effective reading strategy

English Language Learners and the Wilson Reading System 1

Advisor: Dr. Joanne Seelaus Using the Wilson Reading System as an Effective Strategy to Teach English Language Learners

Reading Comprehension Lexi Pavone

Program of Special Education

Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of

Master of Arts in the Graduate Program

Caldwell College 2014

All rights reserved

INFORMATION TO ALL USERSThe quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted.

In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscriptand there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed,

a note will indicate the deletion.

Microform Edition © ProQuest LLC.All rights reserved. This work is protected against

unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code

ProQuest LLC.789 East Eisenhower Parkway

P.O. Box 1346Ann Arbor, MI 48106 - 1346

UMI 1555735

Published by ProQuest LLC (2014). Copyright in the Dissertation held by the Author.

UMI Number: 1555735


Abstract

The Wilson Reading System was incorporated into a multi-grade special education

classroom to determine its impact on reading comprehension of four male English language

learners. The study was implemented during the participants’ daily language arts class.

Qualitative and quantitative methods were used to triangulate the data including, pre and post

assessments, journal entries and an oral assessment of reading comprehension in guided reading

groups. Results of the data indicated some progress on reading comprehension for three out of

the four participants when the Wilson Reading System was implemented during language arts. In

addition, quantitative data provided the most significant finding since all four students

demonstrated increased confidence, participation and a love for reading.


Table of Contents

Chapter 1- INTRODUCTION 4 Background 4

Statement of Problem and the Need for the Study 6 Research Question 6

Terminology 7 Conclusion 7

Chapter 2- LITERATURE REVIEW 9 Phonological Awareness 11 Fluency 11 Interactive Teaching 12 Related Studies 13 Conclusion 14 Chapter 3- METHODOLOGY 15 Participants 15 Materials 16 Procedure 17 Conclusion 18 Chapter 4- DATA ANALYSIS 19 Results of the Data 19 Analysis of Data 24 Limitations 27 Discussion 27 Implications for Teaching 28 Conclusion 28 REFERENCES 29 APPENDIX A 31 APPENDIX B 32


Chapter 1

Introduction Introduction

English language learners are students who are learning English as a second language. As

English language learners (ELLs), children often struggle with the basic skills associated with

reading comprehension. Some of those skills include phonemic awareness, fluency and decoding.

Due to the language barrier of their native language, letter sounds and English letter sounds, ELL

students struggle when trying to sound out words phonetically. The children are not familiar with

the letter sounds so they struggle to read smoothly and accurately.

The Wilson Reading System, (WRS) is an instructional program in reading that focuses

on phonemic awareness, decoding and fluency to promote successful reading comprehension for

students. The WRS program is mainly focused on the basic key components that are required in

successful readers and for overall reading comprehension (Wilson, & Schupack, 1997).

Therefore, the Wilson Reading System emphasizes the skills ELL learners need to improve

reading comprehension and become successful readers.

Background

The study took place in a school district that is classified by the New Jersey Department

of Education as being in District Factor Group "GH", the third highest of eight groupings.

District Factor Groups (DFGs) organize districts statewide to allow comparison by common

socioeconomic characteristics of the local districts. Therefore, this district consists of a large

range of socioeconomic groups.


As of 2010, the town’s population was 46,207. The town’s racial makeup is 57 %

Caucasian, 27% Black or African American, 0.38% Native American, 8% Asian, 0.02% Pacific

Islander, 5% from other races, and 3% from two or more races.

The school district consists of eleven schools that serve 6,689 students in grades Pre-K

through grades 12 in the following configuration: one high school, three middle schools and

seven elementary schools. The district has 11 students for every full-time equivalent teacher,

with the NJ state average being 13 students per full-time equivalent teacher. The district serves

5% English language learners. The elementary school the study was conducted in contains a

language learning disabled (LLD) classroom for each grade. Kindergarten shares a classroom

with the first grade, second grade shares a classroom with third grade students and fourth graders

share a classroom with the fifth grade students. Each LLD classroom has one special education

teacher and an instructional assistant.

The children in the study are all male Latino children in fourth and fifth grades. The

primary language spoken at home for these children is Spanish. The class consists of 15 children.

Among those children are a range of disabilities from communication impaired, to specific

learning disabilities and autism. Language arts, math, social studies and science are taught within

the LLD classroom. The class is mainstreamed during specials throughout the day. Instructional

assistants are there to provide accommodations and modifications in accordance to the

individual’s education program or plan.


Statement of the problem/Need for the study

The goal of this study was to determine the effectiveness of specific instructional

strategies on reading comprehension for English language learners. The ELL population

struggles with decoding, fluency and phonemic awareness skills that are associated with

language barriers. Standardized test scores have been evaluated and the English language

learners in this study are partially proficient in language arts, which indicate low performance on

standardized state testing in comparison to other children their age in New Jersey.

