Loading Add to favorites

Written by Lyne Bessette, Ph.D., Remedial Teacher

In our schools, teachers devote a lot of energy to teaching students to read so that they become competent readers. Research plays an important part in supporting teachers in their professional person practice since it highlights theoretical components that are necessary for developing the act of reading. As function of my Ph.D. project, I was a practitioner-researcher in addition to working as a remedial instructor in Quebec schools, which are wrestling with a consistent increase in reading difficulties. I adult and tested a plan of teaching activities to aid students in regular classrooms with reading, including those with and without learning difficulties. This teaching activity programme was designed and tested in the three tiers of the Response to Intervention (RTI) model. During the testing, 149 chief school students from Class 2 to Grade 4 received targeted pedagogy in reading, from Oct to May, in regular classrooms, too as in subgroups for remedial instruction. The objectives of this research were to evaluate the effects of the trial educational activity activity program on the evolution of reading fluency, also as to describe and analyze reading fluency progression at the three tiers of the RTI model, from Grade 2 to Grade four at the principal level.

Progression in the three components of reading fluency was evaluated and compared to that of 111 students in the control groups. Thus, in total, 260 students were involved. The results obtained indicate that the students who participated in the trial instruction activity program made corking strides at each form level. The nigh marked effects were observed for the accuracy component. Students in the experimental groups (n=46) avant-garde to a higher level, whereas those in the control groups (northward=36) remained at the same level. Indeed, our teaching activeness program had a statistically meaning impact on reading accuracy for students in Grade 2 and Grade 4. According to my research findings, it would seem that reading accuracy is more of import than speed for understanding the texts that are read. In September, the students in the experimental and control groups were evaluated in a pre-test and, in May, in a mail-examination, using the same text. Information technology should be noted that only the students in the experimental group participated in the teaching activeness program implemented in regular classrooms over 32 weeks in Tier 1 of the RTI model.

The Human activity of Reading

Reading is critical in our lives as we are constantly required to read written materials. Nowadays, it is understood that the act of reading is circuitous, and at that place are numerous ways to approach reading. The act of reading can exist summarized as an interaction between the reader and a written text. The ultimate purpose of reading is to access the significant of the text, i.e., to understand it. Reading is intended to be both an agile and interactive process between the reader and the written text (Giasson, 2003).

Reading Fluency

In Canada, the Canadian Linguistic communication and Literacy Research Network (2009) focuses on six areas of intervention in line with those of the National Reading Console (2000): written language awareness, phonological awareness, vocabulary, fluency, reading comprehension, and writing.

Acquiring skilful reading fluency does indeed appear to exist a protective factor against reading failure. The development of reading fluency is very of import and, according to researchers, should exist given more than consideration at school when students are learning to read (MELS, 2005). Thus, infrequent students must develop better reading fluency in order to lessen their cerebral load. The cognitive load calls upon working memory, which has express capacity. Hence, if the required task is arduous for the student, it will place very significant demands on working memory, causing cognitive overload. In attempting to reduce the cognitive load generated past this task, we desire to improve the cognitive availability of students and then that they tin can focus on understanding the text (Giasson, 2011). One written report showed that students who obtain the lowest scores in fluency also obtain the lowest scores in comprehension (Jenkins, Fuchs, van den Broek, Espin and Deno, 2003).

Defining Reading Fluency

In light of the unlike definitions and the state of knowledge in the surface area of reading fluency, the concept of fluency is defined as follows in this study: reading fluency consists of reading speedily, accurately, and prosodically in social club to empathize (Allington, 2009). The three components of reading fluency are speed, accurateness, and prosody.

The Response to Intervention (RTI) Model

The Response to Intervention model (RTI) originated in the United States. It aims to address the various challenges posed by regular classrooms today. In the United States, the RTI model has been the subject of a number of scientific studies, and piloting this systemic model is mandatory in some states in gild to better the chances of success for all students.

Tiered Approach (RTI) pyramid of intervention

Figure 1. The Tiered Approach to Intervention; commonly referred to equally Response to Intervention (RTI). Adapted from: Ontario Ministry of Pedagogy, 2011; Matattall, 2008; Katz, 2012.

