Action Plan

What was implemented:

Each week a reading strategy was implemented to support students with understanding that week’s reading skills during small group instruction. For example, one strategy I implemented in small group instruction was rereading to better understand how to compare/contrast while reading. My goal was to see if explicit instruction of reading strategies/skills would increase students' overall reading comprehension of text.

During my literacy block on Mondays, Tuesdays, Wednesdays, and Thursdays, each group met with me for about 15 minutes at a time. During this time, each group followed a gradual release instructional model. My lesson plans followed an “I do, we do, you do” structure. On Mondays, I explicitly taught that week’s strategy showing students in all of my small reading groups how I use the strategy while reading. I modeled the strategy and used think-alouds during focused instruction. For example, if that week’s strategy was to reread and the skill was to compare/contrast, that is when I modeled how to “reread” and also think-aloud about why a great reader would need to reread. Then, I made connections between the reading strategy and how that would help me understand how to compare and contrast in the text. I aligned that week’s strategy with the Wonders skill and strategy assessed during that week. We discussed how we can use rereading to become better readers, what it looks and sounds like, and the expectations for the “we do” step. On Tuesdays, as a group, we began practicing the strategy together as we dove into the leveled readers of the week at their reading level. We practiced together what the specific strategy looked like and sounded like. Each reading group also discussed the purpose for rereading and connected the strategy to the weekly skill. As a group, we read the book together. I used checks for understanding and quick formative assessments to recognize when students are ready to move on to the “you do” step. On Wednesdays, students came to to small groups to practice rereading from their leveled readers to better understand the story all on their own. That is when I did a more formal assessment of each students’ ability to understand what is being read by using the reading strategy independently. I used exit tickets that were sentence starters to show their knowledge on how they used the strategy. Throughout the week I also used targeted questioning to prompt discussions and written/drawn tasks that they completed to show me their learning.

When it was implemented:

Calendar: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1M9qo7Cw5KiXDiabEW3IJMTFfehQlNz4oP1B_lETKw8k/edit

Weekly instruction overview for each reading strategy implemented

Summarize

Visualize

Metacognition

Schema

Ask/Answer Questions

Rereading

Action Plan

Why these strategies were chosen:

I first chose to implement explicit modeling in small group instruction rather than whole group instruction because I noticed a lack of engagement and focus during whole group instruction. Through differentiated, small group instruction, I was able to better support my students individually and they could work with students who are at the same reading level as they were. Here are the skills and strategies I taught and monitored during small group instruction based on the data I have collected for the skills I saw a lack of knowledge in:

Skills: cause/effect, theme, point of view, author’s point of view

Strategies: metacognition, reread, visualize, summarize, schema, ask and answer questions

How I differentiated instruction and worked with students to enhance individual student learning:

I differentiated instruction/worked with students in different ways. One way I taught instruction is through small groups. This way, students were surrounded by peers that are on a similar reading level that they easily collaborated with. This increased the productivity of student learning because when the students worked in small groups they heard each other's thoughts, asked questions, and they felt like they were contributing to the group. Small groups helped students gain confidence in reading, check for understanding, and I got a better sense of what kind of reader they were. I also differentiated instruction by breaking down and expanding on the strategies I explicitly taught each week. My lessons with my high group looked different than my low group due to their ability to grasp each concept. I created different visuals, manipulatives, and formal assessments to give based off of their group.

Here are three examples of successful small group strategy use in the classroom. These pictures were taken during day three explicit instruction when students had mastered the strategy:

Ask and Answer Questions

A group utilizing sentence starters during small groups to ask questions while they are reading. This was on the third day of explicit instruction when students were asked to use sentence starters to ask questions while they read. They demonstrated their knowledge by writing down purposeful and intentional questions while reading a nonfiction story. I was able to use these questions to guide the conversations with them.

Visualization

Student A demonstrating visualization quick checks during small groups. This was on the third day of explicit instruction when students read the story on their own and practiced the strategy. Student A was taking their time reading by stopping and writing what they were visualizing what was happening in their mind or using a sentence to describe what they think the picture might look like. Using this strategy, students understood the story better by comparing their pictures or sentences and having a discussion about the text.

