The purpose of this study was to explore and document the various roles of Virginia's Reading First reading coaches. The goal of Reading First is to ensure that all students learn to read at grade level or above by the end of third grade. Because of No Child Left Behind legislation and the mandates set forth by Reading First, reading coaches are in demand. In order to gain an understanding of the roles and responsibilities of reading coaches, this study was based on qualitative methodology. Specifically, the data collection consisted of a self-administered survey sent to Virginia's 95 Reading First reading coaches. The data revealed that the majority of Virginia's Reading First reading coaches had K-3 teaching experience and reading specialist certification. Reading coaches perceived that they are impacting reading teachers' practices. Furthermore, reading coaches indicated they are supported by the principal, LEA, and state level Reading First reading specialists. As a result of this study, it is recommended that additional studies involving the effect of reading coaches on school-wide reading achievement be conducted. Similarly, additional research concerning the best type of professional development to assist reading coaches in their positions is warranted. Additional research is needed to determine if there is a difference in reading coaches' effectiveness on teacher practice when they have support from state-level reading experts compared to those without such support

This study examined explicit and systematic reading instruction for Hispanic, limited English, lower SES students in a southwest Florida school district. Additionally, collective teacher efficacy was assessed to determine if differences existed between a Reading First and a non-Reading First school. A total of 68 students participated in the study and were divided equally between a Reading First and non-Reading First school. While the Reading First school concentrated resources on grades 2 and 3, all students received some degree of Reading First strategies. Available reading measures for analyses at the time of the study included the Group Reading Assessment and Diagnostic Evaluation (GRADE), the Florida Comprehensive Assessment Test (FCAT), and the Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills (DIBELS). Results from two-way analyses of variance (ANOVA) did not reveal significant differences between the two groups on a pre and posttest administration of the GRADE. When the two groups were combined, repeated measures ANOVA indicated a significant difference between pre and post administrations of the GRADE with the posttest being significantly higher. Grades 4 and 5 showed significant gains between pre and posttest while grades 2 and 3 did not. It was hypothesized that as students' English proficiency improved, reading instruction became more meaningful and thus positively influenced the posttest. Both the GRADE and the DIBELS Oral Reading Fluency test were significantly correlated with the FCAT. Regression analyses revealed that both were significant predictors individually and combined of the FCAT reading score. Collective teacher efficacy was assessed with the short-form of the Collective Teacher Efficacy Scale (CTES). A total of 38 Reading First teachers and 30 non-Reading First teachers completed the CTES and a brief biographical questionnaire. Results indicated significantly higher collective teacher efficacy in the non-Reading First school. Findings did not support the hypothesis that the intensity of the Reading First program and the teacher training required would result in significantly higher collective efficacy. Differences in level of teacher education, experience, and years teaching in a school were speculated as potential variables influencing the level of collective efficacy. Implications from this study were discussed along with recommendations for future research.

No description available.

The current research study investigates the predictive value of two frequently-used benchmark reading assessments: Developmental Reading Assessment (DRA) and the Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills (DIBELS). With an increasing emphasis on high-stakes testing to measure reading proficiency, benchmark assessments may assist in predicting end-of-year performance on high-stakes testing. Utah's high-stakes measurement of end-of-year reading achievement is the English Language Arts Criterion-Referenced Test (ELA-CRT). A Utah urban school district provided data for students who completed the DRA, DIBELS, and ELA-CRT in the 2005-2006 school year. The primary purpose of the study was to determine the accuracy to which the Fall administrations of the DRA and the DIBELS predicted performance on the ELA-CRT. Supplementary analysis also included cross-sectional data for the DIBELS. Results indicated that both Fall administrations of the DRA and the DIBELS were statistically significant in predicting performance on the ELA-CRT. Students who were high risk on the benchmark assessments were less likely to score proficiently on the ELA-CRT. Also, demographic factors did not appear to affect individual performance on the ELA-CRT. Important implications include the utility of data collected from benchmark assessments to address immediate interventions for students at risk of failing end-of-year, high-stakes testing.

No description available.

