works Clearinghouse (WWC) leadership shows limited expertise in reading instruction among its key staff and principal investigators. Only two of the 14 key staff and principal investigators could be considered experts in reading instruction. Furthermore, WWC does not specialize in reading. This organization reviews a wide range of educational products, from math to high school dropout programs.”

and

“Based on Read Naturally’s research on and experience with these consumer guides, as well as our knowledge of the studies they analyzed, we assert that the FCRR and the University of Oregon reviews provide valid critiques of our strategy. The WWC reviews do not.” Two other links from the Read Naturally website downplay the findings of the WWC:

1. Chart comparing the WWC, FCRR, and University of Oregon

2. http://www.readnaturally.com/approach/evaluators.htm

Furthermore, the highly respected Best Evidence Encyclopedia from John Hopkins University School of Education, headed by Robert E. Slavin characterizes the Read Naturally program as “Limited Evidence of Effectiveness: Weak Evidence with Notable Effects” with no “qualifying studies.” http://www.bestevidence.org/

Evaluating How the Read Naturally Program Works: The Pros

• Fluency is highly correlated to reading comprehension and the Read Naturally program generally does a good job in remediating this reading deficit for both children and adults.
• Students generally enjoy both the content and the process of the Read Naturally program design.
• The program is highly motivational. The kids love the two-color pencils for the “cold” (unpracticed) and “hot” (practiced) fluency timings. They love the personal goal-setting and the progress monitoring charts.
• Students reading slightly below grade-level fluency norms tend to improve in their unpracticed timings after a few months.
• Students like reading along with the high-interest non-fiction passages. The passages are very interesting to both children and adults. The multi-cultural focus of the passages gives students of all background buy-in to the program and some prior knowledge is already built-in because of the passage content.
• The passages are also leveled appropriately. The Brief Oral Screener does a fairly good and quick job at placing students at their “fluency levels.”
• The program can be run by a supervising paraprofessional. No real teacher expertise is required.
• The management system, including the equipment, works well and prevents off-task behavior problems.
• The thirty minute sessions, three times per week, are reasonable amounts of time for reading intervention in or out of class.
• The Read Naturally is systematic and quantitative. The numerical components of words per minute, fluency norms, and number of miscues makes for easy progress monitoring and data analysis. Teachers who use Read Naturally have impressive reading matrices.

Evaluating How the Read Naturally Program Works: The Cons

• Teachers tend to expect Read Naturally to solve all reading problems. It doesn’t. Read Naturally does not remediate phonological awareness or decoding deficits (although there is a separate Read Naturally phonics program). Read Naturally does not address vocabulary deficits. Read Naturally does not teach reading comprehension.
• Although the program is highly motivational, students do get bored, especially after a few months. Many students are “motivated” to cheat in their timings and recordings, especially when natural competitiveness among children is not actively limited by the paraprofessional or teacher.
• Although the Brief Oral Screener properly places students for fluency practice, the suggested reading levels limit student improvement. For example, a student may improve in his reading level after the fourth passage in Level 5.0; however, there are twenty more passages to go in that level and the teacher would have little clue that he needs to be reassessed. Usually, students just complete their level and move on to the next. Although the program pushes students to read faster, it does not push students to read more complex text with higher vocabulary, more syllables per word, longer sentences, and more difficult sentence structure.
• Students reading far below grade-level fluency norms tend to improve less than their slightly below grade-level peers. This is probably due to more severe reading problems, especially phonemic awareness and decoding issues.
• Many teachers have at or above grade-level fluency readers participate in the program and little reading gain is noted by these students.
• The Read Naturally passages are high-interest and all non-fictional, which are positives. However, the passages are a strange mixture of narrative and exposition. This is unfortunate because at the age that many students begin using the Read Naturally fluency program (third-fourth grade), that is when most of their academic reading shifts from narrative to exposition. Read Naturally passages are distinctively different than the students’ social studies and science books. Thus, less transfer of text knowledge and text schema from Read Naturally is readily made to what becomes the bulk of student academic reading. I’ve noticed that students do not transfer their fluency skill-set from the Read Naturally passages to other “real” classroom reading nearly as much as teachers would like.
• Using Read Naturally as an intervention program can be reductive. For many remedial reading students, fluency is not the greatest issue. Yet, these students may only receive differentiated fluency instruction because there are no other programs, there is no more allotted reading intervention time, or there is no teaching expertise to address different reading needs. The relevant question is… “What else could be done with 90 instructional minutes in the week?”
• Such intense focus on the “reading skill” of fluency may supplant focus on reading comprehension. Ask most students what they are learning, using Read Naturally, and they will say, “We’re learning to read faster with better expression.” They won’t say, “We’re learning how to understand our reading more” or “We’re learning about____.”

