Reading (Elementary)

Although metacognition is an area that has been receiving considerable research interest in recent years, few studies have been concerned with metacognitive knowledge about reading. An even fewer number of studies have included students with learning disabilities (LD) as part of the subject pool. This reality is cause for concern. Increasingly, students with LD are receiving their reading instruction in general education classrooms. Because little is known about the effects of method of reading instruction on students with LD in general education classrooms, the purpose of this study was to determine if there was a difference between the metacognitive awareness about reading of fourth-grade students with LD and without LD (NLD) taught by code-based (CB) and meaning-based (MB) instruction in inclusion classrooms. Further, the study was concerned with determining if there was an interaction between learning condition (LD, NLD) and instructional approach (CB, MB). A total of 88 fourth graders from seven elementary schools in a large south Florida school district participated in the study: 38 were students with LD; 50 were students without LD. Forty-five of the students received their reading instruction in CB classrooms and 43 were taught reading in MB classrooms. All students were given the silent reading section of an informal reading inventory, a metacognitive interview, and a metacognitive questionnaire. Results revealed that although there is a significant difference between the metacognitive knowledge about reading between students with and without LD, this difference did not appear to be influenced by their method of reading instruction. Students with LD consistently scored below students without LD, whether they were in code-based or in meaning-based classrooms.

The primary purpose of this study was to determine if there were commonalities in the approaches of ten elementary school principals in the state of Florida identified as "success stories" in leading reading improvement in their schools in 2002 shortly after enactment of the No Child Left Behind Act at the national level and the Just Read, Florida! initiative at the state level. A secondary purpose of the study was to determine if a relationship existed between the elementary school principals' reported success in leading reading improvement at their schools and reported level of agreement with the Survey Form for Elementary Principals , (Hillard, 2005), the Instructional Leadership Behavior Checklist (McEwen, 1997), and the Self-Directed Learning Readiness Scale (Guglielmino, 1977/78). In a qualitative analysis of selected interview questions, five major themes emerged: Philosophical Framework, Human Resources, Programs/Strategies, Use of Data, and Use of Federal and State Initiatives and Information. The principals had initiated reading improvement before the Just Read, Florida! initiative had begun. When analyzing the Survey Form for Elementary Principals and the Instructional Leadership Behavior Checklist (McEwen, 1997), a pattern of high agreement emerged with a majority of the statements that earned average scores in the range of 4.0 to 5.0. On the Self-Directed Learning Readiness Scale (Guglielmino, 1977/78), the principals' scores were exceptionally high, comparable with those of the top entrepreneurs in the United States. The overarching conclusion of the study centers on the identification of these exemplar principals as "educational entrepreneurs" who employ innovation, teacher empowerment, shared leadership, and reliance upon data to lead reading improvement in their schools.

The focus of this study is on evaluating the impact of a school counselor-led program, Ready for Success (RFS) on the academic achievement of second- and third grade students. The research question investigated in this study was: How do students in grades 2 and 3 who receive the RFS classroom intervention perform on the Scholastic Reading Inventory (SRI) when compared to students in grades 2 and 3 who do not receive the RFS classroom intervention. This study is significant because it addresses the need for more outcome research tying school counselor led interventions to student achievement. Research based interventions for school counselors that improve academic achievement directly address the current focus on student achievement outcomes as well as the need for accountability of school counselors. The sample for this study included 240 participants, 107 in the treatment group and 133 in the comparison group. Students were selected from all second- and third-grade classes at four schools in South Florida. There were 66 participants in the second grade; 37 were male and 29 were female. There were 174 participants in the third grade; 92 were male and 82 were female. Academic achievement was measured using a standardized, objective, state-wide assessment instrument, the Scholastic Reading Inventory (SRI). The analysis used for this study was an analysis of covariance (ANCOVA). Pretest scores on the SRI were used in the study as covariates on the dependent variable to account for group differences at pretest. The statistical analysis shows that there was no significant difference between the comparison and treatment group reading achievement levels on the SRI. Upon further review of the research a significant, confounding variable was discovered. High concentration of non-ESOL students were in the comparison group as compared to the treatment group.