The dissertation is a study to determine which program, Reading First or Bay State Reading Initiative, will demonstrate the greatest gains in reading for students in grades K-3 using a 3-Tier Reading Model. The findings from this study are intended to provide pertinent information on which best practices work in increasing student achievement for reading. Education reform continues to be a hot topic at all levels within the United States. With the spending of billions of federals, state and local dollars, the persistent talk of accountability is ongoing. Since NCLB inception, the year 2014 when all students need to reach proficiency in statewide standardized tests in mathematics and reading, continues to be a threatening time period. With each state setting its own definition and determination of what proficiency is, it is measured by the Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP). This AYP measurement will determine each school’s progress incrementally until it reaches 100% in 2014. 48% of all schools in Massachusetts failed to make their AYP in 2004. It is predicted that by 2014, 90% of schools in Massachusetts will not reach its APY obligation (MassPartners for Public Schools, 2005). With the pursuit of reaching AYP, the search is still on for what best practices work in increasing student achievement. This study utilizes a mixed method research design; including quantitative analysis of the reading scores, a qualitative analysis of teacher and administrator perspective on the effectiveness vii of each program and a financial cost-effectiveness comparison of the two programs. The quantitative research design includes comparing DIBELS and GRADE results of two elementary schools for students in grades K – 3 each of which uses a different reading program. School A uses the Houghton Mifflin Reading Series for their core reading curriculum while School B uses Scott Foresman Reading Street. In addition to comparing the aggregate scores of each school to each other, a number of sub-groups will also be compared. These groups will include low income students (students who receive free and reduced lunch), students with limited English proficiency (LEP), and special education students. Mean comparisons will be utilized to identify which program produces the best results. In order to identify strengthens and weaknesses of each approach a questionnaire will be utilize to obtain this information from teachers and the administrators who took part in implementing both programs. In these times of tight budgets and difficult decisions on how to meet the needs of all students it is imperative that cost effectiveness is examined between the two programs. Which of these two programs will provide the greatest gain? How much will that gain cost? Which program will reap the best results for the least amount of money?

Despite flexibility waivers granted to states by the United States Department of Education from some provisions of the No Child Left Behind Act, our nation’s public schools continue to struggle to improve reading proficiency as measured by high stakes assessments. To reach state targets for reading proficiency schools must use data at the earliest point possible to inform instructional strategies and identify students at risk of failure. The response to intervention model holds promise for improving reading outcomes particularly for early elementary students. The effective use of reading curriculum based measures (R-CBM) to determine if instruction is adequate to produce students who score proficient or advanced on state mandated reading assessments is critical to achieving the goals for student learning. The population selected for this study included all third grade students from an East Tennessee school district. The third graders attended 13 schools and included 911 third grade students of which 770 students participated in the study. This included 372 male and 398 female students. Approximately 47% of the students were economically disadvantaged as determined by qualifying for free and reduced priced meals. The purpose of this study was to investigate the relationship between 4 predictor variables (fall R-CBM, winter R-CBM, spring R-CBM, and median R-CBM) and the Tennessee Comprehensive Assessment Program (TCAP) third grade reading and language arts assessment. Each data set included 4 R-CBM scores expressed in words read correctly and TCAP reading language arts scale scores. Gender and free and reduced price meals eligibility information for all third graders from the 2010-2011 school year were also collected. Results reflected a strong predictive relationship between the AIMSweb R-CBM and TCAP reading and language arts measure for third grade students. Zero order correlations in the multiple regression analysis ranged from .70 to .74 for the 4 predictor variables. A linear equation was developed to predict TCAP scores from a single R-CBM score (fall, winter, spring, and median). Based on this study practitioners may be able to establish goals for student reading that are strongly correlated with achieving proficiency on the TCAP reading and language arts assessment.

The purpose of this study was to determine if there was any significant increase in the reading achievement of Reading First third grade students compared to the reading achievement of the third grade reading students in Non-Reading First schools located in southwest Virginia for 2004-2009. The Standards of Learning (SOLs) reading test scores were compiled from the Virginia Standards of Learning test scores that are available to the public from the Virginia Department of Education website. The elementary schools chosen for this study have a similar number of disadvantaged students and similar demographics. The reading achievement was being examined after 6 years of implementation of teaching strategies using Reading First in 3 of the elementary schools and compared to Non-Reading First schools. Using a quantitative design, the comparative study included data obtained from the 2004-2009 Virginia Standards of Learning standardized assessment test scores for third grade students in 6 elementary schools. The data comparison examined the reading achievement relationship between the Reading First schools (experimental) and the Non-Reading First schools (control group). The analysis was based on 2 research questions and 12 hypotheses; 6 hypotheses for each question. A t-test for independent samples was used to identify the differences between the means of Reading First schools and the Non-Reading First schools. A chi square analysis was used to identify the differences between the means of Reading First schools compared to the means of Non-Reading First schools in the areas of not proficient, proficient, and advanced proficient. The results of the study indicated that there were significant increases for reading achievement for the Reading First schools in the experimental group compared to the Non-Reading First in the control group. The Reading First schools performed better or as well as their peers in Non-Reading First schools at the advanced reading proficiency level.