Action Plan
What was implemented?
I conducted an hour-long guided reading block in my classroom four days a week. There were four rotations during the guided reading block, and each rotation lasted for 15 minutes. One of the rotations required students to meet with me. During this time, we read a text matched to their reading levels and discussed the reading. I had six small groups that I met with throughout the course of the week. According to the Fountas and Pinnell leveling system, two of the groups were reading below grade level, two of the groups were reading on grade level, and two of the groups were reading above grade level.
During the meet with teacher rotation within the guided reading block, I implemented targeted questioning with all 24 of my students. Each week, I preplanned at least six questions for each group to embed throughout my lesson including within the text, about the text, and beyond the text questions asked before, during, and after reading the leveled book. These targeted questions were strategically placed to initiate various essential components of the reading process that led to comprehension, including but not limited to, activating background knowledge, making predictions, drawing conclusions, clarifying, summarizing, analyzing, and making connections with the text. During whole-group read alouds, I followed the district-mandated curriculum and asked specific samples of students from each guided reading group comprehension questions reinforcing and assessing skills that all groups were working on.
When did this study occur?
Why were these strategies chosen and best for the population?
In today’s world, reading comprehension is imperative to success in school and beyond. Whether students are reading a recipe, deciphering a math word problem, or conducting a science experiment, they need the ability to comprehend a text. Targeted questioning was chosen, because while conducting research during my Literature Review, I noticed that this practice allowed the teacher to remain in control over specific discussion points while monitoring for comprehension during various stages of the lesson.
​
Out of 24 students in my classroom, eight read below grade level according to the Fountas and Pinnell leveling system. Their accuracy and fluency according to this leveling system was right on target; their downfall and deterrent from an on level reading score stemmed from their inaccuracy when answering the comprehension questions as the culminating task of the leveling assessment. Using the targeted questioning strategy, I could clarify misconceptions while they occurred and, as a result, guided students towards self-monitoring and correcting throughout the reading process. This ultimately contributed to independent reading comprehension.
How were diverse learning needs addressed throughout the study?
The students in my classroom varied greatly in a multitude of ways. The wide range of developmental and academic levels were noticeable, and to ensure I was meeting the needs of all learners, I used the Fountas and Pinnell leveling system as well as the Measures of Academic Progress (MAP) test to create homogenous guided reading groups. I met with my two groups with the lowest guided reading levels and MAP scores four times a week. During our meetings, I spent more time scaffolding to guide them towards the thought processes and actions of actively engaging with a text, such as predicting, making connections, and reviewing text features. I met with my on-level and above-level groups twice a week. I found that my on-level groups often blurted and did not take the time to contemplate their thoughts, so to promote growth and ensure that they were carefully constructing their answers, I required them to write their thoughts down in order to have time to think independently and process before discussing. My above-level groups, however, were immediately ready to jump in and work through their answers with their fellow group members.
My two lowest groups struggled with confidence when reading, so I found myself taking a bit more time to provide positive, specific praise to those students. While I still provided praise to my on-level and above-level guided reading groups, it seemed as if their motivation was more intrinsic than extrinsic. To promote growth in my on and above-level students, I encouraged them to discuss answers to targeted questions with one another instead of answering to me directly. This allowed them to challenge each other’s viewpoints in a respectful manner when applicable and exposed them to ideas different than their own, which added depth to their understanding.
Another way that I differentiated my instruction was by asking solely within the text questions during the first day of reading the leveled reader for my below-level and on-level guided reading groups. I wanted to give those students a chance to soak in the entry level information from the text before probing them with questions that required a higher level of thinking. My above-level group was able to handle all three types of questioning even though they had just been introduced to the first half of the book, so I questioned them using within, about, and beyond the text questions from the start.
How were culturally responsive practices utilized to positively impact student learning?
