guided repeated reading: an approach to improve reading ...•co-teaching made possible the...
TRANSCRIPT
Guided Repeated Reading: An Approach to Improve Reading Fluency for Pupils with Reading Difficulties Louise Barr
Irish Learning Support Association Spring Conference March 29th 2019
Overview of Session
• Rationale for a co-taught repeated reading intervention
• Masters in Special Educational Needs (DCU) research study:
Definition of reading fluency
Two repeated reading routines
Assessing reading fluency
Lesson framework
Key findings
• Enriching the teacher and student experience
Rationale: Primary Language Curriculum Learning Outcome 10: Fluency and Self-Correction
3 (NCCA, 2015)
L.O. 10: Fluency and
Self-Correction
“The need to elaborate on other aspects of literacy not fully described in the Primary School English Curriculum (e.g. dialogic storybook reading, the alphabetic principle, reading fluency, the writing workshop, guided reading)” (Kennedy et al., 2012, p. 33).
Progression Steps
Rationale: Inclusive Practice
• Current policy in Irish education endorses a collaborative teaching approach to meet the needs of pupils with SEN (DES, 2017).
• Research relating to inclusive classroom practices is limited (Florian & Spratt, 2013). In research studies, the area of interest is generally related to researching specialist teaching skills for pupils with SEN (Florian & Black-Hawkins, 2011).
• Collaboration of teachers to address the issue of marginalising pupils who have SEN, is a key principle of inclusive education (Florian & Spratt, 2013; NCSE, 2011).
4
Research Questions
1. To what extent does a guided repeated oral reading intervention impact on reading fluency outcomes for pupils with reading difficulties?
2. To what extent does a co-taught guided repeated oral reading intervention enhance the inclusion of pupils with reading difficulties?
5
What is Reading Fluency?
Accuracy
• Ability to identify most words correctly
Automaticity
• Recognises words quickly and effortlessly, saving mental energy for comprehension
Prosody
• Ability to read expressively, using phrasing and voice tone to support understanding and convey meaning
6 (Doherty, 2017, p. 3)
The Fluency Bridge (Pikulski & Chard, 2005)
7 (Picture: Doherty, 2017, p. 5)
Comprehension of text enables expressive reading (prosody), indicating that students understand what they are reading
Achieving fluent word recognition (automaticity) allows pupils to focus on comprehending the text
“If automaticity is the fluency link to word recognition, prosody completes the bridge by
linking fluency to comprehension” (Rasinski, 2012, p. 519).
A Definition of Reading Fluency
“Fluency combines accuracy, automaticity, and oral reading
prosody…facilitate the reader's construction of
meaning…demonstrated during oral reading through ease of word
recognition, appropriate pacing, phrasing, and intonation…a factor
in both oral and silent reading…can limit or support comprehension” (Kuhn et al., 2010, p. 240)
In the Irish context, Guerin and Murphy (2015) promote a “complex definition of fluency” (p. 552) as integral to success in reading.
8
The Fluency Development Lesson (FDL) (Rasinski, Linek, Sturtevant, & Padak, 1994)
1. Modelling: Students listen as
teacher reads aloud
2. Choral Reading: Students read the
text chorally
3. Paired Reading: Paired repeated
reading
4. Performance of text for an audience
5. Vocabulary Development:
Word study
9 (Doherty, 2017, p. 75)
The Fluency Development Lesson (FDL) (Rasinski, Linek, Sturtevant, & Padak, 1994)
Struggling readers do not have the opportunity to hear themselves read fluently. The goal of the FDL is that students will read a text of 50-250 words fluently by the end of the lesson.
Modelling of text by the teacher demonstrates to pupils what quality reading sounds like.
Performance of the text gives students an authentic reason to repeatedly read a text in preparation for performance.
10
Repeated Reading
Based on the theory of automaticity (LaBerge & Samuels, 1974).
Pupils read text several times until a specified level of fluency is achieved as measured by words correct per minute (Samuels, 1979).
Improvements in reading accuracy and reading rate transfers to new, previously unseen passages (Samuels, 1979).
Approved by the National Reading Panel (2000) as a suitable methodology to improve reading fluency.
