Formal and Informal Reading Diagnostic Assessments

Formal and Informal Reading Diagnostic Assessments

Critical Analysis

Michael Miller

Fall 2014

Practicum III

Wilmington University

Formal and Informal Reading Diagnostic Assessments

     A students ability to read the English language can be influenced by a number of factors.  While recognizing that students represent a diverse population of varied backgrounds and experiences, teachers must consider a variety of resources to identify the specific factors that are contributing to reading challenges.  No one assessment can fully diagnose the barriers to reading success that a child may be facing.  After careful review of a student’s background, experiences, and prior academic performance, a teacher can then consider a number of specific assessments, including the Slosson Intelligence Test (SIT), Slosson Oral Reading Test (SORT), Basic Reading Inventory (BRI), Wepman’s Auditory Discrimination Test (WADT), Test of Visual Perceptual Skills (TVPS-3), and The Stroop Test.  

     The Slosson Intelligence Test (SIT) is designed to estimate the individual cognitive ability and verbal intelligence of students, mental patients, and/or mentally handicapped individuals.  The test is user friendly, low cost,  and can be administered in a short amount of time, ranging from 15 to 30 minutes.  The test is designed to evaluate vocabulary knowledge, general information, similarities and differences, comprehension, quantitative, and auditory memory across 187 questions categorized by age.  While the test can be administered to individuals with learning disabilities and orthopedic disabilities, it is only applicable to children above age 4 and offers no differentiation past age 18.  Furthermore, because the test is administered orally, it has limited applications across an increasingly diverse student population that speaks multiple languages.  Finally, due to complex academic terminology, an advanced degree is recommended to successfully implement the test, limiting the population that can use it as an assessment tool.  While the Slosson Intelligence Test (SIT) has both it’s strengths and weaknesses, it should only be used as an initial screening tool to determine the need for further diagnostic testing and never to make placement decisions.

     Also designed by Richard Slosson, the Slosson Oral Reading Test (SORT) provides a quick estimate of target word recognition levels and decoding ability in both children and adults.  The SORT is a norm-referenced assessment that provides estimates of grade and age equivalents, standard scores, and national percentiles.  Students are asked to read words in sets of 20 until they are no longer able to do so correctly.    Benefits of the SORT includes its quick and easy administration and availability in Spanish, Braille, and large print.  One of the biggest advantages is the test’s alignment with Common Core State Standards, assuring that performance on the test is a valid indicator of grade level equivalence.  Like the SIT, the SORT has a number of significant disadvantages.  One of the biggest weaknesses is it’s lack of a comprehension component, particularly given the recent push for close reading and text evidence.  Furthermore, the SORT fails to assess the ability to determine grapheme/phoneme relationships and lacks sensitivity for cultural differences.  The Slosson Oral Intelligence Test (SORT) should be used for screening only and combined with observations and additional diagnostic assessments to make deterministic placement decisions.

     Perhaps the most widely used reading diagnostic assessment is the Basic Reading Inventory (BRI), which is designed to identify reading behaviors and ability, including word identification, fluency, and comprehension.  The BRI assesses a student’s individual, instructional, and frustration levels through the reading of grade specific word lists, short stories and passages, and ability to answer text dependent comprehension questions.  Considering performance in the above mentioned areas, the BRI goes on to recommend targeted interventions that address the challenges a student may be facing.  Benefits of the BRI include its user friendly administration and progress monitoring ability by providing multiple sets of grade specific word lists.  Although the BRI does not specifically assess phonemic awareness, it is a comprehensive manner of assessing rate, accuracy, and prosody in reading.  Cautions to consider when administering the BRI include the individual interpretation of comprehension responses along with the external factors that can effect the results when the test is administered over multiple days.  Because the BRI requires more time than most of the other assessments, administration in one session can be influenced by student attention and stamina, and administration across multiple days can be affected by an abundance of at-home challenges like lack of sleep and proper nutrition.  Even with it’s shortcomings, the BRI is still considered an effective tool to diagnose specific challenges in reading behavior and identify necessary interventions.

