PROPOSAL

RESEARCH METHOD IN ENGLISH

LANGUAGE TEACHING
“Improving Student’s Reading Comprehension through
Repeated Reading at School 9 Batanghari”

THE LECTURER:
MONALISA, [Link] [Link]

ARRANGED BY:
MU’AWANA : TE140016

English Education Department of

Teacher Training and Education Faculty
State Institute for Islamic Studies
Sulthan Thaha Syaifuddin Jambi
2016/2017
 Chapter I

Introduction

A. Background

One of the key elements in a quality education is reading proficiency, which the
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (2005) has claimed to
be one of the most important foundations of a basic education” (Siah & Kwok, 2010, p.
168). Recent research studies have outlined the important aspects to teaching reading.
The National Reading Panel (2000) has highlighted phonemic awareness, phonics
instruction, comprehension, computer technology and reading fluency. Reading fluency
has received much attention in recent years as an important stepping stone to successful
reading.

Students learning to read or struggling readers have a difficult time with decoding
words. The reading process can be more challenging resulting in additional time spent in
decoding and labored reading with less time for comprehension. “When readers become
more automatic at decoding their reading becomes faster and they tend to chunk text into
phrases as they read” (Stevens, 2006, p. 38). An effective reader is able to interpret
(decode) the words on the written page easily and make sense or meaning
(comprehension) of what is read. These readers are said to have developed fluency in
reading.

Students who read fluently sound as if they are talking. Their reading is smooth,
paced and pleasant to listen to. Fluency is an important component to successful
reading. Reading fluency is defined as “the ability of readers to read quickly, effortlessly,
and efficiently with good meaningful expression” (Rossini, 2003, p. 26). There are three
stages in fluency development; rate, accuracy and prosody (National Institute of Child
Health and Human Development, 2000). Rate is determined by measuring the speed of
the reader. Accuracy refers to a reader who can read by sight or decoding with a minimal
amount of mistakes. Prosody refers to a reader who reads with pacing, expression and
phrasing.
Reading rate is how quickly a student reads a particular reading passage at his
level in a given time. The teacher is able to calculate the number of words read along
with the minutes taken to read the passage.

The type of text does need to be taken into consideration as different texts are
read for different purposes and could result in slower or faster reading rates.

Reading accuracy is reading or decoding words correctly. A simple assessment

called a running record may be used to measure accuracy. This measure of accuracy is
determined by observing a child read a leveled passage. Any mistakes or miscues are
noted and qualified by type of reading error. The numbers of miscues are tallied. A
computation is determined by dividing number of correctly read words with the number
of words in the passage resulting in an accuracy rate. Reading accuracy and reading rate
go hand in hand. When students become more accurate in reading words, they will read
them more rapidly and their reading rate will increase.

The last component in developing fluency is prosody. “Prosody refers to reading

smoothly, effortlessly and with proper phrasing and expression” (Hicks, 2009/2010, p.
320). Prosodic features are variations in pitch, stress patterns, and duration that
contribute to expressive reading of a text. Developing prosody has been tied into
comprehension. “The ability to properly chunk groups of words into phrases and
meaningful units is an indication of a reader’s comprehension” (Kuhn, 2003).

Reading speed is important but should not be the primary goal of reading fluently.
A student who only reads words quickly but does not use expression or understand the
words he is reading is lacking a significant part of the equation. Likewise a child who
reads each word accurately but lacks expression in his reading is not really paying
attention to the cues and nuances of the language of the text. This is not reading fluently.
Fluency must include all components of rate, accuracy and prosody.
B. Statement of the Problem

Students who manifest difficulties in reading often experience difficulties in

fluency as well. This lack of fluency is a problem. Fluency is a major component to
reading success. Fluent readers use expression and adjust their pace appropriately. They
read effortlessly.

“Expressive readers interpret meaning. They do this through the use of good
phrasing, appropriate voice tone, and appropriate voice volume. A fluent reader groups
words together in phrases that convey meaning, are consistent with punctuation, and
correspond to sentence structure” (Fox, 2008, p. 113). These fluent readers make
connections with the text as they are reading. They understand what they read and make
links with prior knowledge as well as recognize the purpose for reading. These fluent
readers enjoy reading aloud as well as reading to others as they have experienced success
in their reading experiences. Students who develop fluency will continue to read for
understanding and enjoyment.