The study sought to improve the literacy in ELL children by using the Wilson Reading

System and by promoting more social interaction between English language students and

monolingual students. The children will be able to read and address the same required

assignments together. It is crucial to start a program that will address decoding, fluency and

phonemic awareness in early years of elementary school so the children will be able to

comprehend and even read beyond the text in their future years of education. The purpose of this

study was to determine the effective strategies for teaching reading comprehension to English

language learners on reading comprehension.

Research Question

Will the Wilson Reading System be an effective strategy to teach reading comprehension

to English language learners in a language learning disabled classroom?


Definition of Terms

Language and learning disabled (LLD). Children who have difficulties with age-

appropriate reading, spelling, and/or writing and are determined to be eligible for special

education services.

English language learners (ELL). Children who are learning English as a second

language in addition to their primary spoken language.

Fluency. The ability to read the words in a text at a smooth rhythm and appropriate pace.

Decoding. The ability to apply one’s knowledge of letter-sound relationships, including

knowledge of letter patterns, to correctly pronounce written words. Understanding these

relationships gives children the ability to recognize familiar words quickly and to figure out

words they haven't seen before.

Phonemic awareness. The ability to hear and manipulate individual letter sounds by

separating each letter with its own individual sound.

The Wilson Reading System (WRS). An instructional program in reading that focuses

on phonemic awareness, decoding and fluency to promote successful readers.

Conclusion

This study sought to determine the effectiveness of the Wilson Reading System in

improving the reading comprehension of English language learners who are language and

learning disabled. Fluency, decoding and phonemic awareness are basic skills that are found to


be essential in reading comprehension of ELLs. The study attempted to determine whether the

WRS is an effective program for ELL students and basic skills associated with reading

comprehension.


Chapter 2

The Review of Literature Introduction

English language learners, (ELLs) in the United States have increased dramatically in

recent years. The number of ELLs increased by nearly 60% to over five million students of

whom 80% are Spanish speakers. Development of literacy and oral language proficiency is

critical to the success of these children (Nakamoto, Lindsey & Manis, 2010). ELL children are

lacking the ability to sound out letters due to the language barrier and in some cases, their

individual learning disability (Lipka, & Siegel, 2011). When exploring how language and

literacy skills in ELLs contributed to reading comprehension, phonemic awareness skills

including fluency and decoding were identified as essential (Nakamoto, Lindsey & Manis, 2010).

The lack of phonological awareness, decoding ability and fluency skills have all been strongly

linked to reading comprehension difficulties (Lipka, & Siegel, 2011).

Reading comprehension is a multi-dimensional process that includes the reader, the text

and factors that are associated with the activity of reading. Reading comprehension is an area of

academic difficulty for ELL students and these children perform at significantly lower levels on

reading comprehension than their peers who only speak one language (Lipka, & Siegel, 2011).

History

ELLs are primarily children and youth from immigrant families, or children with at least

one foreign-born parent. Although they come from many nations today, 40% of ELL children in

the United States have origins in Mexico (Hernandez, Denton, & McCartney, 2008). Spanish is

the predominant native language spoken but more than 350 different languages are used by ELLs

in the United States. ELLs are likely to have parents with limited formal education, tend to have

interrupted schooling, and are generally at greater risk for academic underachievement. The early


elementary years are particularly important for ELL students. During these years, ELL students

are struggling to learn the new language and to read. ELLs need programs to incorporate basic

skills that will promote fluency, decoding and phonemic awareness to ensure reading

comprehension in the future.

The No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB, 2001) stipulates that all teachers must

provide the same curriculum to ELLs as they do for monolingual students. The teachers must

ensure that ELLs are making adequate yearly progress. Adequate yearly progress is assessed

using standardized tests evaluated by the state at the end of the academic year (Hernandez,

Denton, & McCartney, 2008).

Content teachers are required not only to teach their content areas, but also to assist

students who are learning English as a second language. ELLs must be included as early and as

quickly as possible in the mainstream classroom. When these children suffer from a learning

disability there needs to be an early intervention in the form of a direct instruction program

(Wilson, & Schupack, 1997).

The Wilson Reading System, (WRS) is an instructional program in reading that focuses

on phonemic awareness, decoding and fluency to promote successful readers. Phonological

processing involves orally manipulating the individual sounds in words and letters. The WRS

program is mainly focused on key components that are required in successful readers and for

overall reading comprehension (Wilson, & Schupack, 1997).

