Reading Recovery® in Maine

2001-2002 Executive Summary

INTRODUCTION

Reading Recovery is a short-term early literacy intervention for first grade students who are having difficulty learning to read. Students receive 30 minutes of daily individualized instruction from a highly skilled registered Reading Recovery teacher for 12-20 weeks. Reading Recovery enables the lowest-achieving students to make accelerated gains and achieve at the average classroom level of their peers.

PROGRAM HISTORY

Reading Recovery is a research-based collaborative effort between schools, universities and departments of education. Designed by Marie M. Clay of New Zealand, Reading Recovery has proven effective in reversing the failure cycle of first-grade students in a relatively short time. A national program in New Zealand, Reading Recovery has expanded to the United States, Canada, the UK and Australia. Reading Recovery researchers have collected data on more than one million children.

In the United States, Reading Recovery was first implemented at The Ohio State University in 1984. In 2001-2002, almost 200,000 Reading Recovery students were served across 3,300 school districts and 10,500 schools nation-wide. There were 42 university faculty and over 700 teacher leaders in 570 sites. In Maine, Reading Recovery has grown rapidly since the University of Maine trained the first group of teacher leaders in 1991-1992. Since then, 544 teachers have served more than 18,500 first graders in 272 schools.

READING RECOVERY IN MAINE 2001-2002

The University of Maine serves as the Reading Recovery University Training Center for Maine. The university trainer provides initial and ongoing training for teacher leaders who return to local areas to train teachers. The research associate provides support to Reading Recovery professionals and schools through annual evaluations of program data.

In 2001-2002, there were 12 teacher training sites serving 100 school districts and 211 schools. Fifteen teacher leaders provided initial or ongoing training to 309 teachers, with 40 in their initial training year. These teachers served 2,469 students in Maine.

Program Outcomes

Reading Recovery reports on all students served. There are five outcomes: discontinued successfully upon meeting or exceeding average grade level expectations, recommended for further assessment after receiving a full 20-week program, moved before completing the lessons, incomplete series of lessons usually because the school year ends and none of the above, a rarely used category e.g. a student is placed back in kindergarten.

Of all students served, 1,245 students, or 57%, met the stringent criteria for discontinued service within 20 weeks and 22% were recommended for further support. At the end of the school year, 13% were still in Reading Recovery with insufficient time to complete their programs (Figure 1).

The effects of Reading Recovery can best be measured with data from children who had a full series of lessons, in other words, from those who received the complete treatment. 72% of these students were successfully discontinued (Figure 2).

The format and content of this report was adapted from similar reports by the University of Maine, The Ohio State University and Texas Woman's University.

Closing the Achievement Gap

As part of the evaluation design, Reading Recovery students are compared with randomly selected first graders. Because they start out the school year with the lowest test scores, Reading Recovery students must make higher gains than students in the Random Sample group (the upper 2/3's of the achievement band) to meet grade-level expectations by year-end. In 2001-2002, discontinued students (RR) made accelerated gains to finish at a text reading level of 18.5 (Figure 3).

Figure 3

The horizontal gray bars show Stanine 5, the average achievement goal for first graders in the fall (two bottom lines) and at year-end (two top lines). In the fall, the Random Sample (RS) group started out above Stanine 5 and the Reading Recovery (RR) group started out below. By year-end, however, the RR group reached 18.5, which is within Maine Stanine 5. In sum, Figure 3 shows how the Reading Recovery students' accelerated gains in text reading level narrowed the gap with the RS group.

In addition, classroom teachers described dramatic changes in reading group placements for Reading Recovery students across the year. In the fall, 77% were in the lowest quartile group compared to 18% of the random sample group; by year-end, low group placements for both groups had converged (Figure 4).

Figure 4

Also by year-end, 98% of discontinued reading recovery children were on grade level, within or above the Maine text reading stanine criterion band compared to 90% of random sample children.

Finally, the data on lunch costs shows that Reading Recovery narrowed the achievement gap for students with free or reduced lunch (the most economically disadvantaged students). In fall 2001-02, there was a gap of 5 text levels. By year-end, discontinued students with free/reduced lunch were reading on average at text level 20, compared to 22 for random sample students.

Special Education/Retention

Although Reading Recovery students were the lowest readers when they entered Grade 1, only 16% of students who received a full Reading Recovery program were referred for special education. Only 2% were placed in LD programs for reading. Moreover, only 6% of Grade 1 Reading Recovery students who had a full program were actually retained, and most for reasons other than literacy.

Qualitative Results

Parents, administrators, classroom teachers, and Reading Recovery teachers rated the program as a very good program. They observed Reading Recovery students making big improvements in reading strategies, writing performance and classroom test scores. These students also became happier, more self-confident and better risk-takers. Teachers also said that their Reading Recovery training enhanced both their understanding of literacy and their classroom teaching in Grade 1 and beyond. Finally, administrators stressed the cost-effectiveness of Reading Recovery, specifically, through reductions in special education and Title 1 referrals and lower retention rates.

Conclusion

In Maine, Reading Recovery has an 11-year track record of success in closing gaps in reading achievement in first grade. The 2001-2002 data shows that Reading Recovery is a very effective program with a broad impact. Because the program reduces special education, Title 1 referrals and retention rates, it is also cost-effective. With the generous support of Maine legislators, Reading Recovery continues to set the standard for early literacy intervention. Reading Recovery provides economically disadvantaged, low-achieving students with excellent teaching interventions early on so that they can close the achievement gap with their classroom peers.

Literacy Area Programs

College of Education and Human Development,

5766 Shibles Hall,

Orono, ME 04469-5766

Phone: (207) 581-2438

 

University Trainer Paula Moore

Site Coordinator Rosemary Bamford

Research Associate Valerie Ruhe