If students do not develop fluent reading in the early grades, it can impact their
reading speed, accuracy, comprehension and enjoyment of printed text. These students
are reluctant to read aloud or read to others as their reading is slow and tedious to listen
to. When students are unable to read fluently, it can result in poor comprehension, an
essential component of reading success (Rasinski, 2000, p. 92). Lack of comprehension
of written text will continue to be a stumbling block for a student’s continued
understanding of fiction and non-fiction text in the classroom. This lack of fluent reading
can impact a student’s understanding of text in all subject areas. These non-fluent readers
may struggle comprehending science, social studies and math texts. Lastly, this
continued lack of fluency has the potential to discourage student’s reading for continued
education and learning as well as lack of reading for enjoyment as they grow into
adulthood.
 Repeated readings have been shown to be an effective and authentic practice that
fosters and improves reading fluency in the classroom. This reading strategy requires a
student to read a passage or text a number of times while the teacher records the time
with the number of correctly called words. The student continues to read the same text
repeatedly until a desired goal or criterion is met. Research has demonstrated that
repeated reading can not only improve reading fluency but is also effective in improving
other facets of reading success. (Therrien, 2006, p. 156).

C. Problem Formulation
Reading fluency is a major focus of instruction in second grade. Recent research has
demonstrated that repeated readings are a valuable instructional tool for improving
reading fluency. The National Reading Panel has recommended that fluency
instruction be taught along with other reading components such as phonemic
awareness vocabulary instruction.
1. use repeated readings in the classroom setting can increase student fluency rate?
2. Can repeated readings increase reading accuracy rate?
3. What is the gain in fluency and accuracy rates of second grade students who
participate in repeated readings practice?
D. Purpose of the Research

The goal of this study is to demonstrate that reading fluency will improve with
consistent use of repeating readings. This study will prove that consistent fluency
instruction with repeated readings will also increase accuracy rate in young readers. It is
possible that repeated readings will contribute to the improvement in student’s reading
levels and reading interest.
E. Advantages of the Research
For students:
1. Can improve students' ability to repeated reading.
2. Can improve the confidence of students while reading English texts aloud
3. Can improve students' competence in this aspect of reading.
For the teachers:
1. to improve the professionalism of teachers in applying the techniques - techniques to
teach reading.
2. Can increase the innovative power and creativity of teachers in designing lesson plans
3. Obtain valuable experience in conducting classroom action research

Chapter II

Literature Review

A. Introduction

Research has shown that repeated reading is a successful strategy to increase

reading fluency. This chapter will review the current research and importance of fluent
reading and its relationship to comprehension. The stages of fluency development will be
discussed. Next, the methods of assessing reading accuracy, rate and prosody will be
explained. Recommended repeated reading procedures that have proven to be successful
in research and classroom use will be detailed. Finally, the use of repeated readings for
general classroom use will be suggested.

1. Gateway to comprehension

The fundamental reason of reading is to make sense of text, to learn and to engage
in the ideas that are articulated. If we accept this as truth, then we must accept the fact
that fluent reading is the critical building block that prepares the reader for this capability.
Once students understand and master the ability to decode words, it is vital for them to
integrate control of their reading fluency so they are able to focus on making meaning of
the text. Students lacking fluency are concerned with decoding and word recognition and
are less likely to be able to construct meaning from what they are reading. Poor readers
tend to spend less time on reading than fluent readers. They may avoid reading which
may lead to the loss of skills and cause them to lag further behind other students at their
grade level. Fluency is the gateway to understanding.

2. History of Fluency
 The interest in reading fluency emerged as a result of the work by S. J. Samuels and
D. Laberge (1974) in their work on automatic information processing. “According to
automaticity theory, the fluent reader decodes texts automatically, that is without
attention, thus leaving attention free to be used for comprehension” (Samuels, 1997, p.
379).

These researchers surmised that emerging readers focus on the decoding of words
and thus are limited in their ability to make meaning with the text. Their work outlined
the sequence of the beginning reader and the three stages of development required for
word recognition. The beginning reader is non automatic and devotes little attention to
comprehension. In the accurate stage, the reader calls words correctly but must make
efforts to do so and is not able to comprehend all of what he reads. The most
sophisticated stage of fluency development according to Samuels is the automatic stage.
This reader can decode words automatically without effort. This reader may read faster
that he or she speaks using expression and demonstrates comprehension of the text. Using
this theory of automaticity, Samuels developed a teaching method for teachers to use in
the classroom with emerging readers to promote reading fluency.

“Teachers can do two things to help students develop automaticity in word

recognition. First, they can give instruction on how to recognize words at the accuracy
level. Second, they can provide the time and the motivation so that the student will
practice these word recognition skills so that they become automatic” (Samuels, 1997, p.
379). The practice of repeated reading was born from Samuels’s research and need to
find a teaching method for emerging readers to gain the practice to become automatic
readers.