     Wepman’s Auditory Discrimination Test (WADT) provides a measure of phonological awareness and is an accurate indicator of a child’s readiness of reading instruction.  Auditory discrimination is critical to the ability to differentiate between phonemes which allows students to compare and contrast speech sounds, separate and blend phonemes, identify phonemes in words, and combine phonemes.  All of these skills are critical to the development of fluency, reading comprehension, and success in future reading instruction.  The Wepman’s Test is most appropriate in the evaluation of communication skills and the identification of reading difficulties and speech deficits.  The test is fast, inexpensive, and easy to administer and includes retests to account for testing interference and challenges.  While the norms for the test were based on a diverse student population, both culturally and socioeconomically, the test does not account for these differences in the preparation of the test material.  Furthermore, the WADT lacks accommodations for students with disabilities; whereby hearing and attention deficits can skew the results.  

     Because visual perceptual abilities are critical to success in a number of academic activities and instruction, it is important to know which processes prove challenging for a student.  The Test of Visual Perceptual Skills (TVPS-3) is used to determine visual perception strengths and weaknesses over extended periods of time in student’s ranging from age 4 to 18.  The test involves the administration of seven subtests arranged in order of difficulty and includes visual discrimination, visual memory, spatial relationships, form constancy, sequential memory, visual figure ground, and visual closure.  The TVPS-3 is administered in a multiple choice format with students indicating their choice orally or by pointing.  As just mentioned, strengths of the test includes the child’s ability to use multiple response methods, including pointing to one of the designs on the page, saying the number of the answer choice, or by any other means understood by the examiner.  For this reason, the test can be administered to children with and without disabilities.  Weaknesses of the TVPS-3 include the difficult and confusing scoring process, sometimes lengthy administration, and the reliance on a child’s strong receptive language skills to complete the test.  Overall, the TVPS-3 is considered a valid and reliable indicator of visual perceptual abilities that may be contributing to reading difficulties.

     Used widely in clinical practice and investigation, the Stroop Test evaluates the psychological process of reading through the administration of three trials, including color naming, color name reading, and interference.  The word trial requires students to read words of color name; the color trial asks students to identify the color of printed shapes; and the color-word response inhibition trial asks students to name the color in which the word is written and not the actual printed word.  The Stroop Test measures a person’s selective attention capacity and skills, as well as their cognitive flexibility and processing speed ability.  It is easy and quick to administer, applicable across cultures, and available in multiple translations.  Unfortunately, the Stroop Test cannot be used on individuals with brain damage, ADHD, and a variety of mental disorders.  Furthermore, given the use of colors to administer the test, individuals with color blindness may not produce valid test results.  In the appropriate population, the Stroop Test can be used to determine the impacts of cognitive processing ability and attention capacity on reading ability and comprehension.

     In conclusion, a number of diagnostic reading assessments exist to effectively evaluate a student’s skill level across all five elements of reading instruction.  No one resource can be used to make deterministic and placement decisions due to the individual limitations of each assessment.  Educators and/or assessment administrators must fully assess the background and individual differences amongst the student population prior to selecting the most appropriate tests under a given set of circumstances.  Through the use of the most appropriate diagnostic assessments, a student’s challenges and barriers to reading ability can be identified and the most effective strategies for improvement implemented in an effective and timely manner.

Comparison of Reading Diagnostic Assessments - Data Table

Test	Purpose	Strengths	Weaknesses	Appropriateness
Slosson Intelligence Test (SIT)	Estimates individual cognitive ability and verbal intelligence	Easy to administer and low cost;  identifies need for further evaluation	Only applicable above age 4 No differentiation past age 18 High Education level required to administer	As an initial screening method to determine the need for further diagnostic testing
Slosson Oral Reading Test (SORT)	Quick estimate of target word recognition levels and decoding ability	3-5 minutes to administer; Use with children and adults; Spanish, Braille, large print; CC alignment	Lacks cultural sensitivity; Can’t determine grapheme/phoneme relationships; no comprehension component	To provide estimates of grade/age equivalents, standard scores, and national percentiles; screening only
Basic Reading Inventory (BRI)	Identify a student’s reading behaviors and ability, including word identification, fluency and comprehension	Relatively easy to administer; comprehensive manner of assessing rate, accuracy and prosody in reading; targeted interventions based on results	Comprehension results can be skewed by individual interpretation; external factors can affect results due to multiple day administration	To diagnose specific challenges in reading behavior and identify necessary interventions; also used in progress monitoring
Wepman’s Auditory Discrimination Test (WADT)	Measure phonological awareness and a child’s readiness for reading instruction	Fast, inexpensive, and easy administration; Includes retests; norms include diverse students	Lacks accommodations for children with disabilities; hearing and attention deficits can skew results	To evaluate communication skills and identify reading difficulties and speech defects
Test of Visual Perceptual Skills (TVPS-3)	Determine visual perception strengths and weaknesses over extended periods of time	Child can use multiple response methods; does not require speech; can be used for children with disabilities	Difficult and confusing scoring; lengthy administration; child must have good receptive language skills to complete	To assess visual perceptual abilities that may be contributing to reading difficulties and tracking progress over time
The Stroop Test	Measure a person’s selective attention capacity and skills, as well as their cognitive flexibility and processing speed ability	Easy and quick to administer; applicable across cultures; available in multiple translations	Cannot be used on individuals with brain damage, ADHD, and a variety of mental disorders	To determine the impacts of cognitive processing ability and attention capacity on reading ability/comprehension