Response to Intervention (RTI) is thought to be a more constructive model for addressing the various challenges involved in pedagogy reading (Vaughn and Fuchs, 2003). It is a three-tiered intervention model that was designed to foster learning for all students and prioritizing early intervention. In Tier 1 of the RTI model, reading is taught in regular classrooms using teaching practices whose effectiveness is supported by research findings. These practices include explicit teaching, rereading, also called repeated reading, assisted reading, and the provision of feedback. In Tier 2, students who take not reached the expected level of fluency participate in more targeted activities, in a pocket-sized subgroup with the classroom teacher and/or the remedial teacher. In Tier 3, students who did not reach the expected level of fluency in Tier 2 engage in private activities or participate in a very pocket-sized subgroup with the remedial teacher.

According to researchers, effective reading instruction in regular classrooms is sufficient to ensure that 70 to 80% of students make progress. Still, 20 to 30% of students seem to require boosted supportive intervention, and 5 to x% appear to demand intensive interventions (Vaughn and Klinger, 2007). Several studies have shown that the RTI model improves learning for exceptional students, and likewise reduces the number of students who experience reading difficulties or who echo grades (O'Connor, Harty and Fulmer, 2005; Fuchs, Fuchs and Vaughn, 2008). This model, focusing on prevention and early intervention, adopts teaching practices whose effectiveness has been demonstrated empirically. Stakeholders tend to recall that this model is intended merely for students struggling with learning challenges, but all students can benefit from it.

Teaching Activities to Develop Reading Fluency

Following a literature review, we identified several teaching activities that have had significant furnishings on the development of reading fluency.

Oral Rereading

Oral rereading is an activeness that appears to contribute to developing reading fluency. With back up from a instructor or a tutor, oral rereading apparently has a meaning touch non only on fluency but also on word identification and comprehension (National Reading Panel, 2000). Enquiry has shown that this activity enhances fluency and that, between the outset and the third reading, reading speed increases significantly. Students make fewer mistakes and become more skillful at detecting and correcting their mistakes. They read with greater facility and sympathise the text meliorate (Giasson, 2003). Oral rereading tin be washed in various ways, including choral reading, partner reading, readers' theatre, and rhythm walks.

Choral Reading

In choral reading, the teacher and the students read the chosen text aloud together, with accuracy, speed, and expression (EDU, 2007). To access the meaning of the text, before reading information technology, students brand predictions nearly the subject of the text, based on the championship and the accompanying prototype. Next, several students read the text, together, in choral reading (Giasson, 2003). Then, they collectively endeavour to verify whether their predictions were right and give their assessment of the text earlier answering a few comprehension questions orally.

The Whisper Phone

A number of studies have shown that learning is more constructive when dissimilar senses are called upon (Block, Parris and Whiteley, 2008; Hoffman, 1991). In this action, the sense of hearing is added, as students will hear themselves read instead of reading silently. Students read the text past belongings the whisper phone, a pocket-size curved cylinder equally if they were placing a telephone up to their mouth and ear. When they read aloud, they hear their voice beingness amplified, which helps to isolate their reading from the other noises in the classroom. Research has been carried out using these phones known as "whisper phones". The findings bear witness that there are benign effects for the improvement of fluency, word decoding, and comprehension (Rasinski, 2002; Rasinski, Flexer and Boomgarden-Szypulski, 2006).

Rhythm Walks

In a written report conducted with primary school students, Peebles (2007) incorporated rereading, or repeated reading, with walking, which she calls "rhythm walks". The purpose of rhythm walks is to assistance students to break up sentences into groups of function words or phrases. Information technology is suggested to echo the rhythm walk from three to ten times, accompanied by rereading. Through repetition, students develop confidence and their reading improves. Therrien (2004) contends that infrequent students not only find it hard to read individual words but also to read properly by groups of function words or phrases. Furthermore, Pressley, Gaskins, and Fingeret (2006) recommend using multidimensional approaches to intervene with exceptional students who are struggling to read fluently.

Assisted Reading

Assisted reading appears to be derived from rereading. A model reader, either an adult or a student, coaches a less experienced student or one who is experiencing difficulties with reading. If the reader pauses for more than 5 seconds, the model reader helps them by correctly reading the discussion, and the student repeats this word and then continues to read. If the student makes a mistake, the model reader gives them a chance to endeavor once again and, if needed, reads the word correctly for them (Nichols, Rupley, Rasinski, 2009).

