jamierester.weebly.com · web viewaccording to the word recognition test the researcher...

Analysis of Secondary Reading 1

Analysis of Secondary Reading Differentiation in an 8th Grade Student

Jamie Rester

Rochester College


APPENDICES

Appendix A Parent Consent

Appendix B Bader Graded Word Lists

Bader Reading Passages

Appendix C Student Priorities and Interests

Inventory

Appendix D Oral Reading Miscues

Appendix E Student Work (Lessons 1-5)


ANALYSIS OF SECONDARY READING DIFFERENTIATION IN AN 8TH GRADE

STUDENT

Overview of Case Study

This case study was conducted to assess, diagnose, and develop literacy skills by

implementing differentiated instruction. The study took place at the college that the researcher

attends in Rochester, Michigan. One of the faculty’s daughters was chosen for this case study, as

the researcher does not have any students of her own to work with. Assessments were conducted

on the student’s reading levels and interests, and lessons were implemented to improve her

literacy skills.

Researcher

The researcher is currently a student at Rochester College studying to get a bachelor’s in

Secondary Education with a focus in English Language Arts and a minor in Reading. She has

been in school for four years and has one year left of schooling before she starts her teaching

career. She would like to teach middle school in the future, not focusing on any particular grade.

Participant

Background

The participant, Peggy (all names are pseudonyms), is in 8th grade and attends a private

Christian school. The researcher got connected with her through a professor at Rochester College

who works with Peggy’s mother. Since the researcher does not have a classroom of her own, thet

wo meet at Rochester to tutor. Peggy is very involved in volleyball at her school and takes it very

seriously. She also enjoys shopping with her family with whom she is very close. Her sister is


like a best friend to her as she is the only other sibling that Peggy has, and they are close in age.

She also talked about her church a lot, so it seems that she is very involved there. She is

especially open about her faith, and in general very talkative and upbeat.

As far as her reading ability, from what the researcher has gathered from her mother and

professor, she wants to please and perform for her audience. She reads fluently, but she

expressed to the researcher that motivation is difficult for her when it comes to subjects and

genres that she is not interested in (such as history). As one of her goals for this case study,

Peggy explained that she would like to be able to read a variety of texts in any subject and still

retain the content, not simply the texts that she finds interesting.

Setting

The tutoring took place at the Rochester College library since that is where researcher

attends and Peggy’s mother works there. The researcher and participant met at least once a week,

sometimes biweekly for about an hour each time.

Data Sources

The assessments were conducted all in the same day, in the same location. The researcher

led each assessment as the student answered questions and read the given material. The lessons

conducted were retrieved from Sustaining Strategic Readers by Valerie Ellery and Jennifer L.

Rosenbloom.


Bader Graded Word Lists and Reading Passages– Appendix B

The Bader Graded Word Lists and Reading Passages were administered to find the

student’s instructional reading level using a combination of word recognition lists as well as

reading passages assessing comprehension. It was explained to the student before beginning the

tests that they were not graded, but simply used for data to find out where her reading level was

at and what she needed assistance with. It was also explained to the student that for the Word

Recognition Lists, she would simply need to read down the lists given and if she came across a

word she did not know, to try her best to pronounce it. Once she read down the first list, the

researcher went up a grade level since there were minimal mistakes made. This continued in this

fashion until the frustration level was reached.

Once a reading level was determined from the Word Recognition Lists, the Reading

Passages were administered with all oral, unprepared reading. For this, the student was asked a

prior knowledge question to analyze if enough background knowledge was present to understand

the text. If the answer was sufficient, the student would move on to reading the passage. During

the reading, the researcher would keep track of corrections and errors the student made. When

the student finished, the researcher asked comprehension questions with no prompts to assess

whether the student understood the text or not. Once this was done, the researcher either had the

student move up or down on the reading levels depending on how the student performed.

Student Priorities and Interests – Appendix C

The Student Priorities and Interests Inventory is an account of the things that the

participant is interested in as well as her strengths and weaknesses in reading. Conducting this

was beneficial to the researcher because this gave her information to be able to more accurately


choose reading material that would be advantageous to the student. This also aided in building

rapport with the student. The survey went through the participant’s priorities in reading, interests,

preferred work settings, and finally unfinished sentences which allowed the student to think

freely while finishing the ends of vague sentences about her life.

Oral Reading Miscues – Appendix D

The student’s miscues were tallied up and recorded in categories. For instance, the

student’s mispronunciations for the 7th grade level unprepared oral reading were tallied,

alongside with the substitutions for that text. The researcher also added Peggy’s self-corrections

to the columns in order to obtain more data. Once all of the scores were recorded, each score was

divided by the total number of miscues. This was also done with the self-corrections, which

provides more data into Peggy’s mindset as she reads.