References

Alic, Margaret, PhD. (2014).  Auditory Discrimination Test.  Encyclopedia of Children’s Health.       Retrieved from:  http://www.healthofchildren.com/A/Auditory-Discrimination-Test.html

Johns, J. (2012).  Basic Reading Inventory. (11th Ed.).  Dubuque, IA:  Kendall Hunt Publishing Company.

Martin, Nancy A.  (2014).  Test of Visual Perceptual Skills - 3rd Edition.  Therapy BC.  Retrieved from:   http://www.therapybc.ca/

McKechnie, Jennifer A., M.Ed.; Erford, Bradley T., PhD. (2002).  Test Review:  Slosson Intelligence Test - Revised (SIT-R).  Association for Assessment in Counseling and Education.  Retrieved from:  http://aac.ncat.edu/newsnotes/y01win.html

Slosson Oral Reading Test (SORT). (2014). Collaborative Center for Literacy Development.  Retrieved from:  http://www.kentuckyliteracy.org/~literacy/sites/default/files/resource_tools/Slosson%20Oral%20Reading%20Test.pdf

Stroop Tests:  Naming, Interference, Reading.  National Institutes of Health.  Retrieved from:  http://www.commondataelements.ninds.nih.gov/Doc/NOC/Stroop_Test_NOC_Link_Out.pdf

Wepman’s Auditory Discrimination Test, Second Edition.  (1987).  Western Psychological Services.  Retrieved from:  http://www.ecasd.k12.wi.us/student_services/assessments/ADT.pdf

Implementing the Common Core State Standards: A Primer on "Close Reading of Text" - Review

     There is no denying the fact that implementation of the Common Core State Standards has been a challenging and time consuming process that many have proceeded with begrudgingly.  This comes as not surprise as the new standards require teachers to learn how to teach in a manner that is out of sync with their usual day to day approaches to lesson planning and instruction.  One of the biggest pushes within the Common Core State Standards is for close reading of texts.
     The above mentioned article touches on some very important points with regards to the implementation of close reading in the modern classroom and the implications it has for instructional approaches.  First, close reading requires that students have multiple readings and multiple lessons on the same brief, high quality piece of literature.  ALL students must have the chance to interact with this material through engaging in partner and group reads, and even those with reading challenges should be given the opportunity to struggle with advanced concepts and engaging discussions.  As the article states, this opportunity to grapple with the text has been show to motivate students further and increase their will to take on more challenging texts in the future.  The teacher's comments at the end of the article further supported this notion as she indicated that these opportunities motivated her students to work harder and think more deeply, often at a level thought to be beyond their ability. This point hammers home the intention of Common Core in that it suggests that teachers not give their students the answers; however, teachers must let students self-discover the answers to create students empowered to take control of their own learning.
     Another important take-away from the article is the role that background knowledge plays in the ability to tackle more complex texts in close reading.  Teachers must know student well enough to know what background knowledge they need and what information they can self-discover.  Often times, if a teacher is giving too much help prior to reading that means the text is not appropriate and/or the teacher does not believe his/her students are capable of the task.  If cross curricular approaches to reading instruction are being employed, then the need for extensive pre-reading activities is significantly reduced.  Students are already gaining the needed background information in other subject areas and can use this information to support their understanding of a close read set around a similar topic or time period.  While having background knowledge is very helpful in completing a close read, it is not always the most realistic.  Students will encounter texts in their lives on which they have little or no prior information, and for this reason, assigning students a "cold read" is appropriate and extremely beneficial in preparing for life and state assessments.
     Finally, teachers must engage in close reading themselves prior to implementing the instructional approaches in their classroom.  This allows the teacher to understand what exactly is required of students when conducting a close read and what does it look like in practice.  This exercise makes it much easier for teachers to provide opportunities for modeling, guided practice, and independent practice in a manner that is conducive to creating independent learners.  As the old saying goes, "You have to walk the walk to talk the talk."  A teacher who attempts to teach close reading without having done so themselves may not be fully prepared to set students up for success when it comes to the rigor and in-depth thinking that close reading of high quality, complex texts requires.