Partner (or Paired) Reading

Partner or paired reading is washed with model readers. A few students who can read "fluently" and who are among the older readers can then read the text and serve every bit models for the younger students. Next, the students who are the subjects of the intervention read in turn, and the "practiced" reader makes annotations nearly the students' reading and and then gives them feedback (Canadian Language and Literacy Research Network, 2009). According to the findings of a meta-analysis that determined which methods were effective to teach reading to infrequent students at the primary level, partner reading ranks second (Bissonnette et al., 2010). Rereading a written text several times helps to read it fluently, but modeling by a proficient reader helps students read with fluency and comprehension. A lack of fluency in reading is one of the factors that can cause average readers to develop difficulties (Brown, 2007).

Feedback

Oral rereading (or repeated oral reading) combined with feedback is ane of the best ways to improve reading fluency, in an environment where an developed is able to assist the pupil (Hasbrouck, Ihnot and Rogers, 1999; Rasinski, 1990; Smith and Elley, 1997). In 2002, a synthesis of several enquiry studies on constructive interventions to improve reading fluency yielded the same findings (Chard, Vaughn, Tyler, 2002).

There are other activities to approach rereading and assisted reading (Cahill and Gregory, 2011). A study carried out with Grade two students involved a teacher who wanted to motivate her students by creating workshops to develop fluency. The teacher would first model the reading and so would read aloud to the students every twenty-four hour period, ensuring that she used the right expression and speed. Adjacent, she would allow parent volunteers to attend demonstrations to enable them to assist with reading fluency activities in the classroom.

Readers' Theatre

Readers' theatre is a grade of rereading (Rasinski, 2003). It too entails time spent on assisted reading and feedback. It is an effective and motivating approach for students who are struggling with reading. By participating in readers' theatre as a teaching action to practise rereading, students become engaged and persevere with the goal of presenting their play in front of an audience. Short plays with around iv to six characters can be chosen. These plays do not require any costumes or sets. Their purpose is simply to develop skilful skills in telling a story with fluency. Yet, this requires preparatory piece of work, choosing characters, and allocating responsibilities to the various students in the group. Readers' theater is an authentic and dynamic action since it involves a public performance at the end of this intervention. It is a reading operation that requires rehearsals. Thus, it is natural to include rereading and assisted reading. It is the readers' fluency that will allow the audition to sympathize the meaning of the play (Young and Rasinski, 2009). This is therefore interpretive oral reading (Giasson, 2011). In this way, students gain fluency and learn the skills for capturing attention using their voices.

The teaching activities that we have just presented are organized into a programme that takes place over four days in a regular classroom in Tier 1 of the RTI model, and some of these didactics activities are implemented in Tiers 2 and 3 of the model.

Analysis

In order to analyze the findings obtained for the three components of reading fluency, we selected three charts.

Firstly, reading "accuracy" was measured using the chart validated by Fuchs, Fuchs, Deno (1982); Leslie and Caldwell (1995), as well equally Gillet and Temple (2000), and Rasinski and Padak (2005). Accuracy is measured by calculating the student's mistake rate in relation to the number of words read. The 3 levels of accuracy range from "frustration level" (less than 92% success rate) to "functional level" (92 to 98% success charge per unit) to "independent level" (99 to 100% success rate). The near recent nautical chart by Rasinski and Padak (2005) follows criteria based on current texts: the educatee should exist able to identify 95% of the words in the text with accurateness, and below 92%, the text is likewise challenging.

Here are the charts used to assess fluency in terms of reading accuracy (Gillet and Temple, 2000; Rasinski and Padak, 2005; Rasinski, 2010).

Independent Level 99 to 100% success  rate: is  able to read independently , without any  help
Functional Level 92‒98% success rate: is able to read with help
Frustration Level Less than 92% success charge per unit: has reading difficulties, even with help

Tabular array one. Accuracy Levels as per Rasinski and Padak (2005)

Secondly, in club to analyze the reading "speed" or "charge per unit", we used Hasbrouck and Tindal's chart (2006). This chart was previously used in many studies, including those of Deno, Mirkin and Chiang (1982); Fuchs, Fuchs and Maxwell (1988); Marston (1989), as well as Rasinski and Padak (2005). Hasbrouck and Tindal's chart (2006) allows u.s. to rank students by grade level and according to the season of the year, by revealing their percentile rank and providing information on the progress fabricated in terms of the number of words per minute that the educatee should attain each week.

