<p> In 2000, the National Reading Panel (NRP) identified scientifically based reading instructional practices in the five key areas of phonemic awareness, phonics, fluency vocabulary, and comprehension. The purpose of this study was to determine the strength of the relationship between the degree of implementation of scientifically based reading instruction in K-3 and Grade 3 Pennsylvania System of School Assessment (PSSA) Reading achievement in school districts in Northeastern Pennsylvania (NEPA). Research indicates that throughout the past decade, these same instructional practices were found to be effective. As educators in K-3 worked to prepare students for high-stakes testing in reading, the degree of implementation of these instructional practices were being examined. In this quantitative study, 132 K-3 classroom teachers in 20 schools completed the Revised Teacher's Implementation of Scientifically Based Reading Instruction (TISBRI) survey to determine the school-wide level of implementation of scientifically based reading instruction. Teacher experience within each school was also studied. The results of the survey were compared to the 2012 Grade 3 PSSA Reading mean scale score for each school. Inferential statistics determined that no correlation existed between the level of implementation of scientifically based reading strategies and Grade 3 PSSA Reading achievement. There was a correlation between years of teaching experience and level of implementation of scientifically based reading strategies. The study also concluded that scientifically based fluency instruction correlated to scientifically based reading instruction in phonemic awareness, phonics, vocabulary, and comprehension.</p>

<p> Reading is an essential skill taught during elementary academic years. The Sunny Day School District recognized the need of locating a reading program tailored to effectively meeting the instructional needs of students. A preliminary question was, "how do we increase the reading achievement of all our students?" In response to this instructional concern, the Sunny Day School District decided to implement the Missouri Reading Initiative (MRI), a state program created to assist teachers with scientifically research based reading instructional strategies. This study addressed the problem of a lack of a program evaluation for the MRI program as implemented within the elementary schools of the Sunny Day School District. </p><p> Qualitative and quantitative approaches added depth and authenticity to the data collection process and the intention was to triangulate the data in order to obtain a holistic picture of the MRI program in one school district. Design features were inclusive of the following study elements: administrative interviews, surveys, classroom observations, and MAP Scale Scores. Statistical tools used to analyze the MAP Scale Scores comprised of two <i>z</i>-tests for proportions calculated to find differences in opinions and an ANOVA to find any variances between MAP Scale Scores of grades 3-5 during the years of this research study. </p><p> An alignment of the research questions, observations, and surveys to the interview questions was completed then linked with the literature. Interviews and observations revealed valuable details of the implementation process of the MRI program. Emerging themes added data about the implementation processes and were reflective of management and classroom facilitation. Survey results did suggest MRI was beneficial for assisting teachers with research based instructional strategies. Two <i>z</i> tests for proportions of the survey results were in the critical range causing the rejection of the null hypotheses. An ANOVA of the MAP scores did not show a significant change in any one year over the five-year period. Before deciding on implementing an extensive reading program similar to MRI, other districts carefully consider the evaluation methods of teachers. Factors not considered in this study, such as evaluative measures (cognitive coaching versus traditional methods), may yield different program implementation results.</p>

<p> Reading instruction at the K-2 grade levels is of utmost importance for a student's education. The foundational skills acquired during this time period will serve a student throughout their life. Elementary teachers often feel unprepared for the demands of the struggling, proficient and advanced readers within their classrooms. The professional development offered to teachers has often been one day workshops where depth of content is not attained. Through this action science research, onsite professional development utilizing a coaching model was provided to K-2 teachers in a rural elementary school setting. This intervention lasted for three months and explored the <i> Continuum of Literacy Learning</i> by Fountas &amp; Pinnell (2007) and utilized the <i>Benchmark Assessment</i> system by Fountas and Pinnell (2007) for identifying reading levels while implementing Guided Reading. The teachers' sense of self efficacy included a modest increase in utilizing a variety of instructional strategies to better meet the various needs of the students but also revealed areas for additional professional development in the future.</p>