Schema

Student B using the schema strategy while reading the text to make personal connections with the story. While students read in small groups, they wrote things down that make them unique and things that have happened to them in the past. We acknowledge that as a reader, we can experience different things and it makes us view stories in different ways. Students would point to a memory or item about themselves as they read to make connections. This showed me as the teacher if they were thinking while they were reading.

Why these strategies were the best for the population:

These strategies were the best to teach and implement into my group of learners because this is where my students are scoring the lowest academically. Since the Winter MAP test score, literary text and theme was my students lowest strand. Overall, my class average for weekly Wonders tests is 60%. I know this implementation of explicit instruction of reading strategies will help my students become better readers and help with comprehension.

How diverse learning needs were accounted for:

My plan was to keep them in their designated reading group for the six weeks of data taking; I wanted to be responsive to the data collected each week from the weekly assessments on Fridays. I worked with each small group to work on strategies and skills that they specifically needed support with. Throughout my study, I noticed that certain students were not working well with others in their designated groups. I decided to change up the reading groups half way through the study to better fit the needs of the learners in each group. I decided this based off of how they performed on the previous weekly test. If 4-5 students fell within a 60-70% test score range, I placed them in a group together. Scores changed weekly so I was making data-driven informed decisions while fitting their specific reading needs.

Another way that I met diverse learning needs was by implementing picture walks through each leveled reader at the beginning of the week. This exposed new vocabulary words, pictures, and a better idea of what the story was going to be about for each reader. I also prompted students when they were not sure about how to answer a question and write down questions they had on sticky notes while they were reading. This allowed me to individually meet with them and answer questions without disrupting others.

Fostering an equitable and accessible learning environment:

I have 20 students who are part of the data. I differentiated the instruction based off of the needs of all of my learners in the literacy block. I have students of all different educational backgrounds with different needs to support, 6 high readers who scored in the 90th and up percentile, and 2 students on an IRIP reading plan. I welcomed all learners by helping them make better sense of reading by explicitly teaching reading strategies they can utilize. They worked in small groups to feel like they have a voice and work with others that are on the same reading level.

Including multiple perspectives related to teaching and learning:

The Wonders’ curriculum was the main source of data and materials I used. Their curriculum did a great job at exposing readers to all different backgrounds. These books included several races and ethnicities from different parts of the world that students made connections to. Some of these topics were about about Native American culture, different religions in the United States, and cultural traditions we learned about and related to. Their leveled readers broke it down into ELL, below, on, and a high level text selections to fit the needs of students.

Collaboration

The collaboration that took place was an essential component to my action research this year. There were both external and internal stakeholders that collaborated with me to help implement my six weeks of data.

Internal Stakeholders:

The internal stakeholders consisted of my third grade level team at my building. They helped me by providing insight on resources provided by the curriculum, advice with lesson plans, and helpful strategies to implement. Strategies such as picture walks, vocabulary preview, and graphic organizers to utilize throughout explicit instruction. My CADRE mentor was a huge part of the success with my action research. She helped me implement explicit instruction in small groups by suggesting a lesson plan structure each week. She allowed me to use her resources such as books and hands-on materials for close reading, provided me feedback on student engagement and improvement, and suggested new ideas to try in small groups for my lower groups such as hands on cups to promote engagement.

She also analyzed my data with me to help me pull a common thread to analyze with weekly assessment grades. When I would not have enough time to meet with students due to our schedule, she pulled small groups to ensure I was meeting their needs as learners. Her support and feedback this year has driven me to make informed decisions about my students and future teaching.

External Stakeholders:

The external stakeholders that supported me throughout this project were my graduate cohort who gave me different resources to implement such as graphic organizers with small groups or their examples of anchor charts they had used for reading. I used their suggestions, advice, and feedback with their projects and compared it to my own with analyzing data. They also provided me with different ways they use informal assessments and small groups planning such as exit ticket ideas, post-it notes in students books, and ideas they had for students that were not participating in small groups. My professors provided me with feedback on my literature review, research articles to use for my paper, and gave me effective feedback to further my research within my classroom.

Page updated

Report abuse