Guided Reading
Planning for Differentiation
Action Plan
What was implemented?
In this study, I implemented purposeful planning for guided reading by using the Literacy Continuum by Fountas & Pinnell. I turned the lesson structure outlined in the text into a two-day model. The lesson included before reading, during reading, and after reading followed by word work and writing about the reading. Each part of the lesson plan fit the needs of the group and used targeted teaching points from the Literacy Continuum.
At the beginning of my study, I used Fountas and Pinnell (F & P) Benchmarking system to decide the appropriate reading level for each student. I also conducted a classroom climate survey for each student to learn more about their thoughts on school. Using the student's instructional level, I placed my students into small groups of three to five students, with similar abilities. Throughout my study, I used cold and warm read running records to assess my students decoding and accuracy skills. I also used anecdotal notes to decide what reading behaviors from the Literacy Continuum they were using at each level to help drive my instruction. I continually reflected on my guided reading lessons and the progress students were making in order to move students on to different levels as needed. At the end of my study, I looked at the students running records, anecdotal notes, and F & P level to decide if they had increased their reading achievement.
I chose purposeful planning in order to get the most success out of the twenty-minute chunk of time that I had with my guided reading groups. The two-day lesson structure worked best for my students because we were able to spend time introducing and discussing the book on day one and then we reviewed the text on day two and expanded our comprehension through word work and writing. Fountas and Pinnell described specific features of the lesson that need to be included, and the two-day lesson plan includes all the elements of Fountas and Pinnell’s lesson structure. The research that I gathered from various articles listed the following eight commonalities in guided reading: students can all succeed, students are taught by skilled teachers, students become independent readers, students learn by reading, students are reading for meaning, students know the how and why of reading, students experience joy when reading, students are instructed using a well-developed lesson. The use of purposeful planning during my study guaranteed that I was using all eight commonalities. One commonality that provided differentiation during guided reading was using flexible grouping. Even though I only benchmarked students' reading levels at the beginning and end of my study, I was constantly aware of the progress students were making and changed groups and instruction as needed throughout my study. Research supported the strategies that I implemented into my study and continued to impact the decisions I made in my classroom.
Running Record Form
When and with whom?
In my kindergarten class of 18 students, I had four different guided reading groups. This is because the students were all at different levels. The purpose of guided reading is to differentiate lessons to meet the learners’ specific needs that are not being met through whole group instruction. After conducting F & P Benchmarks, I noticed that many of my students were struggling with decoding and accuracy across all levels. My students that were reading above grade level were still not able to use decoding strategies regularly, when running into a word they did not know. Using differentiated groups, I purposefully planned the lesson to be more specific to the text students encountered at each level. I chose to focus on accuracy and decoding at the kindergarten level because if students were not able to decode the texts they were reading, they would not be successful across curriculum with literacy.
I created four different groups based on similar guided reading levels. I met with each group once a day for fifteen to twenty minutes. Three of the students received small group instruction from guided reading in the classroom, and they were also pulled out to be in a small group with the Resource Teacher. One student who was pulled out for resource was also pulled out for speech services during the guided reading block of time. Two other students in the classroom received small group instruction with me and were pulled out to be in a small group with the Reading Specialist. The specialists in our school also worked with individual students by providing interventions on beginning and ending sounds, high frequency words, and blending words. The students' goals in my classroom were met by providing support both in the classroom during guided reading and outside the classroom. All instruction was differentiated and specific to student and group needs.
Culturally Responsive Teaching
In my classroom, I fostered equality and accessibility as my students were always working at their own pace to become independent readers. When I was working with small groups, other students were independently working on stations that reviewed skills taught during whole group. The students that got pulled from class to get extra support were missing independent work time, but it was more important for them to receive one-on-one support. Some students in the classroom were still working on letter sounds, others were tracing dictated sentences, and some were being challenged to go beyond the task assigned. In my classroom, I was continuously differentiating instruction for the students to be successful. In my groups, the lessons differed from group to group based on the learners that I had. For example, in my beginning group, we started with letter sounds, high-frequency words, and then dove into the text. When introducing the text, I had to provide a lot more scaffolding because the layout and words in the text were new. Whereas, my students who were reading above grade level needed very little scaffolding because they had more experience working with the text. When teaching decoding skills to the students, I taught the same skill from group to group to create a baseline, but I used different words to teach the skill. After the baseline was created I moved on to teaching specific decoding skills that related to each group's ability level and the text we were accessing, again ensuring that I was fostering equality and accessibility throughout my groups. My teaching practice was culturally responsive as I chose books that represented the different cultures present in my classroom. During guided reading, my students were encouraged to share and actively participate because I wanted them to learn from myself as well as each other. Each perspective was valued as important at our guided reading table. I also valued different perspectives of professionals and how they successfully taught guided reading, including the reading specialist in my building, instructional coach, Fountas and Pinnell, Jan Richardson, and the authors of Daily 5. By valuing multiple perspectives in my classroom I combined them to use what worked best for my students.
Professional Collaboration
During my study, I collaborated with various stakeholders to improve my research. Within my building, I worked closely with my grade level team, principal, resource teacher, and reading specialist. I worked with the grade level team to look at the reading levels of kindergarteners and make sure we were providing the appropriate instruction. I checked in regularly with the reading specialist and resource teacher to see how my students were progressing and what we could do to help them improve and to see growth in their reading achievement. I worked with my principal at the beginning of my study to decide the areas for improvement, in reading, for my class. I communicated with the specialists in the building that were providing intervention support to students in my classroom. These specialists, when pulling small groups of students who needed intervention, primarily worked on high-frequency word fluency and CVC blending. Working with stakeholders within my building allowed me to provide the most purposeful instruction to my students.
Outside of my building I worked with stakeholders including my CADRE associate, peers, and an instructional coach, with experience in kindergarten reading. My CADRE associate helped conduct the classroom climate survey to get clear results from my students. I worked closely with her in checking student reading levels and running records to be sure the data I was collecting was valid. I collaborated with my peers about how they use guided reading in their classroom to differentiate for all learners. I also interviewed an instructional coach in the district which provided me great insight on how to plan and get the most success out of my guided reading time. She told me to look closely at reading behaviors during guided reading, as well as other times throughout the day. By collaborating with internal and external stakeholders I was able to improve my guided reading instruction to benefit all learners in my classroom.