The WRS, when fully implemented, provides word-reading instruction as well as

vocabulary, fluency and comprehension. In 1985, Barbara Wilson and her husband, Edward,

founded the Wilson Learning Center and three years later published the Wilson Reading System.

Wilson observed that many students did not believe that English could be made understandable


to them. In order to address this issue, Wilson developed the WRS to teach students the structure

of words in a systematic and cumulative manner. Following this system helps students to trust

that they can learn English within the system, and ultimately, deal with the irregularities of the

language (Wilson, & Schupack, 1997). Children that are identified as being at risk for reading

problems in kindergarten should receive additional phonological awareness training provided by

classroom teachers in small groups and on an individual basis. Therefore focusing directly on

phonemic awareness, decoding and fluency skills can enhance a reader’s comprehension

(Nakamoto, Lindsey & Manis, 2010).

Phonological Awareness

Specific elements of the WRS include phonological awareness. Phonological awareness

involves the detection and manipulation of sounds and refers to a variety of skills involving the

processing of speech sounds. It is the ability to segment speech into smaller units such as

syllables and phonemes, and is related to word reading skills. Phonological awareness is

measured through a wide variety of techniques, including rhyming, segmenting sounds, blending

sounds and deleting sounds (Lipka, & Siegel, 2011). For ELL students, phonological awareness

is a factor of word reading skills (Hernandez, Denton, & McCartney, 2008). In addition,

phonological awareness has been found to be an important factor in reading comprehension

(Lipka, & Siegel, 2011).

Fluency

Fluency is a speech language pathology term that means the smoothness or flow with

which sounds, syllables, words and phrases are joined together when speaking quickly (Lipka, &

Siegel, 2011). The ELL learners that are not able to decode a word will not read fluently and

their comprehension of the text will suffer (Hernandez, Denton, & McCartney, 2008). While


using the WRS, children read a set of words on the page at a quick pace. The children are then

asked to read the words from a paragraph where they should be able to read fluently. The direct

instruction of the WRS promotes fluency in readers (Bursuck, & Dickson, 1999).

The WRS focuses on phonological awareness in which individual sound such as, short

vowel sounds, long vowel sounds and consonants are introduced and reinforced throughout the

program. It also requires that the children break down the multi-syllabic words. This deficit must

be corrected by direct, multisensory and structured language teaching (Bursuck, & Dickson,

1999).

Interactive Teaching

An interactive classroom is highly effective with ELLs because they must communicate

with their peers and practice using the English language every day (Hernandez, Denton, &

McCartney, 2008). Teaching in an interactive classroom must be student-centered with many

opportunities for discussion, dialog, and communication so that ELLs use English within the

content subject area. Research has found that students who are encouraged to speak and interact

with their classmates develop their academic language faster, and the earlier ELLs begin

speaking in the classroom; the better their language development will be (Hernandez, Denton, &

McCartney, 2008).

Interactive teaching strategies are necessary components of instruction for ELL students.

These strategies include requiring ELLs to interact with their classmates by working in pairs,

small groups, and on activities that involve the entire class (Lipka, & Siegel, 2011). The WRS

uses small group instruction as well as activities that involve the whole class. Therefore the

children will be able to have one on one time with the instructor as well as conferencing with


peers which will help benefit the children to interact socially and more confidently with their

classmates (Bursuck, & Dickson, 1999).

Related Studies

(Nakamoto, Lindsey & Manis, 2010) Studied the effects of reading comprehension

development in ELLs on language and literacy. The study was conducted in both English and

Spanish to see which basic skills contributed most to growth in reading comprehension. The

study proposed that potentially, the large set of cognitive variables that could predict reading

comprehension fall into three broad categories of; decoding, fluency and phoneme awareness.

The effects of English phonological decoding and Spanish phonological decoding skills were

assessed in kindergarten and reading comprehension in grade three. Both groups were given the

same instruction which focused strenuously on letter sounds, decoding and fluency skills in

English and Spanish. The instruction was initially taught to both groups in their native language,

however throughout the study the children and instructors were asked to use less Spanish over

time. During this time children and instructors focused on phonemic awareness and decoding

skills. The children were being instructed in English only by second grade. Results of the study

indicated that implementing programs that focus on phonemic awareness and decoding in either

language generally resulted in more positive outcomes in reading comprehension by upper

elementary grades.

Yuill and Oaskhill (1991) noted that problems of poor comprehension arise when low

level processes are intact but higher level processes are required including inference making,

working memory, and story structure knowledge. This is difficult for the special education

population as a whole since children with disabilities lack the ability to use imagination and

struggle when reading beyond the text. In addition to the research found on reading and special


education, ELL learners require a reading program that will focus on fluency, decoding and

phonemic awareness for basic reading skills (Nakamoto, Lindsey & Manis, 2010).

