Literacy Profile

Laura Efford

Longwood University
 Literacy Profile

Contextual Framework

“Betsy” is a nine-year-old third grader in a small city in Central Virginia (population

about 46,000). Her school has 340 students and serves grades pre-K through 4th. It is located

two blocks from a large university. Because of its location, many students have parents with

advanced degrees. The school also attracts international students whose parents visit the

university on short-term business. Furthermore, the school is located in a diverse, historically

Black neighborhood. Areas of the neighborhood are low-income.

Betsy’s school is 50% white, 30% Black, 10% Asian, 5% Hispanic-Latino, and 5%

mixed race. Forty-three percent of students at the school qualify for the Free and Reduced-Price

Lunch program. The school was built in 1925, and her classroom is located on the third floor,

with great views of the surrounding landscape. In her classroom, desks are pushed together to

create four islands. The teacher uses flexible grouping during the two-hour literacy block. The

students have access to laptops and ipads stored on carts in the hallway.

Betsy and her twin sister moved to the city from a rural area eighteen months ago. They

moved during their second-grade school year to live with their estranged father after their mother

passed away. Teachers and specialists believe the trauma of her mother’s death and the

subsequent move affected her school success. Both her second- and third-grade teachers report

much growth in their time working with her. She received Tier 3 support in second grade and

receives Tier 2 support now.

The most important implication to consider while working with Betsy is her recent

trauma and its potential effects. Care should be taken in the selection of instructional materials

2
to avoid themes that may re-traumatize her. Similarly, assessments should be administered in a

way that avoids inducing anxiety in order to produce more reliable results.

Assessments

Betsy was recommended to me by her classroom teacher. She ended her second-grade

year at a level H/I—about a year behind. Mid-year third-grade data showed her reading at a

level J/K. Her teacher reports notable growth throughout the school year thus far, but concerns

persist as she remains behind literacy benchmarks. Betsy receives Tier 2 services for literacy

skills, and works in a small group in her classroom every day with a reading interventionist. She

has many strengths, including an overall positive attitude and strong background knowledge in

many areas.

Professionals at the school agree that Betsy’s traumatic experiences contribute to her

academic difficulties. The move from a neighboring rural county eighteen months ago after the

death of her mother changed everything in her daily life. She and her twin sister moved to the

city to live with their estranged father and one of his adult children. Betsy reported to me during

the student interview that her least favorite subject is recess. This surprised me and I asked her

to tell me more. She told me recess is boring. I imagine she is having difficulty making friends

at her new school and navigating her new social landscape.

This trauma may affect her reading habits. She reads aloud in a halting, choppy way and

usually without expression. Her teacher reports a sort of stutter as she reads. She sometimes

elongates the first sound or utters the first phoneme of an incorrect word before self-correcting.

This stutter-type behavior is not present when she speaks. She is sometimes easily distracted.

3
 A reading attitude survey revealed a positive attitude about reading in school, and no

interest in reading for fun at home. It seems Betsy understands reading is necessary for school

success, while also believing reading is not a worthwhile leisure activity. Her affective measure

for reading is ranked in the 38th percentile.

Student Interview and Affective Measure

Aspects of literacy addressed by these assessments:

A. Motivation

B. Metacognition

C. Student interests

D. Attitudes toward reading

Betsy revealed during the student interview that she has a twin sister, also in third grade. She

shared the information noted in previous sections concerning her mother’s passing and the

subsequent changes in living conditions. She likes to watch the Disney channel and a YouTuber

named Funneh. Her favorite subject in school is P.E. She enjoys listening to someone read

aloud; no one reads to her at home. Betsy shares that “tiny words” and “words you don’t

understand” make something hard to read. When she has difficulty reading a word, she shares

one strategy she tries: trying “to say it in different ways.” Results from the student interview

suggest Betsy will benefit from consistent tutoring times and routines (based on reports of recent

trauma), as well as explicit instruction with decoding and comprehension strategies.

