Running Head: PROJECT H 1

EDUC. 512 Learning Module

Student: Ashton Stahl

astahl@usd259.net

1717 S. Cypress #113

Wichita, KS, 67207

Day Telephone: 316-992-6882

Evening Telephone: same as above

Assignment Title: Project H

Date of Submission: 8/12/14

Assignment Due Date: 8/13/14

Course: EDUC. 540 Learning Module:

Course Instructor: Teresa San-Martin

Faculty Mentor:

Certification of Authorship: I certify that I am the author of this paper and that any assistance received in its preparation is fully acknowledged and disclosed in the paper. I also have cited any sources from which I used data, ideas, or words, either quoted directly or paraphrased. I certify that this paper was prepared by me specifically for the purpose of this assignment, as directed.

Student’s Signature: Ashton Stahl

PROJECT H2

Action Research: Increasing Letter Name and Sounds in Kindergarten Intervention

Ashton Stahl

August 12, 2014

Southwestern College Professional Studies

Submitted to Dr. Teresa San-Martin

PROJECT H3

Abstract

This paper is a developing plan for an action research project focused on increasing student letter

name and letter sound recognition fluency. This plan includes the purpose and research for this

study, the participants that will be involved and the context of the study, the research plan, the

data collection strategies, the plan for increasing validity, the appendices, and proposed research

time line for application.

PROJECT H 4

Research Focus

I have been teaching general education at the kindergarten grade level at Franklin Elementary in

Wichita, KS for two years. Franklin Elementary has student enrollment of approximately 475 students.

The student below the poverty line measured by free and reduced lunches is about 90%. English

language learners make up approximately 49% of Franklin Elementary's population, 38% of those

students being Hispanic. Special education students make up approximately 14% (KSDE Report Card,

2013). My team is made up of two general education kindergarten teachers, three intervention teachers,

one special education teacher, one ELL teacher, and myself. I plan to implement lessons and co-teach

with my fellow kindergarten teachers, as well as, discuss intervention plans with the intervention

teachers and special education teacher. Each teacher will be responsible for their own

classroom/students. Each teacher will need to collect observation notes, progress monitor, and

conference with their students. Their findings will be brought to monthly meetings for collaboration

discussion. We serve our students on a student-to-student basis. Based on data results some students

will receive pull-out services, in class small group interventions, or one-on-one instruction within the

classroom.

Over the last two years, my team and I have noticed that a lot of our students have fallen in the

below average category for letter name and sound recognition at our school. It is very obvious there is a

gap of knowledge when I ask my students to tell me the letter the word starts with or to sound out

words and they only look at me with confusion on their faces. Why is it that some students are able to

retain the information during whole group instruction while others are not? I discussed this issue with

my teammates and we came up with some questions about intervention in order to carry out the action

research study. Those questions are the following: How can I help my students who are below average

in letter name and sound recognition, What students would benefit from intervention, How can I

measure their growth, What time of day would work best to have intervention groups and pull out

PROJECT H 5

services take place, and What intervention tool will work best? These questions will help guide us as I

prepare a plan of action and literature review. The actions I plan to use include: quizzes and written

assignments, teacher observation logs, and conferencing with the students who receive intervention.

These data collection strategies used for the action research will help me determine how effective the

intervention is going and if anything needs to be changed for better planning. The hopeful outcome is

to increase students' knowledge of letter name and sound recognition.

Literature Review

Many sites were used in this paper: Deets Library, ERIC, PROQuest, and Google helped in

finding valuable resources. To advance search I typed in “response to intervention” or “RTI” along

with “Elementary”. The sources used add credibility to the research paper and proposal.

Response to intervention (RTI) is used to help students make greater gains in learning.