11
Evidence-based Fluency Instruction Routine (EFIR) (Reutzel, 2012)
• Partner reading
• Self-assessment
• Performance of text for the class
• Choral reading
• Discussion of text
• Fix-up strategies
• Metafluency
• Modelling text
• Metafluency
• Teacher assessment rubric
Modelling Sharing
Guiding Independent
12
Gradual Release of Responsibility Model (Pearson & Gallagher, 1983)
Metafluency (Reutzel, 2012)
Metafluency: Learning the language of fluency e.g., accuracy, rate, expression, intonation, phrasing.
It is necessary to have the language of fluency to become a self-regulating fluent reader: a reader who can monitor and repair their reading.
Pupils can’t discuss their fluency if they don’t have the vocabulary to discuss it. This allows for awareness of and reflection on their fluency. This is called deep fluency (Topping, 2006).
13
In my experience, fluent reading is the teacher’s goal for the
student but it is not the student’s goal.
“Students need to know that fluency is an
important goal of reading instruction” (Reutzel, 2012, p. 122).
14
Why have a focus on self-assessment and peer assessment?
Self-Assessment and Peer Assessment
Self-assessment to develop self-regulating strategic readers (Reutzel, 2012; Wiliam, 2011).
Is reading word by word a consequence of not being a self-regulating reader? (Allington, 2006).
Puts the pupil at the centre of the learning situation and allows for individualisation of learning (Bourke & Mentis, 2014).
Pupils identify their progress in relation to their reading fluency goals and work towards achieving them. Imbues them with confidence to assess their own learning and become self-regulating learners (Wiliam, 2011).
Tangible depiction of learning for pupils for whom progress is not always overt (NCCA, 2007).
Feedback from adults and peers shapes their thinking (Bourke & Mentis, 2007).
15
Research Study
• Action research (McNiff, 2010), mixed methods approach • Mid-January 2018 to mid-March 2018
• Large urban mainstream primary school
• 3rd class: 26 pupils participated in the study aged between 8 years 8 months and 9 years 8 months
• 8 weeks: 1 week for pre-assessment, 20 lessons over 6 weeks, 1 week for post-assessment • Class teacher and researcher (special education teacher) • 5 target pupils • Two lesson routines: Lesson A and Lesson B, based on the FDL (Rasinski et al., 1994), incorporating aspects of the EFIR (Reutzel, 2012).
Assessing Reading Fluency
17
• Rate
• Accuracy
• Prosody
• Comprehension
Comprehensive Approach to Assessment
(Guerin & Murphy, 2015)
Pre- and Post-Assessments
Silent Reading Comprehension
• New Group Reading Test (GL Assessment, 2010)
Self-concept as readers
• Questionnaires
Oral Reading
• Neale Analysis of Reading Ability (Neale, 1997)
Prosody
• Multidimensional Fluency Scale (Zutell & Rasinski, 1991)
Rate
• Words Correct Per Minute (Hasbrouck & Tindal, 2006)
Opinion on intervention
• Post intervention interview with target pupils
18
Whole Class Target Pupils
Multidimensional Fluency Scale (MDFS)
(Zutell & Rasinski, 1991)
• Easy to score
• Provides valuable diagnostic information
• Enables teacher to devise targets for pupils
Target Pupils: Strengths and Needs
Target Pupils*
Reading Fluency Strengths Priority Fluency Needs
James • Comprehension • Slow his reading rate to attend to accuracy • Prosody
Eva • Attempting to use graphophonic
information to decode • Word recognition and decoding skills • Prosody
Lisa • Surface fluency skills • Comprehension • Prosody
Luke • Reading volume • Pauses at full stops
• Decoding / Word recognition (many refusals evident) • Confidence • Prosody
Robert • Word recognition • Comprehension • Prosody
20
*pseudonyms
Creating Lesson Objectives: What does fluent reading sound like?