Betsy’s scores on the affective measure—the Garfield survey developed by Dennis J. Kear—

shows her attitude toward recreational reading to be in the 21st percentile (with a raw score of

25). Her attitude toward academic reading is noticeably higher—in the 58th percentile and a raw

4
score of 29. When considering both recreational and academic reading attitudes, her full-scale

raw score is 54, putting her in the 38th percentile. These scores suggest that Betsy does not like

to read for fun but is willing to read at school and understands the importance of academic

reading.

Individual Reading Inventory

Aspects of literacy addressed by these assessments:

A. Oral reading fluency

B. Automaticity in word knowledge

C. Decoding

D. Oral reading accuracy in context

E. Comprehension

Reading the first three word lists on the WRI—preprimer, primer, and first grade—Betsy had

timed accuracy scores of 95% and untimed scores of 100%. That is, on each of these lists, she

missed one word while being timed that she read accurately with more time to see the word.

(See Appendix A.) With the second-grade word list, she scored 90% in both the timed and

untimed scenarios. This suggests some decoding deficits, although is not strong evidence for

such since this data is based on the accurate reading of only two words (promise and insects).

Betsy’s WRI performance exhibited a “crash” on the third-grade word list. She read 50% of

these words accurately while being timed, and 60% accurately during the untimed piece. The

10% increase in scores here further suggests decoding deficits. The WRI results suggest Betsy

reads independently at second grade level and below. Notably, at 90% accuracy, second grade

passages will be in her low-independent range. The data further suggests Betsy reads

5
frustrationally at a third-grade level and higher. One may reasonably assume her instructional

range to be more difficult second-grade texts or simplified third-grade texts.

The WRI score of 95% on the untimed first-grade word list suggest Betsy could read first

grade texts with automatic word recognition and good fluency. The WRI score of 90% on the

untimed second-grade word list shows she could probably read with automaticity and good

fluency at a second-grade level, too. I include the modifier “probably” here because a 90%

accuracy score just barely meets the cut-off to be deemed “independent.” Her lack of

improvement with time to decode further supports this claim.

Interestingly, her WRI scores “crash” forty percentage points between second and third

grades. An accuracy score of 50% untimed suggests she will read third grade texts with poor

automaticity and fluency. Furthermore, her correction of only two errors when untimed suggests

she may struggle to decode words at this level as well.

During the administration of the QRI-IV WRC, Betsy read aloud a narrative passage at a

second-grade level with 96% accuracy. She read at 75 words per minute—meeting fluency

expectations for a second-grade reader. She answered comprehensions about the text with 88%

accuracy, placing her comprehension in a high-instructional range. These scores, when

considered with the WRI scores, show that Betsy reads instructionally at a second-grade level.

In order to find Betsy’s highest instructional level, she was next given a narrative third-grade

passage to read aloud. She read this with 95% accuracy at 71 words per minute. This fluency

rate is notably slower than the third-grade expectation of 100 words per minute. Her slow rate

most likely affected her comprehension of the passage: she answered only 63% of

comprehension questions satisfactorily. (This score increased to 75% with look-backs.).

6
 To gather further information about her reading abilities at a third-grade level, I next

administered an expository text WRC at this level. Like the narrative text, Betsy read this text

aloud with 95% accuracy. Her fluency rate slowed to 65 words per minute with this passage,

however, and her comprehension score decreased to 38% (50% with look-backs). With both of

these passages, then, she reads with an instructional-level accuracy, but frustrational

comprehension (most likely due at least in part to slow fluency). To probe further, I asked her to

read a narrative text silently. She read this text at 128 words per minute. I attribute this almost-

doubling in fluency rate to a poor attention to the text; she was most likely skimming the

passage. Comprehension scores support this supposition: she scored 63% on the comprehension

questions, and 75% with look-backs.