3. Fluency Forgotten

“For years reading fluency was the forgotten stepchild of the reading curriculum.
Teachers and reading scholars were interested in readers’ ability to decode words
accurately, not in readers’ ability to decode words automatically and quickly” (Rasinski,
Homan & Biggs, 2008 p. 2). Additionally, it was thought that teachers and reading
specialists placed a greater emphasis on encouraging students to read silently and place
less importance on expressive reading aloud.

In fact, Rasinski and Zutell (1996) claimed that there was minimal instruction in fluency
either directly or indirectly given in the classroom during the portion of the day devoted
to reading. This lack of attention to fluency pushed it to the backseat of importance in
classroom reading instruction.

However, with the release of the Report of the National Reading Panel (2000) and other
reviews of studies on fluency (Kuhn & Stahl, 2000; Rasinski & Hoffman, 2003), reading
fluency has risen to the literary surface and is now considered an important component in
effective reading instruction for students in the primary grades.

4. Components of Fluency

Students who read fluently sound as if they are talking. Their reading is smooth,
paced and pleasant to listen to. Fluency is an important component to successful reading.
“Our education system tends to overlook instruction on reading fluency, while stressing
decoding and comprehension. Subsequently, many children are not fluent readers, and a
national concern has emerged” (National Reading Panel, 2000). The research findings on
fluency instruction has lead the National Reading Panel to consider fluency instruction as
one of the five components to successful reading alongside phonemic awareness, phonics,
vocabulary, and comprehension.

Reading fluency is defined as “the ability of readers to read quickly, effortlessly,

and efficiently with good meaningful expression” (Rasinski, 2003, p. 26). Fluency has
three phases which include rate, accuracy and prosody. Rate is determined by measuring
the speed of the reader. Accuracy refers to a reader who can read by sight or decoding
with a minimal amount of mistakes. Prosody refers to a reader who reads with pacing,
expression and phrasing.

5. Reading Rate
 Reading rate is how quickly a student reads a particular reading passage at his
level in a given time. Reading speed is important but should not be the primary goal of
reading fluently. “Although rate may be a measure of word recognition automaticity, it
does not capture the prosodic component of reading, that component that connects
comprehension, or the making of meaning, to fluency. For students to read with
appropriate expression, they need to be cognizant of the meaning of passage. We feel
that reading rate does not provide the complete picture of reading fluency” (Rasinski,
Rickli & Johnson, 2009, p. 352). A student who only reads words quickly but does not
use expression or understand the words he is reading is lacking a major part of the
equation. Likewise a child who reads each word accurately but lacks expression in his
reading is not really paying attention to the cues and nuances of the language of the text.
This is not reading fluently. Fluency must include all components of rate, accuracy and
prosody.

6. Reading Accuracy

Reading accuracy is reading or decoding words correctly. Reading accuracy and

reading rate go hand in hand. When students become more accurate in reading words,
they will read them more rapidly and their reading rate will increase. On the other hand,
those readers who must laboriously decode many words as they read can lose the
meaning in the text. “Cognitive attention or energy that must be applied to the low-level
decoding task of reading is cognitive energy that is denied to the more important task of
comprehending the text. Hence, comprehension is negatively affected by a reader's lack
of fluency” (Rasinski, Rickli & Johnson, 2009, p. 351). Students who demonstrate
accuracy in reading have mastered sight words and developed decoding strategies. These
decoding strategies allow students to stretch out unknown words and successfully read
them. Although it is important for students to master sight words to improve word
identification, knowing reading strategies for decoding unknown words is equally
valuable. Students should not focus on word memorization as that can be
counterproductive to using strategies for decoding unknown words (Hicks, 2009/2010 p.
320).
 7. Reading Prosody

“Reading fluency is more than just reading words quickly; it also has an important
perceptual component. Fluent readers chunk words into groups, typically sentences or
phrases that are processed together as a whole” (Stevens, 2006, p. 38). The last
component in developing fluency is prosody. “Prosody refers to reading smoothly,
effortlessly and with proper phrasing and expression (Hicks, 2009/2010, p. 320).
Prosodic features are variations in pitch, stress patterns, and duration that contribute to
expressive reading of a text. Developing prosody is tied into comprehension. “The ability
to properly chunk groups of words into phrases and meaningful units is an indication of a
reader’s comprehension” (Kuhn, 2003). The prosodic reader is able to read the text,
comprehend the meaning and interpret this meaning by their reading of it which
demonstrates appropriate phrasing, inflection, and expression.