Recognises words in the
text automatically
Reads smoothly, grouping
words into phrases
Intonation demonstrates understanding
of text
Expression reflects
meaning of the text
Adjusts reading rate
depending on text difficulty
21 (Reutzel, 2012)
Assessment for Learning: Sharing Learning Intentions with Pupils
• Pause for 3 seconds at a full stop
• Pause for 1 second at a comma
Smooth Reading /
Rate
Sound like the character when there are speech marks
Expression
Read loudly and softly, as the text requires
Intonation
22
Read several words together without pausing
Smooth Reading/ Phrasing
Emphasise the most important words in each sentence
Expression / Comprehension
• Read with emphasis when there is an exclamation mark
• Change your voice when there is a question mark
Intonation
(Barr, 2018)
Reading Fluency Lessons
23
Lesson A Assessment for Learning: Sharing Learning Intentions
24
Definition of Reading Fluency for Pupils
25
(Doherty, 2017) (Reutzel, 2012)
Fluency Fix-up Strategy Posters
26
Lesson Objective: To sound like the character when there are speech marks
Texts
27
• Texts were 50-250 words (Rasinski et al., 1994) and included poetry, fiction, and non-fiction texts.
• Two texts for every
Lesson A. Same texts read in Lesson B.
• Levels of texts catered
for the range of reading levels amongst the five target pupils.
• Teacher did not
predetermine the text each target pupil read, pupils had choice (Florian & Black-Hawkins, 2011).
• The texts were the
context in which the lesson objectives were implemented.
• Teacher models reading both texts
• Think aloud: Fluency
fix-up strategies, refer to posters
• Teacher models self-
assessment • Class discussion: Did
teacher achieve the lesson objectives?
Modelling
(Table modified from Doherty, 2017)
• Whole class read the texts chorally
• Class rate their reading in relation to the lesson objectives
Sharing: Choral Reading
Whole Class Choral Reading Strategies
Cumulative Reading
30 (Doherty, 2017; Paige, 2012)
Guiding: Paired Repeated
Reading
• Target pupil chooses the text
• Partner reads first to model text again for target pupil
• Location of target pupil on poster changed for every lesson
(Barr, 2018)
Before reading with a partner, pupils identified their current level of performance in relation to lesson objectives
32
Pupil Self-Assessment Recording Sheet
(Barr, 2018)
Routine to Guide Paired Reading: PPPP
Praise Congratulate them for reading a tricky word correctly.
Prompt If your partner is still stuck, give them a hint!
Pause If your partner can’t read tricky word, pause for 4 seconds to give them time to use a reading accuracy strategy.
Preview “How will we read this text? Which words will we emphasise? Where can we use expression?”
33 (Doherty, 2017)
34
Peer and Self-Assessment Recording Sheet: Partner Repeated Reading
(Table modified from Doherty, 2017)
35
Pupil Self-Assessment Recording Sheet: Reflecting on Learning and Goal Setting
(https://teachingessentials.wordpress.com/ ; www.twinkl.co.uk )
Pupils self-assessed using this MDFS in the final lessons:
36 (Rubric modified from Zutell & Rasinski, 1991)
Justification for an explicit approach to word study in a reading fluency intervention, is based on the research which posits the importance of vocabulary development for struggling readers (Pikulski, 2006; Rasinski, 2017).
Including material from across the curriculum is important so pupils can develop content specific vocabulary (Zutell et al., 2012).
Pupils who haven’t previously experienced fluency difficulties can start to experience them from 3rd grade onwards if vocabulary hasn’t developed (Pikulski, 2006).
37
Vocabulary Development
Lesson B Choral reading; performance of texts; discussing goals;
word study; comprehension
Station 1
Choral reading with teacher (Text 1)
Word Wise Whizz
Station 2
Word Study Activities
Station 3
Choral reading with teacher (Text 2)
Word Wise Whizz
Station 4
Comprehension Activities
38
The independent phase of the gradual release of responsibility model (Pearson & Gallagher, 1983)
Mixed ability groups (Hart & Drummond, 2014)
12 minute stations Another opportunity to read text repeatedly
39
(McLachlan & Elks, 2012) (McLachlan & Elks, 2012) (First Steps, 2013)
Samples of task cards at the independent stations Vocabulary work at the teacher stations
What is the definition of the word?
Can someone extend that sentence?
Can you think of a rhyming
word?
Key Findings
• Improvements accrued by repeatedly reading texts did transfer to the first reading of a new text (GL Assessment, 2010; Neale, 1997). This was evidenced by the improvements in some, not all, variables of reading fluency for each target pupil.
• Gains may have been attributed to increased resilience and confidence as readers, attained by immediate feedback, metacognitive growth, and increased familiarity with text and text structure.
• Evidence of the progression of accuracy, comprehension, and prosody, resulting from authentic literary experiences (Rasinski, 2017) rather than focusing on primarily developing these skills in an isolated manner (Rasinski & Padak, 1998).
