4. PIONEER SCHOOL
“THIS IS AN OLD PHOTO OF THE ONE ROOM SCHOOL DR.
ALLINGTON ATTENDED. IT WAS PIONEER ELEMENTARY
SCHOOL 10 MILES OUTSIDE OF CEDAR SPRINGS, MI. THIS
PHOTO SHOWS THE “IMPROVED” BUILDING, WITH THE
BATHROOM AND FURNACE ROOM ADDITION TO THE BACK.
IT HAD A WOOD STOVE AND AN OUTHOUSE WHEN DR.
ALLINGTON BEGAN SCHOOL.”
-DR. ALLINGTON’S WEBSITE:
TEACHERSREAD.NET
6. 1965-1973
1965–1968, B.A., Western Michigan University,
Social Science/Elementary Education
1968–1969, Classroom Teacher, Grade 4/5, Kent
City Schools, MI
1968–1969, M.A., Western Michigan University,
Reading Education
1969–1972, Title I Director/reading teacher,
Belding Area Schools, MI (poor, rural district)
1969–1973, Ph.D., Michigan State University,
Elementary and Special Education
1971–1973, Graduate Assistant and Lecturer,
Michigan State
7. 1973-1981
1973–1978, Assistant Professor/Teaching and
Research, State University of New York at
Albany
1974, Outstanding Dissertation Award,
International Reading Association
1976, Visiting Professor/Teaching, University of
Minnesota
1978–1981, Associate Professor/Teaching and
Research, State University of New York at
Albany
8. 1981-1989
1981, Visiting Professor/Teaching, Eastern
Montana College
1982–1988, Chair, Department of Reading, State
University of New York at Albany
1987–1989, Director, Center for Teaching
Effectiveness, State University of New York at
Albany
9. 1989-1996
1989–1999, Professor, Teaching and Research,
University at Albany
1990, co-recipient (with Dr. Anne McGill-
Franzen) of the Albert J. Harris Award for
contributions to improving professional
understanding of reading/learning disabilities
1995, inducted into the International Reading
Association Reading Hall of Fame
1995-1996, President of National Reading
Conference
10. 1995-2004
1995–1999, Chair, Department of Reading &
Senior Research Scientist National Research
Center for English Learning and Achievement
University at Albany
2000–2004, Fien Distinguished Professor of
Education, University of Florida
11. 2005-PRESENT
2005-2006, President of International
Reading Association
2005- Present, Professor of Education at the
University of Tennessee
2007, received the William S. Gray Citation of
Merit from IRA for his contributions to the
organization and the profession
15. THE6TSOFEFFECTIVE
ELEMENTARYLITERACY
INSTRUCTION
Time
Texts
Teach
Talk
Tasks
Test
Time Read and write for ½
the school day
Texts Reading experiences
where students have a
high level of accuracy,
fluency, comprehension
Teach Direct, explicit
demonstrations and
strategy models
Talk More student talk
(student-student,
student-teacher
Tasks Longer assignments
Test Student work based on
effort and improvement
not just achievement
17. YOUCAN’TLEARNMUCH
FROMBOOKSYOUCAN’T
READ
Too few schools offer remediation for
older readers (grades 5-12)
The average classroom is using
textbooks written two or more years
above grade level of students
What exemplary teachers do:
Create a multi-sourced, multi-leveled
curriculum
Did not rely on traditional area textbooks
Offered students choices to show what
they had learned
Tailored instruction to meet students
needs
18. INTERVENTIONALLDAYLONG:
NEWHOPEFORSTRUGGLING
READERS
Key words: Intervention,
textbooks, struggling readers, all
day
Purpose: To evaluate a way that
we can provide intervention to meet
the needs of struggling readers
Perspective: Natural Learning
Social Constructivism
Methodology: Quantitative and
Qualitative (through student
observation)
19. INTERVENTIONALLDAYLONG:
NEWHOPEFORSTRUGGLING
READERS
Struggling readers need books they
can read accurately, fluently, with
strong comprehension in their
hands all day long
Reader-Text Match Tool
Lesson Delivery Tracking Sheet
To reflect how groups of students are
organized during classroom lessons
21. ACTIVITY
For each text take a
running record,
calculate wcpm, %
accuracy, evaluate
fluency, and record on
padlet at
http://is.gd/EDUC802b
107 wcpm (Hasbrouck &
Tindal, 2006)
For each room record
instructional format,
calculate % whole
class for each room,
record on padlet
Watch Videos Watch Videos
23. ACTIVITY
For each text take a
running record,
calculate wcpm, %
accuracy, evaluate
fluency, and record on
padlet at
http://is.gd/EDUC802b
For each room record
instructional format,
calculate % whole
class for each room,
record on padlet
Watch Videos Watch Videos
25. ACTIVITY
For each text take a
running record,
calculate wcpm, %
accuracy, evaluate
fluency, and record on
padlet at
http://is.gd/EDUC802b
For each room record
instructional format,
calculate % whole
class for each room,
record on padlet
Watch Videos Watch Videos
26. SCHOOLRESPONSETOREADING
FAILURE:INSTRUCTIONFOR
CHAPTER1ANDSPECIAL
EDUCATIONSTUDENTSINGRADES
TWO,FOUR,ANDEIGHT
Research Question:
What is the quantity (amount) of literacy
instruction for special education students
as compared to Chapter 1 students?
