Dolch Sight Words List

I am currently working in a title one school in the District of Broward County. In my school there are many interventions utilize through a number of materials and technology. For instance, I-ready is a reading and math online program that is utilized to build the students strength in areas they may fall weak in through enjoyable activities and games. I-Ready gives a pre, mid, and post test to assess the students strength and weakness in that particular subject (math or reading). In addition to I-Ready, we utilize Journey’s reading series that provides a tool kit for Tier 2 and 3 students. The tool kit has a great amount of comprehension strategies and graphic organizers that can be used to develop strength in reading comprehension. Furthermore,

Author note: This paper was prepared for the American Federation of Teachers by Louisa C. Moats, project director, Washington D.C. site of the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD) Early Interventions Project, and clinical associate professor of pediatrics, University of Texas, Houston, Health Sciences Center. Her work is supported in part by grant HD30995, “Early Interventions for Children with Reading Problems,”

Wilson, Faggella-Luby, & Wei (2013) present a cogent plan for Tier 3 Response to Intervention (RTI) for secondary students with reading disabilities, content, and pedagogy planning tools, content instruction, and instructional method implementation. Both research application lacks concerning Tier 3 RTI in high schools (Wilson et. al). RTI is curriculum that addresses the learning needs of all students that also includes screening and monitoring progress. Continuing, Wilson et. al define Tier 1 RTI, core curriculum for all students serving the needs of 80% of students, Tier 2 RTI, small group instructional intervention, serving the needs of 15% of students, and Tier 3 RTI, an intense one to one intervention for students who continue to struggle beyond Tiers 1 and 2, serving 5% of students. Wilson et al. provides information the reader needs to understand in the article without clutter, expressing their writing with economy (Zinsser, 2013). The article is unified in theme, gives enough information without giving too much, and follows a clear progression (Zinsser). “More simple, than complex” (Henson, 1999, p. 58), Wilson et. al’s article is an example of good writing.

The inventory should be individually administered to students in order to accurately observe student automaticity with the high-frequency word recognition. Elementary students are frequently given this test in order to progress monitor high-frequency word mastery and general factors of fluency.

I gathered NWEA (Northwest Evaluation Association) standardized test reading scores for my students from the last 3 years. I gathered information about my students’ writing which was from grade level meetings, that I participated in, with colleagues to analyze my student writing to determine how well they were applying previously taught vocabulary words to write. I gathered information from notes that recorded the conversations that took place at these meetings regarding my students’ limited vocabulary use in their writing. I gathered information from observational rubrics I used to score students’ application of newly learned content

The type of assessment tool that would be used to measure students’ fluency is DIEBELS Oral Reading Fluency (DORF). The target intervention for the four students is improving their reading fluency to a 2nd grade level. DORF is a standardized test that measures student performance of reading word from the grade level by being timed for 1 minute. Students are instructed to read a passage as best as they can while the teacher is monitoring how many WPM they can read accurately in 1 minute. DORF also asks students to describe what they just read to allow a more accurate *** of students level or reading and avoid students reading quickly because they know they are being timed. (**p.32-33). The selecting of DIEBELS DORF was selected based on the

In ELED 4444 (Diagnosis and Remediation of Reading Difficulties), I was assigned by Dr. Morrison to work with a peer to create a diagnostic report based on a semester long tutoring project at Washington Irving Elementary School. To create the report, my partner and I ran pretests (Informal Reading Inventory-Graded Word List, Oral, Silent, and Listening Comprehension Passages, Basic Sight Words and Phrases, Phonics, and the DIBELS mid-year assessment) to see what we needed to work on with the student and then we created lesson plans that addressed the child’s needs. After tutoring the student for eight weeks, we post tested him to gather data on how much he progressed. We used the post-tests: IRI Oral and Silent Reading Comprehension, Basic Sight words and Phrases, Phonics, and the DIBELS assessment

For weeks 4-6, George was given 10 third-grade spelling words. His average score for weeks 4 to 6 was a 94%. There is a clear increase in scoring results. When the amount of spelling words was lowered, George was able to increase his overall spelling score. Based on George’s spelling CBM, his teacher felt as the issue with his decreasing score wasn’t the level of difficult just the amount of words presented at one period of time. With the high success rate of George’s spelling scores for week 4-6, his teacher increased the amount of words per week for the final duration of the progress monitoring.

In regards to experimental design each boy utilized a different design. Joey utilized and ABAB design and for Carl a multiple baseline design was utilized. (p. 70) In order to establish the initial baseline for both boys the teachers went back to utilizing the methods they had implemented prior to the beginning of the research so that they could obtain an accurate measurement of the effectiveness of chosen interventions. In regards to Joey and the ABAB design, the initial baseline identified through the above procedure and was off task behavior in writing 1-2 times weekly. Utilizing both teacher interview, the interview with Joey and observer data it was identified that Joey showed his behaviors most often during pencil-paper task both long and short (these are the A’s in the ABAB design). Thus the first intervention used in the ABAB design was the use of a computer during writing assignments equal to or longer than 20 minutes (this is the 1st B in the ABAB design). (p. 70) For short term (5-7 minutes) writing assignments the intervention utilized was to give Joey and his peers 2 minutes of brainstorming (this is the 2nd B in the ABAB design)

The words ranged from simple words like "a" to more complex words like "number". For this assessment, I printed the sight words onto bigger cards and I laid them out for J.R. Her job was to read the words that were listed. If she read them correctly and without hesitation then she got it correct. However, if she had to spell out the word or if she hesitated for a long period of time then I marked it wrong because she is supposed to recognize them right away. J.R. did fairly well on this assessment. She was able to recognize 88 sight words out of 100. I recognized that the words that she got wrong were the harder sight words. The second assessment that I completed with J.R. was the spelling inventory assessment. For this assessment, I gave J.R. a simple spelling test. I would say the word to her and include the word in a sentence. As I did this, J.R. wrote the words down. This assessment was given to see if J.R. could hear and write the constants (initial and final), the short vowels, digraphs, blends, and common long vowels that appear in the words that were given. This was one of the assessments that J.R. struggled with. She spelled most of the words wrong and she had trouble identifying digraphs and blends in words. The third assessment that I conducted was the phonemic awareness assessment. This assessment tested skills such as rhyming, phoneme isolation, oral blending, oral segmentation, and

Select an intervention or support strategy from the module and explain how this approach meets the needs of students with dyslexia. Demonstrate the effectiveness of your chosen intervention by critically evaluating its research and evidence base, and discuss how you might implement this approach in practice

2. Were the post-reading comprehension test scores following a lesson using any one of the

Evidence-based instruction includes reliable and valuable data obtained from your classroom. When you apply basil tests, unit tests, exit slips, and acuity assessments you need to collect the data from your classroom to organize your classroom groups. You should also use this data to decide who needs AIS or tiered interventions for certain areas. Instructional practices include the previously mentioned assessments. Pretests for all units of instruction can also help you understand what your students already know and who is weak in certain areas. For example, a unit on main idea and details using passages can be difficult for some students. Running records will help to determine what reading level your students are on. From this

The materials needed for these interventions were simple. All five interventions required a storybook, which needed to be carefully chosen, so the book was grade level appropriate and contained vocabulary words. The adult needed to be familiar with the story, in order to summarize the story and facilitate questions with the students. The vocabulary intervention required additional

After the completion of these assessments, Lucy’s reading skills continuously improve by practicing reading strategies for word study that begin at the transitional long vowel patterns within word patterns stage. Word Study strategies should start as a teacher-directed two-step sort that examines the CVC,