Repeated Reading and CBM-R PPT

Submitted by Sandy Toothaker
SPY 620: Introduction to Multi-Tier Systems of Support
December 2013
1

 Reading fluency is the ability to read text accurately,
quickly, and with good expression so that time can be
allocated to the understanding of what is read. (Meyer
& Felton, 1999)
3

 David LaBerge and Jay Samuels (1974) were the first
psychologists to design a model of automaticity in
reading. They argued that lower-level microskills (letter-
sound knowledge, letter combinations, and meaning of
words and their connections) needed to be automatic to
allow the reader the more complex comprehension skills.
 Dahl (1974) and Samuels (1985) developed the Repeated
Reading technique where students would read a level
appropriate passage over until a particular rate of words
per minute (wpm) was achieved.
 Their thoughts were that the repeated reading would
increase the student’s fluency and that fluency
contributes to comprehension.
4

 A variation of the technique, Assisted Repeated
Reading (ARR) was later developed. (Bowers, 1993;
Young, Bowers, & MacKinnon, 1996) In ARR, the
student reads along with a fluent reader. Therefore,
increasing phrasing, expression, and speed.
 Repeated Reading is a technique that would be
appropriate to utilize with all grade levels and with
students from diverse, economic, racial, linguistic,
religious, cultural, and ability backgrounds .
 Repeated Reading would be appropriate for Tiers one
through three in a MTSS.
5

 Teachers could train themselves on the repeated
reading procedures through online research or by
purchasing The Power of Repeated Reading in Small-
Group Instruction by Wendie Bramwell and Brooke
Graham Doyle (July 1, 2008)
 Amazon.com $9.99 Kindle Edition
 Scholastic.com $8 e-book/$12.74 book
 The principles could be utilized with all
Grades.
6

 Choral reading; Students read in unison
 Tape/computer assisted reading; Student practice reads in
unison with the use of a tape/computer.
 Partner (paired) reading; Students are homogeneously paired.
They take turns reading a passage three times to each other. The
non reader assists with errors.
 Readers Theatre; Students are able to practice their individual
parts to prepare for either a final reading or performance.
 Echo reading; A teacher models fluent reading while reading a
short passage. When the teacher stops, the student then reads
the short passage back to the teacher.
 Timed Reading; Individual students practice read a passage
while timing themselves in an effort to increase their time as
they read a passage multiple times.
7

 Fluent reading aids comprehension (National Institute of Child
Health and Human Development (NICHD), 2000). The goal of
the Family Fluency Program was to heighten the awareness of
parents, children, and teachers concerning the important roles
they collectively play in literacy development (Mandel Morrow,
Kuhn, Schwanenflugel, 2006). The purpose of the Fluency-
Oriented Reading Instruction (FORI) was to identify effective
procedures for teaching reading with a focus on fluency training
(Kuhn & Stahl, 2003). The study took place over five years, in
two elementary school districts in southeastern U.S. and one in
the northeast. There were a total of 376 children involved in the
study. The participants that will be discussed are the students
from the school in northeast that were tracked for one year.
There were a total of 115 participants. Students were placed into
two groups; three classes in repeated reading groups and three
classes in a control group. There were 62 students in the
treatment group. The remainder of the students was placed into
the control group.
9

 The median age for both groups was seven years and six months. Both
groups utilized a basal reading program. The lessons were similar, with
exception to the treatment group receiving more guidance in their
reading lessons. Teachers would introduce the story and new
vocabulary, taking time to build schema, as well as have students take
part in repeated reading of the story. The Gray Oral Reading Test,
Fourth Edition (GORT-4) was utilized for pre and post tests. During
the study, students in the treatment group were sent home with the
basal reader to practice read with their parents. Also, their parents
were invited to three parent meetings discussing the importance of
fluency, describing the school program and teaching parents of ways
they could support their children’s fluency development. The results
of the study confirmed that scaffolding reading lessons and parent
involvement are beneficial to students. At the end of the study, a
survey was given to all participants, teachers and parents from the
treatment group. The survey results showed positive results. The
fluency methods utilized in this study would be appropriate for tier
one and two of response to intervention.
10

 Reading difficulties often continue beyond the primary
grades when students are expected to transition from
learning to read to reading to learn. The objective in this
study was to examine the necessity of passage repetition
within the Re-read-Adapt and Answer-Comprehend
(RAAC). Thirty students from a rural elementary school, in
Southeast Iowa, were chosen to participate in the study
through the school’s response to intervention criteria.
Students were randomly assigned to the repeated reading
or non repeated reading conditions. Pre and post data was
collected through DIBELS Oral Reading Fluency (DORF)
and Woodcock-Johnson III (WJ-III). 11

