Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

The effects of reader’s theater on oral reading


Published on

Published in: Education, Sports
  • Be the first to comment

The effects of reader’s theater on oral reading

  1. 1. The Effects of Reader’s Theater onOral Reading FluencyCathy C. Suarez
  2. 2. Oral Reading Fluency (ORF)• Accuracy• Automaticity• Prosody“ The gateway to comprehension ” (Rasinski, p. 7042006).Fluency is intertwined with reading comprehension(Pikulski & Chard 2005).National Institute of Child Health and Human Development’s [NICHD] 2006 ;Pikulski & Chard, 2005; Rasinki, 2006, Samuels 2006, Tyler & Chard 2000)
  3. 3. The Problem• Dysfluent Reading• Low comprehension rates• Frustration and reluctance in students to repeat read
  4. 4. The Question• How would the use of Spanish Reader’sTheater affect the Oral Reading Fluency (ORF)in a 1st grade, two-way, 80/20 Dual Languageclassroom?
  5. 5. Repeated Reading Strategy• Exposure to the same text multiple times increasesoral reading fluency, which leads to improvedcomprehension(Gorsuch &Taguchi, 2010; NICHD, 2006; Rasinski, 2006); Tyler &Chard, 2000; Welsch, 2006; Young & Rasinski, 2009)
  6. 6. Reader’s Theater• Students reading text in scripted format as a group• Requires repeated reading for “rehearsals”• Provides a reason to read with fluency andexpression(Avi, 2009; Flynn, 2004; Rasinski, 2000, 2003; Rieg, 2009; andYoung & Timothy Rasinski , 2009)
  7. 7. Current Research• “A natural and authentic way to promote repeatedreadings" (Rasinksi 2000).• Improves automaticity, prosody and comprehension(Girffith &Rasinksi 2004, Young & Rasinski 2009).• Struggling readers are motivated by playing acharacter, moving around, and working in groups (Tyler& Chard 2000).
  8. 8. Theory• Sociocultural learning (Vygotsky 1978) InteractingTalkingConstructing meaning(Pérez, 2004)
  9. 9. Procedures• 6 week study• Wk 1: Modeling, I do, We do, You do• Wks 2,3: 3 times/week 15 minutes• WPM @ 3rd week• Mid year vs End of Year EDL reading assessment(Avi, 2009; Flynn, 2004; Rasinski, 2000, 2003; Rieg, 2009; andYoung & Timothy Rasinski , 2009)
  10. 10. Data Collection• EDL– ORF: Expression, Phrasing, Rate, Accuracy• Running Records– Accuracy (miscues)– Rate (WPM)– Comprehension (retell)
  11. 11. Modifications• Scripts• Grouping• Model:ActingRead AloudTesting
  12. 12. Rate010203040506070Juanita Cruz Emily Matthews Jack Smith Danilo Martinez Janice Baker Elaine Botero Eric PearsonPre- WPMMid-WPMEnd-WPM
  13. 13. Increase in EDL Levels024681012141618AliceHendersonAdolfoRomeroFernandoDiazAntonioSantosElaineBoteroJack Smith JaniceBakerJuanitaCruzEmilyMatthewsDaniloMartinezEricPearsonJanuary EDLApril EDL
  14. 14. Limitations• Time: Spring Break, Easter, bad weather day, end ofyear activities• Variables: tutoring, interventions, comprehensionfocus, maturity, language acquisition,• Selection: Spanish, levels, relevance• Insufficient research: demographics, language,
  15. 15. Conclusion• Fluency is more than Words per minute.• While automaticity did not change significantly……..• Accuracy and Prosody increased• Motivation and interest increased• Confidence and engagement increased• Increase from 2-4 reading levels