8. Assessing Reading Fluency

Classroom teachers and reading specialist use the running record (Clay, 1993) to
assess reading development. “A running record is a test of contextual reading accuracy
and student strategy use in which students read leveled connected passages under
untimed conditions. The examiner typically makes a record of the types of errors (e.g.,
deletions, insertions, omissions) that each reader commits during oral reading” (Fawson,
Ludlow, Reutzel, Sudweeks & Smith, 2006, p. 113). The student reads from one copy or
text and the examiner has an identical copy in front of him/her to follow as the student
reads. This notation is typically done by ticking, or marking a check above each word that
the student reads accurately. Errors are noted above or below the word depending on
error. The running record was initially used in the Reading Recovery Program by reading
professionals as a diagnostic tool to measure the progress of struggling readers. Now it is
widely used by classroom teachers as well as reading specialists to assess reading
accuracy, diagnosis reading problems and monitor progress. The type of text does need to
be taken into consideration as different texts are read for different purposes and could
result in slower or faster reading rates.
 As a running record is conducted, if a mistake or miscue is made, it is noted above
the word. The number of miscues will be counted. A teacher may be seeking specific
information in regards to the type of reading errors made. More detailed information can
be gleaned by sorting the miscues into types of errors. Then a computation is determined
by dividing the number of correctly read words by the number of words in the passage.
This is the accuracy rate. Using a running record and miscue analysis will give the
teacher a more thorough understanding of the mistakes that a child is making. “Through
careful examination of error patterns, a teacher can determine which strategies the student
is using and which strategies the student is failing to use” (Hudson, Lane & Pullen, 2005,
p. 705). This information can then be used to drive instruction or intervention when these
specific areas are targeted. Assessing reading rate is determined by timing students
reading of an appropriate text while recording the errors made. Assessing accuracy is
accomplished by timing the student as he reading a familiar text. Accuracy means that
the student is reading the words in the text correctly. Timed readings are conducted using
books or passages the student has read before that are at an independent reading level
(i.e., books the student can read with 95% accuracy or above)” (Hudson, Lane & Pullen,
2005, p. 705). Assessing reading prosody is somewhat more subjective as the teacher
makes a judgment of reading expression, phrasing and inflection based on listening to a
student orally read a connected text.

9. Repeated Reading

To gain fluency in any activity, one must repeat or practice that activity until
mastery is reached. That repetition often includes a certain skill, speech or movement. In
much the same way, fluency is gained by practice. Fluent readers gain this level of
mastery by wide reading or repeated practice of a text. This success does not come as
easily for struggling readers.

A method that has been proven to aide these students is repeated practice of the
same passage or repeated reading. Repeated reading is an instructional method used to
increase automaticity in reading. The technique of repeated reading is valuable for
improving reading fluency because it allows students to practice a text over and over until
the text becomes more and more familiar and students can decode the text automatically,
giving students more cognitive capacity for understanding. Samuels is the leading
researcher in the field of repeated reading. His work from the 1970’s continues to have a
huge influence in the field of reading strategies that focus on practice and repetition.
Repeated reading has been used with regular and special needs students, young children
and adults. This practice has been successful as a widely adaptable technique used in
intervention settings, whole group instruction and skill-based reading lessons. Numerous
researchers have demonstrated the positive results of this method.

Another important effect of Samuel’s work in fluency is the attention that it

brought to the field of fluency instruction. After Samuel’s research was published,
educational research and practice began to focus their attention on the importance of
fluency instruction in the classroom and how it is the key to reading for understanding.
Samuel’s research was re-published in 1979 in The Reading Teacher. Samuels was
pleased to learn that more than 20 years later his strategy of using repeated reading to
increase fluency was still valid. Samuels added four new findings in this re-publication.
The first one is that, “the original findings had been replicated; that is a high degree of
accuracy and speed develops in the practiced text. Two, there is a transfer of fluency to
other portions of the text, even the parts that were not specifically practiced. Three,
repeated reading is the most universally used remedial reading technique to help poor
readers improve reading skill. Four, repeated reading is now widely used widely to teach
reading in foreign languages” (Samuels, 1979, p.381).

The technique of repeated reading practice requires a student to read a passage

while a teacher records the reading speed and number of word recognition errors. The
child practices the passage on his own. Subsequently the student reads the passage aloud
to the teacher until a criterion rate is reached. As reading speed increased, reading errors
decreased. The number of rereading necessary to reach the student’s goal decreased.
 An important finding in Samuel’s work demonstrated that as the student
continued to use this method, the data revealed that the student speed with each new
passage increased from the previous one. “However, he also found that when students
moved to new passages, their initial readings of those new pieces were read with higher
levels of fluency and comprehension than the initial readings of the previous passage,
even though the new passage was as difficult or more challenging than the previous
piece” (Rasinski, Homan & Biggs, 2008, p.4). These findings indicate that a general
improvement in reading fluency had resulted by using repeated reading. Although this
strategy was successful in the past, is it still viable with the diversity of students in the
classroom today? Roundy and Roundy (2009) asked this same question in their research
on repeated readings. They questioned whether this technique could continue to be
effective. “This diversity of academic ability, socio-economic status, and race and ethnic
background, may dampen the positive influence of repeated reading on fluency.
Therefore, before recommending the implementation of the repeated reading method, it is
necessary to examine whether the method indeed produces increased fluency in
classrooms composed of diverse learners” (Round & Roundy, 2009, p. 55).