  Indeed, the five question (mostly literal) comprehension response for Levels .8—5.0 and the nine questions for 5.6 on up are woefully inadequate for comprehension.

• The “look at the title and picture and predict what the story is about” and brief pre-teaching the pronunciation of difficult words is woefully inadequate to promote access to prior knowledge. The questions at the end of the selection are not previewed. No purpose is established for the reading, other than to read quickly, accurately, and with good expression. In my experience, students answer the questions by skimming the passage for the answers once the repeated readings are done. Thus, reading and comprehension, are in reality, two separate processes from the students’ perspectives. There is no internal monitoring of the text, nor any self-questioning strategies, nor any reader response in terms of reflection or analysis. Reading is passive, although very fast!

• Although exposed to good content vocabulary in the passages, little is done with unknown words. Students are not required to activate context clue strategies with unknown words. One of the comprehension questions is vocabulary-based, but this is hardly enough to develop vocabulary.

• Read Naturally is extremely expensive. The cost of one level of reading passages is well over $100.00. Site or district licenses are available, but are costly. The program does not include the multiple cassette or CD-players or computer stations. That does not include the $9.00 per dozen two-color pencils. You get the idea.

Are there any reasonable alternatives to comprehensive reading intervention, which includes fluency practice for those who need it and address the major concerns presented with respect to the Read Naturally program? Yes. The author of this article, Mark Pennington, is pleased to present the comprehensive reading intervention program, Teaching Reading Strategies (TRS). TRS uses the five SCRIP Comprehension Strategies to teach readers how to independently interact with and understand both narrative and expository text. The SCRIP acronym stands for Summarize, Connect, Re-think, Interpret, and Predict. All five SCRIP strategies are reinforced in each of the 43 Animal Passage Comprehension Worksheets. These brief high-interest all-expository passages have been designed for remedial or reluctant readers. Each article describes the key features, life cycle, and habitat of the animals featured on the Animal Sound-Spelling Study Cards, and provides interesting facts about each animal’s role within its own ecosystem. Passages are leveled in a unique pyramid design: the first two paragraphs are at an adjusted third grade (Fleish-Kincaid) level (after deleting a few key multi-syllabic words such as carnivores or long animal names such as armadillos); the next two paragraphs are at the fifth grade level; and the last two are at the seventh grade level. The reader begins practice at an easier level to build confidence and then moves to more difficult academic language and sentence length. This helps students “push through” the limiting barriers of “one reading level fits all” fluency passages. Each of the articles is recorded at three different speeds to ensure that your students are challenged at the appropriate reading rates.

Animal Passage Comprehension Worksheets each have five questions–one question for each of the five strategies. The questions are placed in the right-hand margin and require students to interact with the article. Students answer the questions in the margins. Additionally, three key vocabulary words are boldfaced. Students should define and use vocabulary words in original context clue sentences on the back of their worksheets. Each worksheet takes students about fifteen minutes to complete. A Teacher Answer Key follows the worksheets.