RTI table 2

Table two. Reading Fluency Norms as per Hasbrouck and Tindal (2006)

Thirdly, in order to analyze reading expression or prosody, we used a chart from the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP, 1995). It allows us to rank students at one of 4 levels, starting with level i, where the student reads give-and-take past word, up to level 4, where the pupil has functional reading skills. This chart was so designed to appraise Class iv students through a reading test. To this day, a number of authors are all the same using this chart: Kuhn, (2009); Padak (2008), Rasinski, (2010), Kuhn and Rasinski (2011).

Level 1 The student primarily reads word by word and occasionally two or three words consecutively. Reads without expression or intonation. Has difficulty reading.
Level ii The student primarily reads 2 words at a fourth dimension, and occasionally 3 or 4 words. Has trouble reading groups of words. Piffling or no intonation and expression.
Level three The student primarily reads 3 or iv words and sometimes more. Syntax is adequate in nigh sentences. Parts of the text are read with expression and intonation.
Level 4 The student reads functionally by groups of words and occasionally makes mistakes, but the structure is maintained. About of the text is read with expression and intonation. Reads orally with ease.

Tabular array 3. Levels of Expression (National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 1995).

Presentation of Findings

The findings will be presented in 2 stages for the purpose of meeting our ii enquiry goals, namely, comparing the results obtained in the experimental group with those obtained in the control group, and describing and analyzing student progress in the experimental group in the three tiers of the RTI model.

Comparing the Results Obtained in the Experimental Group with Those Obtained in the Control Group

Figure 2:  Comparison of Pre-test and Post-test Results of the Experimental Group with Those of the Control Group for the Three Components of Reading Fluency.  

Figure ii:  Comparison of Pre-exam and Post-examination Results of the Experimental Group with Those of the Command Group for the Three Components of Reading Fluency.

As shown in Figure two, an improvement in reading rate was noted on average for principal Grade 2 students. Information technology can be seen that the number of words that the students read correctly per minute went from 34.5 in the pre-test to 78.4 in the post-exam, which represents an increment of 44 words per minute. According to Hasbrouck and Tindal's chart (2006) in Table 2, the expected progress for the duration of the education activity program, i.eastward., 32 weeks, should have been 38.4 words per minute. In addition, it should be noted that the experimental group initially had more exceptional students than the control group. In fact, the gap betwixt the 2 groups can already be seen in the pre-test results.

In terms of accuracy, the results indicate an average gap betwixt the pre-exam and the mail service-test. The students' accurateness charge per unit rose from 86.viii% to 96.ix% from the pre-test to the postal service-test, for an boilerplate increase of 10.1%. At pre-test, the resulting boilerplate placed the Form 2 students at the frustration level (Tabular array 1), whereas at post-test, the results ranked them at the functional level. It is worth noting that these results were statistically pregnant for the experimental group.

In terms of expression or prosody, at pre-examination, the results placed the students at level 1 for expression, where students mainly read word by word, and reading is laborious and difficult. At mail service-exam, the results placed the students at level iii, where students are able to read several words at a fourth dimension while reading the text with expression. This represents a significant gain for these students.

Results Obtained by Tier of the RTI Model for Form 2 Students

Figure 3:  Comparison of Pre-test and Post-test Results of the Experimental Group for the Three Components of Reading Fluency in the Three Tiers of the RTI Model.  

Figure three:  Comparison of Pre-exam and Post-test Results of the Experimental Group for the Iii Components of Reading Fluency in the 3 Tiers of the RTI Model.

As shown in Effigy 3, with regard to the "speed" component, all students made great strides regardless of the RTI model tier. However, it can be seen that the Tier two students stood out and improved by 49.1 words per minute.

For the "accuracy" component in Tier i, the students' results went from 92.iii% to 97.viii% from the pre-test to the post-examination, representing a five.5% increase, allowing the students to accomplish the functional level. The results of the Tier 2 students increased from 72.9% to 97.seven% from the pre-test to the mail-test, thus an average increase of 24.8%, as well enabling the students to reach the functional level, whereas they were initially below the frustration level.