In 2002, the What Works Clearing House (WWC) was established by the U.S.

Department of Education’s Institute of Education Sciences to provide evidence of what works in

education. The WWC identifies studies on effectiveness of educational interventions that meets

its evidence standards (Torgesen, 2007).A study, which is defined by WWC, is an evaluation that

examines whether a program, product, practice, or policy is effective. WWC reviews studies

using their rigorous research standards to find the high quality research that provides evidence of

effectiveness. In July 2007, the WWC released its intervention report on the Wilson Reading

System. Only 24 programs of the 153 programs examined by the WWC met their evidence

screens and the Wilson Reading System was one of them- therefore, the study by the WWC

shows that WRS is an effective strategy to teach basic skills associated with reading

comprehension (Brunner, 2005).

Conclusion

The purpose of The Wilson Reading System is to target key skills needed in successful

readers. ELL learners lack phoneme awareness, fluency and decoding skills which prohibit them

from understanding the text. These skills are emphasized in the WRS programs. Using the WRS

as a common practice in early grades is essential for the overall success of a reader, especially

the ELL student. The Wilson Reading System is an effective program that uses direct instruction

to maximize learning in reading (Nakamoto, Lindsey & Manis, 2010). Studies of effective

instruction for ELL students indicate they need skills such as decoding, phonemic awareness and

fluency. The Wilson Reading System emphasizes these strategies.


Chapter 3 Method

Introduction

The Wilson Reading System is an instructional program in reading that focuses on

phonemic awareness, decoding and fluency to promote successful reading comprehension. This

program offers a strategy used to enhance the reading comprehension in English language

learners. The WRS program is mainly focused on the basic key components that are required in

successful readers and for overall reading comprehension (Wilson, & Schupack, 1997).

Action research allows a researcher to determine whether strategies that are incorporated

into their individualized fields are effective. Through action research educators can learn from

conducting a study or implementing an intervention for improvement of their students learning.

This experimental design project determined whether the Wilson Reading System is an effective

strategy for improving reading comprehension in English language learners. Multiple data

collection strategies in the form of qualitative and quantitative data were used to triangulate the

information for validity and credibility (Hendricks, 2013).

Participants

This study consisted of four participants. The participants in the study are all male Latino

children in grades four and five for whom Spanish is the primary language spoken at home.

These children have all tested out of the English as a Second Language program (ESL), and were

all given psychological, educational and speech/language evaluations which placed them in the

language and learning disabled classroom (LLD). The class consisted of 15 children, 16 being

the maximum amount of children allowed per LLD classroom. Two of the children are eligible

for special services under the category communication impaired and the other two participants

are both eligible for special services due to a specific learning disability. Each of the four


children received group speech therapy two times per week where they worked on mouth

manipulations and vocabulary words associated with the classroom lessons. The class was

mainstreamed during specials throughout the day; however, language arts, math, social studies

and science were taught within the LLD classroom. During the study, the researcher who is also

the primary teacher for the children in the study is responsible for language arts instruction for all

four participants in the study. The teacher researcher provided accommodations and

modifications in accordance to the individual’s education program for each child prepared by the

child study team.

Materials

Multiple forms of data were collected in order for the data to be credible and reliable for

the teacher researcher. Using this triangulation process enhanced the validity and credibility of

the research study (Hendricks, 2013). One of the data collection methods was the Fountas &

Pinnell Benchmark Assessment System (F&P). This test allowed the researcher to evaluate the

instructional and independent reading level of each child. A running record, fluency and reading

comprehension level was determined for each child based on the F&P score.

The second method of data collection was WRS journal entries recorded by the teacher

researcher on each child during each lesson to note any strengths or weaknesses the child may

develop in relation to the WRS program. The journal entries allowed the researcher to decide if

the child was ready to move onto the next step in the WRS program or further instruction needed

to be implemented.


The third method of data collection was oral assessment of fluency and comprehension

during conferencing in guided reading groups. Guided reading groups are structured so that

children are grouped together based on levels of their instructional reading level assigned by the

F&P score. The children took turns reading and answering comprehension questions orally with

the researcher as they read together. The researcher used this information to see any growth in

the comprehension level and reading fluency of the child in the study. This allowed the

researcher to record a summative assessment on the material used-at the conclusion of the

instruction during guided reading. All of the participant and data information in this research

study is kept confidential and anonymous.

