Response to Intervention
Savvy Teacher’s
Guide: Reading
Interventions That
Work
Jim Wright
www.interventioncentral.org
www.interventioncentral.org
1
Response to Intervention
Building Reading
Fluency
www.interventioncentral.org
2
Response to Intervention
Reading Decoding
‘…Of course, when children cannot decode
at all, there is little chance of
comprehension. When they can decode
but it requires a considerable effort,
decoding competes with comprehension efforts for
the limited capacity available for processing of
text…so that effortful decoding consumes capacity
that might otherwise be used to understand text.’
- Pressley & Wharton-McDonald, 1997
www.interventioncentral.org
3
Response to Intervention
NRP Conclusions Regarding Importance of Oral Reading
Fluency:
“An extensive review of the literature
indicates that classroom practices that
encourage repeated oral reading with
feedback and guidance leads to meaningful
improvements in reading expertise for students—for
good readers as well as those who are experiencing
difficulties.”-p. 3-3
www.interventioncentral.org
4
Response to Intervention
Interventions for…Increasing Reading Fluency
• Assisted Reading Practice
• Listening Passage Preview
(‘Listening
While Reading’)
• Paired Reading
• Repeated Reading
www.interventioncentral.org
5
Response to Intervention
Paired Reading
(p.17)
The student reads aloud in
tandem with an
accomplished reader. At a
student signal, the helping
reader stops reading, while
the student continues on.
When the student commits a
reading error, the helping
reader resumes reading in
tandem.
www.interventioncentral.org
6
Response to Intervention
Building Reading
Comprehension
www.interventioncentral.org
7
Response to Intervention
Reading
Comprehension
Skills Checklist: p. 104
www.interventioncentral.org
8
Response to Intervention
‘Student Reader’ Activity
In your ‘elbow groups’:
Review the ‘Reading Comprehension
Checklist’ (p. 104)
Identify the 2-3 most frequent or important
‘comprehension blockers’ that you
have observed in the population of
‘difficult-to-teach’ students with whom you
work.
Be prepared to share your selections with
the larger group.
www.interventioncentral.org
9
Response to Intervention
Processing Before Reading (Pressley & Wharton-McDonald, 1997)
• Good readers
– have clear goals in mind before reading
– overview the text before reading to:
• determine whether text is worth reading
• identify sections that may be most relevant
• Create a ‘reading plan’
www.interventioncentral.org
10
Response to Intervention
Processing During Reading (Pressley & Wharton-McDonald, 1997)
• Good readers
– pay ‘differential’ attention to information
that pertains to their goals
– may jump back and forth in the text to clarify
confusion, review specific information
– anticipate what will come next in the text and updare
their predictions based on new information
– make inferences based on reading
– ‘demonstrate passion’ for their reading
www.interventioncentral.org
11
Response to Intervention
Processing After Reading (Pressley & Wharton-McDonald, 1997)
• Good readers
– may reread or ‘reskim’ the text just read
– may take notes on text or attempt to restate
main ideas
– continue to think about and reflect on text once they
are done reading
www.interventioncentral.org
12
Response to Intervention
Comprehension Interventions That Rely on ‘Gist’ Sentences
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
‘Click or Clunk?’ Self-Check
Keywords: A Memorization Strategy
Main Idea Maps
Mental Imagery: Improving Text Recall
Oral Recitation Lesson
Prior Knowledge: Activating the ‘Known’
Question-Generation
Reciprocal Teaching: A Reading Comprehension Package
Story Map
Text Lookback
www.interventioncentral.org
13
Response to Intervention
Create a ‘gist’ sentence for this passage…
‘…when skilled readers read, they implicitly
parse the text into micropropositions, the
smallest units of meaning that can be
conceived as verbs or prepositions as well
as semantic roles that are related by the verbs or
prepositions. All of the micropropositions specified in
a text combine to capture the full meaning of the text.
Of course, no one remembers every idea specified in
a text. What people remember is the gist-the main
idea of the text.’- Pressley & Wharton-McDonald, 1997
www.interventioncentral.org
14
Response to Intervention
‘Click or Clunk’
Self-Check
(p.25)
Students periodically check
their understanding of
sentences, paragraphs, and
pages of text as they read.
When students encounter
problems with vocabulary or
comprehension, they use a
checklist to apply simple
strategies to solve those
reading difficulties.
www.interventioncentral.org
15
Response to Intervention
‘Click or Clunk’
Check Sheet
www.interventioncentral.org
16
‘Click or Clunk?’ Example
Response to Intervention
‘…The
lack
of practice,
deficient
decoding
‘…The combination
combinationof of
lack
of practice,
deficient
skills,
and difficult
materials
results
in unrewarding
decoding
skills, and
difficult
materials
results in
early
reading experiences
thatexperiences
lead to less involvement
unrewarding
early reading
that lead
in reading related activities. Lack
ofofexposure
and
Lack
exposure
and
to less involvement in reading related activities.
practice
on
the
part
of of
thethe
lessless
skilled
readers
delays
practice
on
the
part
skilled
readers
Lack of exposure and practice on the part of the less
the
development
of automaticity
and speed atand
the
delays
the
development
of
automaticity
skilled readers delays the development of automaticity
word-metacognition level. Slow,
capacity-draining
Slow,
capacity-draining
speed
at the
word-metacognition
Slow,
and speed
at the
word-metacognition level.
level. Slow,
word-recognition
processes
require
cognitive
word-recognition
processes
require
cognitive
capacity-draining word-recognition processes
require
resources
that
should
be be
allocated
to higher-level
resources
that
should
allocated
to higher-level
cognitive resources that should be allocated
to higherprocess of text integration and comprehension.’
process
of text
integration
level process
of text
integrationand
andcomprehension.’
comprehension.’
- Stanovich, K., (1986)
- Stanovich, K., (1986)
www.interventioncentral.org
17