A Schoolwide Organization System for Raising Reading Achievement Using General Outcome Measures and Evidence-Based Instruction: One Education District's Experience
Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online April, 2003
A Schoolwide Organization System for Raising Reading Achievement Using General Outcome Measures and Evidence-Based Instruction: One Education District's Experience
Improved student achievement in reading is the number one priority in American schools at the beginning of the 21st century. This article describes a system that coordinates (a) general outcome measures, (b) evidence-based instruction, and (c) schoolwide organization to ensure the most effective instruction possible for each student. First each of the elements are described along with a brief review of the literature. Next the implementation of the system in seven elementary schools in one education district is discussed using case studies to illustrate how these elements interact to serve students efficiently and bring about improvements in reading proficiency.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Adams, M.J. (1990). Beginning to read: Thinking and learning about print. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press .
2.
Coyne, M.D., Kameenui, E.J., & Simmons, D.C. (2001). Prevention and intervention in beginning reading: Two complex systems. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 16(2), 62-73.
3.
Deno, S.L. (1985). Curriculum-based measurement: The emerging alternative . Exceptional Children52(3), 219-32.
4.
Deno, S.L., & Fuchs, L.S. (1987). Developing curriculum-based measurement systems for data-based special education problem solving. Focus onExceptional Children, 19(8), 1-16.
5.
Deno, S.L., Marston, D., Shinn, M., & Tindal, G. (1983). Oral reading fluency: A simple datum for scaling reading disability. Topics in Learning and Learning Disabilities , 2(4), 53-59.
6.
Deno, S.L., Mirkin, P., & Chiang, B. (1982). Identifying valid measures of reading. Exceptional Children, 49( 1 ), 36-45.
7.
Ellis, S.E., & Worthington, L.A. ( 1994). Research synthesis on effective teaching principles and the design of quality tools for educators (Tech. Rep. No. 5). Eugene: University of Oregon, National Center to Improve the Tools of Educators.
8.
Kameenui, E.J. ( 1993 ). Diverse learners and the tyranny of time: Don't fix blame; Fix the leaky roof. The Reading Teacher, 46(5), 376-383.
9.
Kameenui, E.J., & Simmons, D.C. (1998). Beyond effective practice to schools as host environments: Building and sustaining a school-wide intervention model in beginning reading . Oregon School Study Council, 41(3), 3-16.
10.
Kaminski, R.A., & Good, R.H. ( 1998). Assessing early literacy skills in a problem-solving model: Dynamic indicators of basic early literacy skills. In M. R. Shinn (Ed.), Advanced applications of curriculum-based measurement (pp. 113-142). New York: Guilford Press.
11.
Marston, D. ( 1989). A curriculum-based measurement approach to assessing academic performance: What it is and why do it. In M. R. Shinn (Ed.), Curriculum-based measurement: Assessing special children (pp. 18-78). New York: Guilford Press.
12.
McConnell, S.R., Preist, J.S., Davis, S.D., & McEvoy, M.A. (2002). Best practices in measuring growth and development for preschool children. In A. Thomas & J. Grimes (Eds.), Best practices in school psychology IV (pp. 1231-1246). Bethesda, MD: National Association of School Psychologists.
13.
Moats, L. (1999). Teaching reading is rocket science. Washington, DC: National Institute of Child Health and Human Development. (HD 30995)
14.
Mosteller, F.R., Light, R., & Sachs, J. (1996). Sustained inquiry in education: Lessons from skill grouping and class size. Harvard Educational Review, 66(4), 797-842.
15.
National Assessment of Educational Progress. ( 2001). 2000 NAEP-reading highlights. Washington, DC: National Center for Educational Statistics.
16.
National Institute of Child Health and Human Development. (2000). Report of the National Reading Panel, Teaching children to read; An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction-reports of the subgroups. Bethesda, MD: Author.
17.
No Child Left Behind of 2001. Pub. L. No. 107-110.
18.
Snow, C. E., Bums, S. M., & Griffin, P. (Eds.). (1998). Preventing reading difficulties in young children . Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
19.
Stanovich, K.E. (1986). Matthew effects in reading: Some consequences of individual differences in the acquisition of literacy. Reading Research Quarterly, 2 (4), 360-406.
20.
U. S. Department of Education. (2001 ). Put reading first: The research building blocks for teaching children to read. Washington, DC: Author .