How Children Learn to Read

How Children Learn To Read

Michael Miller

Fall 2014

Practicum III

Wilmington University

How Children Learn to Read

     The ability to read is often cited as the single most important predictor of future academic  success.  For this reason, the process by which children learn how to read has been extensively researched to determine when this learning begins and how best to facilitate continual growth and improvement.  Children learn how to read through five distinct phases, beginning at birth and ending in the third grade, when the focus shifts from learning to read to reading to learn.  Each of these phases include some if not all of the five components of effective reading instruction, beginning with phase one building phonics skills and phonemic awareness and ending in phase five with a more in-depth focus on comprehension and richer text connections.

     Phase one of how children learn to read is the awareness and exploration stage encompassing the years from birth to pre-school.  These years are the most critical in establishing a solid foundation for future instruction in reading.  Children learn about reading by observing the adults around them interact with print, which can include something as simple as writing a grocery list or reading a recipe to prepare dinner.  It is through these everyday experiences that children soon realize how important a role reading ability will play in their lives.      In order to get a good start in reading and writing, children must have access to print and books, observe adult demonstrations of literacy behavior, and be surrounded by supportive adults that read to them regularly.  With the proper exposure, children begin to develop phonemic awareness and phonics skills by learning and reciting nursery rhymes, using invented spelling, and participating in activities that encourage word play.  Boyd and Bee (2012) confirm that, “Developmentalists now have abundant evidence that children who are more phonologically aware at age 3, 4, or 5 later learn to read much more easily and score higher on tests of reading comprehension in later childhood than children who are less phonologically aware (Kim, Petscher, Schatschneider, & Foorman, 2010)” (p 209).  Another critical component in learning how to read is the vocabulary a child is exposed to prior to entering formal schooling.  Because children are surrounded by literate adults in their early years, they are hearing a copious amount of new words and slowly adding these to their knowledge bank.  Vacca et al (2012) adds, “The stakes are high for young children regarding vocabulary; research tells us that children from professional homes hear more than 30 million words by age 3 compared to 10 million words heard by children in welfare homes” (p 122).  This lack of exposure to a print rich, verbally stimulating environment significantly widens the gap between these two groups by the time they enter pre-school.  It is clear that while this early phase does not often entail explicit instruction, the world around a developing child must be filled with opportunities to observe and hear reading and language in order to set the stage for formal schooling beginning in phase two.

     Phase two of how children learn to read focuses on experimental reading and writing in kindergarten.  In this stage, children are beginning to make sense of the print rich world around them through the development of concepts of print.  The development of phonemic awareness really explodes in this stage, often aided by explicit phonics instruction.  Students recognize letters and letter-sound relationships, rhyming words, and begin writing letters and high frequency words.  There has long existed a debate between those who favor explicit phonics instruction and those who favor a whole language approach.  Proponents of the whole language approach believe that children learn how to read best when instruction centers around exposure to language through high quality literature.  Given that both sides of the argument have their merits, a more balanced approach that includes phonics instruction and exposure to high quality literature is most favored.  Vacca et al (2012) adds, “When working with children, it’s important to use read-aloud books, nursery rhymes, riddles, songs, and poems that play with language and manipulate sounds” (p 123).  The value of literacy related play centers, like a post office, restaurant, or doctor’s office setting, should not be underestimated at this stage as they are integral to student exploration and instruction and allow children to play with print on their own terms.  By the end of phase two, children begin to engage in sustained reading and writing, develop a solid foundation in phonemic awareness and phonics skills, and are prepared to focus on fluency and comprehension.