These researches found some resistance at the onset of the study with one student
remarking that the technique of repeated reading was “stupid” and questioned why he had
to “read the same thing over and over” (2009). The results of their study proved that the
success that the students experienced with each reading motivated them to continue.
Success bred success. Roundy and Roundy found that, “poor fluency has a negative
impact on reading comprehension. But as fluency increased, there was evidence that
comprehension was positively affected. For example, “Trisha”, who originally had a very
negative attitude towards reading, stated, “Look! (she pointed to her paper) I went up in
score. I did better this week than last. And I missed only one comprehension question too.
(Observation notes, October 27, 2006” (Roundy & Roundy, 2009, p. 56).

10. Model Fluent Reading

While on the surface it may seem that all students just need a quiet place to read,
leveled books to practice and they will become a fluent reader. However it is not that
simple. Less fluent readers may not know what it sounds like to read fluently. Students
may think that fluency should be reading quickly. Reading quickly may indicate a
measure of automaticity but it may not indicate that a reader is fluent. Students need to
be shown or modeled what a fluent reader sounds like. The teacher should model
meaningful expression and automaticity and ask students to listen and determine what
qualities they heard that made the reading fluent. Explicitly modeling, teaching and
discussing fluency will help the student to identify what it is they should be doing
themselves.
11. Texts for Repeated Reading

It is important to select texts that lend themselves well to an oral reading

experience. These texts are not found in non-fiction materials or basal textbooks. The
most appropriate types of fluency materials come from poetry, reader’s theatre, dialogue,
songs, plays, and rhetoric where the author’s voice is apparent. Not only can these be
performed repeatedly but they also allow the reader to interpret this passage with a
variety of meanings and emotions. They allow the reader as performer the freedom to
express their own voice. The knowledgeable teacher must become a collector of fluency
materials to prepare the classroom for one that instructs and supports fluency practice.

12. Using repeated reading everyday

The teacher can set up a listening center in the classroom with books on tape for the
children to listen to fluent reading and then practice it. The audio can be played over and
over again as students listen and then read along. Teachers can record their voice as they
model fluency and also use the voice of fluent readers in the classroom or other grades in
the school. As in practicing any other musical instrument or sport, the performance
showcases the talent.

The teacher can provide an authentic fluency performance by allowing

students to read their piece in front of an audience. This audience could be other students
in their grade level or in front of the whole school. Parents can be invited into the
classroom to observe a Reader’s Theatre. This forum involves reading text with dialogue
such as a play in front of spectators. A Poetry Café allows students to read their poetry for
an audience. Students practice their poetry pieces over an extended period of time until a
level of fluency is reached. Students can create invitations to be sent out for guests to
come to the Poetry Cafe. Decorations and seating can be created to define a coffee bar
with stage like setting for the students to perform their poetry.

Refreshments can be served after to treat the performers and audience as they discuss the
performance. These experiences create awareness for parents to value this importance of
reading aloud. Authentic practices create meaningful experiences and provide additional
motivation for the student to strengthen reading fluency.

The research has been written. After two decades, repeated reading continues to
be the most universally used technique to improve fluency instruction. It has been widely
applicable to use in regular education and special education classrooms. Repeated
reading has been widely adapted to various classroom structures. It is widely effective
increasing comprehension, word recognition and fluency as well as helping students
become better readers. Finally with the endorsement of the National Reading Panel
(2001), fluency has once again regained its place as one of the keys to success in reading
instruction. And repeated reading is simply a strategy that has been proven to make that
happen.

Chapter III

Methodology

A. Introduction

Struggling readers often lack fluency. As they labor to decode words on the page,
their reading sounds choppy and comprehension often suffers. These students may fall
further behind their classmates in reading success and lack the motivation to read for
enjoyment. Repeated reading has proven to be a successful strategy to increase fluency.
The intent of this research is to demonstrate this method of repeated reading using poetry
and rhyme with a small group of struggling second grade students as well as outline the
implications for repeated reading for general classroom usage.