“Response to intervention is the practice of providing high-quality instruction and intervention matched

to student need, monitoring progress frequently to make decisions about changes in instruction or goals

and applying student response data to important education decisions” (Elliott, 2008).The RTI Action

Network (2014) states that RTI can be described as a multi-tier approach to identify and give support to

students with learning and behavior needs. Response to intervention was developed due to the concern

about the significantly large number of students being identified for special education services (Office

of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services, 2002). The expectation of RTI is to reduce the

number of students being identified for special education and provide more effective instruction for

students (Bean & Lillenstein, 2012).

To effectively use RTI, a collection of data is necessary to gather information in order to make

decisions that will lead to an increase of student performance (Dupuis, 2010). High-quality instruction

and universal screening of all children is needed to determine students at risk. To accelerate their rate

of learning, struggling learners are provided with interventions at increasing levels of intensity (RTI

PROJECT H 6

Action Network, 2014).

The three-tier model is used to provide differentiated instruction to all levels of learners.

Students who are identified as tier one are given three universal screenings or progress monitoring tests

a year. Tier one is when all students receive high-quality, scientifically based instruction provided by

certified teachers to ensure that if struggles or difficulties become relevant, that it is not due to

inadequate instruction (RTI Action Network, 2014). If students do not show adequate growth in the

regular education classroom in tier one then they are provided with intensive instruction in a small

group setting that matches their needs, also known as tier two. If students continue to show a lack of

progress or fail to meet benchmark criteria then they are placed in tier three. In tier three, the

interventions are even more intensive and typically are provided by a special education teacher. Tier

three also includes additional assessments that may find the student eligible for special education

services (Fuchs et al., 2003). Based on many research findings and the RTI Action Network, the three

tier model is setup to have 80% of students to be placed in tier one, 15% of students to be placed in tier

two, and only 5% of students to be placed in tier three.

There are four components that are necessary to have when successfully implementing RTI

school wide. The four essential components are the following: accuracy, efficiency, implementation,

and progress monitoring (Mellard & Johnson, 2008). In order to have accuracy, the screening tools

must be used accurately when assessing student performance. For efficiency, the tools used for

screening must be quick and easy for teachers to use with little risk for error (Dupuis, 2010). RTI must

be implemented correctly to identify the student who are at risk early enough to provide the needed

support. Progress monitoring is required by RTI for data-based decision making for tier movement

(McDaniel, Albritton, & Roach, 2013).

In order to have effective implementation of RTI, the administrator of the school is in charge.

It is the administrator's job is to provide structure, support, materials, and ongoing professional

PROJECT H 7

development opportunities for the staff. The administrator must carefully plan the time and scheduling,

as well as, provide the resources necessary to carry out the intervention (Hardcastle & Justice, 2006). It

is the general education teacher's job to refer students for special education. In order to make the

referral, progress monitoring results and evidence of intervention strategies are necessary. The general

education teacher provides fidelity of the implementation in regards to RTI as to create a foundation of

success (Dupuis, 2010).

There are some concerns regarding the implementation of RTI. Daly, Martens, Barnett, Witt,

and Olson (2007) state the challenges general education teachers face when a student's response to

intervention changes. Meetings with the supporting staff need to be made to determine what should be

done with the student next. New intervention strategies may need to be used, the student may need

more intensive instruction or the student may not need the intensive intervention they were receiving

before. All general education teachers, supporting staff, and special education teachers must meet to

discuss if there is a need to modify instruction or change the intensity of the instruction.

The main issue with RTI is an overall lack of understanding to the importance of RTI and why

so many parts need to be used when implementing it. Scheduling times to meet as a staff to discuss RTI

can be bothersome but it's all for the success of the students. When teachers sit down to analyze the

data as a team, they see the big picture of what needs to be accomplished and will make student-

specific decisions that lead to increased student achievement (Shores & Chester, 2009, p. 54). Records

must be kept to show growth and progress. Without the records, there is no evidence that RTI is

working for the student. Data analysis must be used to determine what tier the student belongs in and

what they need help in (RTI Action Network, 2014). The data needs to do the talking in order to find

out where the holes are and how to close them. If RTI is implemented with fidelity then answers on

how to better serve the students will be in the results.