At the beginning of the study, baseline data was collected before the implementation of

the intervention and was used to make comparisons of participants before and after the

intervention (Hendricks, 2013). This study was conducted over an eight week period. First, the

F&P benchmark assessment was administered to determine a current independent and

instructional reading level for each child. After the independent and instructional reading levels

were determined for each child, the WRS was implemented three days a week for 40 minutes a

day. During this time the teacher researcher implemented WRS strategies to improve fluency,

phonemic awareness and decoding skills. On the fourth day the children were assessed orally by

the researcher in their guided reading groups. This allowed the researcher to monitor their

progress reading within the text or beyond the text in their reading comprehension. The teacher

researcher recorded any strategies that were shown to improve comprehension in the dated

journal. At the end of four weeks the teacher researcher re-administered the F&P benchmark

assessment to measure any change in their comprehension level. If the child demonstrated

sufficient progress to move to a higher instructional level, the researcher recorded that in the


field notes and WRS journal and administered the new level to the child during the guided

reading groups. The same process continued for the following four weeks. At the conclusion of

the eight weeks the F&P was administered again to determine a final reading comprehension

level for each child.

Conclusion

This teacher researcher used multiple forms of data; standardized tests, oral assessments

during guided reading groups and journal entries during the Wilson Reading System instruction

to make the data reliable and credible. Triangulation established the credibility of the research

study with the multiple artifacts of data. By collecting multiple data artifacts the researcher

determined whether the Wilson Reading System was an effective strategy to improve reading

comprehension in English language learners.

Chapter 4

Analysis of Data

Introduction


The purpose of this data analysis was to determine the effectiveness of specific

instructional strategies on reading comprehension for English language learners. The ELL

population struggles with decoding, fluency and phonemic awareness skills that are associated

with language barriers. The data analysis is important for other educators as it will provide them

with feedback on enhancing reading comprehension for ELLs. This study used triangulation of

data in order to enhance the validity and credibility of the research study (Hendricks, 2013).

Results of Data

In this section each participant will be discussed individually; however, the following

chart displays the data for fluency and reading comprehension for all four students. Fluency and

comprehension levels are measured using the Fountas and Pinnell (F&P) Benchmark Assessment

System (Appendix A). According to the F&P a child is expected to improve three levels of

growth throughout a school year.

Table 1. Fluency Scoring Scale

Table 2. The Fountas & Pinnell Text Level Gradient

Participant Pretest Posttest

JL 2 3

JD 1 0

DR 2 1

CB 0 1

Participant Pretest Level Posttest Level Levels of Growth

Achieved


The first participant, JL a fourth grade male student was given a pre and posttest as the

first method of data collection. The Fountas & Pinnell pretest determined the participant’s

fluency, phonemic awareness and reading comprehension level before any intervention. The pre

test indicated that JL was reading at a second grade level. His fluency scored a two, which is

defined as reading primarily in three-or four-word phrase groups according to the Fountas and

Pinnell system. The reading comprehension level was rated as satisfactory. JL included

important information and ideas; however, he lacked other key understandings such as character

names, setting and main idea. Phonemic awareness and decoding ability was determined by the

participant’s accuracy rate which was scored a 98% out of a possible 100%. The second method

of data collection was WRS journal entries. The participant demonstrated the ability to

understand key concepts required to use the WRS. He mastered the basic keywords, short and

long vowel sounds and welded sounds. He was able to master the correct markings for each

sound. JL was able to read nonsense words which demonstrated to the teacher researcher that his

understanding of the WRS was being implemented as a strategy for reading. The third method

of data collection for JL was an oral assessment of fluency and comprehension during

conferencing in guided reading groups. JL demonstrated his ability to read more fluently and

accurately throughout the intervention. When JL paused during guided reading groups he

independently referred back to the WRS sound drill which helped him with his reading

comprehension. Posttest scores indicated an increase in fluency and overall reading

comprehension. JL read primarily in large, meaningful phrases or word groups resulting in an

JL ( J ) grade 2 ( K ) grade 2 1 JD ( I ) grade 2 ( K ) grade 2 2 DR ( J ) grade 2 ( L ) grade 3 2 CB ( E ) grade 1 ( E ) grade 1 0


increase from two to three (Appendix A). Phonemic awareness and his decoding ability were

determined by the participant’s accuracy rate which remained the same as the pretest, 98% out of

a possible 100%. The Fountas & Pinnell posttest indicated that JL achieved one level of growth

after the WRS intervention which demonstrated the participant’s reading comprehension

reflected an excellent understanding of the text according to F&P. JL included almost all

important information and main ideas. After the intervention, JL showed more confidence in his

oral reading by participating more in class and he demonstrated more confidence in oral reading.

The second participant, JD is a fourth grade male. The Fountas & Pinnell pretest results

indicated that JD was reading at a second grade level. His fluency was primarily in two-word

phrases. The reading comprehension level was rated as satisfactory understanding of the text

according to F&P which means that he included important information and ideas but neglected

other key understandings such as the ability to make inferences and identify character names.