Additionally, Teaching Reading Strategies provides multiple choice reading assessments on two CDs, formative assessments, blending and syllabication activities, phonemic awareness and phonics workshops, comprehension worksheets, multi-level fluency passages on eight CDs, 390 flashcards, posters, activities, and games. Everything teachers need to teach a diagnostically-based reading intervention program for struggling readers at all reading levels is found in this comprehensive curriculum. Perfect for ESL and Special Education students, who struggle with language/auditory processing challenges. Simple directions and well-crafted activities truly make this an almost no-prep curriculum. Works well as a half-year intensive program or full-year program, with or without paraprofessional assistance. 364 pages

Reading fluency, fluency intervention, free read naturally stories, read naturally, read naturally passages, read naturally stories, reading fluency, reading fluency programs, reading intervention, remedial reading

Over the last dozen years, our nation’s educators have dramatically improved K-3 literacy skills. A return to phonics-based instruction, improved teacher-training, and increased funding (including lower primary class sizes) all share credit. Recent National Assessment of Educational (NAEP) fourth-grade reading scores attest to this improvement. Especially encouraging are the increases in reading performance by lower socio-economic students. Indeed, we have made solid progress in learning to read at these age levels. However, reading scores still level off in upper elementary and noticeably decline in middle school.

Reading scores for students entering high school are particularly sobering. In high poverty schools, fewer than one-in-six students read at grade level (Perie et al., 2005). Half of freshman students have reading scores more than two grade levels below ninth grade expectations (Balfanz et al, 2002). Not until the junior and senior years of high school do we see an upward trend, and these results are significantly skewed due to high school drop-outs. Although we still have little meaningful data on who drops out and when, it does not take a Carnegie Foundation fellow to surmise that students who have dropped out of the system by this point tend to be those most challenged by lack of literacy skills.

And, even those students who remain in the comprehensive high schools on the college-track face challenges. Only have of the college-bound students taking the ACT college entrance exam were found ready to complete college-level reading assignments in core subjects such as English, history, math, and science (ACT 2005).

Why are we failing our secondary students?

The predominant educational philosophy in American schools can be summarized as this: Learn the skills of literacy in K-6 and apply these skills to learn academic content in 7-12. In other words, learning to read should transition to reading to learn. Courses have been organized in middle schools (or junior high schools) and high schools by academic areas. Even English is considered an academic content area, primarily organized by literature content standards in most school districts. Most secondary English teachers consider themselves as teachers of literature, less so that of reading or writing. Teachers have been trained and hired to reflect this secondary focus. For example, secondary teachers in most credential programs still only take one post-graduate “reading strategies” course. Clearly, this educational philosophy and its application are failing a sizeable portion of our secondary students.

What can we do to reverse this trend?

To meet the increasing demands of Twenty-First Century literacy skills, we need to abandon the current educational reading philosophy at the secondary level. Every secondary teacher needs the training to re-orient instruction and coursework to a reading to learn pedagogy. Yes, every teacher a teacher of reading (and writing). Now, obviously some disciplines should shoulder less of this responsibility. No one is suggesting that geometry teachers should abandon teaching theorems and begin teaching reading fluency. Both university and school districts need to develop partnerships to improve this expertise and re-write curriculum to reflect this focus. New collaborative partnerships need to be formed, in terms of flexible cohorts with professors and adjunct district personnel teaching both pre-service and in-service professional development in literacy skills. We also have to get past our mortar and brick biases and embrace online education to accomplish these ends. This focus ongoing professional development should be key to Response to Intervention (RtI) at any secondary school.

Secondary school curriculum and instruction must be both content and process focused. And this re-orientation is not solely for students with poor literacy skills; this paradigm shift is for our “best and brightest,” as well. We already have the diagnostic tools to differentiate instruction, now we have to make the commitment to doing so. Higher level reading involves analysis, critical thinking, and problem-solving. All students need explicit instruction to master the rigorous demands of Twenty-First Century academic reading. Once this instruction is mastered, we can then more effectively return to reading to learn.