Data Analysis and Findings

Peggy

Based on the findings from the researcher’s assessments of Peggy, motivation is key to

her. In the Student Priorities and Interests Inventory (See Appendix C), Peggy expressed

struggling with comprehension with texts that were of little interest to her. She explained how

she has a difficult time focusing and therefore understanding what a text says if she is not

personally interested in the topic. She also expressed a great interest in reading expository/non-

fiction books and magazines. Under the Unfinished Sentences portion of the Student Priorities

and Interests Inventory, she stated that should we like to be able to read and comprehend any

text, whether it particularly interests her or not.


According to the Word Recognition test the researcher administered, Peggy’s

instructional level is at 7th grade. She started out at the 6th grade level with full accuracy, then

moved on to 7th grade with 90% accuracy, then 8th grade with 70%. The researcher also

administered the test one level up at the high school level where she reached 60% accuracy.

Based on the findings, the researcher has determined that Peggy’s independent level for word

recognition is at the 6th level, instructional at 7.5 since she only missed one word, and 8th for

frustration.

The results of Peggy’s Reading Passages were quite confusing; She started reading at the

8th grade level with a passage that shared her interests, but her accuracy was only 64%. She then

moved on to another passage in the same level and scored a 73% for comprehension. She

continued on to the 9-10th grade level and also scored a 73%. The researcher considered that the

first passage was possibly a fluke, and so she had Peggy read at the 7th grade level as a

comparison, to which she scored a 67% on comprehension. With this information, it seemed that

Peggy’s instructional level for comprehension was between 8 and 9-10th grade, and her

instructional for the words in context was 8th grade.

In the Oral Reading Miscues section (See Appendix D), the researcher has found that

Peggy had a fair amount of miscues, but also self-corrections, which tells the researcher that she

is spending most of her brain power on decoding words, while not leaving much room for

comprehension. This is imperative for understanding why Peggy’s comprehension may be so

low in certain passages. While this hinders her comprehension, she is very good at decoding

words as she reads.


Lessons

Lesson One – “Passage Concept Impressions”

CCSS.ELA-Literacy.RI.8.1

Cite the textual evidence that most strongly supports an analysis of what the text says explicitly

as well as inferences drawn from the text.

Summary

For the first lesson, the researcher chose a book from the library entitled Girls Play to

Win Volleyball by Chros McDougall (880L). This was chosen because the student expressed

interest in reading expository books, and she is also very involved in her school’s volleyball

team. The researcher explained that they would be working on predicting in this lesson, and

began by showing Peggy the cover of the book. The researcher asked if Peggy had any ideas

what the book could be about and who would be involved in it based on the cover, and Peggy

made very good insights saying, “I think that it will follow the Dallas volleyball team because

that is the team of the jersey the girl on the cover is wearing.” I explained that this was a very

good use of her background knowledge to infer and predict.

Next, the researcher pulled a section of the text and plugged it into a word cloud in front

of the Peggy so that she could see the most frequently used words. Then the researcher drew a

line on the whiteboard and asked Peggy to decipher what she thought the book could be about

now that she had more information, and the researcher recorded her answers on the line. Peggy

said things like the Olympics and famous players, and the researcher asked why she thought that

at each prediction in order to get her to support her predictions with evidence. She would give

proper evidence like, “I see this team’s name here and this says Olympics.”

http://www.corestandards.org/ELA-Literacy/RI/8/1/


After that, the researcher and Peggy both created a four-sentence story based on the

predictions that she had come up with as well as the information from the cover and the word

cloud. It was brought to Peggy’s attention that she could write it in the form of a narrative or an

expository text, however she thought the book was structured. When they were done writing,

both shared their short stories. Then the researcher asked Peggy to read the first chapter and skim

through the rest of the book by their next meeting in order to get a feel for the structure and

content of the book so that way they could discuss how accurate her predictions were. The

researcher also introduced the “Text-to-self, text-to-text, text-to-world” model to Peggy and gave

her a worksheet on it to fill out as she did her reading that week.

Reflection

The researcher chose this literacy strategy because in their last meeting, Peggy had

explained her desire to comprehend everything that she reads, even if it does not particularly

interest her. Because of this, the researcher thought it would be a good idea to do some

motivation strategies in order to get Peggy more involved and invested with the text, and thus

improve comprehension. The prediction and text application strategies are great for motivation,

and the researcher explained this to Peggy as the lesson went on. Peggy said herself that she

liked the predicting strategy and that she would try the text application while doing her reading

during the week. Next time they meet, the researcher will do an assessment on comprehension to

see if the motivation strategy was successful.