Phonemic awareness and decoding ability were determined by the participant’s accuracy rate

which was scored a 94% out of a possible 100%. The second method of data collection was

WRS journal entries. The participant demonstrated the ability to understand key concepts

required to use the WRS such as basic keywords, short vowel sounds and welded sounds. JD

struggled to determine long vowel sounds and needed redirection to the WRS rules and markings.

JD showed the ability to read nonsense words consisting of short vowel sounds and welded

sounds; however, he struggled when asked to read nonsense words of long vowel sounds of the

WRS. The third method of data collection for JD was an oral assessment of fluency and

comprehension during conferencing in guided reading groups. JD’s fluency decreased moving

from a one to a zero on fluency scale according to the F&P (Appendix A). The participant

primarily read word- by-word with occasional but infrequent or inappropriate phrasing.


According to the Fountas and Pinnell posttest, JD demonstrated a decrease in fluency but a

strong increase in his ability to decode words and on his overall reading comprehension.

Phonemic awareness and decoding ability were determined by the participant’s accuracy rate

which scored a 95% out of a possible 100%. The reading comprehension level was rated as

excellent. JD included almost all important information and main ideas. The posttest indicated

that JD achieved two levels of growth after the WRS intervention (Appendix B). Towards the

end of the intervention, JD was participating in language arts more frequently and his answers

were more accurate in reading comprehension than prior to the intervention.

The third participant, DR, is a fourth grade male student. The Fountas & Pinnell pretest

indicated that DR was reading at a second grade level. According to F&P his fluency was

primarily in three-or four-word phrase groups scoring a two on fluency scale (Appendix A). The

reading comprehension level was rated as excellent which according to the F&P indicated that,

he included almost all important information and addressed the main ideas. Phonemic awareness

and decoding ability were determined by the participant’s accuracy rate which was scored a 96%

out of a possible 100%. The second method of data collection was WRS journal entries. The

participant demonstrated the ability to understand key concepts required to use the WRS. He

mastered the basic keywords, short and long vowel sounds and welded sounds. He was able to

master the correct markings for each sound. DR was able to read nonsense words which

demonstrated to the teacher researcher that he understood the WRS. The third method of data

collection for DR was an oral assessment of fluency and comprehension during conferencing in

guided reading groups. DR demonstrated his ability to read more accurately however, he read

less fluently. When DR would pause during guided reading groups he referred back to the WRS

sound drill which helped the participant to sound out the word, increasing his reading


comprehension. The Fountas & Pinnell posttest indicated a decrease in fluency. According to the

F&P, DR scored one which indicated DR read primarily in two-word phrases with some three-

and four-word groups (Appendix A). While the participant decreased in fluency his accuracy rate,

phonemic awareness and decoding ability increased. Phonemic awareness and decoding ability

were determined by the participant’s accuracy rate which was scored a 98% out of a possible

100%. The reading comprehension level was indicated an excellent understanding of the text.

DR included almost all important information and main ideas. The posttest revealed DR

achieved two levels of growth after the WRS intervention. DR is participating more often in oral

reading in class and is more accurate when answering comprehension questions.

The fourth participant, CB, is a fifth grade male. The Fountas & Pinnell pretest indicated

that CB was reading at a first grade level. According to the F&P, his fluency was primarily

word-by-word with occasional but infrequent or inappropriate phrasing, scoring a zero on the

fluency scale (Appendix A). The reading comprehension level was rated as satisfactory which

according to the F&P indicates that, CB included important information and ideas; however, he

lacks other key understandings such as making inferences and locating information. The

participant’s accuracy rate scored a 94% out of a possible 100%. The second method of data

collection was WRS journal entries. The participant demonstrated the ability to understand some

key concepts required to use the WRS. He mastered the basic keywords, and short vowel sounds.

CB struggled to determine long vowel and welded sounds and needed redirection to the WRS

rules and markings. CB was able to read nonsense words consisting of short vowel sounds and

some welded sounds. The third method of data collection for CB was an oral assessment of

fluency and comprehension during conferencing in guided reading groups. CB was able to apply

WRS rules and markings while in guided reading groups. In the Fountas & Pinnell posttest, CB


demonstrated an increase in fluency, moving from a zero to one. The participant primarily read

in two-word phrases with some three-and four-word groups. CB also demonstrated a small

increase in his phonemic awareness and decoding ability during the posttest. CB’s accuracy rate

scored a 95% out of a possible 100%. The reading comprehension level was rated as excellent.