Mark Pennington, MA Reading Specialist, is the author of the comprehensive reading intervention curriculum, Teaching Reading Strategies. Designed to significantly increase the reading abilities of students ages eight through adult within one year, the curriculum is decidedly un-canned, adaptable to various instructional settings, and simple to use. Get multiple choice reading assessments on two CDs, formative assessments, blending and syllabication activities, phonemic awareness and phonics workshops, comprehension worksheets, multi-level fluency passages on eight CDs, 390 flashcards, posters, activities, and games. Everything teachers need to teach a diagnostically-based reading intervention program for struggling readers at all reading levels is found in this comprehensive curriculum. Perfect for ESL and Special Education students, who struggle with language/auditory processing challenges. Simple directions and well-crafted activities truly make this an almost no-prep curriculum. Works well as a half-year intensive program or full-year program, with or without paraprofessional assistance. 364 pages

Reading learning to read, NAEP, reading comprehension, reading intervention, reading strategies, reading to learn, remedial reading, secondary reading

As an MA reading specialist, I’ve seen some strange remedial reading fads come and go over the years. Much like new weight loss products, each new fad looks enticing and promising. Let’s face it. Everyone wants the magic reading pill that will transform poor readers into skillful readers overnight.

My favorite has to be the developmental reading strategy that was quite en vogue back in the 1970s and 1980s. Advocates theorized that poor readers must have missed a key developmental stage somewhere along the way that triggered the brain’s ability to hard-wire the synapses to efficiently interpret and put together sound-symbols. After numerous studies, a positive correlation was found between those students unable to decode and those students who skipped the crawling stage, going from snake-like scooting directly to walking. The reading therapy? You guessed it; poor readers were put on all fours and made to crawl.

Two recent fads rival the crawling therapy. I stumbled upon this article from the Purdue University Calumet Chronicle, February 1, 2010, written by Andrea Drac. At first, I thought it was clever student satire, but NO… It seems that teachers at a number of elementary schools in Northwest Indiana have been requiring students to read out loud to stuffed animals and claim impressive gains in reading comprehension as a result. “One school in particular saw their sixth grade reading levels go from just 47 percent to 93 percent,” said Richard Riddering, Assistant Chancellor for Student Development & Outreach. See the whole article at Strange, but True: Stuffed Animals Increase Reading Levels) but you get the gist.

A related reading fad was detailed in a Sacramento Bee article, published March 20, 2010, titled “UC Davis study shows dogs can help youngsters read [sic].” Here are excerpts:

“Westley Kear, 11, hated reading aloud. Then he found the perfect audience.

Digory, a Labrador retriever mix from a rescue group in Walnut Creek, melted into Westley’s lap when he read to the dog from his book, Warriors into the Wild, as part of a study at CU Davis. Digory never asked Westley to speak up, slow down or repeat sentences.

It remains to be seen whether children would do just as well reading to hamsters, rabbits, cats or turtles, the researchers said, but the fact that dogs are attentive and nonjudgmental seems to make a difference.”

Read the rest, if you must, here. I love collecting these crazy reading fads, by the way… If you have any favorites, please post away.

Mark Pennington, MA Reading Specialist, is the author of the comprehensive reading intervention curriculum, Teaching Reading Strategies. Designed to significantly increase the reading abilities of students ages eight through adult within one year, the curriculum is decidedly un-canned, adaptable to various instructional settings, and simple to use. Get multiple choice reading assessments on two CDs, formative assessments, blending and syllabication activities, phonemic awareness and phonics workshops, comprehension worksheets, multi-level fluency passages on eight CDs, 390 flashcards, posters, activities, and games. Everything teachers need to teach a diagnostically-based reading intervention program for struggling readers at all reading levels is found in this comprehensive curriculum. Perfect for ESL and Special Education students, who struggle with language/auditory processing challenges. Simple directions and well-crafted activities truly make this an almost no-prep curriculum. Works well as a half-year intensive program or full-year program, with or without paraprofessional assistance. 364 pages

Reading phonics, reading comprehension, reading fads, reading intervention, reading programs, reading therapy, remedial reading, response to intervention, RTI, teaching reading

I knew there had to be a short-cut to improving reading success. Why didn’t I learn this in my MA Reading Specialist program? Response to Intervention educators need to take note of this cutting-edge research. In today’s tough economic climate, the cost of one stuffed animal for improved reading gains is certainly a cost-effective approach. Yes, I am being factitious.