Rationale for Future Instruction

The assessment for the next lesson will consist of Peggy summarizing what she had read

while the researcher asks in-depth questions of the text in order to see if comprehension was

reached. They will continue to work on motivation strategies that improve comprehension since


that is the main thing that Peggy needs to work on. In the next lesson, the researcher will tie in

the predicting and text application strategies as well as a new one in order to heighten

engagement with the text.

Lesson Two – “Main Idea Wheel”


Determine a central idea of a text and analyze its development over the course of the text,

including its relationship to supporting ideas; provide an objective summary of the text.

Summary

For the second lesson, Peggy and the researcher reviewed much of what they had gone

over in the first lesson. It began by Peggy summarizing what she had read out of the text during

the week and assessing how accurate her predictions were from the first lesson. The researcher

asked questions as Peggy recounted what she had read in order to assess comprehension. Peggy

would explain, “The chapter talked about the fundamentals of volleyball,” and so the researcher

would ask, “Like what?” This was the summative assessment from the last lesson to see if the

predictions had any effect on Peggy’s comprehension.

Peggy also went over her text applications from the last lesson and explained how she

saw the text applying to her life. The researcher asked for further information on this segment as

well in order to assess comprehension of the text, as well as build rapport with the student and

learn about her life. The researcher then tied the two segments into the final segment by

explaining, “You assessed your own predictions by explaining if your main ideas that you had

come up with matched the main ideas of the book. We will now further dive into the main ideas

to see if we can really determine what they are. And just like how you gave support for how the



book applied to your life by using text applications, we will use support for the main ideas that

we come up with.”

In order to introduce the topic of determining main ideas, the researcher drew three main

idea wheels on the board. She read portions of one of the chapters and did a Think Aloud as she

modeled how she came up with the main idea. Then, she looked through the chapter to find

evidence to support her main idea and utilized a Think Aloud to demonstrate the difference

between support and an interesting fact. Then, Peggy and the researcher took turns reading

another chapter and worked together to determine the main idea and support for that chapter. To

complete the model of the Gradual Release of Responsibility, the researcher had Peggy complete

the final main idea wheel on her own, based on the chapter that she had read. The researcher did

not assist since this was the summative assessment for the lesson, but rather encouraged Peggy to

use her resources of pictures, headings, subheadings, as well as her text applications.

Reflection

The researcher chose to continue with the same book as the last lesson because of the

prediction and text application strategies that Peggy had already done with it, and so sticking

with the book would mean being able to follow up with the student and really diving in to what

she read. The researcher chose this lesson in order to focus on comprehension for the student,

which was achieved. Through all of the assessments performed, Peggy did very well.

Remembering what she had read at first proved to be a bit difficult for her since she had not

looked at the book in several days, but once she got talking about it, she seemed to remember

much more. When asked comprehension questions, she was able to come up with sufficient

answers for each and did very well on her own main idea wheel.



At the end of the lesson, the researcher asked Peggy what she thought about the book and

discovered that not only did she enjoy the expository text, but that she also likes nonfiction

narrative literature and just recently got a book that she would like to read. The researcher

thought that going through this new book would be a great idea and so she is planning to work

with this in order to increase motivation and comprehension in Peggy. Conducting a strategy to

look at the book before reading it would be best for this so that they can each take time during

the week to read it.

Lesson Three – “Reflect on Questions”




Summary

For the third lesson, Peggy and the researcher went over the QAR version of questioning.

The researcher had planned to utilize a book that Peggy had bought the other day in order to

increase interest in the topic. However, Peggy had left her book at school and so was not able to

read through it for the lesson. The researcher improvised and got a book from one of her

professors – a biography about Lois Lowry (840L). The researcher was not certain how Peggy

would react to this, since she had not expressed biographies as an interest of hers. However,

Peggy announced that, “As long as it’s not a fairy tale,” she was okay with it.

Once the new book was established, the researcher introduced the topic of questioning by

explaining that it comes in different levels. She explained the different levels of the QAR (Right



There, Think and Search, Author and Me, On my Own) and wrote the definitions and examples

on the white board. She left it there in order that Peggy may be able to reference it while utilizing

the questions. Then, the researcher had Peggy pick a different page for each question in order to

give her choice to increase motivation, and both Peggy and the researcher came up with

questions for each. When they were finished, they answered each other’s questions aloud. While

Peggy answered, the researcher listened for comprehension of the topic, and while the researcher

answered, she utilized the Think Aloud strategy in order to model for Peggy how to question.