According to the F&P, CB included almost all important information and main ideas. He was

able to locate information within the text, comprehend the main idea and retell details from the

story. The Fountas & Pinnell posttest revealed CB did not show any growth in his reading level

and remains reading on a first grade level (Appendix B). While there was no growth in his

reading level, CB increased in all the other areas such as phonemic awareness and decoding. CB

has been participating more often and more confidently in his language arts block than prior to

the intervention. He is reading more comfortably in his guided reading group and continues to

put forth effort learning the WRS.

Analysis of Data

The participants in this study showed some progress in reading comprehension. The

teacher researcher was able to incorporate all three methods of data collection into the

participants’ daily language arts block, which allowed the teacher researcher to see how the

participants were applying the WRS strategies to their reading and how it would improve their

overall reading comprehension.

For all of the participants, fluency was a basic reading skill that proved challenging to

improve. While other areas increased for three out of the four participants, according to the F&P,

only one out of the four participants was able score a three on the fluency scale. This is

demonstrated by reading primarily in larger, more meaningful phrases or word groups. The


participants read more smoothly with expressive interpretation and pausing by the author’s

meaning and punctuation; however, JL is the only participant noted to have read with expression

and appropriate pausing, scoring a three on the fluency scale (Appendix A).

The Fountas & Pinnell pre and posttests allowed the teacher researcher to interpret the

participants overall reading comprehension. Reading comprehension was determined by an oral

test. The participants were asked questions within the text which required them to answer basic

questions such as character names, setting and what happened in the story, in sequence. The

participants were also asked to answer questions beyond the text which requires the students to

make inferences, understand idioms and answer ‘why’ questions. All four participants

demonstrated improvement in reading comprehension. According to F&P, the participants

demonstrated understanding of the text and included almost all important information and ideas.

Although CB made progress on decoding and fluency, results indicated that CB did not

increase his reading level. CB was absent from 8 sessions due to his triennial re-evaluation and

illness, which may have affected his scores. CB was able to make progress in all other areas.

Although CB demonstrated a decrease on fluency, he increased his accuracy rate, which affected

his ability to read more smoothly.

The oral assessment during guided reading provided a consistent record of how the

participants were progressing on their reading comprehension and fluency. Therefore, the teacher

researcher was able to reinforce the WRS strategies while the participants were reading orally in

a group setting. While the children were applying the WRS strategies, their fluency decreased

and the participants primarily focused on the pronunciation of the words. The participants were


able to use WRS rules to determine the correct word and read it appropriately which may have

affected any increase in reading comprehension.

Journal entries on each child during the instruction of the WRS provided anecdotal

information regarding strengths and weaknesses in phonics for each participant. Use of the

WRS’s list of nonsense words provided information about which short vowel, long vowel and

welded sounds the participants were applying while reading. Data indicated an improvement of

basic skills associated with reading such as decoding and phonemic awareness for all four

students. The Fountas and Pinnell assessment allowed the teacher researcher to ask questions

about the text to assess the participants’ comprehension, using additional prompts if the

participant required them. Three out of four participants showed a gain in their F&P reading

comprehension and accuracy level, which places them at more age appropriate reading levels.

The most significant finding emerged from the qualitative data. All of the participants

achieved significant progress on participation and overall confidence in reading. The four

participants are more eager to read orally in the classroom and showed more excitement when

choosing books appropriate for their reading level. During guided reading groups, the four

participants are proud to use their WRS rules and markings when reading a text. The teacher

researcher was able to see JD explain the rules of a short vowel sound to another child in the

class who was not a participant in the intervention. An example of the new enthusiasm for

reading was noted in a card from CB to his teacher researcher, “Happy Valentine Ms. Pavone

you are the bet teshr in the school. I am happy you sho me huw to red”. The teacher researcher

felt joyful to see this note and proud of the progress CB has made. While CB was able to

articulate his feelings in writing, it was clear that all participants demonstrated a more positive

attitude toward reading at the end of the study.


Limitations

This study was limited due to time and availability of each participant. The school district

was closed for five days during the study due to inclement weather. The participants were not

able to complete the full 35 sessions required by the teacher researcher to receive maximum

instruction of the WRS and completed only 25 sessions. Two participants in this study were re-

evaluated by their child study team during the time of the intervention to update their IEPs which

caused them to miss instruction in the classroom until testing was competed. After the

participants returned the teacher researcher had to re-teach previous material. Another participant

missed three days of school due to an illness. More instructional time for the WRS and small

guided reading groups might have resulted in a more positive outcome.