B. Description of Subjects

James is a 7 year old second male student in my colleague’s class. He has made
growth in reading comprehension however his reading fluency is choppy. James often
adds the word “a” in front of his word when reading. He is reading below grade level
with a running record score of 19. James struggles with math story problems or any
kinds of directions and needs assistance to read them so he understands what is expected.
Repeated practice with leveled material can be of great help to his fluency development.
Estelle is a second grade female student who is has learned English as a Second

Language (ESL). Her first language is Spanish. She is reading at a level 21. Estelle
understands what she reads but often skips words, guesses or only uses the initial sound
of a word to decode it. Her reading sounds choppy because of this and the fact that she is
an English language learner. Estelle lacks confidence in reading because of her lack of
fluency. As with James, Estelle struggles in reading math story problems, questions and
test taking situations as she needs help understanding directions. Using repeated reading
as well as exposure to print is a strategy that may strengthen Estelle as a reader.

Sam is a 7 year old male second grader in my classroom, who is reading at a

level 20. His reading is chopping and he adds additional syllables to the end of some
words as he stretches them out. He was enrolled in a Reading Recovery program last
year. Reading Recovery is a Reading Intervention program for the lowest performing
first grade students. The intent of Reading Recovery is a short term one on one
intervention to tutor struggling readers so they can reach grade level performance as soon
as possible. Sam graduated from the program last year and has mastered good reading
decoding strategies but continues to demonstrate a lack of fluency this year.
 Carl is a seven year old student in my colleague’s class who is reading at a level
19. He has shown growth in reading comprehension and fluency since the beginning of
the year but could use additional support in developing fluent reading. It will be
beneficial for him to use repeated reading of leveled texts to increase his fluency.

C. Procedures

First, a running record to determine reading level was given before the repeated
reading research work was started. The expected reading level for second grade students
in February is 19 or 20. This assessment was used to identify a reading level for each
student. It was predicted that the students would additionally exhibit a gain in reading
level with the fluency practice as well as the gain in fluency. The reading passages used
for the repeated readings was poetry selected from, Building Fluency-Grade One, from
Evan-Moor Publishers (2006). Selections used are included in the appendix. The
repeated reading practices were conducted Monday through Thursday

at [Link] am. There were 16 repeated reading practices with the students as a small
group.

Every third session, an assessment that included name of passage, words per
minute, accuracy percentile and fluency measure was administered. The word per minute
measurement (wpm) is the number of words read correctly in one minute. The accuracy
rate is calculated by subtracting the number of errors from the number of words in the
passage (running word count) and dividing that by the number of words in the passage.
For example, if the running word count is 133 and the student has 14 errors, the formula
would be 133-14=119. Next, 119 divided by 133 = 89%, the accuracy rate is 89%
(Rigby). The last assessment was a qualitative fluency measure. This fluency measure is
a score based on the components of fluency. These five components are expression,
accuracy, attention to punctuation, phrasing and smooth reading.

D. Testing Procedures

Prior to the testing procedure, two copies of each fluency passage were made, one
for the student and one for scoring notes. The practice and testing area were located
away from the other students in the classroom. Each student was given one minute to
read the passage. During the testing, efforts were made to put the student at ease. The
researcher explained to the student at the initial test, that reading aloud is an important
part of reading. The researcher told the student that she would be listening and taking
notes as the student read the passage. Once the student began to read the number of
word call errors were noted while the student was reading. Word call errors include
mispronouncing, omitting, repeating or transposing words. After testing, the researcher
calculated the numerical score for words per minute, fluency and accuracy and noted this
in her journal.

E. Data Collection

The data collection period using the repeated reading strategy was conducted with
the subjects four times a week for 30 minutes each session. The study was conducted for
a total of 4 weeks. This resulted in sixteen interventions per student. Assessments were
administered after every third repeated reading session to assess reading level. This will
result in 5 wpm, accuracy and fluency assessments per student. There were two running
record assessments per child, at the beginning and following the research. The data was
collected in a notebook and assessment forms from the Rigby PM Benchmark Program.
Upon analyzing the data, it was entered into a number of charts and graphs.

F. Data Analysis

The research findings are displayed in measurement tools that reflect reading
accuracy and fluency data. The first chart outlines the two running records including the
student’s name, date, passage read and accuracy and wpm measure. The second displays
the reading record of each student using the data collected at various checkpoints in the
study to demonstrate growth. Anecdotal notes collected during the study were woven
into the analysis to clarify the results and provide a picture of student and teacher
reactions.

