Early Literary Success: Effective Intervention for Kindergarten Students at Risk for Reading Difficulties Washington Education Research Association 22nd.

Early Literary Success: Effective Intervention for Kindergarten Students at

Risk for Reading Difficulties

Washington Education Research Association

22nd Annual Washington State Assessment Conference

December, 6-8 2006

SeaTac

Mike Jacobsen-Assessment & Curriculum Director-White River School District

Janel Keating-Director of Student Learning-White River School District

Bari Olson-Para-Educator-Mountain Meadow Elementary

Early Intervention in Literacy: What do we know

• Word recognition skills at the end of first grade were strongly related to reading proficiency a the end of fourth grade- Nine of ten children who were deficient in first grade were also poor readers in fourth grade

– Juel (1988)

• Eight of ten children with severe reading problems at the end of first grade performed below the average range at the beginning of third grade

– Torgeson (1997)

• WRSD DIBELS data indicated that poor performing students in kindergarten tended to remain as poor performing students in latter grades and were often referred for LAP/Title or Special Education services

Early Intervention in Literacy: What do we know

• Felton (1993) Concluded that five elements were critical to a beginning reading program for children at risk of reading failure;– 1. Direct instruction in language analysis

– 2. Explicit teaching of the alphabetic code

– 3. Reading and spelling must be taught simultaneously

– 4. Reading instruction must be sufficiently intense for learning to occur

– 5. Use of decodable words and texts enhanced automaticity

What Predicts Successful Reading at the Beginning of First Grade?

• Fathers occupational status

• Amount of reading by parents

• Preschool

• Parents reading to children

• Phonemic awareness

• Library membership

• Child’s gender

• Amount of time watching TV

• Oral language (PPVT)

• Knowledge of the alphabet

• Number of books child owns

• Teacher prediction of reading success

What Predicts Successful Reading at the Beginning of First Grade?

• Phoneme segmentation .62

• Letter names .58

• Kindergarten teacher predictions .50

• Performance on the PPVT .39

• Number of books child owns .25

• Amount that parents read to child .25

• Gender .18

• Amount that parents read .11

• Preschool attendance .05

• Parents occupational status -.30

• Library membership ?

Early Reading Intervention Pilot

• ERI-Developed through a Federal grant with University of Oregon and Bethel School District, Eugene Oregon.

• Purpose is to provide intensive early literacy intervention services to kindergarten students at risk for developing reading difficulties

• Initial research indicated that 97% of kindergarten students who were taught with ERI experienced faster achievement rates and sustained these rates into second grade

• ERI-30 minutes of daily, explicit instruction – 15 minutes on select phonological awareness skills, alphabet

understanding,and word reading

– 15 minutes on further development of phonological awareness writing development, and integrating phonologic awareness and orthography ( letter-sound to whole word writing)


• Grant awarded and training January

• Pilot Implemented March

• 42 students from Foothills/Mountain Meadow– 30 General education kindergarten students- 3x per week-1:5 groups

– 4-Special education kindergarten students

– 8-General education first grade students

• Each experimental group had a matched control group

• Summary of outcomes– All experimental groups significantly outgained controls on DIBELS

phonemic segmentation winter to spring,

– Gen. ed kindergarten=W PS=2.5/S PS=22.5 to W PS=5/S PS=10.5 – Statistically significant

– Sped=W PS=4/S PS=11 to W PS=4.5 to S PS=.5

– Gen. Ed. First=W ORF=7/S ORF=20 to W ORF=3 to S PS-12

– One control group outgained the experimental group in DIBELS, letter names.