What is the quality (nature) of literacy
instruction for special education and
Chapter 1 students?
Perspective: Mental Discipline;
Information Processing; Social
constructivism
Methodology: Ethnographic study,
Observation of students (qualitative
and quantitative), face to face
interviews of teachers
Allington, R. L., & McGill-Franzen, A. (1989). School
response to reading failure: Instruction for chapter one
and special education students in grades two, four, and
eight. Elementary School Journal,89(5), 529-42.
27. SCHOOLRESPONSETOREADING
FAILURE:INSTRUCTIONFOR
CHAPTER1ANDSPECIAL
EDUCATIONSTUDENTSINGRADES
TWO,FOUR,ANDEIGHT
Method:
Participants: 64 students in grades
2, 4, 8 from Chapter 1 and Special
Education (20 matched pairs +)
Materials: Instructional setting, time
Data Collection and Analysis:
observation with ‘Student Observation
Instrument’ –coding lesson, program,
grouping, group size, format, and
instructor over time; field notes
Major Findings:
Chapter 1 had 35 minutes more
reading/language arts instruction in
regular education classroom than
special education
Special education teachers provided
less active teaching and more seat
work than Chapter 1 or regular
education teachers
29. ASTUDYOFEFFECTIVE
FIRST-GRADELITERACY
INSTRUCTION
Research Question: What are the
characteristics of effective first-
grade literacy instruction?
Perspective: Not one theory,
“multiple instructional components
articulated with one another” p.4,
grounded theory approach, Engaged
Learning
Methodology: Ethnographic
qualitative study; observation by
“privileged observer approach,” face
to face interviews, triangulation (2
observers, 1 interview)
Pressley, M., Wharton-McDonald, R., Allington, R., Block,
C. C., Morrow, L., Tracey, D., Woo, D. (2001). A study
of effective first-grade literacy instruction. Scientific
Studies of Reading, 5(1), 35-58.
30. ASTUDYOFEFFECTIVE
FIRST-GRADELITERACY
INSTRUCTION
Method:
Participants: 30 first grade teachers
in New York, New Jersey, Wisconsin,
Texas, California
Materials: teaching processes,
classroom materials, student
performance and outcomes.
Data collection and analysis:
categories emerged from data
collected, ongoing analysis confirming
or disconfirming conclusions
Collected on most-effective-for-locale and
least-effective-for-locale teachers
List teaching behaviors, categorize, unique
to effective teachers
34. ACTIVITY: ADDRESSING SUMMER
READING SETBACK
As your group
discusses the article,
post your responses to
Methodology
Theory
Subjects
Findings
on the padlet at:
http://is.gd/EDUC802
36. ADDRESSINGSUMMERREADING
SETBACKAMONGECONOMICALLY
DISADVANTAGEDELEMENTARY
STUDENTS
Research Questions:
Does easy access to self-selected books for
summer reading over 3 successive years
limit summer reading setback?
Will the FCAT performance of the
treatment students exceed those of the
control group?
Will the FCAT performance of the free
lunch-eligible students in the treatment
group exceed those of the control group?
Perspective: Engaged Learning;
cognitive processing, sociolinguistic
Methodology: Longitudinal
experimental study, face to face written
survey with oral questions
Allington, R. L., McGill-Franzen, A., Camilli, G.,
Williams, L., Graff, J., Zeig, J., . . . Nowak, R. (2010).
Addressing summer reading setback among
economically disadvantaged elementary students.
Reading Psychology, 31(5), 411-427.