<p>This is a quantitative research project utilizing secondary data. Reading Recovery and Leveled Literacy Intervention are two early literacy interventions based on a whole language and phonetic approach to reading instruction. For the purposes of this study, the end-of-first-grade benchmark is a Developmental Reading Assessment (DRA) 18 and the end-of-second-grade benchmark is a DRA 30. This study utilizes descriptive analyses, ANOVA, and ANCOVA analyses of variance, and regression analyses to determine which programs bring tier 3, non-special education readers to grade level status at the conclusion of first grade. Reading Recovery successfully brings first-grade students to grade level status (p = .002), and 47.1% of students who participated in this intervention met the end-of-first-grade benchmark. Overall, their mean end-of-kindergarten DRA score was a text level 3, and their mean end-of-first-grade DRA score was a text level 16. For students who participated in Leveled Literacy Intervention (LLI), 35.3% met the end-of-first-grade benchmark. Overall, their mean end-of-kindergarten DRA score was a text level 3, and their mean end-of-first-grade DRA score was a text level 14. LLI was not found to be statistically significant (p = .607). For students who participated in both Reading Recovery and Leveled Literacy Intervention, 30.1% met the end-of-first-grade benchmark. Overall, their mean end-of-kindergarten DRA score was a text level 3, and their mean end-of-first-grade DRA score was a text level 14. The combination RR and LLI group was not found to be statistically significant (p = .877). </p><p> According to this study, for students who participate in either Reading Recovery or Leveled Literacy Intervention, a child&rsquo;s gender (ANOVA p = .000, ANCOVA p = .000), and ethnicity (ANOVA Black p = .214, Other p = .067; ANCOVA Black p = .765, Other p = .556) is not a significant predictor of their end-of-first-grade DRA level. Depending upon the analysis conducted, a child&rsquo;s free or reduced lunch rate (ANOVA p = .005, ANCOVA p = .283) is a significant predictor of their end-of-first grade DRA level <i>F</i>(2,1) = 5.416, p = .005 with an R² value of .033 and an error of 612. As anticipated, a child&rsquo;s initial kindergarten DRA level remains the most significant predictor of their end-of-first-grade DRA level (ANOVA p = .000, ANCOVA p = .000). The lowest scoring students in kindergarten tend to also be the lower scoring students at the end of first and second grades. The second greatest predictor for children who do not participate in Reading Recovery or Leveled Literacy Intervention is the child&rsquo;s free or reduced lunch rate (p = .005). However, when an ANCOVA analysis of variance analyzed only students with a complete data set, kindergarten through second grade, a child&rsquo;s lunch rate (p = .283) was shown not to be a significant predictor of end-of-first-grade DRA reading level. Additionally, a child&rsquo;s lunch rate is not shown to be a significant predictor of a child&rsquo;s text growth gain. </p><p> The study follows students who met the end-of-first-grade DRA 18 benchmark into second grade to ascertain if the students are able to maintain their grade level status. For students who participated in Reading Recovery and met the end-of-first-grade benchmark, 58.7% also met the end-of-second-grade benchmark. Their mean end-of-second-grade DRA score was a text level 30. For students who participated in Leveled Literacy Intervention and met the end-of-first-grade benchmark, 62.8% also met the end-of-second-grade benchmark. Their mean end-of-second-grade DRA score was a text level 30. For students who participated in both Reading Recovery and Leveled Literacy Intervention and met the end-of-first-grade benchmark, 53.8% also met the end-of-second-grade benchmark. Their mean end-of-second-grade DRA score was a text level 28. </p><p> Finally, the study utilized a regression analysis to determine if there is a difference in reading achievement growth based upon a student&rsquo;s participation in Reading Recovery or Leveled Literacy Intervention. All analyses were controlled for initial DRA level, gender, ethnicity, and free or reduced lunch rate. The results found that while both programs appear to be moving students towards grade level status, Reading Recovery&rsquo;s results are significant (p = .002), LLI&rsquo;s results are not significant (p = .607), and the combination group of both RR and LLI are not significant (p = .877). According to this one year study, for students who participated in Reading Recovery or Leveled Literacy Intervention as first graders, once a child learns how to read, the variables&mdash;initial DRA level, gender, ethnicity and socio-economic status&mdash;do not affect a child&rsquo;s continued reading achievement. </p>