Discussion

Based upon the data results, this study indicated that the WRS may be an effective

teaching strategy to improve the reading comprehension of English language learners. In

addition to the data in this study, research suggests that the Wilson Reading System is an

effective program that uses direct instruction to maximize learning in reading. ELL learners

require a reading program that will focus on fluency, decoding and phonemic awareness for

basic reading skills (Nakamoto, Lindsey & Manis, 2010). This study also supports the

conclusions of Brunner (2005) who found that WRS is an effective strategy to teach basic skills

associated with reading comprehension. In order to achieve significant improvement in reading

comprehension, additional time is needed to implement the WRS.

Implications for Teaching


Using the findings from this study, teachers may reevaluate their approach to reading

instruction for special education English language learners. WRS seems to be an effective

approach for special education classrooms consisting of English language learners. The teacher

researcher plans to continue using the WRS during the language arts block. The teacher

researcher hopes to use the WRS as the primary phonics program to increase improvement in

reading comprehension skills. Children may be able to generalize WRS rules and markings in

math, science and social studies for greater reading comprehension in all subject areas.

Conclusion

This study attempted to determine if the WRS is an effective teaching strategy to improve

reading comprehension for English language learners. The data derived from this study

demonstrated that while fluency decreased for two out of the four participants, the overall goal to

increase reading comprehension was reached by three out of the four students. The WRS

provides children with phonetic rules to refer back to when struggling with reading in any

subject area. The WRS provides this population with a more concrete approach to learning

phonics. The conclusion of this study indicated that given the required amount of instruction

time, the WRS may be an effective strategy for teaching English language learners in order to

improve reading comprehension.

References

Brunner, N. (2005). The light bulb goes on. NEA Today, 23(8), 26–26.

Bursuck, W., and Dickson, S. 1999. Implementing a Model for Preventing Reading Failure: A

Report From the Field. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 14(4), 191-202.


Cheung, A., Slavin, R.E.,(2005) Reading programs; English language; Bilingual education;

Minority students; Elementary schools. Bilingual Research Journal. 241-267

Hernandez, D. J., Denton, N. A., & McCartney, S. E. (2008). Children in immigrant families:

Looking to America's future. Sodai Policy Report, 22(3), 3-22.

No Child Left Behind Act. (2001). 107th Congress of the United States of America.

Available online: http://www. ed.gov/legislation/ESEA02/107-l 10.pdf.

Torgesen, J.,(2007). Closing the Reading Gap. U.S. Department of Education Institute of

Education Science. 15, 109 -144.

Lipka, O., & Siegel, L. S. (2011). The Development of Reading Comprehension Skills in

Children Learning English as a Second Language. Reading and Writing: An

Interdisciplinary Journal, 1873-1898.

Tumner, W.E., Nesdale, A.R., Wright, A.D. (1987). Syntactic awareness and reading

acquisition. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 5, 25-34.

Wanzek, J., Dickson, S., Bursuck WD., & White, J. M. (2000). Teaching Phonological

Awareness to Students at Risk for Reading Failure: An analysis of four instructional

programs. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 15, 226-239.

Wilson, B. and Schupack, H. 1997. Reading, Writing and Spelling – The Multisensory

Structured Language Approach The International Dyslexia Association.

Yuill, N.M., Oakhill, J. V., & Parkin, A. J. (1989). Working Memory, Comprehension

skill and the resolution of text anomaly. British Journal of Psychology, 80, 351-361.

Yuill, N.M, & Oakhill, J.V. (1991). Children’s problems in text comprehension: An

experimental investigation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.


Nakamoto, J., Lindsey, K.A., & Manis, F.R. (2008). A cross-linguistic investigation of English

language learners’ reading comprehension in English and Spanish. Scientific Studies of

Reading, 12, 351-371.


Appendix A

Table 1 Fluency Scoring Scale

Fluency Chart: This chart shows the frequency for each individual child. The students were tested using a Fountas & Pinnell Benchmark Assessment System. The fluency scoring key is as follows:

0- Reads primarily word-by-word with occasional but infrequent or inappropriate phrasing. 1- Reads primarily in two-word phrases. 2- Reads primarily in three-or four word phrase groups. 3- Reads primarily in larger, meaningful phrases or word groups.


Appendix B

Table 2. The Fountas & Pinnell Text Level Gradient

This table provides information regarding the pre and post independent reading comprehension levels for each student based on the Fountas & Pinnell Benchmark Assessment.

Fountas & Pinnell Level Grade Level Goals

A-C Kindergarten

D- I First grade

J-M Second grade

N-P Third grade

Q-T Fourth grade

U- W Fifth grade

W-Y Sixth grade

Z Grade seven, eight and above

effective reading strategy

Education

wilson reading system

male english language

english language learners

native language

language barrier

guided reading groups

english letter sounds

data analysis