Paired Reading Fluency Intervention

References

Adaptations

Additional Research

Marr, M. B., Algozzine, B., Kavel, R. L., & Dugan, K. K. (2010). Implementing peer coaching fluency building to improve early literacy skills. Reading Improvement, 47(2), 74-91. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com.jproxy.lib.ecu.edu/docview/734860990?accountid=10639

Topping, K. J. (2014). Paired reading and related methods for improving fluency. International Electronic Journal of Elementary Education, 7(1), 57-69. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com.jproxy.lib.ecu.edu/docview/1630429443?accountid=10639

• Could have a small group do the paired reading with the teacher at a table to just target the lowest fluency achievers, but still paired with a more fluent student.

• And could use passages or a book depending on the group of students.

The researcher Keith Topping also researched Paired Reading in 2014. He found patterns that students who were engaged with Paired Reading had:

• error rates decrease
• rates of refusal to try to read a word go down
• willingness to use context increase
• use of phonics increased

(p. 65).

Pros? Cons?

PCFB Cons: It's different because this intervention is being used whole group, but if the classroom does not have an equal number of coaches to match to partners, this may not always be feasible.

PCFB Pros: Can be an easy addition to any classroom because of the self-sufficiency of the students once they learn the routine.

Keith Topping's PR Cons: coordinating schedules with another teacher to provide a cross-age tutor for the tutee.

Keith Topping's PR Pros: There are positive effects for both the tutor and tutee. Using this PR framework with a same-age tutor or cross-age tutor who views themselves as a bad reader, but nonetheless is chosen to help a peer learn to read, would provide a huge confidence boost to the tutor.

Research cont...

2. Would students receiving PCFB only significantly out-perform students who were receiving additional fluency instruction in ORF rates?

• Interestingly, those groups receiving PCFB and the additional, more intensive interventions made growth, but did NOT out-grow the PCFB only group. The PCFB only group made 48 wcpm growth, and group 3, receiving the most intensive interventions only made 43 wcpm growth.

The authors suggest that “the addition of more intensive intervention may have had little or no effect on the overall performance of students who received it” (p. 85).

How do I do this in my classroom?

There are two frameworks to use in a classroom according to the two researchers.

Keith Topping:

• can be used by a same-age peer or a cross-age peer
• Any text can be used, preferably of interest to both the tutor and tutee.
• The text should be within the instructional/frustrational level of the tutee, but within the independent level of the tutor.

1. Both the tutor and tutee read together.

2. The tutor will correct any errors, the tutee repeats correctly, then they continue reading, occasionally stopping to discuss the text with questions created by the tutor.

3. Then, when the tutee is confident enough, he or she will give a silent signal for the tutor to stop reading aloud and the tutee reads aloud alone.

4. Next, the tutor praises the tutee for their efforts, however, if the tutee makes an error, the tutor corrects within 4 seconds and then joins back in the reading aloud.

in the classroom continued...

Marr, Algozzine, Kavel and Dugan described Peer Coaching Fluency Building (PCFB):

• a whole group intervention (the whole classroom does this in pairs at the same time as teacher walks around and monitors)
• students have fluency folders with daily passages, provided and leveled by the teacher, already in the folders

1. It begins with a strong reader (coach) and a struggling reader (partner) reading the passage chorally

2. The partners read the entire passage aloud again, this time alternating sentences.

3. The partner reads independently aloud with the coach giving help as needed.

4. The teacher times the partner for one minute and the partner will read the passage aloud again while the coach monitors, and then records words correct per minute on a chart.

How long is this intervention?

These steps repeat several times throughout the 10 to 15 minute session, at least 3 days a week.

Research behind Intervention

How long is this intervention?

Once the teacher has taught this routine, and students are familiar with each step, the process should take about 10-12 minutes every day.

Marr, Algonzzine, Kavel, and Dugan wrote a paper in 2010 that investigated an intervention called Peer Coaching Fluency Building (PCFB) and its’ effect on fluency growth.

They were trying to answer two main questions:

1. Would oral reading fluency (ORF) improve for students receiving the PCFB intervention compared to the control group not receiving this additional intervention?

• The study found that all the students receiving the PCFB made significant growth in their ORF, about 48 wcpm, versus the control group, 41 wcpm, from fall to spring.

Paired Reading Fluency Intervention