In order to create an equitable and accessible learning environment, I met my students where they were developmentally and academically while holding each and every one of them to a high standard. Fair and equal are not synonymous terms, and for that reason I met with my below-level guided reading groups four times a week and my on-level and above-level guided reading groups twice a week. Some of my groups needed more direct instruction while others needed to be independent more often to nurture their own academic growth. To ensure accessibility, I created an environment for my students that was conducive to opportunities for discussion and for their voices to be heard. If students from my on-level or above-level groups needed extra assistance with a concept outside of our regularly scheduled guided reading rotations, I made sure to provide them with the necessary help.
I considered the skills and strategies being taught on a group basis and, therefore, the ways in which I instructed individual groups towards mastery varied, but the end goal was the same: for each group to correctly answer targeted questions that mimicked the thought process of an expert reader. I wanted all of my students to naturally ask themselves comprehension questions as they made their way through a text, and ultimately monitor their own comprehension in this way. In short, I was trying to teach the skill of answering targeted questions correctly to all of my students, but the materials and verbage I used to do so differed from group to group.
To add to this point, in order to support multiple perspectives I paid attention to who each student was as a person. I spent a good portion of the beginning of the school year building relationships with my students, and I used those relationships to inform instructional decisions. When students were able to read books relating to topics they were interested in, they engaged more with the text and, therefore, became more likely to actively participate and answer comprehension questions correctly. When possible, I let students decide on a weekly book as long as it corresponded with their reading level. I also created about the text and beyond the text questions that discussed differing cultural perspectives and opened up discussions based on personal experiences to add depth to answers. This led my students to appreciate diversity, customs, and perspectives different from their own. Using my students’ background knowledge to build upon their needs allowed them to connect more with the text.
​
My own teacher perspective was not the only perspective used to inform decision making during my study. I gleaned perspectives and insights outside of my own through the research I conducted during my Literature Review. I took into account the population that each researcher worked with in conjunction with the way in which they implemented the teaching strategy being studied. This allowed me to choose the technique that was best for the population outlined in my rationale. I kept in mind the multiple perspectives I encountered during my research to meet the diverse learning needs of all students in my classroom.
How did engagement with internal and external stakeholders support the study?
I collaborated with multiple internal and external stakeholders in order to support my study. The internal stakeholders included my grade-level teammates, building specialists, and principal. The external stakeholders consisted of my CADRE associate and peers, UNO professors, district leaders, and parents. First and foremost, my CADRE associate and I discussed gaps in my instruction and in my students’ learning in order to guide me toward choosing to improve my guided reading rotations as my capstone project. My associate conducted research with me pertaining to instructional strategies to implement during guided reading that would allow me to increase comprehension. Upon completing my literature review, I picked targeted questioning as I believed it would best fit the needs of my diverse learners.
Once the structure of my study was in place, I proposed it to district-level instructional coaches and human resource employees to ensure I was following proper protocol. Once I chose targeted questioning as the crux of my study, I convened with fellow CADRE teachers implementing the same instructional strategy. We discussed our triangulation of testing and which instruments would lead us to the most valid data.
My grade-level team and I, along with the special education teacher and reading specialist, met to share experiences with targeted questioning and how to build upon knowledge of the book (within the text questions) to yield positive results when asking about and beyond the text questions. I observed the reading specialist during one of her interventions in order to gauge her use of targeted questioning, as well. During our weekly Professional Learning Community (PLC) meetings, we made sure to include a brief talk point about my study and discussed data collected thus far. My grade-level team was there to offer support and assistance when necessary.
During my study, my CADRE associate also assisted me in creating appropriate targeted questions to embed throughout strategic points during the meet with teacher rotation of my guided reading block. I was fortunate enough that parent teacher conferences took place about half-way through my study, so I briefly explained the happenings of the classroom to the parents/guardians and the strategies I was using to improve their student’s reading comprehension. I encouraged them to reach out if they had any questions about my study in order to keep an open line of communication between school and home. After my study had commenced, I met with my building principal to discuss the results. We conversed about the implications of my study and my continued professional growth as a teacher.