Individualizing Student Literacy Instruction: Exploring causal implications of child X instruction interactions

1. Individualizing Student Literacy Instruction: Exploring causal implications of child X instruction interactions Carol McDonald Connor, Christopher Schatschneider Florida State University/FCRR Barry Fishman, and Frederick J. Morrison University of Michigan Institute for Education Sciences June, 2008

2. Thanks and Acknowledgments • Principals, Teachers, Students and Administrators • ISI Team • Elizabeth Crowe • Shayne Piasta • Stephanie Glasney • Phyllis Underwood • And everybody • US Department of Education IES • National Institute of Child Health and Human Development

3. Research behind the study • In our research, we have found that the effect of specific instruction strategies appear to depend on students’ language and literacy skills • phonics, phonological awareness, comprehension, vocabulary, book reading, sustained silent reading, etc. • These are child by instruction interactions • Correlational evidence from preschool through 3rd grade

4. Attending to the instructional needs of all children

5. Research Questions • Can teachers individualize instruction? • What is the effect of individualizing instruction? • Intent to treat • Study 1, N = 616 students in 47 classrooms in 10 schools • Study 2, N = 443 students in 26 classrooms in 7 schools • Is there a dosage effect? I.e., When teachers individualizing with greater precision, do their children show stronger reading skill growth? • Treatment of the treated • This is where we relied on the video-taped classroom observations • Study 1, N = 461 students in 47 classrooms • Does accessing assessment results affect student outcomes?

6. Schools Study 1: 22 treatment teacher and 25 control teachers, 616 children

7. Schools Study 2: 14 treatment and 12 control teachers, 443 children

8. The Intervention • Both Treatment and Control • Dedicated and uninterrupted language arts block of about 120 minutes • Access to DIBELS scores 4 times per year • Instruction • Conceptualize instruction multi-dimensionally • TM Instruction in small groups or individually using homogenous skill based groups • Attending to the assessed skill levels of the group • Provide A2i algorithm recommended amounts*** • Professional Development • 2 workshops and monthly meetings • Classroom-based support bi-weekly

9. Assessment to Instruction (A2i) software • A2i was designed to make Individualizing Instruction using assessment results easier for teachers • A2i uses model algorithms based on our research to compute recommended amounts and types of instruction for each child in the classroom based on his or her assessed reading and vocabulary skills

10. Algorithm results: Effective patterns of instruction TM-CF TM-CF CM-MF

11. Procedures • Student Assessments • 3 times during the school year – fall, winter, and spring • Woodcock Johnson-III • Picture Vocabulary • Letter-word Identification • Passage Comprehension • Classroom observation • Video-taped • 3 times per year – fall, winter, and spring • Field notes • Noldus Observer Pro • Coded classroom activities for randomly selected subsample of children

12. HLM: Intent to treat results Year 2 (2006-2007) Year 1 (2005-2006)

13. A quick look at A2i • http://isi.fcrr.org • Log in • A2idemo • Password • Isi06!

15. Assessment to Instruction (A2i) Software • http://isi.fcrr.org

19. Output from A2i

20. AE = 8.2 years AE = 6.0 years A2i Use and Reading Comprehension HLM fitted growth curves controlling for fall vocabulary, letter-word reading, curriculum, FARL, and Reading First status. 464 = GE 1.8, 468 = GE 2.0,

21. Treatment teachers use of A2i Mean use = 527 minutes versus 180 minutes in Study 1 Classroom view mean = 148 minutes Minutes using Classroom View and Total A2i were correlated r = .86, p < .001

22. Teachers’ use of Child Information Screen Mean Use = 50 minutes No significant relation between classroom view and child information screen use.

23. HLM Results

24. Conceptualizing Classroom Instruction • Student versus Classroom level • Most observations are conducted at the classroom level • Student level observations – children who share a classroom experience different learning opportunities • (Connor, Morrison & Slominski, 2006) • Multiple Dimensions of Instruction • Teacher/child-managed versus Child-managed • student-teacher interactions • Meaning versus Code focused or Explicit vs Implicit • Content of instruction • Whole class, small group, or individual • Context • Change across the school year • Time on task across and within the school year

26. ISI Coding Scheme Child-managed Pair 4.1. Literacy Codes: 4.1.2. Phoneme Awareness 4.1.3. Syllable Awareness 4.1.4. Morpheme Awareness 4.1.5. Onset/Rime Awareness 4.1.6. Word ID/Decoding 4.1.7. Word ID/Encoding 4.1.8. Fluency 4.1.9. Print Concepts 4.1.10. Oral Language 4.1.11. Print Vocabulary 4.1.12. Reading Comprehension 4.1.13. Text Reading 4.1.14. Writing 4.1.15. Library 4.1.16. Assessment 4.1.2. Phoneme Awareness 4.1.2. Phoneme Awareness 4.1.2.2. Blending 4.1.2.3. Elision/Initial 4.1.2.4. Elision/Final 4.1.2.5. Elision/Vowel 4.1.2.6. Elision/Medial 4.1.2.7. Substitution/Initial 4.1.2.8. Substitution/Final 4.1.2.9. Substitution/Vowel 4.1.2.10 Substitution/Medial 4.1.2.11 Segmenting/Counting

27. TCM Small-group Code-focused

28. Distance from RecommendationsObserved – A2i recommended amounts Absolute Values * Simple Differences * ES (d) = .42 for TCM-CF and .41 for CM-MF

29. Results • Total amounts of small group and individual instruction did not predict student literacy growth • TM-CF • CM-MF • CM-CF • Total amount of TM-MF positively predicted students’ passage comprehension skill growth • What about DFR?

30. Distance from Recommendations (SS)

31. Distance from Recommendations (SS)

32. What about children’s behavior? • Behavioral Regulation – Study 1 • Head to Toes Task • Attention , working memory and task inhibition • Positively correlated with teacher-reported social skills • Negatively correlated with behavior problems • Fall skills predict reading and vocabulary • A high proportion of children with weak BR skills is systematically related to weaker growth in reading skills • What effect does ISI have on students’ BR skills?

33. Stronger Fall HTKS Raw Score Weaker Fall HTKS Raw Score

34. Upcoming Challenges • Progress monitoring assessment of reading and language/vocabulary skills for all students • Semantic-matching task • Word Match Game

36. Future Plans

37. Implications • Child X instruction interactions appear to be causally implicated in the widely varying achievement observed within and between classrooms • Individualizing student instruction may promote students’ reading and language skills • It also seems to have an effect on their BR • Instruction varies between classrooms • Instruction varies for students within classrooms

38. Implications • We can make using assessment to guide instruction more accessible to teachers. • When this information becomes more accessible, we can potentially • increase the efficacy of their classroom practices • enhance students’ outcomes. • Within the context of a randomized control field trial conducted in a diverse group of schools including high poverty schools • Causal implications of child-by-instruction interactions • Assessment-guided individualized instruction may promote stronger literacy outcomes.

39. Thank you! And Questions? • cconnor@fcrr.org