– Gen. Ed. Kindergarten=W L=10/S L 27 to W L=10.5/S L=18

Early Reading Intervention:04-Winter to Spring Growth, General Ed Kindergarten

0

10

20

30

Phon

emic

Segs

./ Le

tter N

ames

Experimental 2.5 22.5 10.5 18

Control 5 10.5 10 27

W PS S PS W L S L

Early Reading Intervention: 04-Winter to Spring Growth, Kindergarten Special Education

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Phon

emic

Seg

./Let

ter N

ames

Experimental 4 11 0 7

Control 4.5 0.5 6 26

W PS S PS W L S L

Early Reading Intervention:04-Winter to Spring Growth, First Grade General Ed

0

5

10

15

20

25

Phonem

ic S

eg./L

ette

r N

ames

Experimental 2 7 20

Control 0 3 12

Fall ORF Winter ORF Spring ORF


• Teacher evaluations– Five returned, three instructional para’s and two certs

– Overall rating 9 on a 1-10 scale, comments on the whole were very positive-”best instructional materials I have ever used for kindergarten students”, very structured, students enjoyed the materials, looking forward to using it next year, takes considerable time for preparation, subs would have a difficult time rapidly picking it up

• Summary comments– Strong staff support

– Strong empirical support in phonemic segmentation

– Less support in growth in letter names

– Limited time of pilot March-May

– Every other day implementation likely reduced effectiveness

– Students were only exposed to less than a 1/4 of the 126 units


• Recommendations

– Implement ERI systematically with low performing kindergarten students following September DIBELS screening

– Consider use of ERI placement test as the second level test for kindergarten students

– Follow ERI pilot students for next year in district CBM assessment system

– Identify a new ERI cohort group and implement during the 2004-2005 school year

– Implement ERI for special education/LAP/Title students in kindergarten/first grade who are not responding to Read Well intervention

Pilot Group Three Years Later

• Kindergarten– Experimental Group=76% above 25th PR as

third graders in ORF Fall 2006– Control Group=57% above 25th PR as third

graders in ORF Fall 2006

• First Grade– Experimental Group=80% above 25th PR as

fourth graders in ORF Fall 2006– Control Group=0% above 25th PR as fourth

graders in ORF Fall 2006

Pilot Group Three Years Later

• Kindergarten– Experimental Group=30% referred to special

education next year as first graders– Control Group=36% referred to special

education as first graders

• First Grade– Experimental Group=28% referred to special

education as second graders– Control Group=60% referred to special

education as second graders

WRSD Kindergarten Winter/Spring Growth Phonemic Segmentations 2005-2006

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Gains 22 17 23 19 11 25.5 21

FD/ERI FD/Non-ERI HD/ERI HD/Non-ERI HD/ERI/X2/mwf HD/ERI/X2m-f All Kind

WRSD Kindergarten Winter/Spring Growth Phonemic Segmentations

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

WPS 17 37 17 26 28 10 24

SPS 39 54 40 45 39 32 44


WRSD Kindergarten Fall-Spring Growth Letter Names 2005-2006

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Gains 39 34 33 30 40 31.5 34


WRSD Kindergarten Fall/Spring Growth Letter Names 2005-2006

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Fall Let 4 25 5 15 5 6 9

Win Let 26 48 22 35 30 27 31

Spr Let 43 59 38 45 45 39 44


WRSD Kindergarten Fall/Winter Initial Sound Fluency Growth 2005-2006

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

Gains 12.5 12.5 9 11 10 8 10


WRSD Kindergarten Fall/Winter Growth Initial Sound Fluency 2005-2006

0

5

10

15

20

25

Fall ISF 5.5 10.5 5 11 10 7 10

Win ISF 18 23 14 22 20 15 20


Description of Current Program

• What it looks like district wide

– Half day ERI– Full day ERI– Half day non-ERI– Full day non-ERI

Description of Current Program

• What it looks like district wide

• What it looks like at MM

Early Literary Success: Effective Intervention for Kindergarten Students at Risk for Reading Difficulties Washington Education Research Association 22nd.

Documents

successful reading

risk of reading failure

early intervention

grade eri

severe reading problems

grade torgeson

grade juel

poor performing students