Action Plan
What was implemented
A structured guided lesson plan following Fountas and Pinnell guidelines was implemented. I chose to break this lesson plan into two days. The lesson was outlined as before reading, during reading, and after reading along with word work. Each part of the lesson plan was chosen to fit the needs of the group and used targeted teaching points from the Literacy Continuum to increase comprehension. The two day lesson plan worked best for my students because we were able to have more time discussing the text through guided discussion which allowed them to enrich their comprehension skills by processing through their thoughts. The Fountas and Pinnell benchmarking system was used to determine differentiated small groups. According to research, flexible grouping is the best practice for guided reading because it allowed students to move up or down levels based on their reading needs. Levels were assessed weekly, on Fridays, through the use of running records, anecdotal notes, and the benchmarking system. Instructionally - appropriate texts were selected for each small group to teach a level-specific skill pulled from the Fountas and Pinnell continuum based on the overall reading goals identified through benchmarking and the MAP reading assessment. These skills worked best for my students because they were skills that were the right kind of challenge. They were not too challenging to cause frustration but they were challenging enough to keep them engaged.
According to research, comprehension instruction is most effective when students integrate and flexibly use reading and thinking strategies across a wide variety of texts and in the context of a challenging, engaging curriculum. My students tended to shut down when things got too hard so the right amount of challenge in a variety of text was the best practice for them. Pre-planned targeted questions were assessed during small group discussion. These questions assessed within, about, and beyond the text comprehension goals of each text that was read. Intentional preplanned word work was implemented to increase students' phonics and vocabulary skills. Specific prompts, strategies and facilitative talk to support comprehension skills from the continuum were taught and practiced to deepen students' comprehension of the text. Responsive planning based off of running records and anecdotal notes were used to alter lesson plans based on student needs. Reflecting on anecdotal notes and running records was best for my students because I was able to recognize their strengths in reading and with what they still needed practice. Therefore, I could reteach where I needed to strengthen reading skills. An administered interest survey was given at the beginning of the study and at the end of the study. I chose to do an interest survey to get a better understanding of how my students felt about reading at school and at home. This helped me understand their attitude toward reading which helped me understand how to approach reading in small groups.
When and with whom?
Sample page from literacy continuum showing goals and skills
I created four different groups based on similar guided reading levels. I met with my two lower groups every day for 20 minutes and my two higher groups twice a week for 20 minutes. One student received small group instruction from guided reading in the classroom and was also pulled out to be in a small group with the Resource Teacher. Two students in my classroom received small group instruction with me and were pulled out to be in a small group with the Reading Specialist. One student received one on one instruction with me, small group instruction, and was pulled out to be in a small group with the reading specialist. I had 9 students fall below the average percentile in literacy theme and analysis on the MAP test which drove my decision to focus on comprehension for my research. I also had 11 students fall below the average percentile in characteristics of text on the MAP test. According to research, the Fountas and Pinnell the 12 systems of strategic actions can be used as tools for the students to expand their thinking to become independent readers. The 12 systems of strategic actions were used to determine my students' comprehension after reading a text. The 12 systems of strategic actions from Fountas and Pinnell was the best strategy to use in my classroom because it acted as a guide with detailed skills on the three main points of comprehension; summarizing, analyzing, and inferring.
These comprehension skills were a commonality under all of my students MAP data goals as a standard they needed to work on. Literacy, theme, and analysis are knowing how to recognize important details of a story and why those details are important. Characteristics of text is being able to understand how the story is set up, and recognizing cause and effect. Both of these skills are important when it comes to comprehension. By implementing pre-planned targeted questions pulled from the Fountas & Pinnell Literacy Continuum during small group discussions I was able to guide my students in finding those important details and understanding the structure of different textS, as a result building their comprehension skills. According to research, discussion about the text provided rich opportunities for every student to expand background knowledge, experience age-appropriate text, and learn in a variety of ways to think deeply about texts. My students loved to talk so this was an easy element for me to implement learning.
Cuturally Responsive Teaching
My instruction reflected culturally responsive teaching in a variety of ways. I chose books that represented the different cultures that were represented in my classroom. During guided reading, my students were encouraged to share and actively participate because I wanted them to learn from each other. All of my students knew that their ideas were important and valued. I fostered equality and accessibility by allowing my students to work at their own pace to become independent readers. While I was teaching small groups, other students were working on stations in partners that reviewed skills taught during whole group or small group. I chose to have my students work in pairs for these literacy activities because I wanted them to learn from each other. The students that got pulled from class to get extra support missed some of those literacy stations, but it was more important for them to receive the one on one targeted support since those literacy activities were above their level. In my classroom, I continuously differentiated instruction for my students to be successful in reading. In my groups, the lessons differed from group to group, based on the learners that I had. For example, in my below group, we started with decoding strategies, sight words, reading the text, and ended in discussion. When introducing the text, I had to give a lot of background knowledge and explanation because the words and ideas were all new for those students. For my higher groups, I didn’t have to review as many sight words. We worked on fluency, and the meaning of the text.
I was able to ask deeper questions that involved the author’s purpose and character feelings because they already had those baseline reading skills. When choosing what questions to ask my groups I used questions that addressed within the text, beyond the text, and about the text understanding to increase comprehension but based on the group's needs I worded them differently. I fostered accessibility by having anchor charts with specific comprehension strategies hung on my walls for students to refer to during independent reading. I also had a large class library for students to choose books at their independent reading level. Reader’s response notebooks were also used for students to practice their reading strategies learned from small group. I also intentionally set up my room as a horseshoe to make it easier for my students to move around and to collaborate with reading partners. All of these things helped my students access content through choice. I planned my reading instruction with multiple perspectives in mind gained from observations of my students and the data I studied from MAP and Fountas and Pinnell benchmarking that indicated where each of my students was achieving in reading. I planned lessons based on the knowledge I had of each of my kids and their background knowledge. My students also loved to draw so I chose reading strategies that had drawing implemented to reach my students' interests. Based on this information I used the continuum of literacy levels to identify specific goals and skills that matched my students' individual needs. My students like to talk so, therefore, using open discussions about the text was best for them.
Collaboration
During my study I collaborated with multiple stakeholders in and out of my building. Collaboration with my building reading teacher, principal, and grade level teammates was used to implement new strategies to better benefit my students. Once a week I sat down with my reading teacher and grade level team to reflect and plan guided reading lessons. We also discussed new strategies to try with different groups. The building reading teacher and I compared running records and anecdotal notes on the students we share to develop new strategies to implement. I collaborated with her to identify overall reading goals for each of my students, based on benchmarking data and MAP reading data. I asked my principal to come in and observe guided reading lessons to provide me with feedback that I could use to improve my instruction. I shared on-going running record data with my principal and discussed the correlation of that data to MAP reading data. Collaboration with my CADRE associate, district curriculum director, and UNO professors was a part of my study, as well. My CADRE associate and I met once a week to discuss best practices of guided reading instruction and to plan instruction for the specific skills and strategies that were implemented to increase my student’s comprehension skills. We reviewed running record data and anecdotal notes to determine next steps in my guided reading instruction. She spent five hours a week in my classroom to help support me; some of which was spent helping me with running records, reading with students, and co-teaching lessons. My curriculum director provided me with different resources and guided reading training to use to improve during guided reading instruction. I was able to reach out to her with any questions that I may have had. My UNO professors provided me with support and guidance during my action research by providing feedback. Collaboration with my peers who were doing action research as well helped me gather suggestions such as how to keep my data organized or where to move forward when I became stuck.