When they were finished with this, the researcher switched up the strategy by having

both of them first come up with an answer, and then give it to the other to determine what the

question might be. The researcher had determined to only use the first two strategies in the QAR

(Right there and Think and Search) for this portion of the lesson since she supposed that it would

be more difficult, but she observed Peggy to be catching on very quickly. Because of this, she

changed the strategies to Think and Search and Author and Me since those proved to be more

challenging. Peggy expressed that this portion was much more difficult, but she did well. She

utilized the board to look back at what each strategy entailed, and even when she did not get the

“correct question” for the Author and Me, the researcher explained that since it was a matter of

inferring, there could be multiple answers. The researcher clarified that even though Peggy did

not think of the question that the researcher wrote the answer for, she did a very good job at

providing evidence for her question, and so the researcher would accept that answer.

Reflection

The researcher assessed Peggy by her answers given on the QAR sheet and determined

that she caught on very quickly to the questioning strategy. Since both of them came up with

questions for one another, the researcher would observe Peggy as both of them wrote, and


perceived that Peggy finished her questions much more quickly than the researcher on more than

one occasion, and that her questions were still satisfactory. Also, the topic of the new book ended

up being beneficial in that the researcher had wanted to incorporate a topic that Peggy was not

particularly interested in order to work on her comprehension even when she was not very

engaged. This book provided the perfect opportunity for this and it appeared that her

comprehension was still there.


Since Peggy did so well with the questioning strategy, the researcher will not be having

her go over another. Instead, they will focus more on previewing the book that Peggy had

originally wanted to do for this lesson. Peggy had expressed interest in the predicting strategies,

so the researcher would like to stick to strategies surrounding that in order to further

comprehension and motivation for the student.

Lesson Four – “Read and Say”


Analyze how a text makes connections among and distinctions between individuals, ideas, or

events (e.g., through comparisons, analogies, or categories).


Determine a central idea of a text and analyze its development over the course of the text,

including its relationship to supporting ideas; provide an objective summary of the text.

Summary

For this lesson, the researcher began with an Anticipation Guide to get the student in the

right mindset to begin her reading. The text was a book that Peggy had brought herself – it was a




nonfiction narrative based on her interests called Braced by Alyson Gerber (640L). The book

centered around a girl with Scoliosis, so the researcher prepped the Anticipation Guide with

statements centered around that in order to assess prior knowledge about the topic and also to

give the student a purpose while she reads. During the reading in the lesson, the researcher would

often have Peggy stop and continue to fill out the Guide as she obtained more information.

Peggy and the researcher then took turns reading out loud through the first chapter of the

book together. Each would read a couple of pages and then stop to write on a poster that the

researcher had brought in. They would write/draw either a prediction, summary, question, or text

application when they switched off reading. This engaged Peggy in the reading and heightened

comprehension. They read through the first chapter in this manner, and then decided that Peggy

would read at least another chapter for homework so that they could discuss it at their next

meeting. Peggy was to also take home the Anticipation Guide and fill it out as she read.

Reflection

During the reading, Peggy would often get so excited about writing on the poster that she

asked to write one or more statements even when it was not her turn to. Some of her

statements/questions were fairly obvious (ex. In a paragraph on how much the main character did

not like her doctor, Peggy’s question was, “Why does she not like her doctor?”), but the

researcher was not concerned with this, because even basic statements and questions such as this

showed that Peggy was comprehending the text and getting engaged with it. The researcher had

Peggy write statements after she read instead of after the researcher read in order to encourage

comprehension of the material while she read it, since often times Peggy focuses on decoding

rather than comprehension while she reads. She did well with comprehension even when she

read during this lesson, and the researcher believes that this was the best lesson so far.



Giving the student choice on what category she wanted to write about as well as letting

her pick the text really seemed to engage her and get her interested in the topic. Because of this,

they will continue to use the same book for the next lesson. They will go over the Anticipation

Guide and see if any of Peggy’s preconceived notions about Scoliosis were correct or not. They

will also focus on comprehension in order to continue to increase motivation.

Lesson Five – “Authentic Questions (Three R’s)”

CCSS.ELA-Literacy.RL.8.1



Summary

To begin the lesson, the researcher had the student summarize what she had read thus far

by using the “Somebody Wanted But So” strategy. The researcher would have liked to go over

the anticipation guide from the last lesson to see if Peggy had added anything to it while she read

on her own, but Peggy had not brought it with her. Instead, the researcher did an informal, oral

assessment of the anticipation guide.