From the Purdue University Calumet Chronicle, February 1, 2010 by Andrea Drac. Here is the article:

Over the years, stuffed animals have become iconic childhood toys. They are used as guests for picnics and tea parties and the occasional session of dress-up and, now, as “reading buddies.”

PUC is participating in the “I Need a Hug” program, a program designed to help tackle literacy in schools using stuffed animals as an aid. The event, which involves a stuffed animal drive, will take place during the week of Feb. 8 -11 in the SUL building and all stuffed animals are being donated first to the United Way and will make their way to 85 local elementary schools in the area. These schools are using the animals to better enhance children’s reading skills.

Before this program improved reading levels, it started for a different reason.

“The program is called, ‘I Need a Hug,’ because it first started as a way for school counselors to help students who were in crisis in elementary schools around NW Indiana,” said Assistant Chancellor for Student Development & Outreach Richard Riddering.

“The counselors gave the students a stuffed animal and told them to give it a hug whenever they felt as if they ‘needed a hug.’ The students needed this because they felt very stressed as a result of situations that were happening in their personal lives.”

Later on, the program went from helping out stressed children to helping them with their reading levels.

“School administrators brought the stuffed animal concept into the classroom as a way to increase the time students were spending reading,” said Riddering.

According to Riddering, students were given a stuffed animal as a “reading buddy” and were encouraged to read to their buddy. Because of this method, reading scores increased greatly.

“One school in particular saw their sixth grade reading levels go from just 47 percent to 93 percent,” Riddering said. “That’s huge success!”

Such successes make the need for this stuffed animal drive strong and Riddering states it is important for PUC students to rally around this cause.

“I’ve thrown out a number of 1,000 new stuffed animals as a goal for our students,” he said. “I’m hoping we can hit that goal, and maybe even surpass it. I’m very optimistic that PUC students will rise to the occasion.”

Riddering is very passionate about the program, not just for the cause itself but the emotional meaning behind it as well.

“I think the ‘I Need a Hug’ program is a wonderful way for PUC students, faculty and staff to make a huge dent in our area’s below par reading levels and, at the same time, make a huge difference in the lives of students who are struggling emotionally,” he said. “If our students look at it that way, they can actually see a face of a child who feels better about themselves with every stuffed animal’s face. So, I’m really excited to see our students come together to support this effort.” Find the article here:

http://media.www.pucchronicle.com/media/storage/paper1082/news/2010/02/01/News/Stuffed.Animals.Become.Reading.Buddies.In.hug.Program-3861480.shtml

Mark Pennington, MA Reading Specialist, is the author of the comprehensive reading intervention curriculum, Teaching Reading Strategies. Designed to significantly increase the reading abilities of students ages eight through adult within one year, the curriculum is decidedly un-canned, adaptable to various instructional settings, and simple to use. Get multiple choice reading assessments on two CDs, formative assessments, blending and syllabication activities, phonemic awareness and phonics workshops, comprehension worksheets, multi-level fluencypassages on eight CDs, 390 flashcards, posters, activities, and games. Everything teachers need to teach a diagnostically-based reading intervention program for struggling readers at all reading levels is found in this comprehensive curriculum. Perfect for ESL and Special Education students, who struggle with language/auditory processing challenges. Simple directions and well-crafted activities truly make this an almost no-prep curriculum. Works well as a half-year intensive program or full-year program, with or without paraprofessional assistance. 364 pages