Even though there are issues with RTI, the positive outcomes are much greater than the

PROJECT H 8

negatives (Fuchs et al., 2003). When students receive the right interventions their needs to succeed will

be met. With RTI in place, educators will be able to make the differentiated instruction necessary and

provide specific interventions for students to show academic achievement. Students who begin to

understand will feel more motivated to learn and participate in the learning environment. The progress

and growth on schoolwork will become evident. Hopefully, the screening and progressing monitoring

tests will show growth, gains, and development in the student.

Response to intervention can make quite a difference on a student's academic achievement and

performance. When using RTI with kindergarteners, we must look at how the child’s response indicates

a need for additional support and share our responsive education plans to ensure the child is placed on a

trajectory for success by conveying positive messages (Coleman, Roth, & West, 2009). Response to

intervention is designed to find those students who may be at risk. My role as an educator is to

differentiate my whole group instruction when needed, provide the interventions necessary to help my

students succeed, and meet with my supporting staff to go over data and come up with strategies or

techniques to better aid the student's understanding of the material. I do not want to feel like I failed my

students because I did not notice when or where they fell behind. I want to be there to catch them and

guide them to succeed by using response to intervention in my teaching. Therefore, for the purposes of

my research, I will use RTI to serve my students who appear to be struggling in letter name and letter

sound recognition.

Purpose and Research

Too often children slip through the cracks and go on to the next grade level with many holes in

their learning. Response to intervention is designed to find those students who may be at risk. Over the

last two years, my team and I have noticed that a lot of our students have fallen in the below average

category for letter name and sound recognition at our school. It is very obvious there is a gap of

knowledge when I ask my students to tell me the letter the word starts with or to sound out words and

PROJECT H 9

they only look at me with confusion on their faces. Why is it that some students are able to retain the

information during whole group instruction while others are not? It is very important to make sure all

students finish kindergarten on target with letter name and sound recognition. I do not want to feel like

I failed my students because I did not notice when or where they fell behind. I want to be there to catch

them and guide them to succeed by using response to intervention in my teaching.

After reviewing the literature available on response to intervention and areas related to

intervention, it is apparent that the three tier model, accuracy, efficiency, implementation, and progress

monitoring need to be used. The purpose of my research proposal is to study a set of strategies for

increasing student letter name and sound recognition fluency during kindergarten reading intervention

time. My primary research question is: In what ways do accuracy and efficiency effect the outcome of

letter name and sound recognition fluency during reading interventions? My secondary research

question is: What effect will the intervention strategies have on students' knowledge of letters and

sounds?

Participants and Context of the Study

I have been teaching general education at the kindergarten grade level at Franklin Elementary in

Wichita, KS for two years. Franklin Elementary has student enrollment of approximately 475 students.

The student below the poverty line measured by free and reduced lunches is about 90%. English

language learners make up approximately 49% of Franklin Elementary's population, 38% of those

students being Hispanic. Special education students make up approximately 14% (KSDE Report Card,

2013). My team is made up of two general education kindergarten teachers, three intervention teachers,

one special education teacher, one ELL teacher, and myself. I plan to implement lessons and co-teach

with my fellow kindergarten teachers, as well as, discuss intervention plans with the intervention

teachers and special education teacher. Each teacher will be responsible for their own

classroom/students. Each teacher will need to collect observation notes, progress monitor, and

PROJECT H 10

conference with their students. Their findings will be brought to monthly meetings for collaboration

discussion. We serve our students on a student-to-student basis. Based on data results some students

will receive pull-out services, in class small group interventions, or one-on-one instruction within the

classroom. Study participants will include students who are below (yellow) or well below average (red)

in letter name and letter sound recognition fluency according to the AIMSWeb assessment scores. The

AIMSWeb assessment will be given to every kindergarten student at the beginning of the study. The

group size will vary room to room at approximately 24 students to allow for intervention based on their

needs by an intervention teacher, classroom teacher or special education teacher.

