User-Centered Improvement to Typical Elementary Literacy Practices: A Case Study Intervention
Keywords:
elementary, science of reading, literacy, syllabication, interventionAbstract
More than twenty years have passed since the National Reading Panel (NRP) (2000) report attempted to answer the question: What works best in reading instruction? According to the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), reading scores (2022) show that a significant number of fourth and eighth graders are still struggling with reading proficiency despite the guidance provided by the NRP. At the same time, a preponderance of evidence from the sciences continues to distill what works best in reading instruction while states pass legislation to align classroom curricula and programs to the science of reading (SoR). This mixed-methods case study, conducted in a North Texas elementary school, evaluated the benefits and challenges of implementing a syllabication intervention based on SoR principles. The study utilized surveys and interview data from teachers and assessment data from students. Despite 52% of students being predicted to not meet the reading proficiency standards on the State of Texas Assessments of Academic Readiness, or STAAR, findings revealed that intervention had a substantial impact on both student achievement and teacher professional learning. Further, educators acknowledged the value of the intervention in enhancing their teaching methods, particularly in terms of professional growth and instructional awareness. However, challenges also occurred, including the nature of training, a lack of resources, inadequate feedback, and pedagogical alignment. The study highlights the importance of prioritizing users' needs and implementing scientific insights from the perspective of typical literacy practices.
References
Apel, K. (2022). A different view on the simple view of reading. Remedial and Special Education, 6, 434–447. https://doi.org/10.1177/07419325211063487
Aukerman, M., & Chambers Schuldt, L. (2021). What matters most? Toward a robust and socially just science of reading. Reading Research Quarterly, 55(S1), S85-S103. https://doi.org/10.1002/rrq.406
Bryk, A. S., Gomez, L. M., Grunow, A., & LeMahieu, P. G. (2015). Learning to improve: How America’s schools can get better at getting better. Harvard Education Press.
Capin, P., Roberts, G., Clemens, N. H., & Vaughn, S. (2021). When treatment adherence matters: Interactions among treatment adherence, instructional quality, and student characteristics on reading outcomes. Reading Research Quarterly, 2, 753–774. https://doi.org/10.1002/rrq.442
Castles, A., Rastle, K., & Nation, K. (2018). Ending the reading wars: Reading acquisition from novice to expert. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 19(1), 5–51. https://doi.org/10.1177/1529100618772271
Creswell, J. W. (1998). Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design. SAGE Publications, Incorporated.
Davis, D. S., & Vehabovic, N. (2017). The dangers of test preparation: What students learn (and don’t learn) about reading comprehension from test-centric literacy instruction. The Reading Teacher, 5, 579–588. https://doi.org/10.1002/trtr.1641
Duke, N. K., Cervetti, G. N., & Wise, C. N. (2017). Learning from exemplary teachers of literacy. The Reading Teacher, 4, 395–400. https://doi.org/10.1002/trtr.1654
Ehri, L. C. (2020). The science of learning to read words: A case for systematic phonics instruction. Reading Research Quarterly, 55(S1), S45-S60. https://doi.org/10.1002/rrq.334
Ehri, L. C. (2022). What teachers need to know and do to teach letter–sounds, phonemic awareness, word reading, and phonics. The Reading Teacher, 1, 53–61. https://doi.org/10.1002/trtr.2095
Gabriel, R. (2020). The future of the science of reading. The Reading Teacher, 74(1), 11–18. https://doi.org/10.1002/trtr.1924
Holston, S., Putman, H., & Peske, H. (2024). Five Policy Actions to Strengthen Implementation of the Science of Reading. Washington, DC: National Council on Teacher Quality.
Kearns, D. M. (2015). How elementary-age children read polysyllabic polymorphemic words. Journal of Educational Psychology, 2, 364–390. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0037518
Kearns, D. M., & Whaley, V. M. (2019). Helping students with dyslexia read long words: Using syllables and morphemes. TEACHING Exceptional Children, 51(3), 212–225. https://doi.org/10.1177/0040059918810010
Kearns, D. M. (2020). Does English have useful syllable division patterns? Reading Research Quarterly, 55(S1), S145-S160. https://doi.org/10.1002/rrq.342
Levine, S., Moore, D. P., Bene, E., & Smith, M. W. (2022). What if it were otherwise? Teachers use exams from the past to imagine possible futures in the teaching of literature. Reading Research Quarterly, 1, 5–24. https://doi.org/10.1002/rrq.488
Mesmer, H. A., & Kambach, A. (2022). Beyond labels and agendas: Research teachers need to know about phonics and phonological Awareness. The Reading Teacher, 1, 62–72. https://doi.org/10.1002/trtr.2102
Mirra, N., & Garcia, A. (2020). In search of the meaning and purpose of 21st-century literacy learning: A critical review of research and practice. Reading Research Quarterly. 56 (3), 463-496. https://doi.org/10.1002/rrq.313
Moats, L. C. (2020). Teaching reading is rocket science. Washington, D.C.: American Federation of Teachers.