G. Limitations
 There are several important limitations regarding this research. Although there
are other methods to increase fluency, this research was limited to the use of repeated
readings to measure its impact on student growth. This study was limited to those non-
random, self selected struggling readers in the second grade. Therefore, a second
limitation is that this study does not assume it would result in the same outcome for all
second grade students. A third limitation of this research is with the use of
instrumentation. There are various instruments to measure reading fluency and running
records. The fluency instrumentation was selected by the researcher because of factors
mentioned earlier. It is possible that other instruments could have been used that would
result in different results. No measures of validity or reliability have been documented
since this instrument was designed for this specific study.

Chapter 4

Results

A. Introduction

The fluency study using repeated readings was conducted with four, second grade
students from Junior high school at 9 Batanghari where the researcher teaches second
grade students. The study began Monday, February 21, 2011 and ended Wednesday,
March 16, 2011. The four students who participated in the study were Carl, Estelle,
Jacob and Sam. Sam is a student from the researcher’s class; the others are from another
colleague’s classroom. The study was conducted from 10:15- 10:45 a.m., each day
unless an assembly or something of that nature would require the session to be cancelled.
The practice was four or five times each week. It should be explained that this is a period
of time where students have a free choice of selecting literacy activities such as practice
reading, writing, or word work activities. So while the research was being conducted, the
remainder of the students was working independently on these activities.

The first day, the researcher explained the basic structure of each fluency practice
session. Students had a red plastic folder where all the poems for repeated reading were
kept. Each day a new poem was added. Previously introduced poems were reviewed
followed with the introduction of a new poem. The researcher explained that once or
twice a week, students would take a fluency test which would involve reading a text for
one minute. Finally if students had a snack to eat that day, they would be able to eat their
snack at the end of the session. If the students finished the lesson in less than 30 minutes,
they would be able to choose a literacy activity such as word work, reading or a computer
game to play.

B. Fluency Strategies

The researcher explained to the students that reading fluency is reading that
sounds smooth as if one was talking. Using the poem, “My Red Big Balloon,” (Appendix
#A), the researcher read it aloud modeling fluent reading. Next, the researcher taught the
students to group words together in phrases as a strategy of reading fluency. Then the
researcher modeled “phrasing” by stopping after certain words using and marking a slash
mark indicating when to stop reading. Students made the same slash marks on their
copies of “My Red Balloon.” This strategy would be used when each new poem was
introduced so students had a visual tool to use for fluency practice. The researcher
pointed out that punctuation marks signal various changes in reading such as question
marks, exclamation, comma and quotation marks. The group discussed the purpose of
each and how their reading voice would and could convey this meaning. During the case
study, the researcher gave the students opportunities to practice reading fluency by using
a variety of techniques such as individual reading, choral reading and partner reading.

C. Fluency practices for week one

On Tuesday, February 22, 2011, the researcher reviewed, “My Big Balloon” by
asking the students to read the poem together as a group and then read it individually.
The researcher introduced the poem, “Rags” (Appendix #B). The researcher read the
poem pointing out the hyphenated words such as “flip-flop” and “wig-wags” as well as
the rhyme in the poem. Students read the poem as a group as well as individually. The
researcher also introduced another new poem, “Bubble, Bubble” (Appendix #C). The
students enjoyed the rhythm of this poem as was evidenced by their moving to the beat.
On Wednesday, February 23, 2011, the researcher reviewed the three previously taught
poems and then conducted a one minute fluency test with the four individual students
using the short passage, “What did they draw?” (EvanMoor, 2006, p. 7), (Appendix #D).
Results are displayed in Table 1. The researcher also conducted the first reading fluency
assessment (Appendix #E) while students read the passage.

This fluency assessment rates the student’s reading in five fluency areas. Those areas
include; expression, accuracy, punctuation, phrasing and smooth reading. The researcher
used the number rating 1, 2, 3 or 4 for each descriptor. To score this assessment, all five
scores were added together and then divided by five to get the average score. Scores for
the first and last reading fluency assessment are displayed in Table 2.

On Thursday, February 24, 2011, the researcher reviewed the previously learned
poems and introduced two new poems for this session. The poems were “Bubble Gum”
(Appendix #F) and “Five Furry Kittens” (Appendix #G). The researcher pointed out the
sequencing in this text as well as the rhythm. During this practice session, the
investigator introduced the concept of antiphonal or call and answer reading when one
student recites a line and another student answers by reciting the next line or lines in the
poem.

On Friday, February 25, 2011, the fifth session of the fluency study began with a
review of the previously taught poems. Students were asked to select their favorite to
read for the group. Next the researcher introduced a new poem called, “Little Monkeys”
(Appendix #H). A new fluency strategy called radio reading was introduced where each
student reads a part of the passage in proper order. Carl was absent this day.