The WRI and WRC scores show Betsy reading instructionally at second and third-grade

levels. The WRI untimed score at second-grade suggests second-grade texts could be labeled

“high instructional” for her. To find an independent reading level, I administered a first-grade

narrative passage to read aloud. She read this with 97% accuracy, at 86 words per minute, and

with 100% comprehension. Although the accuracy score is just short of an independent call,

WRC fluency and comprehension rates, as well as WRI performance supports an independent

level at this level.

To gather additional data to support a frustrational level call, I administered a fourth-grade

narrative WRC passage. Betsy read this with 95% accuracy. Interestingly, her accuracy did not

decrease between third and fourth-grade texts, and only decreased 1% from the second-grade

text. However, she read the fourth-grade passage at only 55 words per minute, a very slow rate

for a fourth-grade text. Her 75% comprehension score at this level was supported by extensive

7
background knowledge about the topic (Amelia Earhart) revealed through pre-reading

questioning. Her slow rate and WRI scores support a frustrational call at this level.

Qualitative Spelling Assessment

Aspects of literacy addressed by this assessment:

A. Spelling/encoding

Correct Uses But Confuses Absent

Initial and final consonants Common long vowels No features scored on the PSI

Short vowels Other vowels were absent in the student

Digraphs and blends Inflected endings sample.

Betsy is able to spell most single-syllable words that include short vowels, blends, and

digraphs. She has some knowledge of common long vowel patterns, and applies them correctly

sometimes, and incorrectly other times. For example, she spelled hope and blade correctly, but

spelled shine as SHIN. (See Appendix B.) This suggests an almost-firm knowledge of the use

of silent-e. Similarly, she spelled coach correctly, but spelled dream as DREM. She has learned

some common long vowel patterns and continues to work on others.

When we consider the less common vowel patterns studied in the middle-to-late stages of

Within Word Pattern instruction, Betsy uses some correctly and some incorrectly. She correctly

spelled the r-controlled pattern in thorn and incorrectly in third. (She wrote THREED.) She

correctly used the OU digraph in shouted, and incorrectly applied it to chewed. She has

knowledge of the diphthong OY, but incorrectly applied it to spoil (writing SPOYUL). She

spelled growl correctly, but spelled crawl as CROL.

8
 Betsy missed only one out of seven inflected endings. She spelled riding as RIDDING.

It seems she has learned the doubling generalization (seen also in her correct spelling of

clapping), but is not yet firm with e-drop. This aligns with her shaky grasp of silent-e in single-

syllable words.

Betsy should be instructed in word study with an accelerated pace. She is an Early

Within Word Pattern speller, and she should be approaching the Syllables and Affixes stage as

she begins fourth grade. Interestingly, she has lots of knowledge about long vowel patterns, and

only needs to fill in some holes and clear up misunderstandings. However, the Within Word

Pattern stage can take years of instruction, and it’s important to have a firm knowledge base here

because these generalizations will continue to be applied in the Syllables and Affixes stage of

spelling development.

Instruction will begin with mixed short vowel words contrasted with long vowel words

with silent-e. One week may be enough with these contrasts, as Betsy has shown some

understanding of the silent-e long vowel marker. As noted above, she correctly spelled hope and

blade. She also applied silent-e to fright, spelling it as FRITE. Although this is an incorrect

spelling, it shows she knows silent-e can be used to make the long-i sound in this word. The

pattern will be reviewed because she incorrectly spelled shine as SHIN.

Betsy’s tenuous grasp of diphthongs and ambiguous vowels may influence her

automaticity with reading. For example, on her timed WRI testing, she read crowded as “grow”

and glowed with an “ow” sound. Similarly, her continued work with silent-e is reflected in her

reading live as “leave” during the timed WRI. Although many of her WRC errors were function

words (47% of all errors), a miscue analysis shows her accuracy and fluency are affected by

9
Within Word Pattern word knowledge reflected in the PSI. For example, she read heard as

“heered” in context and groom as “grum.”