 Paraprofessionals were trained to facilitate the lessons. Intervention
took place for fifty 15 minute sessions over a four month time frame.
Students in the RAAC intervention with repeated reading began by
reading a passage as quickly as they could while still paying close
attention to understanding the passage. Once they completed the
passage, they were asked to read aloud generic story element questions.
Then, the student reread the passage aloud until they met the
predetermined criteria for correct words per minute (CWPM). After
each reading, the teacher would provide corrective feedback on errors
and fluency. After the student either mastered the reading of the text
or read the text four times, the student was asked to answer four factual
and four inferential questions about the text. If the student met the
CWPM criteria, they were started on a text that was a grade level higher
and continued on with the lesson in the same manner. If they didn’t
meet the criteria the text level was lowered by one grade level.
Students in the RAAC intervention without passage repetition followed
the same steps; however, instead of rereading passages they read the
passage once and moved onto a new passage.
12

 Post tests revealed that both groups of students made
significant gains in reading fluency and general reading
achievement reaffirming the importance of formative
feedback. The researchers noted that they’d like to see
further research done with a no treatment control group,
examination of repetitive and non repetitive reading
fluency interventions and another reading comprehension
measure utilized between conditions. The further research
will help to determine when and with who repeated
reading interventions may be necessary (Therrien, Kirk,
Woods-Groves 2012). The methods discussed in this study
would be appropriate for tier two and three of response to
intervention.
13

 Ring, Barefoot, Avrit, Brown and Black (2013) examined the
effects of word and text-level instruction to repeated
reading in a Tier II level of RTI for reading intervention
through a cluster-randomized trial. 80+ students were
selected to receive small group instruction by 25 classroom
teachers; approximately half focused on text-level
instruction and the remainder focused on word-level
instruction. Students received 30 minutes of instruction
for 3 to 4 days per week for approximately 3 months. The
word-level instruction group utilized the program Rite
Flight, which focused on target phonics concepts,
randomized lists of repeated words, sight words and short
phrases from text. The text-level group utilized the
program Read Naturally, which included grade-leveled
stories.
14

 Students began reading at a text that they could read at
approximately 60 words per minute and continued
practicing the text through re-readings with their
instructor or with a recorded reading. The goal was for the
students to increase their reading rate by approximately 30
words above their initial reading placement and move onto
the next grade-level text. Both programs showed gains in
reading fluency. The authors feel more research is needed
to ascertain the best combination of instruction and
assessment to accommodate the instructional needs of non
fluent students. The methods in this study would be
appropriate for tier one and two of response to
intervention.
15

 The CBM was developed in the late 1970’s by Stanley L.
Deno, Professor of Educational Psychology, at University
of Minnesota.
 In 1985, the CBM was field-tested at the Pine County
Special Education Cooperative in Minnesota. Since that
time, the CBM has been supported by the U.S. Dept. of
Education and has been the measurement and assessment
tool of choice in numerous federally funded studies,
http://www.cehd.umn.edu/research/highligts/CBM.
 Since the mid 1980’s, CBM has been developed to measure
student progress in reading, math, early literacy, spelling,
and writing.
16

 Curriculum Based Measure-Reading (CBM-R) is an individual
Oral Reading Fluency (ORF) assessment for grades one to 12 that
can be administered in real-time browser based scoring or paper
and pencil. Assessments are one to four minutes in length.
 The CBM-R is available in English and Spanish and can be
utilized to assess students with disabilities.
 There are 23 grade level test probes for first grade and 33 grade
level test probes for grades two through eight. National Norms
extend to grade 12 with the eighth grade probes.
 CBM-R assessments are available through NCS, Pearson, Inc.
Their latest publication is fall 2013.
 The cost of CBM-R is $4 per student/per year.
 On –site training is available for up to 30 participants for $4,500.
 The CBM-R would be appropriate for students with diverse ,
economic, racial, linguistic, religious, and cultural backgrounds.
17

 Student reads aloud from a grade level passage for one
minute.
 Errors are recorded (mispronunciations, substitutions,
omissions, or words read out of sequence) that the student
doesn’t self correct within three seconds.
 During universal screening, students are administered
three grade level probes and the median score is utilized to
measure academic progress.
 CBM-R can be utilized for universal screening of all
students three times per year.
 Probes are also designed to be used for progress
monitoring more frequently with at risk students.
18