37. ADDRESSINGSUMMERREADING
SETBACKAMONGECONOMICALLY
DISADVANTAGEDELEMENTARY
STUDENTS
Method:
Participants: 852 students from 17
high poverty schools (experimental),
478 students from same schools
(random control)
Material: self-selected trade books 12
per student for each summer
Data Collection and Analysis:
Florida Comprehensive Achievement
Test, Literacy Habits Survey (written)
Major Findings:
Access to books improved outcomes on
FCAT as compared to control (summer
school produced same positive effect)
Larger effects for most economically
disadvantaged students
43. PUBLICATIONS
Published over 100 articles,
chapters, monographs, and
books.
Served or serves on the editorial
advisory boards of:
Reading Research Quarterly
Review of Educational
Research
Journal of Educational
Psychology
Reading Teacher
Elementary School Journal
Journal of Literacy Research
Remedial and Special
Education
This evening we will present … Information about Dr. Allington’s life, six articles focusing on aspects of his research, share activities with you, and some of Richard Allington’s publications.
First- Allington’s life and achievements
Dr. Allington’s academic career began in Michigan where he grew up on a dairy farm. His first school was the one room Pioneer School pictured here from his website- teachersread.net
Richard Allington’s academic career spans almost 5 decades, from 1965 to the present.
Dr. Allington did his undergraduate work at Western Michigan University and taught 4 th and 5 th grades in Kent City Schools Michigan. He quickly discovered the difficulty his students had with reading and began graduate work in reading and special education at Western Michigan and continued with his PhD at Michigan State University.
In 1974 Dr. Allington received the Outstanding Dissertation Award from the International Reading Association for his “An evaluation of the use of color cues to focus attention in discrimination and paired-associate learning” Institution: Michigan State University
Dick Allington moved to the State University of New York at Albany to become the Chair of the Department of Reading
In 1990, Allington and Anne McGill-Franzen received the Albert J. Harris Award In 1995 he was inducted into the IRA Reading Hall of Fame And also was president of the National Reading Conference
He moved to the University of Florida where he was the Fien distinguished professor of Education
In 2005 He was the President of the IRA and moved to the University of Tennessee In 2007 he received the William S. Gray Citation of Merit from the IRA
All of his work aims at helping to accelerate needy readers – (list) We chose 6 articles from Allington’s research studies, book chapters, and journal articles across several of his interests.
The first article…
The third article…
To replicate the data collection in this article, Jackie video taped a student in her school reading for 1 minute out of all the texts in his desk that day. Your handout includes several passages on which you may take an informal running record. For each passage calculate wcpm, % accuracy, and evaluate fluency as Good, Fair, Poor. Enter on padlet at website.
(make sure everyone has the passages, understands the directions, and that the prezi is loaded- show videos as class records and calculates)
Discuss the access to readable texts for this student. How would this impact his learning all day long? To replicate the class observations Jackie recorded 3 rd grade classrooms at various times of the morning and afternoon over a 4/5 day period. As you watch the videos of each room, record whole class, small group, side x side, and calculate % whole class – record on padlet
(make sure all have paper to note on, or padlet up to record on, and understand directions while the prezi is loading)
Discuss results of the classroom observation activity – look at padlet to see numbers for each room and each format as well as % whole group How does this impact at risk third graders’ learning all day long?
Allington has continued to be interested in struggling readers as shown in the 3 articles Eileen shared. 2 federally funded programs with different entering, exiting requirements and different regulations serve similar populations Research Questions… Perspective : Mental Discipline due to time on task; Information Processing because they implied the benefit of explicit instruction; Social Constructivism because of importance of differentiation Methodology : Observed amount and type of instruction coding instructional setting within time (quantitative) field notes (qualitative), and interviews to corroborate data collected
Method: Participants- mix of urban, suburban, rural; other 24 from same district or school/ grade Materials: Data: lesson (language arts, math), program (regular education, Chapter 1), grouping (whole class, sub group), group size (#), format (active teaching, guided work, testing, management, surrogate- computer), instructor (classroom teacher, special ed teacher, assistant) spreadsheet and data software to analyze Findings: Chapter 1 more time Total RLA than special education as well –almost 14 minutes a day
Means Ranges!