Lastly, her spelling knowledge affects her performance in writing. She correctly spells

most single-syllable short vowel words, many long vowel words, and some diphthongs,

including note, dance, week, and crown. Her misunderstandings concerning ambiguous vowels

are reflected in her spelling saw as SALL; her misunderstandings about r-influenced are shown

in her spelling first as FRIST. She is able to spell well enough to write fluently but continues to

lag behind peers in encoding skills.

Written Language

Aspects of literacy addressed by this assessment:

A. Spelling/encoding

B. Grammar and punctuation

C. Writing fluency

D. Organization of communication

Betsy’s writing sample (Appendix C) shows a relative strength in voice and weaknesses in

conventions and organization. Her story was an adapted fairy tale titled “Cinderella the Dog,”

and was written with a commitment to the topic and with a sense of humor. The writer shares

her unique voice when she writes about the main character, Cookie, and the upcoming royal ball:

Cookie was so happy but she only had messy fur. She cried in till she heard a “poof.”

Then she look’s up and see’s her fairy dog mother was there. She was so happy.

10
Later, the wicked stepmom says, “how ever [whoever] that ugle girl was she will get it Cookie.”

She uses dramatic irony to share the joke with the reader, who knows that the “ugle girl” is in

fact Cookie herself.

Betsy’s writing sample also included frequent conventional errors that make reading

difficult. For example, the ending states:

When they went to kingdom Cookie let her step sister’s go frist but it did not fit

ether of them then she set it on she looked like she did at the ball they got maired.

The End. “Woof.”

Furthermore, the story is sometimes list-like and relies heavily on the original tale for its

story structure. Word choice should be improved to make the writing more interesting. Perhaps

the strongest weakness is the failure to explicitly state facts the reader needs to understand the

story. Instead, she leaves the reader to make assumptions on his own. For example, she never

states the main character—“the sweetest puppy in the village”—is named Cookie. She begins

writing about Cookie in ways that leave the reader to assume this must be the puppy. She also

changes from objective narration to first person narration halfway through the story (and then

back again), which adds to the reader’s confusion. She writes:

Then she look’s up and see’s her fairy dog mother was there. She was so happy.

Then I said “I need a pumpkin 3 mice and 1 rat and stick that sparkul’s.”

The reader does not know who the “I” is here, but can assume it refers to the fairy dog mother.

This example, too, shows the switch in tense from present to past. The story contains many of

these switches.

Overall, then, the story makes sense because it uses a well-known storyline. The

narrative is sometimes list-like and difficult to understand, but also contains a unique voice and

11
humor. Betsy seems to write with fluency and has good ideas to put down on the page. She

should be helped to organize her thoughts before writing and to use transitional words. These

steps may help prevent the list-like structure, as will additional instruction in conventions, such

as use of punctuation. Brainstorming interesting words before writing will improve the bland

and sometimes repetitive word choice.

Summary of Data Analysis and Reading Levels

Betsy reads just below grade level and is working on improving fluency. This should in

turn improve comprehension. While her accuracy is good even on a fourth-grade level, the pace

is so slow that she cannot retain what she is reading and make sense of it. The miscue analysis

shows that 35% of errors are self-corrected, showing Betsy does do some self-monitoring as she

reads. She relies on background knowledge to help her talk about a text and answer

comprehension questions about what she reads. Although experiencing difficulty fitting in at a

new school, she has a good attitude about working in school to improve literacy skills. Spelling

data shows she is an early-Within Word Pattern speller but may be able to move at an

accelerated pace due to some understanding of various long vowel patterns. Her writing shows

some originality and humor, although it can be disorganized and difficult to understand due to

conventional errors.

Betsy reads on an instructional range of 2nd to 3rd grade. Second-grade materials may be

considered “high instructional.” The WRI showed 90% accuracy on the timed second-grade list,

and she read a narrative passage at this level with 96% accuracy and at 75 words per minute.