     Termed the early reading and writing stage, phase three takes place in first grade with students reading simple stories and writing about topics within their existing schema or topics that connect to strong feelings.  It is within phase three that students continue to improve their phonemic awareness and develop word identification skills.  A report by Learning Point Associates (2004) emphasizes that, “Teaching young readers to segment words into individual phonemes appears to be as effective in helping them learn to read as instruction in both segmenting and blending (Torgesen, Morgan, & David, 1992)” (p 9).  In addition to segmenting and blending, students can also further develop phonemic awareness through the deletion, addition, and substitution of phonemes.  Reading with fluency becomes more evident as students have developed an increased knowledge of sight words.  Teachers can further develop fluency at this stage by offering many opportunities for guided, shared, and repeated reading.  The emphasis on vocabulary instruction continues to expand near the end of phase three with a focus on active engagement and learning new words within meaningful contexts.  Vocabulary words should be terms that children will encounter in their reading, should be taught in relation to words within their existing schema, and should be discussed prior to reading to activate prior knowledge and establish the hooks for retention as the words are encountered in context.  Offering an abundance of opportunities to read contributes significantly to vocabulary development as students move toward improved reading comprehension in phase four.

     While in second grade, students are in phase four, or the transitional reading and writing stage.  Within this stage, students begin to demonstrate increased ability in all areas of reading and writing including word identification strategies, sight word recognition, sustained silent reading, and conventional spelling.  By this time, students have developed a strong base in phonemic awareness and are able to read material without having to break-down the words, resulting in improved fluency and comprehension.  Furthermore, students develop cognitive and metacognitive strategies for reading comprehension.  The Learning Point Associates report (2004) on the five essential components to effective reading instruction states, “A short list of examples of comprehension strategies includes comprehension monitoring, cooperative learning, using graphic and semantic organizers including story maps, answering questions about what has been read, having students create their own questions about what they have read, using prior knowledge to connect what they read to what they already know, and summarizing what they have read” (p 30).  By the end of second grade, students are using most of these strategies to help them understand what they have read with the guidance of the classroom teacher.  By explicitly teaching and modeling these techniques, teachers are providing students with the skills required to read more in-depth and complex material, which will be required as they advance to the fifth and final stage.

     Phase five of how children learn to read is characterized by independent and productive reading and writing and often occurs within the third grade year.  During this time, students are extending and refining their literacy skills and strategies and moving away from learning to read and more towards reading to learn.  Students continue to improve their fluency and comprehension as they are exposed to longer, more advanced texts that cannot be read all at once.  Chapter books are often introduced at this stage, offering students increased opportunities for extension activities that tap higher order thinking skills and explore more thorough understandings of plot, characters, and story line.  Students at this stage still benefit from read alouds and guided reading, particularly at the beginning of the year, and should continue to be given an abundance of opportunities to read independently as they develop a preference for certain genres and authors.  Increased use of informational texts is also common in this phase as students are increasingly expected to utilize these resources within instruction.  By the end of phase five, students should have a solid foundation in all five components of effective reading instruction that they will continue to refine as they prepare to tackle increasingly complex reading material in the upper elementary and middle grades.

     Children learn how to read in five distinct phases that span the period from birth to grade three.  As is evident from the research, the most critical first phase begins at home when children must be exposed to copious opportunities to observe others interacting with print and exchanging information verbally in order to build a solid foundation for later learning.  Phases two through five span the period from kindergarten to third grade when students move from a focus on phonics and establishing phonemic awareness to expanding vocabulary in order to increase fluency and improve comprehension.  Teachers must employ research based strategies in each phase to help students move from learning to read towards utilizing comprehension strategies to aid in reading to learn.

Works Cited

Boyd, Denise; Bee, Helen.  (2012).  The Developing Child.  New York, NY:  Pearson.