For the "expression" or "prosody" components, one can meet that the students in the three tiers made gains respective to one level, enabling them to access the adjacent level. These are significant gains every bit the students are in Course 2 and fluency is showtime to be acquired.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the results show that the development and testing of the didactics activity programme were beneficial. This program volition be able to contribute to enriching the teaching of reading fluency. It should be emphasized that the program is piece of cake to implement in regular classrooms and requires no specific materials, which could be an influential cistron in increasing instructor back up for the program. The implementation of this teaching action program in new schools, particularly in Grade 2 at the primary level, could have positive brusk- and medium-term effects on the prevention of learning difficulties in reading in club to foster fluency, i.e., reading with speed, accuracy and prosody in gild to understand the text (Allington, 2009).

At the terminate of the teaching activity trial plan, the results obtained showed positive effects on the three reading fluency components among the Class 2 pupil participants, at the iii tiers of the RTI model. More pronounced effects were obtained at Tiers 2 and 3 of the RTI model. In addition, the students obtained statistically significant results for the "accuracy" component. Let u.s. call back that the teaching action trial program proposed in this project was beneficial for all students regardless of whether they take reading difficulties. Withal, it was the Tier ii and Tier 3 students who made the most progress, for the three components of reading fluency.

References

Allington, R. L. (2009). What really matters in response to intervention: Research-based designs. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.

Bissonnette, South., Richard, M., Gauthier, C., and Bouchard, C. (2010). Quelles sont les stratégies d'enseignement efficaces favorisant les apprentissages fondamentaux auprès des élèves en difficulté de niveau élémentaire? Résultats d'une méga-analyse. Revue de recherche appliquée sur fifty'apprentissage, 3 (1), ane–35.

Block, C. C., Parris, S. R., and Whiteley, C. S. (2008). CPMs: A kinesthetic comprehension strategy. The Reading Teacher, 61, 460–470.

Brown, Due south. (2007). La lecture partagée. Montréal: Chenelière Éducation.

Chard, D. J., Vaughn, South., and Tyler, B. J. (2002). A synthesis of enquiry on effective interventions for building reading fluency with unproblematic students with learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 35(5), 386–406.

Deeney, T. (2010). One-infinitesimal fluency measures: Mixed passages in assessment and educational activity. The Reading Teacher, 63(6), 440–450.

Deno, S. Fifty., Mirkin, P. K., and Chiang, B. (1982). Identifying valid measures of reading. Exceptional children, 49(one), 36–45.

Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., and Deno, Due south. 50. (1982). Reliability and validity of curriculum-based informal reading inventories. Reading inquiry quarterly, 18(1), half dozen–26.

Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., and Maxwell, 50. (1988). The validity of informal measures of reading comprehension. Remedial and Special Didactics, 9(2), 20–28.

Fuchs, D., Fuchs, Fifty. Southward., and Vaughn, South. (2008). Response to intervention: A framework for reading educators. Newark, DE: International Reading Association.

Giasson, J. (2003). La lecture : De la théorie à la pratique 2e édition. Montreal: Gaétan Morin.

Giasson, J. (2011). La lecture : Apprentissage et difficultés. Montreal, Quebec: Gaétan Morin.

Gillet, J. Due west., and Temple, C. (2000). Understanding reading problems (fifth ed.). New York: Longman.

Hasbrouck, J.E., Ihnot, C., and Rogers, G.H. (1999). "Read Naturally": A strategy to increase oral reading fluency. Reading Research and Instruction, 39(ane), 27–37.

Hasbrouck, J. E., and Tindal, G. (1992). Curriculum-based oral reading fluency norms for students in grades 2 through five. Teaching Exceptional Children, 24(3), 41–44.

Hoffman, J.V. (1991). Teacher and schoolhouse effects in Learning to read. In R. Ban, K. Kamel, P. Mosenthal and P.D. Pearson (eds). Handbook of Reading Research, vol. 2, 911–950.

Hattie, J., and Timperley, H. (2007). The Ability of Feedback. Review of Educational Research,77, (one), 81–112.

Hernandez, D.J. (2011). How Tertiary-Form Reading Skills and Poverty Influence High School Graduation. ERIC: ED518818.

Jenkins, J.R., Fuchs, 50.S., van den Broek, P., Espin, C., and Deno, L. (2003). Sources of individual differences in reading comprehension and reading fluency. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95(4), p. 719–729.