Research Plan

My research will take place during the sixty minute reading intervention time slot designated by

our district. The approximate 24 students will be present for whole core reading and small group

instruction. Special education and ELL students will remain in the classroom for this instruction. Based

on the amount of special education students, para-professionals may or may not be in the classroom to

assist those students' needs. After whole group and small group instruction, intervention time will take

place. Special education students will be pulled out for sixty minutes of small group intervention with

the special education teacher. ELL students will be pulled out for thirty minutes of small group

intervention with the ELL teacher. Students who are well below average (red) will receive pull out tier

three services from an intervention teacher. Students that are below average (yellow) will remain in the

classroom with me and be pulled over for one-on-one instruction. Intervention time will last 30 minutes

in the classroom. After intervention time, the following 30 minutes will be a conferencing period for

the student and teacher. Quizzes and written assignments will be used to track performance according

to student. Teacher observation logs will be used to observe students receiving tier two and tier three

interventions. I will observe students as they work independently, cooperatively, and in small groups.

As a teacher and facilitator, I will evaluate how the intervention is working by writing my findings in

PROJECT H 11

an observation log. I will use the next 30 minutes of conferencing time to conference with my students.

While conferencing with students, I will give them feedback on their work. Together we will set goals

for how many letters and sounds they aim to learn monthly. Each student will have different goals

based on their level of achievement. Some students may have goals of learning 20 letters and 15 sounds

while others strive for learning 7 letters and 4 sounds. This is a time used to talk with my students and

give me insight to where my students feel successful and where they struggle.

Data Collection Strategies

The primary question I am asking in this research proposal is, in what ways do accuracy and

efficiency effect the outcome of letter name and sound recognition fluency during reading

interventions? In order to select the 24 participants for this study, a baseline of letter and sound

knowledge must be established for all kindergarten students at Franklin Elementary. Students will be

given an AIMSWeb test that measures their letter name and letter sound recognition fluency. The 24

students from the three kindergarten classrooms with the lowest scores of combined letter and sound

recognition, according to the AIMSWeb rainbow report, will be selected for the research study.

The collaborative team will meet to discuss which students will be placed in which intervention

groups with what teacher. Things that will be considered when placing students in intervention groups

include: Is the student special needs? Is the student ELL? Where did the student place on the rainbow

report compared to their peers? Will the child need tier two or tier three intervention? Once the 24

students have been placed in their intervention groups, parents and students will have reviewed and

signed the consent form (Appendix A) and conferences will be held. Teacher observation logs will also

be kept to record weekly updates on how the student works cooperatively, independently and in small

groups during reading center activities(Appendix D).

During the conferences, students will be asked questions regarding the AIMSWeb test and other

tests given; how they think they performed, what they think they did well, what they could do better,

PROJECT H 12

and in what area they may need help. During conferences students may be asked to explain their

reasoning further. For example, if a student says, “I think I know my letters pretty well” they will be

prodded to answer why they think that (Appendix B). This conferences will be recorded and

transcribed to show proof and evidence.

Teachers will discuss with their students ideas for progress. Together, they will develop two

goals according to their AIMSWeb results. The first goal will be a letter name goal and the second goal

will be a letter sound goal. After their goals have been set, they will monitor those goals daily for a

consecutive week during reading interventions. The teacher will provide an intervention binder that

holds each student's goals, a bar graph of their progress, and their own intensity board. The intensity

board will be used to track their letter name and sound progress (Appendix E). Results will be recorded

on a checklist (Appendix C). They will also be recorded on a bar graph so student's can visually see

their gains. If a student's goal is to learn five letters and five sounds that week then everyday for that

week they will review their intensity board that have five letters listed repeatably in random order.

