As noted in the September 30, 2015
blog post, the core competency required for effective implementation of
Response to Interventions (RTI) is the ability to correctly collect, analyze,
and utilize data. The correlate of
frequent monitoring and subsequent adjustment drives the core principles for
implementing RTI. The ability to collect
data, evaluate results, and be an honest consumer of the resulting data
promotes the correlate of frequent monitoring and subsequent adjustment. Teacher proficiency with data must therefore
become a professional competency
Frequent monitoring of student
progress, and
adjusting instruction or interventions based on results, is a correlate of
continuous school improvement within Effective Schools. This correlate requires teacher competency in
collecting data, evaluating results, and effectively consuming the data. When teachers identify and prescribe an
intervention, they often have difficulty accepting the need to adjust when the
prescribed intervention proves ineffective. Too often, a teacher erroneously
perceives the intervention’s failure as a personal failure of the teacher’s
initial prescription. Thus,
defensiveness rather than professional awareness delays the necessary
adjustment. For this reason, teacher
preparation programs as well as districts or schools need to consider the
following six ideas for successful development of an effective RTI system:
1. Encourage participation by key
stakeholders during planning and implementation.
2. Elicit strong administrative support
in staff development, instructional integrity, and data collection.
3. Provide in-depth staff development
with mentoring, modeling, and coaching.
4. Begin follow-up trainings at the
beginning of each school year.
5. Distribute a manual outlining
procedures and materials.
6. Build Problem Solving Models
including RTI into school schedules and the student improvement process (Lau, Sieler, Muyskens, et al, 2006).
Increased
awareness optimizes the opportunity for effective implementation of the RTI
system. However, potential problems will
be omnipresent without administrative support and ongoing professional
development. The following identify the
essential eight core principles for implementing RTI.
1. Effectively teach each and every
student.
2. Provide early intervention.
3. Use a multi-tier model of service
delivery.
4. Use a problem-solving method to make
decisions within the multi-tier model.,
5. Use research-based validated
interventions/instruction.
6. Monitor student progress to inform
instruction.
7. Use data to make decisions.
8. Use assessment for three purposes:
screening, diagnostics, and progress monitoring.
RTI has been proven effective for
improving reading, writing, Mathematics, and school culture related to behavior
management. The most popular areas for
RTI addressed academic expectations or behavioral concerns. One widely utilized, albeit controversial,
program is Reading
First. Another highly successful
program has been Positive Behavioral
Interventions & Supports (PBIS).
These initiatives utilize the RTI framework as displayed in Table 1
below.
Table 1:
The balance of this post will discuss phonemic and phonological awareness, which is an essential competency for emergent literacy. Phonemic and phonological awareness is now typically introduced during Pre-Kindergarten programs. This emphasizes the need for universal Pre-K since foundational emergent literacy concepts are being introduced and then reinforced during the Kindergarten year. When such learning opportunities are missed or ineffective, a child might find him/herself in First Grade and in need of a Tier 2 or 3 intervention to develop the phonemic and phonological awareness exhibited by same-age/grade peers.
Phonemic
awareness is the ability to hear and manipulate the sounds in spoken words
and the understanding that spoken words and syllables are made up of sequences
of speech sounds (Yopp, 1992). Phonemic awareness is essential to learning to
read in an alphabetic writing system, because letters represent sounds or
phonemes. Without phonemic awareness,
phonics makes little sense. Phonemic
awareness is fundamental to mapping speech to print. For instance, if a child cannot hear that
"man" and "moon“ begin with the same sound or is unable to blend
the sounds /rrrrrruuuuuunnnnn/ into the word "run", then he or she may have great difficulty
connecting sounds with their written symbols or blending sounds to make a word.
A phoneme is a speech sound. A phoneme is the smallest unit of spoken
language and has no inherent meaning (National Reading Panel, 2000). Phonemic
awareness involves hearing language at the phoneme level.
Phonemic
awareness is not phonics.
Phonemic awareness is auditory and does not involve words in
print. Phonemic awareness is important
because it teaches students to attend to sounds. Phonemic awareness primes the
connection of sound to print. Phonemic
awareness gives students a way to approach reading new words. Phonemic awareness helps students understand
the alphabetic principle whereby letters in words are systematically
represented by sounds.
Phonics,
is the use of the code (sound-symbol relationships to recognize words. Phonological
awareness is the ability to hear and manipulate the sound structure of
language. This is an encompassing term that involves working with the sounds of
language at the word, syllable, and phoneme level.
Phonemic and phonological awareness
is difficult because although the English language includes 26 letters, there
are approximately 40 phonemes. Sounds
are represented in 250 different spellings.
For instance, /f/ as in ph, f, gh, ff.
Research has established that children lacking phonemic and phonological
awareness skills exhibit difficulty grouping words with similar and dissimilar
sounds (mat, mug, sun), blending and splitting syllables (sun-ny), blending
sounds into words (m_a_n), segmenting a word as a sequence of sounds (e.g.,
fish is made up of three phonemes, /f/ ,/i/, /sh/), detecting and manipulating
sounds within words (change “r” in “run” to “s” to make “sun”), (Kame'enui, et al., 1997).
Most research-based reading
intervention programs utilize a phonemic and phonological awareness approach as
the foundation for their model of reading intervention. Many of these programs are recommended for
utilization as Tier 3 (Intensive) RTI.
Next month's blog post will review the tenets of some of the most
popular Tier 3 reading intervention programs.
Big Ideas in Beginning Reading (2009) University of Oregon Center on Teaching and Learning
Davenport, P., & Anderson, G. (2002). Closing the achievement gap: No excuses. Houston, TX:
APQC.
Lezotte, L. W. (1991) Correlates of Effective Schools: The First and Second Generation.
Retrieved from: http://www.effectiveschools.com/images/stories/escorrelates.pdf
Kame'enui, E. J., Simmons, D. C., Baker, S., Chard, D. J., Dickson, S. V., Gunn, B., Smith, S. B.,
Sprick, M., &
Lin, S. J. (1997). Effective strategies for teaching beginning reading. In E.
J. Kame'enui, & D. W. Carnine (Eds.), Effective Teaching Strategies That
Accommodate Diverse Learners. Columbus, OH: Merrill.
J. Kame'enui, & D. W. Carnine (Eds.), Effective Teaching Strategies That
Accommodate Diverse Learners. Columbus, OH: Merrill.
should know and
be able to do. Washington, D. C.:
American Federation of Teachers.
Lyon, G. R. (1995). Toward a definition of
dyslexia. Annals of Dyslexia, 45, 3-27.National Reading Panel (2000). Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of
the scientific
research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction
[online]. Retrieved
from: http://www.nichd.nih.gov/publications/nrp/smallbook.htm.
Shaywitz. S. (2003). Overcoming dyslexia: A
new and complete science-based program for
Reading problems at
any level. New York: Knopf.
Smith S. B., Simmons, D. C., & Kame'enui,
E. J. (1998). Phonological awareness: Research
bases. In D. C.
Simmons & E. J. Kame'enui (eds.), What reading research tells us
about children with diverse learning needs: Bases and basics. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence
Erlbaum Associates.
about children with diverse learning needs: Bases and basics. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence
Erlbaum Associates.
45(9), 696-703.
Zangwill, W.I. & Kantor, P. B. (1998).
Toward a theory of continuous improvement and thelearning curve. Management Science, 44(7) 910-920.
To cite:
Anderson,
C.J. (January 28. 2016) Response to intervention: Phonemic and
phonological awareness.
No comments:
Post a Comment