Her comprehension was also in the instructional range at 88%. Betsy’s reading performance on

the WRI demonstrated a “crash” between second and third grades. She read the third-grade list

12
during the timed administration with 50% accuracy, which improved only 10% with unlimited

time to decode missed words. She read a narrative passage at this level with 95% accuracy, but

at 71 words per minute (slow), and with only 63% comprehension. Data with an expository

passage at this level is similar at 95% accuracy, 65 words per minute, and 38% comprehension.

Her performances on the WRI and WRC show she reads independently at a first-grade level and

frustrationally at fourth.

Betsy’s positive attitude about school and literacy-related work have helped her

demonstrate a good deal of growth over the past year. She continues to struggle with grade-level

materials; these struggles are most likely compounded by experiencing the trauma of losing her

mother and moving in with an estranged family. While she states she has difficulty making

friends at her new school, she has a close bond with her twin sister, who is in a different third-

grade class. Betsy has supports, then, that help her show growth in literacy, including a positive

attitude, a strong sibling bond, and Tier II intervention with a reading specialist. She is able to

use her extensive background knowledge about some topics to talk about what she reads;

sometimes she relies too heavily on this knowledge for comprehension. She reads grade-level

materials slowly and reads aloud in a halting voice typically devoid of expression. Her writing,

though, is fluent and able to convey a story with voice. Her difficulties with reading fluency

may be making some classroom content too difficult to understand.

Instructional Goals

Instructional goals for Betsy include those related to word knowledge, fluency,

vocabulary, and comprehension. First, Betsy will firm up her knowledge of silent-e. PSI data

show she has some understanding of this feature but fails to use it consistently to spell long

13
vowel sounds. Once she shows an understanding of this feature, she should learn other common

long vowel patterns, including EE and EA vowel teams for long-e. Word sorts, dictated

sentences, and blind writing sorts will help her learn these features.

Second, to build fluency, Betsy will accurately read and reread texts on her independent

reading level—that is, texts on a first-grade reading level. Reading scripts aloud from the

Reader’s Theater series will help her improve prosody. These texts ask students to take on

different characters and include many types of expression (questions, exclamations, shouting,

singing, etc.). She will also be asked to read her own writing. This method, called the Language

Experience Approach, will help build fluency and ultimately improve comprehension.

To build vocabulary knowledge and improve comprehension of texts, Betsy will learn

about ancient Egypt as she reads texts at her highest instructional level—third grade. These

efforts will be supported by pre-reading activities, including vocabulary overviews and

stimulating background knowledge. Comprehension goals for her include using the text to

answer questions instead of relying on background knowledge or assumptions. To improve her

capacity to supply text-based answers, she will practice finding and highlighting pieces of text

that answer a question. She will also use reading guides to support her understanding of these

content-heavy third-grade texts.

Lastly, Betsy will improve her ability to use descriptive words in her writing. She will

write a variety of responses to the readings about ancient Egypt noted above. These responses

will require that she use descriptive language. For example, she will write a letter to a friend

describing the pyramids and a brochure encouraging people to visit ancient Egypt. To help her

become more comfortable with using descriptive words, we will first brainstorm interesting

words, such as humongous or gigantic for “big.”

14
 Evidence of Research Base: Individualized Instructional Goals

The proposed program of word study for Betsy is based on research completed by Marcia

Invernizzi, among others. In Integrated Word Study: Spelling, Grammar, and Meaning in the

Language Arts Classroom (1997), Invernizzi, Abouzeid, and Bloodgood argue that when

students develop understandings about words on their own, the knowledge is better committed to

memory and learned. That is, by engaging in open sorts and exploring spellings and sounds of

words, Betsy will discover ways our orthographic system works rather than learning what the

teacher says through rote memorization, which is a more passive style of learning.

Richard Allington’s research supports the practice of reading independent-level materials

to build fluency. In The Six Ts of Effective Elementary Literacy Instruction (2002), Allington

states that students need lots of experiences of reading success to become proficient readers.