Kuhn, M.R., and Stahl, S.A. 2003. Fluency: A review of developmental and remedial practices. The Journal of Educational Psychology, 95, 3–21.

Kuhn, M. R. (2009). The hows and whys of fluency instruction. Boston University, PA: Pearson

Kuhn, M. R. (2011). Fluency: A review of developmental and remedial practices. In R. Fifty. Allington and A. McGill-Franzen (Eds.), Handbook of reading disability research (p. 307–314). New York, NY: Taylor and Francis.

Leslie, L., and Caldwell, J. (1995). Qualitative reading inventory-II. Boston: Longman.

Ministère de l'Éducation, du Loisir et du Sport (MELS) [Ministry of Education, Leisure, and Sports]. (2005). Apprendre à lire - Activity concertée cascade le soutien à la recherche en lecture. Québec: Gouvernement du Québec.

Ontario Ministry building of Education (2007). Guide d'enseignement de la littératie de la 4e à la 6e année, Authorities of Ontario.

National Assessment of Instruction Progress (2002). Per centum of students, oral reading fluency scale level. (http://nces.Ed.gouv/nationsreportcard/studies/fluency.asp).

National Reading Panel (2000). Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction. Washington, DC: U.S. Regime Printing Office.

O'Connor, R. East., Harty, K. R., and Fulmer, D. (2005). Tiers of intervention in kindergarten through tertiary course. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 38(6), 532–538.

Padak, N., and Rasinski, T. (2008). Fast start: Getting ready to read. New York, NY: Scholastic.

Peebles, J. 50. (2007). Incorporating motion with fluency instruction: A motivation for struggling readers. The Reader Teacher, 6, 578–581.

Pressley, K., Gaskins, I., and Fingeret, L. (2006). Instruction and development of reading fluency in struggling readers. In S.J. Samuels and A.E. Farstrup (Eds.), What inquiry has to say most fluency education (47–69). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.

Rasinski, T. 5. (1990). Investigating measures of reading fluency. Educational Inquiry Quarterly, fourteen(3), 37–44.

Rasinski, T. V. (2002). Speed does thing in reading. The Reading Teacher, 54(2), 146–151.

Rasinski, T. 5. (2003). Parental involvement: Central to leaving no child behind in reading. The New England Reading Clan Journal, 39(3), ane–v.

Rasinski, T., Flexer, C., and Szypulski, T. (2006). The audio of learning. Why self-amplification matters. Harebrain. Minneapolis.

Rasinski, T.V., and Padak, N. (2005). Three-infinitesimal reading assessments: Word recognition, fluency, and comprehension (Gr. 1-–4). New York: Scholastic.

Rasinski, T.V., Blachowicz, C., and Lems, K. (2006). Fluency pedagogy: research-based best practices. New York: Guilford Publications.

Rasinski, T.V. (2010). The fluent reader: Oral and silent reading strategies for building word recognition, fluency, and comprehension (2nd ed.). New York: Scholastic.

Réseau canadien de recherche sur le langage et l'alphabétisation (Canadian Language and Literacy Enquiry Network). (2009). Pour united nations enseignement efficace de la lecture et de l'écriture : une trousse d'intervention appuyée par la recherche. (Translation of Foundations for literacy: an evidence-based toolkit for the effective reading and writing instructor) Ottawa.

Smith, J. W. A., and Elley, W. B. (1997). How children learn to write. Katonah, NY: Richard C. Owen.

Therrien, W. J. (2004). Fluency and Comprehension Gains as a Outcome of Repeated Reading. Remedial and Special Education, 25, 252–261.

Vaughn S., and Fuchs LS. (2003). Redefining learning disabilities every bit inadequate response to instruction: The promise and potential problems. Learning Disabilities Enquiry & Practice, 18,137–146.

Vaughn, S., and Klingner, J.K. (2007). Overview of the three-tier model of reading intervention. In D.H. Haager, S. Vaughn, and J. 1000. Klinger (Eds.), Evidence-based reading practices for response to intervention (three–ix). Baltimore: Brookes.

Immature, C., and Rasinski, T. (2009). Implementing readers theatre equally an approach to classroom fluency didactics. The Reading Instructor, 63(1), 4–13.