Reading phonics, reading comprehension, reading fluency, reading intervention, reading intervention programs, reading levels, reading programs, reading strategies, remedial reading, response to intervention

With the Response to Intervention (RTI) model now being incorporated into many school districts today, it has become increasingly important to help frame the differentiated instruction (DI) discussion in an objective manner that won’t promote narrow agendas and will encourage teachers to experiment with DI in their own classrooms. Before I offer some tips on the dos and don’ts of differentiated instruction, it makes sense to address the key reasons that some teachers resist this educational approach.

Why Some Teachers Resist Differentiated Instruction

1. Some teachers resist implementing DI because they wrongly perceive that managing diverse instructional strategies and on-going assessments would necessitate a veteran superstar teacher with no life outside of the classroom. Some teachers believe that DI requires too much preparation, assessment, correction, and record-keeping. These may have been truisms years ago, but clever teachers have since developed effective short-cuts to planning, assessment, and paper work. DI need not be a cause of teacher “burn-out” and teachers of all ability and experience levels can begin differentiated instruction with proper training and support. Furthermore, DI is not an “all or nothing” proposition, as some would lead us to believe. Most teachers layer in different aspects of DI over time.

2. The increasing emphasis on rigorous standards-based instruction and teaching to high-stakes tests have clearly prevented some teachers from implementing DI. In today’s educational climate, teachers do not want to be accused of “dumbing-down” instruction. However, DI can provide better access to those rigorous standards and greater success on those high-stakes tests, if done right. Differentiated instruction adjusts the focus from teaching to learning. Teachers can help students “catch up” through scaffolded instruction, while the students concurrently “keep up” with rigorous grade-level instruction.

3. Some teachers resist implementing differentiated instruction by attempting to create  homogeneous classes. Early-late reading and math instruction in the elementary grades and tracked ability classes in the secondary schools are designed to provide qualitatively different instruction for different student levels. However, analyzing the data of any subject-specific diagnostic assessment will indicate that students have a wide variety of relative strengths and weaknesses in any subject and that “different student levels” is an arbitrary and unworkable concept. Even within highly-tracked programs, DI is absolutely necessary because each student is unique with different skill sets and learning needs.

*For the complete article on Why Teachers Resist Differentiated Instruction, check out this link.

The Whats of Differentiated Instruction

Don’ts

1. Don’t Trust the Standardized Test Data. The results of standardized tests provide “macro” data that can assess program quality or level of student achievement relative to the composite scores of other students. The data cannot pinpoint the “micro” data of student strengths and weaknesses in the skills and content that teachers need to assess. Even standards-based assessments provide only generic data, not the “nuts and bolts” discreet skills analyses that can effectively inform instruction.

2. Don’t Trust Your Colleagues. Teaching is an independent practice. No matter how many years we have eaten lunch with our teacher peers, no matter how many conferences, department or grade-level meetings we have attended together, no matter how many of the same teaching resources we share, and no matter how specific our scope and sequences of instruction align, we cannot assume that the students of our colleagues have mastered the skills that we need to build upon.

3. Don’t Trust Yourself. Making instructional decisions based upon “what the students know and what they don’t know” requires objective data to inform our judgments. There are just too many variables to trust even the best teacher intuition: family situations, language, culture, school experience, just to name a few. If we are honest, even veteran teachers are frequently fooled by sophisticated student coping mechanisms and cultural stereotypes.

Dos

1. Use relevant and specific diagnostic assessments. Eliminate the trust factor with good diagnosis. Record and analyze the student data to inform direct and differentiated instruction, including what skills and concepts need to be taught, how much time needs to be spent upon instruction, who needs intensive instruction and who needs only review, and who has already mastered the skill or concept. Use whole-class, multiple-choice assessments whenever possible, to minimize assessment and grading times.