Learning Point Associates.  (2004).  A Closer Look at the Five Essential Components of Effective              Reading Instruction:  A Review of Scientifically Based Reading for Teachers.  Retrieved from:             www.learningpt.org/pdfs/literacy/components.pdf

Vacca, Jo Anne L., Vacca, Richard T., Gove, Mary K., Burkey, Linda C., Lenhart, Lisa A., Mckeon,            Christine A.  (2012).  Reading and Learning to Read.  New York, NY:  Pearson.

Article/Research Report Summary - Prezi

“I Skim and Find the Answers”

Addressing Search-and-Destroy in Reading

Andrew P. Huddleston & Tara N. Lowe

The Reading Teacher

Vol. 68 Issue 1

9/2014

Article Summary and Reflection

Michael Miller

Practicum III

Fall 2014

“I Skim and Find the Answers”

Addressing Search-and-Destroy in Reading

     Seeking to understand how students are reading assigned passages is a rather easy process; however, rarely does a classroom teacher engage students in this practice.  It is assumed that students are reading a passage from beginning to end and other factors are contributing to a lack of reading comprehension, but more often than not, students are employing the search-and -destroy, or skimming, method to identify the answers.  In this article, the authors initially sought to explore the experiences of 10 fifth grade students in Georgia with regard to the State’s test-based retention policy.  What the authors found, however, was that all of the students were using the search-and-destroy method to some extent when reading and changed their approach to the study by focusing on how this method was contributing to their success or failure on reading assessments.   The authors’ report seeks to understand through prior research how the search-and-destroy method has been addressed in education, describes the background and experiences of the 10 case study students and what can be gleaned from observations and feedback, and concludes with practical recommendations on assessing student’s reading approaches, including how and when the search-and-destroy method should be employed.

     The term search-and-destroy in reading has been used by researchers and teachers dating back to the 1970’s; however, investigations have failed to explain why students use this method when reading, nor have they offered advice on how to help those students who are unsuccessful with this approach.  One fact the existing research offered was how extensive the use of this method is among students, with one study suggesting that 50% of students will read questions first and then skim to find the answers.  The research further supported the fact that many students used the search-and-destroy method unproductively, seeking out quick fixes and short cuts to identify the answer.  While this method may have worked for some students, for those who were using it the most, they failed to check their answers for accuracy and performed poorly.  The research also pointed to some positive aspects of the skimming approach, noting that it is a very valuable strategy that many highly effective readers use regularly.  Dating back to the 1920’s, researchers have noted that readers must determine what type of reading is going to be most successful given the task at hand.  Huddleston and Lowe add (2014), “The term selective reading has been used to designate the need to teach students how to recognize the most important parts of texts that require more attention and how to recognize other aspects that require less (Cunningham & Shablak, 1975)” (p. 72).  Although the research supports the fact that the search-and-destroy method has it’s place in effective reading practices, educators continue to emphasize close reading as the only legitimate form of reading and spend minimal time on using the purpose for reading to inform how students’ read.

     The 10 students studied for the purpose of this report represented a diverse group of fifth grade students all receiving intervention in reading, including Response to Intervention (RTI) and Early Intervention Programs (EIP).  Additionally, some of the students were receiving ESL services which included a read-aloud accommodation on the State test.  While the majority of the students were on a third grade reading level, one was at the first to second grade and two were at the fourth-to fifth grade level.  All of the students in the study had previously employed the search-and-destroy method, had a history of struggling with reading, and had failed the State’s reading assessment.  Similar to the teacher’s assumptions, the report’s authors assumed that the students were reading the questions and then reading the passages from beginning to end to identify the answers.  It was not until the authors began discussing the methods for taking the tests with the students that a student revealed that she does not actually read any of the passages.    Further discussion with other students revealed that this was a group-wide issue, with students often sharing that reading was unnecessary or reading was too difficult.

     The report goes on to explain the variation amongst the 10 students in the study on how and why they determined that the reading was unnecessary or difficult and how this impacted their performance on the State test.  Two of the students shared that they read everything on the actual test but only skimmed the practice tests because it was not going to be graded; therefore, reading all passages in the practice test was deemed unnecessary.  Another student learned that some questions did not require her to read the entire passage, specifically those that asked her to define a literary device or part of speech.  This student only read the sections of the passage that were specifically mentioned in the question and failed to recall any of the major details of the passage when later asked.  For the majority of the students in the study, the decision to use the search-and-destroy method was determined by the difficulty of the passages.  Some students noted that they only read short passages and deemed longer selections to be above their capabilities.  While observing a small group intervention session, the report’s authors noted that students’ difficulty and inability to read the assigned passages resulted in an abundance of off-task behavior.  Eventually, the students simply gave-up and decided that they were too dumb to accomplish the task at hand.  