• Co-teaching made possible the inclusion of pupils with reading difficulties on a social level and an academic level in the classroom (Norwich, 2017). Two teachers allowed for closer observation of pupils. Greater time could be devoted by each teacher to interacting with the target pupils and monitoring their fluency development in relation to their fluency needs.
40
Pre- and Post-Repeated Reading Running Records
41 (Barr, 2018)
Quantitative Findings: Luke
42
Pre Standard Score (NGRT 2A)
Post Standard Score (NGRT 2B)
88 94
Silent Reading Comprehension
Pre-Assessment Accuracy Reading Age
Post-Assessment Accuracy Reading Age
9:08 9:09
Reading Accuracy
Pre-Assessment Comprehension Reading Age
Post-Assessment Comprehension Reading Age
9:04 10:01
Oral Reading Comprehension
Prosody
Pre-Assessment MDFS
Post-Assessment MDFS
7 13
Quantitative Findings: Luke
43
Pre-Assessment Accuracy Reading Age
Post-Assessment Accuracy Reading Age
9:08 9:09
15 errors across texts 1-4 10 errors across texts 1-4
Reading Accuracy
It is argued by Martens (1997), that repeated reading does not improve word recognition skills, rather “proficient readers are experienced readers” (Martens, 1997, p. 608). Experienced readers use the same cueing systems as poor readers. However, they navigate the syntactic, graphophonic, and semantic cue systems more efficiently resulting from their engagement with, and familiarity of, different text genres (Martens, 1997).
Quantitative Findings: Eva
44
Pre Standard Score (NGRT 2A)
Post Standard Score (NGRT 2B)
83 83
Silent Reading Comprehension
Pre-Assessment Accuracy Reading Age
Post-Assessment Accuracy Reading Age
6:10 7:01
Reading Accuracy
Pre-Assessment Comprehension Reading Age
Post-Assessment Comprehension Reading Age
8:01 6:08
Oral Reading Comprehension
Prosody
Pre-Assessment MDFS
Post-Assessment MDFS
4 7
Quantitative Findings: Eva
45
Pre-Assessment Reading Rate Age
(NARA, 1997)
Post-Assessment Reading Rate Age
(NARA, 1997)
7:05 8:02
Oral Reading Rate
Pre-Assessment Comprehension Reading Age
Post-Assessment Comprehension Reading Age
8:01 6:08
Oral Reading Comprehension
When assessment of the variables accuracy, rate, and comprehension occurs simultaneously, teachers can identify which specific components of fluency are having an impact on oral reading performance (Rasinski & Padak, 1998).
Paired Reading
Confidence Immediate feedback
Social Inclusion
46
“It gets you confident about reading to other people” (James, Interview)
“There is less pressure reading with a partner than reading with a teacher” (Nontarget pupil, Questionnaire)
“…. because they can help you when you’re stuck on something” (Eva, Interview)
“I enjoyed reading with people you don’t normally read with” (Nontarget Pupil, Questionnaire)
Qualitative Findings Theme: Paired Reading
“When someone reads it, I copy them” (Eva, Interview)
“It was helpful because you hear the story twice before you read…” (Lisa, Questionnaire)
Assessment Recording Progress
Goal Setting
Influence of dialogue with
teachers
Metafluency & Fix-up
strategies
47
“I…would think about it when I couldn’t read that good, I think that I said…a little bit, sometimes…now I’m putting always” (Eva, Interview)
“…when you don’t really know you can kind of read slowly because you don’t know the words…when you know it, it’s easier because…you know the hard words…” (James, Interview)
“…by my expression and emphasise [sic] my voice” (Luke, Questionnaire)
Theme: Assessment
“I’d read like I was talking to a friend” (Lisa, Interview)
Explicit Teaching
Automaticity of surface
fluency skills
48
“You could write down tricky words and learn from them” (Luke, Interview) “I didn’t really know
how big it [barracuda] was…thought it was a small little tiny one but it’s a ginormous one” (Eva, Interview)
Developing vocabulary for
English language learners is
necessary for them to move to
advanced levels of reading fluency
(Lems, 2012)
“Asking pupils to define a word or to give an exact meaning was a real challenge for some” (Class Teacher, Interview)
Theme: Explicit Teaching
49
What would you do if you met a new word in your reading that you did not know? (Question on Post-intervention Questionnaire)
I’d ask for the definition (Luke, Questionnaire)
Explicit Teaching
Automaticity of surface
fluency skills Word Study
Evidence of advanced word identification skills: using word
meaning as a decoding strategy.