Another focus of Allington’s work was effective teaching- research group which studied fourth grade and first grade teachers. research question … Began with just observing and coding the teacher characteristics and behaviors- analyzed for theory and focus- focused observation as time went on. Grounded theory approach - “Thus, although observations at the beginning of the study were open ended, they became more focused as conclusions about a teacher emerged, consistent with grounded theory methods (Strauss & Corbin, 1998) Not one theory: “In general, these outcomes did not support any theory that emphasizes just one particular component (e.g., skills instruction, whole language emphasis) as the key to effective Grade 1 literacy; rather, excellent Grade 1 instruction involves multiple instructional components articulated with one another.” Engaged – motivation, learning context, adjust as child progresses; also behaviorism: positive success oriented; inquiry learning: high level skills, collaboration; metacognitive theory: gradual release of responsibility; social constructivism: zone of proximal development, scaffolding; social learning theory: modelling, self-efficacy
Participants: school principals selected ‘very effective’ teachers and more typical teachers based on effectiveness in promoting student achievement; 15 pairs- researchers evaluated student engagement and quality of student reading and writing to corroborate; later narrowed to most effective and least effective for state = 10 teachers reported out. Data: …221 most effective behaviors narrowed to 103 which appeared in all 5 states and placed into 7 overarching categories Observers: “In doing so, the observers commented on the following: the daily schedule in the class, the nature of reading instruction and the types of reading that occurred, the nature of writing instruction and the types of writing that occurred, how skills development was addressed, the extent and nature of opportunistic teaching, the extent and nature of across-curricular connections, and the methods and effectiveness of classroom management .”
Most effective from all 5 states demonstrated: Classroom management included: coordinated instruction from other adults/paraprof. to insure integrity of curriculum for struggling readers, monitored student reading and book selection Environment : exceptionally positive- no negativity noted Skills/Literature/ Reading writing balance : explicit teaching, modeling, re-teaching in context of ongoing reading and writing activities, reading all day, writing process Accelerating demands- scaffolding: texts, tasks and scaffolding matched student needs – ZoPD Self- regulation: students engaged- ‘lost in their work’ Curriculum: integration
Some least effective also demonstrated the same characteristics and behaviors- the ones demonstrated by ONLY the most effective teachers were: Teaching: opportunistic- at point of need Writing: high demands – process and mechanics; scaffolding in place to reach including class made books
You read the Addressing Summer Reading Setback among economically disadvantaged elementary students article from 2010 by Richard L. Allington, Anne McGill-Franzen, Gregory Camilli, Lunetta Williams, Jennifer Graff, Jacqueline Zeig, Courtney Zmach & Rhonda Nowak Your turn in group…
Show padlet- each group discuss and post responses. Share out for a few minutes- discuss if differences.
From IRA convention- shows fall to spring growth pattern, spring to fall SES difference, increasing gap (use curser to show)
Questions… Perspective – engaged learning due to student choice Lenses – cognitive processing – ‘self-teaching hypotheses’ and volume/ proficiency link; sociolinguistic comparing SES groups; mental discipline – practice and time on task; unfoldment theory – provide books, choice; constructivism/ engagement – authentic texts, choice, variety, purpose; literacy development theory – rich home environment, natural development Methodology …
Participants… Material… Data… Findings…
In comparing the articles we chose- Breadth of topics/ methods/ lenses- theory over the years. Each study lead Allington to another area to study or another way to study the area to refine the information. All relate to struggling readers and all are practitioner friendly.
Most of Allington’s research interests are depicted in these two short clips. This 3 minute clip is about what we know about teaching reading. What are Dr. Allington’s main points about instruction? Discuss
This 2 and a half minute clip is about interventions. How does Dr. Allington’s concept of intervention differ from what is happening in the schools? Discuss- What did you notice about Allington’s political undertones in these two videos?
In addition to being a standard at national conferences, Dr. Allington published… and served or serves…
Some of the books Richard Allington edited recently include Reading to Learn and Learning to Read –the studies of exemplary fourth and first grade teachers; Big Brother and the National Reading Curriculum: How ideology trumped evidence describes how federal mandates impede improved reading instruction and public schools; Schools that work describes effective schools and district and what makes them work while Classrooms that work details what goes on in individual classrooms that is effective; No Quick Fix details how to make literacy programs more effective; The What Really Matters series includes Fluency , Struggling Readers, and Response to Intervention; Essential Readings on Struggling Learners are articles from IRA publications and the Handbook of Reading Disability Research brings together a wide variety of research on causation, assessment and remediation of reading disabilities. His latest work is Summer Reading which compiles the research on summer reading comparing it to summer school effectiveness and comparing its effects on different socioeconomic levels and in different formats. Podcast 13:40 minutes long- on interventions and RtI from IRA
My concept of Dick Allington’s work is that he makes research accessible to the classroom teacher. His work is often elegantly simple, clear, and straightforward. These attributes make it more likely that his studies will be implemented in our schools. Questions?