     Two of the students, referred to as Donovan and Hallie, struggled the most with reading and used the search-and-destroy method almost exclusively.  Donovan was reading on a first-to-second grade level; however, all of the assigned passages were on a fifth grade level.  In this instance, Donovan would quickly reach a frustration level and learned to employ the search-and-destroy method once determining if he was able to read 5 words in the first sentence.  Interestingly, Donovan was able to pass the State test because he was an ESL student with a read-aloud accommodation.  He had strong listening comprehension skills; however, this accommodation disguised the fact that he still struggled with reading comprehension and presented a barrier to early intervention assistance.  Hallie simply found reading too difficult and would express her frustration by stating that it gave her a headache.  For this reason, Hallie always used the skimming approach and rarely read a passage in its entirety.  During the administration of the state test, Hallie quickly skimmed the first section and finished well before her classmates, falling asleep while waiting for the remainder of the class to finish.  She then proceeded to guess the answers to the entire second section of the test, resulting in a failing grade on the test and a sub-sequent retest.  According to Huddleston and Lowe (2014), “Their teachers’ consistent use of practice passages, the lack of student choice in their reading, and the ongoing expectation that the student read texts beyond their instructional levels all appeared to contribute in some way to the students’ use of search-and-destroy” (p. 76).  Addressing just these factors will only solve part of the problem; therefore, the report’s authors offer recommendations to help students understand when and how to use the search-and destroy approach.

     The report concludes by offering three classroom recommendations to improve reading comprehension, including learning how students actually read their assignments, discussing what it means to read for a variety of purposes, and how to determine when search-and-destroy is effective and when it is not.  Teachers can determine how their students are reading through observations and interviews.  Observations can reveal the amount of time spent reading selected passages, what students choose to look at first, and the extent to which students flip back and forth between the questions and the answers.  Interviews, however, are often the most valuable tool in revealing reading behaviors as students are often very forthcoming with their approaches to reading.  Formal assessments can also be used to reveal reading behaviors, including whole-class and individual student questionnaires that can consist of both open-ended and multiple choice questions.  This approach can quickly identify ineffective approaches and help the teacher to differentiate instruction accordingly.  Second, teachers should discuss with students what it means to read for a variety of purposes and share that effective readers choose to read in a variety of ways, including careful reading, normal reading, rapid reading, and skimming.  Finally, and perhaps the most valuable approach, is to help students understand when using the search-and-destroy method is most successful.  By recognizing how to determine if a question requires a deeper understanding of the passage, students can determine if search-and-destroy or careful reading would be most successful.

     This studied revealed a wealth of valuable information for the reading teacher seeking to understand the manner in which his/her students read and the challenges they face with reading comprehension.  Because struggling readers have often determined that they can’t read or that the practice passages are too difficult, they fail to get any practice in reading comprehension, assuring their challenges will only continue.  If a teacher fails to determine how his/her students are actually approaching reading and if they are really attempting to read classroom assignments, practice assignments will only serve to reinforce ineffective search-and-destroy approaches amongst those students who find reading most difficult and require the most assistance.  Even the most dedicated and hard-working teachers will fail to realize improvement amongst struggling readers if they do not seek to diagnose the source of the problem.  As the old saying goes, “Insanity is repeating the same mistakes and expecting different results.”  In keeping with best practices in education, reflecting on the success or failure of classroom interventions will save valuable time and help break the cycle of reading avoidance.  In conclusion, to fully understand and diagnose reading comprehension struggles and improve performance,  teachers should never assume students are reading assigned passages and should employ approaches to determine reading behaviors, discuss what it means to read for a variety of purposes with students, and explain when the search-and-destroy method can be employed most successfully.

Prezi

Works Cited

Huddleston, Andrew P., & Lowe, Tara N.  (2014).  “I Skim and Find the Answers,” Addressing      Search-and-Destroy in Reading.  The Reading Teacher, Volume 68 (1), pp. 71-79.