Reading texts on one’s independent level builds fluency and understanding as well as confidence

and motivation. To build vocabulary, Betsy will engage in pre-reading activities that help her

make sense of new words, including strategies that encourage activation of background

knowledge. Tovani (2004) lists the activation of background knowledge as a tool proficient

readers use when they read difficult texts.

Successful readers must read with understanding—accuracy is not enough. In fact, Betsy

reads on grade level with high accuracy, but poor fluency and comprehension. In order to build

comprehension, she will be asked to make meaning of short passages and answer questions

whose answers are explicitly stated in the text. Research by McKenna, Franks, and Lovette

(2011) support the use of reading guides to build comprehension. They state that these guides

help focus a student’s attention on important pieces of text. The guides also help readers process

15
the content of the text, and through practice, encourage independent application of strategic

reading strategies.

Long-Range Instructional Plan

Betsy’s tutoring sessions will focus on improving fluency with the ultimate goal of

improving comprehension. She will explore the essential question “What makes a culture

unique?” At the request of her classroom teacher, she will learn about ancient Egypt as she

pursues thoughtful responses to this guiding line of inquiry. Each 90-minute tutoring session

will begin with fluency work, during which time she will read independent level texts aloud and

with expression. She will be coached on using good expression at this time. Next, she will

improve word knowledge by engaging in word sorts that contain words with common long

vowel patterns such as silent-e and common vowel digraphs. The bulk of each session will

consist of learning and applying comprehension strategies while reading instructional-level texts

about ancient Egypt. During this time, she will consider the essential question as she uses

reading guides and highlighting tools to help her create text-based answers to questions. She will

then write responses based on her reading. These written responses will encourage creativity and

the inclusion of descriptive words as she writes about ancient Egypt. The full long-range plan

can be found in Appendix D.

Tutoring Log

I worked with Betsy during the instructional day, at the request of her classroom teacher.

I pulled her from the classroom during her literacy block for 45 minutes every Thursday and

Friday for 10 weeks. Tutoring sessions were held in my kindergarten classroom while my

16
students were at Specials. Sessions were held toward the end of the school day, from 12:45-1:30.

We talked while we walked down the three flights of stairs to my classroom. I hoped that this

time to chat would allow us to begin focusing on instructional work once we arrived to the room,

which was typically the case. For further information, see the Tutoring Log in Appendix E.

Literacy Lessons and Reflections

Over our time together, I learned through trial and error how to best teach Betsy. First, I

learned that some of my comprehension objectives needed to be scaffolded, and she should be

asked to apply a new comprehension strategy in bite-sized pieces. For example, one lesson

asked that she summarize a passage. I quickly found out that she first would need to instead

summarize small portions of the passage, after I modeled my thinking aloud. This activity

remained rather difficult for her, so the next week I asked her to answer “right there” questions

based on the text and to defend her answer by highlighting the piece of text that supports it. This

comprehension objective and instructional activity was a great fit for her. She tended to rely on

background knowledge or suppositions to answer questions about a text, and she is now better

able to use the text to support her answer to a “right there” question.

I also slowed my pacing with word study. Based on pre-assessment data, I planned for

one week of review with silent-e. Instead, I reviewed silent-e over a few lessons while

incorporating other common long vowel features such as EA and OA. I wanted to use an

accelerated pacing while ensuring she had command of each feature. Post-assessment data

shows that she now continually uses a long vowel marker, whereas before she did not.

Lastly, I learned that she needed much more time to write than I originally anticipated.

She tended to have difficulty staying focused on writing tasks. I learned to provide “meatier”

17
brainstorming and pre-writing activities to support writing with a clearer focus. I am still unclear

why her pre-assessment writing was quite lengthy while her writing during lessons tended to be

much shorter. I suspect this was related to the instructional tasks and motivation.