 The CBM-R may not be appropriate for students with
certain speech impairments (stuttering) , hearing
impairments that need to use sign language for their
only means of communication and/or certain vision
impairments prevent the student from seeing the
assessment.
19

 Purpose: To examine CBM-R and CBM-mR slopes across grades utilizing the
bivariate latent growth modeling (blgm), advanced statistical approach.
Method: 1528 third through eighth grade general and special education
students, 770 girls/758 boys from two elementary and three middle schools in
rural southeastern U.S.
 -School one utilized Scott Foresman (2004) reading instructional materials for
students in Kindergarten through grade five.
 -School two utilized Wilson Reading Foundations for Students in grades three
through five.
 -School three utilized Scott Foresman (2004) reading instructional materials
for grades five through eight.
 -Schools four and five utilized Scott Foresman (2004) reading instructional
materials for grades six through eight.
 Ethnic breakdown: 94.4% caucasian, 3.3% hispanic, 1.5% African American,
0.5% Asian, and 0.3% Native American.
 9.3% of students received special education services under an individualized
educational plan (IEP).
 1.33% of students were ELL students.
 54.7% of students were eligible for free or reduced lunch. 21

 Measures:-Four standardized AIMSweb measures (CBM-R, CBM-mR, CBM-WE
(Written Expression) and M-CBM (Math) probes) were collected on all students in
grades three through eight. The CBM-R measures number of words correctly identified
in one minutes. The CBM-mR, a multiple choice cloze task, measures number of words
circled correctly within three minutes.
 -Tennessee Comprehensive Assessment Program (TCAP) standardized test was
administered to students in grade three through eight each spring. This test measures
skills in Reading, Language Arts, Mathematics, Science and Social Studies.
Accommodations are made for special education and ELL students.
 Data Collection: CBM-R and CBM-mR passages were administered to all students three
times a year to individual students. Each CBM-R score represented the median score of
three grade-level passages.
 Data Analysis: Latent Growth Modeling was utilized to test the proposed growth
models.
 -Univariate LGM was used to examine whether growth trajectories from the fall to spring
are a linear trend.
 -Bivariate LGM allowed the researchers to examine multiple growth processes
simultaneously was utilized to estimate the growth parameters in the CBM-R and CBM-
mR.
22

 Results: Overall, the mean level of both CBM-R and CBM-mR
increased in all cases, with exception for CBM-mR at Grades 4,6, and 8.
The magnitudes of correlation coefficients for CBM-R were generally
more robust (ranging from .89 to .96) than those of the CBM-mR
(ranging from .59 to .81). In reviewing the correlation coefficients
between the CBM-R and CBM-mR for the Fall, winter and spring
assessments, it was found that the outcome was positive and significant
(ranging from .58 to .77). This shows that there were modest to
moderate associations between the CBM-R and CBM-mR.

Conclusion: This study indicated that with BLGM, the CBM-R and
CBM-mR slopes aren’t correlated. Some limitations are noted within
this study; results are unique to one state located within the
Southeastern United States, this study is limited to examining the two
CBM assessment slopes, the correlation coefficients for CBM-mR,
which indicate stability, weren’t good, CBM has only been utilized in
basic academic skills ie. math and written expression, and a linear
growth shape was the only shape that could be evaluated considering
only three data points per grade were recorded.
23

 The purpose of this study was to estimate rate of growth
within seasons for general and special education
populations, evaluate whether CBM-R rate of growth will
be consistent throughout the academic year, and test the
hypothesis that the seasonal effect is typically
characterized by more growth in the fall than in the spring.
 A total of 4824 participants (52% males, 48% female) in
second through sixth grades, from seven elementary
schools in rural and suburban Midwest. Participants
included: 94% white, 2% Native American, 2% Asian or
Pacific Islander, 1% Hispanic, 1% Black. 31% of participants
received free or reduced lunch and 8% received special
education services.
24

 All students were assessed using CBM-R probes every fall,
winter, and spring for each year of the study. Data was
collected from 2001 to 2005.
 Individuals were trained for an hour, which was followed by
a session of competency.
 The average of growth was positive for all conditions across
the seasons, grade levels and populations.
 Study limitations were as follows: participants were all
from one midwestern state, students were only assessed
three times per year, as opposed to monthly or weekly and
the assessments were given according to a given month, as
opposed to a certain date.
25