2. Develop quick and frequent formative assessments to gauge student mastery of your teaching objectives. Use the data to inform and adapt your instruction accordingly. Learning is the heart and soul of DI, not teaching.

3. Establish and use a collaborative model to determine the whats of instruction. Include students, parents, and teaching colleagues in data analysis. Collaboration is essential to successful implementation of DI and RTI.

The Hows of Differentiated Instruction

Don’ts

1. Just because DI is student-centered, don’t go overboard on adjusting the how of instruction to correspond to student learning preferences. Learning styles, multi-sensory instruction, and multiple intelligences are long-standing educational constructs, but are based upon minimal research. Learning preference inventories do not provide reliable diagnostics about how to differentiate instruction. For example, auditory and visual processing deficits can be diagnosed, but no research has yet demonstrated which instructional strategies work best for these learners.

2. Don’t devolve all decision-making to student choice regarding how they choose to learn. Students don’t know what they don’t know. To devolve the how of instruction to student choice is to abrogate our responsibilities as informed and objective decision-makers. Do we really want to entrust the how of instruction to an eight-year old student and agree that Johnny knows best how to learn his multiplication tables? Do we really want to allow middle schoolers to choose whether they can listen to their iPods® while they silently read their social studies textbooks?

3. Don’t allow the hows of learning to destroy class management or time-on-task instructional efficiency. We should always perform a cost-benefit analysis on how we differentiate instruction. Good teachers weigh the needs of the class and the needs of the individual students, and then make decisions accordingly. Sometimes the optimal instructional methodology needs to be ditched and substituted with another because the students or teacher just can’t handle learning or teaching that way that day.

Dos

1. Consider the needs and differences of the learners. We never want to limit students to our own imaginations. Students do have important insights into their own learning that we need to consider. Teaching students to monitor and experiment with how they learn best is invaluable to their development as life-long learners. This kind of self-reflection can be promoted by teaching metacognitive strategies, such as self-questioning during independent reading or self-assessment on an analytical writing rubric.

2. Model different ways to learn skills and concepts. For example, in composition, some students prefer to draft first and revise thereafter; others prefer to integrate the drafting and revision process. Wouldn’t a teacher-led “think-aloud” that models these two composition processes make sense? Students learn which option or combination thereof works best for them through teacher direction, not from a sink or swim, work-it-out-yourself, trial and error process.

3. Use a variety of instructional methodologies. Effective DI instruction adapts to the needs of the learners. For some skills or concepts, DI involves direct, explicit instruction to pre-teach or re-teach concepts. For others, DI is best accomplished in heterogeneous cooperative groups or homogeneous ability groups. For still others, DI requires individualized instruction, via targeted worksheets and one-on-one review.

At its core, DI is simply good, sound teaching. Some proponents seem to intimate that DI is the ultimate educational panacea. However, no educational approach absolutely ensures student success. Unfortunately, it is all too often the case that you “can lead a horse to water, but you can’t make him drink.” Some students exposed to the best DI will continue to fail. But, directly addressing the individual learning needs of our students, rather than teaching a class as though all individuals in it were basically alike, offers our best chance of success for all.

The writer of this article, Mark Pennington, is an educational author of teaching resources to differentiate instruction in the fields of reading and English-language arts. His comprehensive curricula: Teaching Grammar and Mechanics, Teaching Essay Strategies, Teaching Reading Strategies, and Teaching Spelling and Vocabulary help teachers differentiate instruction with little additional teacher prep and/or specialized training.

Reading, Study Skills, Writing auditory processing, constructivism, content area reading, content based reading, DEAR, DI, diagnostic assessments, diagnostic ELA assessments, diagnostic reading assessments, differentiated instruction, differentiated reading, differentiated reading instruction, free reading assessments, independent reading, international reading association, learning styles, multi-sensory, multiple intelligences, race to the top, reading assessments, reading intervention, reading programs, reading skills, remedial reading, response to intervention, SSR, visual processing