Strategic approach: Does it make sense in
the text? (Pikulski, 2006)
Co-teaching
Combination of approaches
50
(Ploessl et al., 2010)
“If you only have one teacher, you
won’t learn as much”
(Luke, Interview)
Theme: Co-Teaching
“I liked that we had defined roles…we both had
responsibility for the teaching duties….I was really
able to support the pupils who needed help….teaching was targeted to meet their
needs” (Class Teacher, Interview)
The Importance of Increasing the Time Pupils Spend Reading
• In a 30 minute reading lesson in a class of 30 pupils each child reads for 1 minute. This equals 3 hours of practice per child across the school year.
• If pupils are reading in pairs, each child reads for 15 minutes per day. This equals 45 hours of practice across the school year (Shanahan, 2012).
51
Round Robin Reading Each pupil takes a turn to read while others in the group follow the text silently, waiting for their turn to read (Rasinski & Hoffman, 2003). The reading practice is too brief. Take for example the following:
Enriching the Teacher and Student Experience
Enriching the Student Experience
Mixed Ability Groups
Paired Reading
Social Constructivist
Approach Self-assessment
and goal setting
Breaking the habit of word
by word reading
(Allington, 2006)
52
Enriching the Teacher
Experience
Co-teaching
Professional Development
Evidence-based
teaching strategies
Formative Assessment
Questions
53
References Allington, R.L. (2006). Fluency: Still waiting after all these years. In S.J. Samuels, & A.E. Farstrup (Eds.), What research has to say about fluency instruction (pp. 94-105). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
Barr, L. (2018). Examining the impact of a guided repeated oral reading instructional routine on reading fluency outcomes for third class pupils with reading difficulties in a co-teaching context. (Unpublished master’s thesis). Institute of Education, Dublin City University, Dublin, Ireland.
Bourke, R., & Mentis, M. (2007). Self-assessment as a lens for learning. In L. Florian (Ed.), The Sage Handbook of Special Education (pp. 319-330). London: SAGE.
Bourke, R., & Mentis, M. (2013). Self-assessment as a process for inclusion. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 17(8), 854-867. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2011.602288
Bourke, R., & Mentis, M. (2014). An assessment framework for inclusive education: Integrating assessment approaches. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 21(4), 384-397. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2014.88833 2
Doherty, U. (2017). Focus on fluency: Practical strategies for teaching reading to struggling readers in senior primary and junior cycle post-primary classes (2nd ed.). Limerick: Curriculum Development Unit, Mary Immaculate College.
Florian, L., & Black-Hawkins, K. (2011). Exploring inclusive pedagogy. British Educational Research Journal, 37(5), 813-828. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01411926.2010.501096
Florian, L., & Spratt, J. (2013). Enacting inclusion: A framework for interrogating inclusive practice. European Journal of Special Needs Education, 28(2), 119135. Retrieved July 10, 2017, from http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08856257.2013.778111
GL Assessment (2010). New Group Reading Test (3rd ed.). London, UK: GL Assessment.
Government of Western Australia (2013). First steps: Reading resource book (3rd ed.). Western Australia: Author. Retrieved February 17, 2018, from http://det.wa.edu.au/stepsresources/detcms/navigation/first-steps-literacy/
Guerin, A., & Murphy, B. (2015). Repeated reading as a method to improve reading fluency for struggling adolescent readers. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 58(7), 551- 560. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jaal.395
Hart, S., & Drummond, M. (2014). Learning without limits: Constructing a pedagogy free from determinist beliefs about ability. In L. Florian (Ed.), The Sage Handbook of Special Education (2nd ed.), (pp. 439-458). London: SAGE.
Kennedy, E., Dunphy, E., Dwyer, B., Hayes, G., McPhillips, T., Marsh, J., O’Connor, M. & Shiel, G. (2012). Literacy in early childhood and primary education (3-8 years). (NCCA Research Report No. 15). [Electronic Version]. Dublin: National Council for Curriculum and Assessment. Retrieved August 21, 2017, from http://www.ncca.ie/en/Publications/Reports/Literacy_in_Early_Childhood_and_Primary_Education_3-8_years.pdf
Martens, P. (1997). What miscue analysis reveals about word recognition and repeated reading: A view through the "miscue window". Language Arts, 74(8), 600-609.