D. Fluency practices for week two

 On Monday, February 28, 2011 the researcher reviewed the previously taught
poems and each student was allowed to choose a poem to read for the group using their
choice of fluency strategies that had been introduced during practices. They were given
the options of solo reading or group reading. All students chose to have their study mates
read in some capacity. Two new poems were introduced. “Giant Tortoise” (Appendix
#I) and “Peanut Butter and Jelly”

(Appendix #J) were modeled by the researcher and the students practiced reading them

aloud. The students were given the opportunity to experiment with their reading speed in

reciting the “Giant Tortoise” poem and repetition in “Peanut Butter and Jelly” which also

required an antiphonal, call and response reading. An assembly required that Tuesday’s

fluency practice was cancelled. On Wednesday, March 2, 2011, the researcher reviewed

all poems previously taught to the students. On Thursday, the researcher reviewed all

previously taught poems and introduced a new poem, “Froggie Fun” (Appendix #K). On

Friday, March 4, 2011, the researcher introduced a new poem, “Did you feed my cow?”

(Appendix #L). Students were able to select one of their favorites to read as practice for

the rest of the session.

E. Fluency practices for week three

The third week of the fluency case study began on Monday, March 3, 2011. The
researcher introduced two new poems, “One Gorilla” (Appendix #M) and “Ladybug,
Ladybug” (Appendix #N). Students reviewed previously taught poems during the thirty
minutes of practice. On Tuesday, March 8, 2011, the researcher conducted a one minute
fluency assessment with all students using the short passage, “Where you live” (Evan-
Moor, 2006, p. 61) (Appendix #O). Student scores are displayed in Table 1. Students
were allowed to work on literacy centers for the remainder of the time. On Wednesday,
March 9, 2011 students were introduced to a new poem, “What’s for Lunch” (Appendix
#P) and then were invited to select their favorite poem to practice for the group. An
early release day prevented the fluency study on Thursday, March
10, 2011. The students practiced all previous poems on Friday, March 11, 2011. No new
poems were introduced.

Table 1

One Minute Probe- words correct per minute (WCPM)

Student WCPM #1 WCPM #2 WCPM #3 WCPM#4 WCPM

Name (2/2) (2/23) (3/8) (3/16) Growth
Dressed for Why did they Where you The lion and the
winter draw? live mouse
Carl 95 112 88 128 +33wpm
Estelle 100 101 83 105 +5wpm
James 80 98 88 81 +1wpm
Sam 76 83 79 89 +13wpm

F. Fluency practice for week four

Week Four of the fluency study began on Monday, March 14, 2011 with a review
of the previously learned poems. An assembly on Tuesday, March 15, 2011 cancelled the
fluency practice for that morning. The final fluency session was a one minute fluency
assessment on

Wednesday, March 16, 2011 with individual students. Students read the short fable “The
Lion and the Mouse” (Evan-Moor, 2006, p. 65) (Appendix #Q). This data is displayed in
Table 1. The researcher also conducted the final Reading Fluency Assessment during
this final one minute assessment. The data is displayed in Table 2.

Table 2

Running Record and Reading Fluency Assessments

 Student Running Running Running Reading Reading Reading
Name Record #1 Record #2 Record Fluency Fluency Fluency
(2/2) (3/22) Growth Assessment Assessment Assessment
#1 #2 Growth
(2/23) (3/16)
Carl 21 22 1 level 2.8 3.6 .80
Estelle 21 24 3 levels 2.8 3.4 .60
James 19 21 2 levels 2.2 3.0 .80
Sam 20 21 1 level 2.2 2.8 .60

References

Clay, M, M. (1993), An observation of early literacy achievement. Portsmouth, NH:

Heinemann,

Fawson, P., Ludlow, B., Reutzel, R., Sudweeks, R. & Smith, J., (2006). Examining the

Reliability of running records attaining generalizable results. Journal of

Educational

Research. 100(2), 113-126.

Fox, B.J., (2008). 100 Activities for developing fluent readers. Retrieved April 14, 2010
from [Link]
comprehension

Hicks, C.P. (2009/2010). A lesson on reading fluency learned from the tortoise and the
hare.

The Reading Teacher, 63(4), 319-323.

Hudson, R., Lane, H. & Pullen, P. (2005). Reading fluency and assessment: what, why
and how.

The Reading Teacher. 58(8), 702-714.

Kuhn, M.R. (2003). Fluency: a review of developmental and remedial practices. Journal
of

Educational Psychology, 95(l), 3-21.

National Institute of Child Health and Human Development. (2000). Report of the
national reading panel. teaching children to read: an evidence-based assessment
of the scientific research literature on reading and its implication for reading
instruction. (NIH