They will read all of the letters first then go back and say their sounds. The student must get all letters

and sounds correct in order to improve their goals. At the end of each week, students will conference

with the teacher and consider if they need to change their goals according to the results or continue to

work on the original goal that was set. If the decision is to change the goal then more letters will be

added to the intensity board. This pattern would repeat for four weeks. Students would monitor their

goals daily, conference weekly, and test progress monthly using the AIMSWeb test.

At the end of the four week process, the collaboration team will meet to discuss the data and

results that were collected from students receiving intervention. Any problems or adjustments in the

research may be discussed as well as any difficulties with a particular student. Students may change

groups depending on the gains they have made. This will happen every four weeks during the twelve

week research study.

PROJECT H 13

The secondary research question I am asking is, what effect will the intervention strategies have

on students' knowledge of letters and sounds? At the beginning of the research study, when baselines

are established for letter name and sound recognition all kindergarten students will take the AIMSWeb

test. Results of the test will be put into a rainbow report to categorize students for multi-tiered

intervention. All students who participate in the research study will take this test monthly. Data results

will be reviewed using the rainbow report. They will also conference with their teacher weekly, be

observed weekly, and monitor progress daily with the use of intensity boards. Students' whose results

increase will be taken into consideration in order to answer the secondary question.

Plan for Increasing Validity

It is important that my proposed research study contain strategies to increase validity to ensure

that my results are accurate and truthful, could be applicable in other classrooms, and change my

instructional practices for the benefit of my students. It is also important to ensure that all stakeholders

have a voice in the study in order to increase the validity of the results.

The first type of validity I wish to consider is truth-value validity. The truth-value validity will

be increased during my proposed research through triangulation of data. Triangulation of data will

guarantee that I am measuring all of the results of the proposed research intervention. I will use

conferences, teacher observations, and published and teacher created tests to ensure that I am acquiring

the correct perceptions of student performance. All data that is collected will be gathered and organized

in a way to show the analysis was done properly and is accurate.

The second type of validity I wish to consider is outcome validity. Outcome validity will be

used to show results on quizzes, assignments, and other observations to my peers when completing our

monthly meeting about intervention students. The outcome validity will also be increased when

presenting the results of the proposed research to other staff members. That could include the special

education teacher, the ELL teacher, the principal, the child study team, or the first grade team since

PROJECT H 14

they have the same issue regarding letter names and sounds in their grade.

The third type of validity I wish to consider is catalytic validity. I plan to increase the catalytic

validity of my proposed research by continually reflecting on my students and myself. I will also use

catalytic validity to reflect on the processes and outcomes in order to make changes that will better suit

my students' needs. My collaboration team will spend time reflecting on our intervention groups and

the data we collect. We will use that data to make changes if necessary.

Projected Results

My projected results are that student letter name and letter sound recognition will increase due

to goal-setting and monitoring. With everything in place, I believe overall student achievement will

increase. I believe student letter name and sound recognition will increase not just because of the

proposed research intervention, but because students will be setting goals for themselves, practicing

their intervention daily, conferencing with their teacher and being observed weekly. The triangulation

of data that will be used gives the evidence of growth through testing and assignments, provides one-

on-one time for the teacher and student to meet to discuss the process, and allows for the teacher to

give their own thoughts about student application when creating observation logs. Strategies to

increase validity such as collaboration within my team and accurate implementation will be essential to

the success of the proposed study. There will be many forms of data to collect. Organization is key

when collecting said data. Reviewing the data will be necessary and precise to ensure that the results

are triangulated and interpreted correctly. If this is all done with efficiency, accuracy, and fidelity, the

action research will be successful in increasing student letter name and letter sound recognition. This

would hopefully change the teachers’ practice for the better.