Progress Monitoring and Post-Assessments

Before tutoring lessons began, I determined Betsy’s instructional needs to include a focus

on improving fluency. To improve fluency, we began each lesson with 15 minutes of fluency

work based on re-reading written work and reading independent-level texts aloud with

appropriate expression and prosody. These texts were usually Reader’s Theater scripts, which

allowed for many opportunities for expression and for teacher modeling. To provide further

instruction and practice to improve fluency, we also worked on improving comprehension of

instructional-level texts.

Betsy’s fluency while reading independent-level Reader’s Theater scripts aloud improved

during our tutoring sessions. During our first lesson, she scored a 2 on a fluency scale of 1-4.

The scale used the following descriptors, from 1 to 4: no expression; little expression; some areas

have expression; very expressive. During subsequent sessions, this score increased to a 3.

Scaffolded practice was provided during these lessons, which included teacher modeling, choral

reading, and rereading after coaching. She continues to read aloud in a halting way, saying some

words like a sort of “stutter” (the term used by her classroom teacher). This is not a conventional

stutter, but a quick self-correction. For example, she reads, “h-there she is” because she is first

going to read there as “here.” These frequent errors persist after our time together, so that while

expression and prosody have improved, she continues to read in a “choppy” way.

18
 Our comprehension work most likely bolstered the growth in fluency exhibited during the

Reader’s Theater fluency work. She was asked to pay closer attention to the text to support her

answers to “right there” questions. This strategy was intended to decrease reliance on

background knowledge and suppositions. She became quite capable of applying the strategy,

and one could reasonably assume this improvement affected fluency.

Through tutoring a transitional reader, I learned it can take a good deal of practice and

application to learn a new comprehension strategy. I also learned that, while very important,

summarizing is a difficult strategy to master, and some prerequisite skills may be necessary. For

example, Betsy needed to be able to locate information in a text that answered a question instead

of relying on her own (sometimes made-up) answers. Otherwise, her summaries could contain

these falsehoods as well. Furthermore, she needed repeated practice with this locating and

highlighting strategy before she was confident using it to help make sense of a text.

I also learned that there is a fine balance between an accelerated pacing of word study—

needed to catch a student up to her peers—and confidence a student has mastered a feature

before moving on. I felt a need to cover many common long vowel features, but also found that

introducing too many new features in just a few weeks was causing confusion. This was made

more difficult because we had only 15 minutes of formal word study each week. If I were to

teach this student again, I would make sure to align my instruction with the classroom teacher’s

so that the student studies the same features in class and in intervention.

In addition, I saw firsthand that motivation plays a key role in working with instructional

readers. Betsy wanted to learn more about hieroglyphics and was most successful when reading

and writing about this topic. When asked to write about pyramids or mummies, she tended to

19
drag her feet during writing time, even when provided with choice regarding format and

audience. She was also motivated by writing for an authentic audience. She was excited to

create a book to be kept in my classroom and read by kindergarten students. Next time I work

with instructional readers, I will be more flexible in my planning so that I will be able to engage

them with activities and topics that interest them.

20
 References

Allington, R. (2002). The six Ts of effective elementary literacy instruction. Reading Rockets.

Retrieved from http://readingrockets.org/article/six-ts-effective-elementary-literacy-

instruction

Invernizzi, M. A., Abouzeid, M. P., & Bloodgood, J. W. (1997). Integrated word study:

Spelling, grammar, and meaning in the language arts classroom. Language Arts, 74, 185-

191.

McKenna, M. C., Franks, S., & Lovette, G. E. (2011). Using reading guides with struggling

readers in grade 3 and above. In J. R. Paratore & R. L. McCormack (Eds.), After early

intervention: Then what? Teaching struggling readers in grades 3 and beyond (pp. 207-

216). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.

Tovani, C. (2004). Do I really have to teach reading? Content comprehension, grades 6-12.

Portland, ME: Stenhouse Publishers.

21