National Assessment of Educational Progress (2022). NAEP Reading: Reading Results. (2022). https://www.nationsreportcard.gov/reading?grade=4.
National Reading Panel (U.S.). (2000). Report of the national reading panel: Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction. https://www.nichd.nih.gov/sites/default/files/publications/pubs/nrp/documents/report.pdf
NWEA. (2024). Advancing learning outcomes for all kids. https://www.nwea.org/
Really Great Reading (2015). Bring the science of reading research to life in your classroom. 18 years of aligning research-based, systematic, structured literacy instruction to classroom practice. https://www.reallygreatreading.com
Seidenberg, M. S. (2018). Language at the speed of sight: How we read, why so many can't, and what can be done about it. Basic Books.
Seidenberg, M. S., & Borkenhagen, M. C. (2022). Reading science and educational practice: Some tenets for teachers. The Reading League Journal.
Seidenberg, M. S., Cooper Borkenhagen, M., & Kearns, D. M. (2020). Lost in translation? Challenges in connecting reading science and educational practice.
Reading Research Quarterly, S1. https://doi.org/10.1002/rrq.341
Serafini, F., Moses, L., Kachorsky, D., & Rylak, D. (2020). Incorporating multimodal literacies into classroom‐based reading assessment. The Reading Teacher, 3, 285–296. https://doi.org/10.1002/trtr.1948
Shanahan, T. (2020). What constitutes a science of reading instruction? Reading Research Quarterly, 55(S1), S235-S247. https://doi.org/10.1002/rrq.349
Solari, E. J., Terry, N. P., Gaab, N., Hogan, T. P., Nelson, N. J., Pentimonti, J. M., Petscher, Y., & Sayko, S. (2020). Translational science: A road map for the science of reading. Reading Research Quarterly, S1. https://doi.org/10.1002/rrq.357
Texas Education Agency. (2023). Texas essential knowledge and skills. https://tea.texas.gov/academics/curriculum-standards/teks-review/texas-essential-knowledge-and-skills
Toste, J. R., Capin, P., Vaughn, S., Roberts, G. J., & Kearns, D. M. (2017). Multisyllabic word-reading instruction with and without motivational beliefs training for struggling readers in the upper elementary grades: A pilot investigation. The Elementary School Journal, 4, 593–615. https://doi.org/10.1086/691684and-skills
Troyer, M. (2022). The gold standard for whom? Schools’ experiences participating in a randomized controlled trial. Journal of Research in Reading, 3, 406-424. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9817.12395
Vadasy, P. F., & Sanders, E. A. (2020). Introducing grapheme-phoneme correspondences (GPCs): Exploring rate and complexity in phonics instruction for kindergarteners with limited literacy skills. Reading and Writing, 1, 109–138. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-020-10064-y
Vaughn, S., & Fletcher, J. (2020). Identifying and teaching students with significant reading problems. American Educator, 44(4), 4-11.
Vaughn, S., Gersten, R., Dimino, J., Taylor, M. J., Newman-Gonchar, R., Krowka, S., Kieffer, M. J., McKeown, M., Reed, D., Sanchez, M., St. Martin, K., Wexler, J., Morgan, S., Yañez, A., & Jayanthi, M. (2022). Providing reading interventions for students in grades 4–9 (WWC 2022007). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance (NCEE), Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/Docs/PracticeGuide/WWC-practice-guide-reading-intervention-full-text.pdf
Wang, Z., Sabatini, J., O’Reilly, T., & Weeks, J. (2019). Decoding and reading comprehension: A test of the decoding threshold hypothesis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 3, 387–401. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000302
Wixson, K. K. (2017). An interactive view of reading comprehension: Implications for assessment. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 2, 77–83. https://doi.org/10.1044/2017_lshss-16-0030
Woulfin, S., & Gabriel, R. E. (2020). Interconnected infrastructure for improving reading instruction. Reading Research Quarterly, 55 (S1), S109-S117. https://doi.org/10.1002/rrq.339
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
All copyright remains with the author.
