Group Tutoring and the Effects on Reading
Fluency and Motivation to Read
Using Related Science Activities
Amy Kraft Ahern
Frustration…
No Motivation…
Improving Reading Comprehension
Phonics
Phonemic Awareness
Vocabulary
Fluency
Reading Comprehension
Problem
44% of fourth graders lack in
reading fluency
Reading motivation is low
Expository text
Adaniano & Turner, 2005Ritchey, Silverman, Montanaro, Speece, &
Schatschneider, 2012
Fluency
Why is it important?◦“Oral reading fluency is one of the strongest predictors of students’ overall reading ability.”
Bengeny, 2011Therrien, 2004
Repeated Reading
◦1979 study by S. Jay Samuel
◦Replicated in over 200 studies
How to Increase Fluency?
Children need to interact
Improve self-esteem
Improve attitude toward school
Positive attitude toward subject matter
Group Peer Tutoring
Madrid, Canas, & Ortega-Medina, 2007
“Reading is an effortful activity that often involves choice, motivation is crucial to reading engagement”
Motivation
Wigfield, Guthrie, Tonks, & Perencevich, 2004
Concept-Oriented Reading Instruction◦Science concepts◦Hands on activities◦Choice◦Collaboration
CORI
Wigfield, et al, 2004
Research QuestionsHow will peer mediated group
tutoring affect reading fluency?
How will repeated reading of nonfiction science passages affect reading fluency?
How will related hands on science activities affect reading motivation?
22 fourth grade students◦Six students labeled gifted and talented◦One student with a speech language IEP◦One student receiving ESL services◦Eight receiving Tier 2 Reading Interventions
School◦K-4 elementary school◦School of 450 students
Participants
School
Elementary School PopulationGender Asian/
Pacific Islander
Black/African
American
Hispanic Caucasian Multiracial
Male – 54%
6 43 62 103 24
Female – 46%
2 29 63 92 18
Total 2% 16% 28% 44% 10%
PlanEight weeks7 groups with three to
four students of various abilities
Monday through Wednesday - Repeated Reading
Science passages with activities
Thursday - activity day
Friday - AimsWeb Fluency check and vote for following week’s topic
11/22/2013 1/11/2014 3/2/2014 4/21/2014 6/10/201475.0
95.0
115.0
135.0
155.0
175.0
195.0
Linear Trend in WPM (Compared to AIMSWeb R-CBM National Norms)
90th %ile
75th %ile
50th %ile
25th %ile
10th %ile
Results…
Tier II ESL TEC Class Avg.0.00
0.50
1.00
1.50
2.00
2.50
3.00
2.072.40
1.20
1.61
Average RoI for Special Populations
Student Group (Some students may be represented in more than one group).
RoI
(WP
M/W
eek)
Average Increase Sept-Jan Average Increase Jan-April0.95
1
1.05
1.1
1.15
1.2
1.25
Growth in Reading Levels (Fountas & Pinnell)
Time Period
Avera
ge #
of
Levels
Incre
ase
10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26
-15
-10
-5
0
5
10
15
Student Survey Score Change
Initial Student Survey Score
Change in S
tudent
Surv
ey S
core
r = -0.41
Happy Reader!
References
Abadiano, H. R. & Turner, J. (2005). Reading fluency: The road to
developing efficient and effective readers. Review of
Research in the Classroom, 41(1), 50-56.
AIMSweb National Norms Table. (2014). [Table Reading –
Curriculum Based Measurement]. Retrieved from
http://aimsweb.pearson.com
Begeny, J. C. (2011). Effects of the helping early literacy with
practice strategies (HELPS) reading fluency program with
implemented at different frequencies. School Psychology
Review 40(1), 149-157.
Dion, E., Fuchs, D., & Fuchs, L.S. (2005). Differential effects of
peer- assisted learning strategies on students’ social
preference and friendship making. Behavioral Disorders, 30(4),
421-429.
Dufrene, B. A., Reisener, C. D., Olmi, D. J., Zoder-Martell, K.,
McNutt, M. R., & Horn, D. R. (2010). Peer tutoring for
reading fluency as a feasible and effective alternative in
response to intervention. Behavioral Education, 19(3), 239-
256.