Conclusion

In conclusion, it is very important that I, the teacher, keep student letter name and letter sound

recognition in the forefront of my mind. If students do not know all of the letters and their sounds by

PROJECT H 15

the time they leave kindergarten then that will create many problems to come in Reading/Language

Arts. The proposed action research plan is to increase student letter name and letter sound recognition

fluency through goal setting and monitoring. The only way I could see this research study faltering is if

individual teacher practices do not show fidelity, efficiency, and accuracy during the intervention. All

teachers collaborating together in the study need to be implementing the same practices for similar

outcomes. If we manage to stay on the same page as a team and work together then the ending result

will be a positive one. Student achievement will increase and teachers will have a plan of action for

everyone to feel successful.

PROJECT H 16

References

Bean, R., & Lillenstein, J. (2012). Response to intervention and the changing roles of schoolwide

personnel. Reading Teacher, 65(7), 491-501. Retrieved from

http://eds.b.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.sckans.edu/eds/detail/detail?vid=3&sid=c66e0c78-9248-

4314-8e0b-

0e260f2ce375@sessionmgr115&hid=110&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWRzLWxpdmUmc2NvcGU9c2l

0ZQ==#db=edsgea&AN=edsgcl.294900162

Coleman, M., Roth, F., & West, T. (2009). Roadmap to pre-k rti: Applying response to intervention in

preschool settings. Retrieved from http://www.rtinetwork.org/learn/rti-in-pre-kindergarten

Daly, E. J., Martens, B. K., Barnett, D., Witt, J. C., & Olson, S.C., (2007). Varying intervention

delivery in response to intervention: Confronting and resolving challenges with measurement,

instruction, and intensity. School Psychology Review, 36(4), 562-581. Retrieved from

http://eds.b.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.sckans.edu/eds/detail/detail?vid=5&sid=c66e0c78-9248-

4314-8e0b-

0e260f2ce375%40sessionmgr115&hid=101&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWRzLWxpdmUmc2NvcGU9

c2l0ZQ%3d%3d#db=eric&AN=EJ788355

Dupuis, S. D. (2010). Elementary teachers' perspectives of the implementation of response to

intervention and special education rates. Retrieved from

http://search.proquest.com.ezproxy.sckans.edu/docview/89256702/fulltextPDF?

source=fedsrch&accountid=13979

Elliott, J. (2008). Inclusion and intervention: What and why? The School Administrator, 65(3).

Fuchs, D., Mock, D., Morgan, P., & Young, C. (2003). Responsiveness to intervention: Definitions,

evidence, and implications for the learning disabilities construct. Learning Disabilities Research &

PROJECT H 17

Practices, 18(3), 157-171. Retrieved from

http://eds.b.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.sckans.edu/eds/detail/detail?vid=13&sid=c66e0c78-9248-4314-

8e0b-

0e260f2ce375%40sessionmgr115&hid=101&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWRzLWxpdmUmc2NvcGU9c2l0ZQ

%3d%3d#db=aph&AN=10031246

Hardcastle, B., & Justice, K. (2006). Rti and the classroom teacher. Horsham, Pennsylvania: LRP

Publications.

KSDE Report Card. (2013). Kansas state department of education: Report card 2012-2013. Retreived

from http://online.ksde.org/rcard/building.aspx?org_no=D0259&bldg_no=1674

Mellard, D. F., & Johnson, E. (2008). Rti: A practitioner’s guide to implementing response to

intervention. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

McDaniel, S., Albritton, K., Roach, A. (2013). Highlighting the need for further response to

intervention research in general education. Research in Higher Education, 1(20), 1-12.