 Christ, Van Norman, Zopluoglu 2013, sought to determine
the effects of baseline value on estimates of trend in CBM-
R data. They hypothesized baseline estimation procedures
that utilized the median of three days observations would
improve the reliability, validity, and precision of growth
estimates compared with using a single or median score of
three observations. The authors used longitudinal
modeling to examine the rate of change in ORF by
evaluating the relationship between time and wrcm. Three
CBM-R probes were administered the first three days of the
school week. Then, one probe was administered each week
for the duration of the progress monitoring; ranging from
six to 20 days.
26

 There were 1517 second grade participants and 1561 third grade
participants. There were close to 46% female, 2% special
education, 53% White, 17% Black, 8% Hispanic/Latino, 6%
Asian/Pacific Islander, and 2% American Indian/Alaska Native
across the group of participants. Students involved in the study
were part of a Tier two reading intervention group. There were
four independent variables that were manipulated in the study;
baseline estimate, residual variance, duration of progress
monitoring, and whether the first observation systematically
underestimated performance. Considering baseline estimates,
three were calculated using one day observations and two were
calculated using three days, nine observations, of data collection.
The procedures for the one day of data collection were mean,
median, and the first observation. The procedures for the three
days of data collection used mean and median value of the nine
observations.
27

 Validity was checked by verifying that simulated
estimates of growth were approximately 1.50 wrcm per
week across the conditions. In conclusion, increasing
the duration of progress monitoring and the quality of
datasets improved the reliability, validity and precision
of the estimates of growth. Collecting numerous
observations to estimate the baseline for CBM-R
progress monitoring may not be in the best interest of
time. The findings of this study show the importance
of utilizing more than one observation to estimate the
baseline.
28

29
Considering an RTI Three-Tier Model, Repeated Reading
could be applied to Tiers One through Three to increase
reading fluency and the CBM-R could be utilized in Tier
One to verify effectiveness of instruction, Tier two and
Three to check and adjust interventions.

 Journal Articles:
 Christ, T. J., Silberglitt, B., Yeo, S., & Cormier, D. (2010). Curriculum-based
measurement of oral reading: an evaluation of growth rates and seasonal
effects among students served in general and special education. School
Psychology Review, 39(3), 447-462.
 Mandel Morrow, L., Kuhn, M. R., & Schwanenfluegel, P. J. (2006). The
family fluency program. The Reading Program, 60(4), 322-333.
 Ring, J. J., Barefoot, , L. C., Avrit, K. J., Brown, S. A., & Black, J. L. (2013).
Reading fluency instruction for students at risk for reading failure.
Remedial and Special Education, 34(2), 102-112.
 Therrien, W. J., Kirk, J. F., & Woods-Grove, S. (2012). Comparison of a
reading fluency intervention with and without passage repetition on
reading achievement. Remedial and Special Education, 33(5), 309-319.
 Van Norman, E. R., Christ, T. J., & Zopluoglu, C. (2013). The effects of
baseline estimation on the reliability, validity, and precision of cbm-r
growth estimates. School Psychology Quarterly, 28(3), 239-255. doi:
10.1037/spq0000023
30

 Journal articles (continued)
 Yeo, S., Fearrington, J. Y., & Christ, T. J. (2012). Relation between cbm-r adn cbm-mr
slopes: an application of latent growth modeling. Assessment for Effective
Intervention, 37(3), 147-158.
 Websites
 Cox, J. (n.d.). Develop reading fluency and comprehension with repeated reading. Retrieved
from http://k6educators.about.com/od/ReadingStrategies/a/Repeated-Reading-Fluency-
Strategy.htm
 Deno, S. L. (2005, October). Curriculum-based measurement (cbm): student
assessment. Retrieved from http://www.cehd.umn.edu/research/highlights/CBM/
 Pearson, Inc, N. (2012). Reading curriculum-based measurement. Retrieved from
http://www.aimsweb.com/wp-content/uploads/R-CBM-Admin_Scoring-
Guide_2.0.pdf
 Structured repeated reading. (n.d.). Retrieved from
http://www.aea267.k12.ia.us/english-language-arts/reading/fluency/structured-
repeated-reading/
31

Repeated Reading and CBM-R PPT

More Related Content

What's hot (20)

Similar to Repeated Reading and CBM-R PPT (20)

Repeated Reading and CBM-R PPT

Editor's Notes