Fountas, I. C. & Pinnell, G. S. (2008). Fountas & Pinnell benchmark
assessment system 2: Assessment guide. Portsmouth, NH:
Heineman.
Green, S. K., Alderman, G., & Leighty, A. (2004). Peer tutoring,
individualized intervention, and progress monitoring with at-risk
second grade readers. Preventing School Failure, 49(1), 11-17.
Gorsuch, G. & Taguchi, E. (2010). Developing reading fluency and
comprehension using repeated reading: Evidence from
longitudinal student reports. Language Teaching Research,
14(1), 27-59.
Hasbrouck, J. (2006). Understanding and assessing fluency.
Reading Rockets. Retrieved from http
://www.readingrockets.org/article/27091/?theme=print
Hasbrouck, J. & Tindal, G. A. (2006). Oral reading fluency norms: A
valuable assessment tool for reading teachers. The Reading
Teacher, 59(7), 636-644.
Hashimoto, K., Utley, C. A., Greenwood, C. R., & Pitchlyn, C. L.
(2007). The effects of modified classwide peer tutoring
procedures on the generalization of spelling skills of urban
third-grade elementary students. Learning Disabilities: A
Contemporary Journal, 5(2), 1-29.
Madrid, L. D., Canas, M., & Ortega-Medina, M. (2007). Effects of
team competition versus team cooperation in classwide peer
tutoring. The Journal of Educational Research, 100(3) 155-160.
Menesses, K. F. & Gresham, F. M. (2009). Relative efficacy of
reciprocal and nonreciprocal peer tutoring for students at-risk for
academic failure. School Psychology Quarterly, 24(4), 266-275.
Oddo, M., Barnett, D. W., Hawkins, R. O., & Musti-Rao, S. (2010).
Reciprocal peer tutoring and repeated reading increasing
practicality using student groups. Psychology in Schools,
47(8), 842-858.
Olson, P. C. (2011). Weaker readers as experts: Preferential
instruction and the fluency improvement of lower performing
student tutors. Reading Improvement, 48(4), 157-167.
Pearson. (2012). AIMSweb rate of improvement growth norms
guide. Bloomington, MN.
Ritchey, K. D., Silverman, R. D., Speece, D. L. & Schatschneider, C.
(2012). Effects of a tier 2 supplemental reading intervention
for at-risk fourth- grade students. Exceptional Children, 78(3),
318-334.
Strickland, W. D., Boon, R. T., & Spencer, V. G. (2013) The effects of
repeated reading on the fluency and comprehension skills of
elementary-age students with learning disabilities (LD), 2001-
2011: A review of research and practice. Learning Disabilities:
A Contemporary Journal, 11(1), 1-33.
Therrien, W. J. (2004). Fluency and comprehension gains as a result
of repeated reading: A meta-analysis. Remedial and Special
Education, 25(4), 252-261.
Therrien, W. J., Gormley, S., & Kubina, R. M. (2006). Boosting fluency and
comprehension to improve reading achievement. Teaching
Exceptional Children, 38(3), 22-26.
Therrien, W. J., Wickstrom, K., & Jones, K. (2006). Effect of a combined
repeated reading and question generation intervention on reading
achievement. Learn Disabilities Research & Practices, 21(2), 89-97.
Samuels, S. J. (1997). The method of repeated reading. The Reading
Teacher, 50(5), 376-381.
Vadasy, P. F. & Sanders, E. A. (2008) Repeated reading intervention:
Outcomes and interactions with reader’s skills and classroom instruction.
Journal of Educational Psychology, 100(2), 272-290.
Wigfield, A., Guthrie, J. T., Perencevich, K. C., Taboada, A., Klauda, S. L.,
McRae, A., & Barbosa, P. (2008). Role of reading engagement in
mediating effects of reading comprehension instruction on reading
outcomes. Psychology in the Schools, 45(5), 432-445.
Wigfield, A., Guthrie, J. T., Tonks, S., & Perencevich, K. (2004). Children’s
motivation of reading: Domain specificity and instructional influences.
The Journal of Educational Research, 97(6), 299-309.
Top Related