Retrieved from http://eds.b.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.sckans.edu/eds/detail/detail?

vid=25&sid=c66e0c78-9248-4314-8e0b-

0e260f2ce375%40sessionmgr115&hid=101&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWRzLWxpdmUmc2NvcGU9

c2l0ZQ%3d%3d#db=edo&AN=90440356

Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services. (2002). A new era: Revitalizing special

education for children and families. Washington, DC. Retrieved from

http://eds.b.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.sckans.edu/eds/detail/detail?vid=30&sid=c66e0c78-9248-

4314-8e0b-

0e260f2ce375%40sessionmgr115&hid=101&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWRzLWxpdmUmc2NvcGU9

c2l0ZQ%3d%3d#db=edsgpr&AN=gpr000548788

PROJECT H18

RTI Action Network (2014). What is rti? Retrieved from

http://www.rtinetwork.org/learn/what/whatisrti

Shores, C., & Chester, K. (2009). Using rti for school improvement: Raising Every Student's

Achievement. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Retrieved from

http://eds.b.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.sckans.edu/eds/detail/detail?vid=32&sid=c66e0c78-

9248-4314-8e0b-

0e260f2ce375%40sessionmgr115&hid=101&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWRzLWxpdmUmc2Nv

cGU9c2l0ZQ%3d%3d#db=nlebk&AN=473693

PROJECT H 19

Appendix A

Student Consent Form

Dear Parent/Guardians,

I will be conducting a study in the kindergarten classrooms at Franklin Elementary to increase letter name and sound recognition fluency through testing, monitoring, and goal setting. This form is to ask permission to use the data that I and my colleagues collect from your child during this research study.

Over the years we have seen a drop in students knowing all their letters and sounds by the time they get to first grade. The purpose of this study is to increase students' knowledge of the letters of the alphabet and their sounds so they can become better readers and writers. Students will be tested monthly to track progress using the AIMSWeb test. They will meet to conference with their teachers weekly about their goals and about any gains they have made. Students will also monitor their goals daily during reading intervention time with the use of intensity boards. We hope these strategies will show an effective improvement in their learning.

The study will take place at Franklin Elementary and will last twelve weeks. We will collect many forms of data throughout the study in order to adjust goals to what the student needs and to determine whether the study was successful. Possible types of data include the following: AIMSWeb rainbow report, video recordings of conferences between teacher and student, conference questions and answers, teacher observation logs and rubrics, intensity boards, checklists and bar graphs to show progress.

Only the kindergarten teachers, the intervention teachers, the ELL teacher, the special needs teacher, and the principal will have access to the data collected in this study. The names of these educators include: Ashton Stahl, Cathie Hoopes, Pearlie McCoy, Shirley Crosby, Angelica Ramos, Heather House, Corie Bishop, and Heather Vincent. Your child's identity and participation in this study will be kept confidential. Participation is completely voluntary.

If you have any questions or would like to contact me regarding your child's involvement, my phone number is 319-992-6882. Please sign below and return to your child's teacher if you agree to the terms of this consent form.

I give permission for my child’s data to be used in this research study. I have read the consent form and understand it. I understand that this copy of the consent form will be kept with my child's teacher. I will receive a scanned copy of this consent form.

_________________________________ ____________________________________ Student's name Signature of parent/guardian

_________________________________ Date

PROJECT H20

Appendix B

Conference questions:

1) How do you think you did on your (AIMSWeb or intensity board) test?

2) What did you do well? What do you know well?

3) What could you have done better? What did you struggle on?

4) What might you need extra help in?

5) What do you think would help you do even better next time?

PROJECT H 21

Appendix C

Checklist

Name: ____________________________________

Ratings:Yes = YNo = blank

Capital Letters

A

B

C

D

E

F

G

H

I

J

K

L

M

N

O

P

Q

R

S

T

U

V

W

X

Y

Z

PROJECT H22

Name: _________________________________

Ratings:Yes = YNo = blank

Small Letters

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

i

j

k

l

m

n

o

p

q

r

s

t

u

v

w

x

y

z

PROJECT H 23

Appendix D

Teacher Observation Log Rubric

Student: ___________________________ Date: _______________

1 = never 2 = seldom 3 = sometimes 4 = often 5 = consistently/frequently

Indicators observed during independent, cooperative, and small group work:

Student knows names of all goal letters 1 2 3 4 5

Student knows sounds of all goal letters1 2 3 4 5

Student recognizes goal letters in alphabet 1 2 3 4 5

Student recognizes goal sounds in alphabet1 2 3 4 5

Student can use known sounds to find matching letters1 2 3 4 5

Student can blend known sounds to read a word1 2 3 4 5

Other observation notes: ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

PROJECT H 24

Appendix E

Date box, then mark with plus (+) if 100% accuracy, or minus (-) if not 100% accurate.