After that, the researcher introduced the lesson by explaining what the “Three R’s” were,

- Record, React, and Reflect. The researcher explained that they would take turns reading

sections of the text, and then stop to record an inferring question from what they had just read,

and then the other would give their initial reaction to the question. When they finished reading,

they would reflect on the questions with more knowledge of the text and either change or support

their original answers. This was all recorded on the white board in order to increase student

http://www.corestandards.org/ELA-Literacy/RL/8/1/


engagement because Peggy had explained to the researcher how much she loved to write on the

white board.

This lesson was chosen because from the last lesson, the researcher had observed that

Peggy excelled at summarizing, predicting, applying, and asking questions, so the researcher

wanted to take one of these areas a step further. Using the “Somebody Wanted But So” format

for summarizing challenged Peggy in that she had to explain what she read using only that

format. The lesson on questioning also challenged her in that she had expressed how difficult

inferring questions were. Not only did she have to come up with inferring questions and thus use

higher order thinking skills than simply a “think and search” answer, but she also had to answer

the researcher’s inferring questions. This way, Peggy had to utilize two different strategies while

tying in what she had learned before about the different levels of questioning.

Reflection

It took the student some time with each question to think of one, but most of her

questions included the right thinking for drawing inferences. For one question, the researcher

asked Peggy, “Do you think that the main character really does not want a colorful back brace, or

do you think she is trying to rebel since she does not want to get one?” Peggy responded with, “I

think it is a sign of rebellion because she obviously doesn’t like the brace, and I think she is

about my age, and I know that none of my friends would want something like that to be plain if

they were given the chance to pick colors.” The researcher exclaimed, “That is a great inference!

You used knowledge of the text, combined with your background knowledge of girls your age,

to draw a conclusion.” Peggy also seemed to enjoy using the whiteboard as well as the content in

the book because every so often she would stop and ask questions or make text-to-self

applications pertaining to the book without being prompted.



Since the end of their sessions, the researcher has contacted Peggy’s mother and given

her advice for future instruction for her as she enters high school. The researcher recommended

that her mother continue to have her read regularly, but also to periodically ask Peggy about

what she is reading and how it connects to her life. The researcher hopes that this will instill a

love for reading in her that sustains her even when the text is not appealing to her. The researcher

also mentioned that the medium of the strategy seemed to be important to Peggy – in several of

their lessons, her engagement seemed to increase when she wrote on the whiteboard or poster

board. Because of this, the researcher suggested that her mother invest in a note taking strategy

that would interest Peggy (such as a small whiteboard or a recording device) so that she could

use this for note taking for school. This also would increase motivation and interest in the

student.

Summary

Overall, the time spent with Peggy was valuable to both her and the researcher. Going

into the sessions, the researcher’s main goal was for Peggy to develop a love of reading and to

comprehend each text that she came across, whether applicable to her or not. Unfortunately, this

does not happen in five sessions. This is a skill that must be worked on over time, and the

researcher hopes that as Peggy continues to work on this, her love for reading will grow.

During their sessions, Peggy showed immense promise as a reader, however, she also

seemed to want to impress the researcher with her ability and by always having the correct

answer. While this is not a bad desire, it can often get in the way of really understanding the

material. For Peggy, it caused her to omit and substitute many words as she read which faltered


her comprehension. It also affected how she read in that she focused more on decoding than she

did comprehending the passages. This is why the researcher concentrated much of their time on

comprehension and motivation. While this cannot be completely achieved in five sessions, the

researcher does believe that a seed was planted in the student and that it will grow into a love for

reading.

Peggy seemed to be very engaged during many of their sessions and often asked

questions and related the material to her own life, which shows evidence of the motivation that

the researcher was attempting to instill being implanted into Peggy’s life. The researcher is

honored to have gotten the chance to work with Peggy as it also benefitted her and her studies.

She was glad to have gotten to interact with a student in the grade level that she is hoping to

teach someday and believes that this experience will impact her future classroom teaching.


References

Bader, L. A., & Pearce, D. L. (2013). Bader reading and language inventory. Boston: Pearson.

Ellery, V., & Rosenboom, J. L. (2011). Sustaining strategic readers: techniques for supporting

content literacy in grades 6-12. Newark, DE: International Reading Association.

Gerber, A. (2017). Braced. New York, NY: Arthur A. Levine Books, an imprint of Scholastic

Inc.

Lowry, L. (2017). Looking back: a book of memories. Place of publication not identified:

Houghton Mifflin Harcourt.

McDougall, C. (2011). Girls play to win volleyball. Chicago: Norwood House Press.


Appendix A


Appendix B


Appendix C


Appendix D


Appendix E

jamierester.weebly.com · web viewaccording to the word recognition test the researcher...

Documents