McLachlan, H., & Elks, L. (2012). Language builders: Advice and activities to encourage children’s communication skills. Cornwall: Elklan. 55
56
McNiff, J. (2010). Action research for professional development: Concise advice for new (and experienced) action researchers (New rev. ed.). Poole: September Books. National Council for Curriculum and Assessment (NCCA), (2015). Primary language curriculum. Dublin: NCCA. National Council for Special Education (NCSE), (2011). Inclusive education framework: A guide for schools on the inclusion of pupils with special educational needs. [Electronic version]. Trim: NCSE. Retrieved August 27, 2017, from http://ncse.ie/wpcontent/uploads/2014/10/InclusiveEducationFramework_InteractiveVersion.pdf National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD), (2000). Report of the National Reading Panel. Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction. Reports of the Subgroups. (NIH Publication No. 00-4769). [Electronic version]. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office. Retrieved May 2, 2018, from https://www1.nichd.nih.gov/publications/pubs/nrp/Documents/report.pdf Neale, M.D. (1997). Neale analysis of reading ability (2nd ed.). UK: gl-assessment. Pearson, P. D., & Gallagher, M.C. (1983). The instruction of reading comprehension. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 8, 317-344. Retrieved May 8, 2018, from https://www.ideals.illinois.edu/bitstream/handle/2142/17939/ctrstreadtechrepv0 1983i00297_opt.pdf?sequence=1,500,300 Pikulski, J.J. (2006). Fluency: A Developmental Language Perspective. In S.J. Samuels, & A.E. Farstrup (Eds.), What research has to say about fluency instruction (pp. 70-93). Newark, DE: International Reading Association. Pikulski, J.J., & Chard, D.J. (2005). Fluency: Bridge between decoding and reading comprehension. The Reading Teacher, 58(6), 510-519. Ploessl, D. M., Rock, M. L., Schoenfeld, N., & Blanks, B. (2010). On the same page: Practical techniques to enhance co-teaching interactions. Intervention in School and Clinic, 45(3), 158- 168. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1053451209349529 Rasinski, T. V., & Hoffman, J. V. (2003). Oral reading in the school literacy curriculum. Reading Research Quarterly, 38(4), 510-522. http://dx.doi.org/10.1598/RRQ.38.4.5 Rasinski, T. V. (2012). Why reading fluency should be hot. The Reading Teacher, 65(8), 516-522. Retrieved July 8, 2017, from http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/TRTR.01077 Rasinski, T. V., Linek, W., Sturtevant, E., & Padak, N. (1994). Effects of fluency development on urban second-grade readers. The Journal of Educational Research, 87(3), 158-165. Retrieved May 12, 2018, from http://www.jstor.org.dcu.idm.oclc.org/stable/27541913 Reutzel, D.R. (2012). ‘‘Hey teacher, when you say ‘fluency’, what do you mean?’’: Developing fluency in elementary classes. In T. Rasinski, C. Blachowicz & K. Lems (Eds.), Fluency instruction: Research-based best practices (pp. 114-138). New York: The Guilford Press.
Shanahan (2012). Developing Fluency in the Context of Effective Literacy Instruction. In T. Rasinski, C. Blachowicz, & K. Lems (Eds.), Fluency instruction: Research-based best practices (pp. 17-34). New York: The Guilford Press.
Topping, K.J. (2006). Building Reading Fluency: Cognitive, Behavioural, and Socioemotional Factors and the Role of Peer-Mediated Learning. In S.J. Samuels, & A.E. Farstrup (Eds.), What research has to say about fluency instruction (pp. 106-129). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
Wiliam, D. (2011). Embedded, formative assessment (2nd ed.). Bloomington, Indiana, USA: Solution Tree Press.
Zutell, D., Donelson, R., Mangelson, J., & Todt, P. (2012). Building a focus on oral reading fluency into individual instruction for struggling readers. In T. Rasinski, C. Blachowicz, & K. Lems (Eds.), Fluency instruction: Research-based best practices (pp. 310-323). New York: The Guilford Press.
57