***Have the student put their finger under each letter/sound/word as they read left to right across the page.

***If a student makes a mistake, stop, correct the error by modeling the correct response, then back up three letters/words and watch to see if they remember the correction.

I ntensity Board Name:

T S B P MS P M T BP T S P MT B P M SB S M B P

PROJECT H 25

Appendix F

Timeline

Timeline for Letter Name and Letter Sound Recognition Study

July 1-July 7: Initial reflection.

July 8-July 28: Review of literature.

August 5: Contact principal, and school district to secure permission for the study.

August 12: Gather baseline data from all kindergarten students on letter name and letter sound

recognition using AIMSWeb test.

August 14: Meet with members of collaboration team to analyze data and choose participants for the

study according to their baseline data (24 tier two & tier three students apply).

August 15: Phone parent of selected students to discuss action research study. Send home

permission forms. Collect permission forms. Follow up with phone calls if necessary.

August 19-August 22: Conference with participants and set two performance goals; one for letter

names and one for letter sounds. Create intensity boards, checklists, and bar

graphs according to student set goals.

Phase 1 LN LS Recognition Study

August 25-September 22: Students practice intensity board daily during reading interventions. Data

is collected on checklist and bar graph to show student progress.

August 29: Conference with students to discuss accomplishment toward goal (videotaped).

September 3: Observation notes are recorded in log.

September 5: Conference with students to discuss accomplishment toward goal (videotaped).

September 10: Observation notes are recorded in log.

September 12: Conference with students to discuss accomplishment toward goal (videotaped).

September 17: Observation notes are recorded in log.

September 19: Conference with students to discuss accomplishment toward goal (videotaped).

September 22: Test students on letter name and letter sound recognition using AIMSWeb test.

September 23: Meet with collaboration team to discuss data and makes adjustments if necessary.

Phase 2 LN LS Recognition Study

September 29-October 27: Students practice intensity board daily during reading interventions. Data

is collected on checklist and bar graph to show student progress.

October 3: Conference with students to discuss accomplishment toward goal (videotaped).

PROJECT H26

October 8: Observation notes are recorded in log.

October 10: Conference with students to discuss accomplishment toward goal (videotaped).

October 15: Observation notes are recorded in log.

October 17: Conference with students to discuss accomplishment toward goal (videotaped).

October 22: Observation notes are recorded in log.

October 24: Conference with students to discuss accomplishment toward goal (videotaped).

October 27: Test students on letter name and letter sound recognition using AIMSWeb test.

October 28: Meet with collaboration team to discuss data and makes adjustments if necessary.

Phase 3 LN LS Recognition Study

November 3-December 8: Students practice intensity board daily during reading interventions.

Data is collected on checklist and bar graph to show student

progress.

November 7: Conference with students to discuss accomplishment toward goal (videotaped).

November 12: Observation notes are recorded in log.

November 14: Conference with students to discuss accomplishment toward goal (videotaped).

November 19: Observation notes are recorded in log.

November 21: Conference with students to discuss accomplishment toward goal (videotaped).

December 3: Observation notes are recorded in log.

December 5: Conference with students to discuss accomplishment toward goal (videotaped).

December 8: Test students on letter name and letter sound recognition using AIMSWeb test.

December 9: Meet with collaboration team to analyze data.

December 9-12: Begin data analysis (observation notes, videotapes, checklists, bar graphs,

rainbow reports, rubrics).

December 15-19: Writing results and putting together action research paper.

December 22-January 5: Revisions of the paper.