<p> Previously, improvisation has served as a term for describing a quality of the action taking place in classrooms between teachers and students. This project begins to theorize a way of understanding embodied literacies and scenes of learning through a lens of improvisation that enhances the description and better equips researchers to analyze this quality. This project synthesizes numerous research threads and theories from theater (Halpern, 1994, 2005; Johnstone, 1992; Spolin, 1999), anthropology (Holland, Lachicotte, Skinner, &amp; Cain, 2003), psychology (Sawyer, 2011b; Vygotsky, 1978), and literary theory (Bakhtin, 1981) in an effort to provide a theory of improvisation that could be deployed in future qualitative studies or serve as a way for literacy teachers to think about their classrooms. A theory of improvisation enables qualitative researchers in the field of education to acquire a more thorough understanding of the way literacies are an improvised process in scenes of learning. This project is necessary because no such theory yet exists. As part of theorizing literacy and improvisation, I draw upon scenes from my own teaching and from theatrical improvisation. I analyze these moments to illustrate various theoretical premises such as instances of "yes, and-ing" that carry a scene of learning forward. This theory building and analysis amount to a first iteration of improv theory.</p>

<p> This research study was conducted to determine the impact of determine the perception of classroom teachers and building principals as to the effectiveness of required Reading and Writing Across the Curriculum in both core and non-core subject areas. Both core and non-core classes are presently required within the study school district to incorporate reading and writing strategies in their content areas. The researcher wanted to study the process to prepare administrators and teachers to work successfully with the advent of required common core standards for curriculum development. Strategies used in the study will help gather information to inform the preparation of administrators and teachers who adopt the Common Core State Standards in the area of Reading and Writing Across the Curriculum. This research study was conducted to determine the impact of determine the perception of classroom teachers and building principals as to the effectiveness of required Reading and Writing Across the Curriculum in both core and non-core subject areas. Both core and non-core classes are presently required within the study school district to incorporate reading and writing strategies in their content areas. The researcher wanted to study the process to prepare administrators and teachers to work successfully with the advent of required common core standards for curriculum development. Strategies used in the study will help gather information to inform the preparation of administrators and teachers who adopt the Common Core State Standards in the area of Reading and Writing Across the Curriculum. </p><p> This report was meant to extend the discussion between the effectiveness of reading and writing strategies in middle schools and preparing teachers for the Common Core State Standards. The author used a mixed method research design to find answers to her questions.</p>

How deaf children relate signs to written words was investigated. Thirty deaf children participated in a lexical decision task and a production task. On both tasks, the children recognized written words that form part of their sign lexicon more accurately and more quickly than words that do not. In the production task, the younger children made fewer errors on written words that share formational correspondences with their signed equivalents, whereas the older children did not. In the lexical decision task, the children recognized words that they signed correctly in the production task more accurately and more quickly than those words they fingerspelled correctly. / These results indicate that deaf children organize their recognition of written words around their knowledge of sign language. Further, the children's responses to legal versus illegal pseudowords in the lexical decision task indicate that they can learn the orthographic rules of written English words.

Thesis (Ph.D.)--Tennessee Technological University, 2007. / Bibliography: leaves 80-85.

Thesis (Ph.D.)--Indiana University, Dept. of Counseling and Educational Psychology, 2007. / Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 68-07, Section: A, page: 2878. Adviser: Jack A. Cummings. Title from dissertation home page (viewed Apr. 15, 2008).

Thesis (Ed.D.)--Indiana University, Dept. of Education, 2005. / Title from PDF t.p. (viewed Nov. 10, 2008). Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 67-03, Section: A, page: 0885. Adviser: Jerome Harste.