Close
About
FAQ
Home
Collections
Login
USC Login
Register
0
Selected
Invert selection
Deselect all
Deselect all
Click here to refresh results
Click here to refresh results
USC
/
Digital Library
/
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
/
Improving foundational reading skills growth in middle school: a promising practices study
(USC Thesis Other)
Improving foundational reading skills growth in middle school: a promising practices study
PDF
Download
Share
Open document
Flip pages
Contact Us
Contact Us
Copy asset link
Request this asset
Transcript (if available)
Content
Running head: IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 1
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS GROWTH IN MIDDLE SCHOOL:
A PROMISING PRACTICES STUDY
by
John Kwon
A Dissertation Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE USC ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
DOCTOR OF EDUCATION
May 2019
Copyright 2019 John Kwon
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 2
Acknowledgements
I write this on my wife, Ji Min’s birthday and I’m reminded of how fortunate I am to be
with you. You are my rock and my greatest source of inspiration. Without you I am lost. Thank
you for standing by me the last 10 years and during the last 3 as I completed this program. Thank
you for encouraging me to pursue this goal. Thank you for listening and engaging in thoughtful
dialogue around topics near and dear to my heart. Thank you especially for supporting me
through every late and sleepless writing night. This last year has been most challenging with
surgery, the birth of our daughter, moving homes, this dissertation, everything, and your
resilience not only kept our family afloat, but was my primary source of life. My Jiminy with the
laughing face. I love you dearly.
To my parents, Hyang Jin and Young Jae, you are my first role models who highlighted
the power of education and the need to stand up for social justice, equity, and compassion. Thank
you for taking me to the library on those long summer days, for filling our house with nothing
but books. My curious nature and to always consider those being left behind come from you.
You are in me and in everything I do. I am your son and I promise to do better.
To my sister, Reese, thank you for showing me the pursuit of excellence. I look up to you
then and now, and I can’t wait to see what unfolds in the future for us. You’re an aunt now!
Please spoil Ella in ways I never can. To Michael, you’re my brother and I love you. Now let’s
all go eat, drink, and be merry while as usual ordering way too much.
To Woojae and Ame, thank you for paving the way on parenting. I look forward to seeing
our kids explore the world together.
To my 03/02 brothers, thank you for tolerating all those heated discussions. No more I
promise, unless you want to.
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 3
To Esther Hammy Deth, thank you for the flexibility and allowing me to conduct
research to finish everything this school year. We’ve been partners for many years and I hope we
can continue geeking out together for many more to come. I thank you for being my moving
target, but I promise to stop sharing resumes only after I lap you.
To my classmates and cohort members, those late nights on campus until 10pm were
definitely terrible, but much less so having experienced it together. To Gregorio and Bhavini
especially, thank you for the accountability, sharing of thoughts, feedback, and rant sessions—
may our text thread never die.
To my dissertation chair, Dr. Kenneth Yates, you are the gold standard for what coaching
and guidance should be, and your detailed support helped me throughout this entire complicated
process. I would not have been able to meet my goal of submitting this spring without our
frequent check-ins and your generosity with your time. I thank you for modeling how to manage
my calendar to meeting goals and how to pay attention to the nuances, to the space between. I
now have the pleasure of critically examining everything with a gap analysis lens and trying to
identify the knowledge, motivation, organizational needs. To Dr. Briana Hinga, thank you for
your practical suggestions and for opening my eye to the potential of qualitative research. From
your class, I still carry with me the process of considering different worldviews and the power of
understanding each other’s stories. To Dr. Sue Jean Hong, thank you for giving me my start in
education, for believing in me back at Watts, and for your older sister friendship. KP and soju.
I dedicate this to all the children currently on their journey to find their passion for
reading in GDPS and especially at my home in ÁWCPA.
I dedicate this to my daughter, Ella Grace Kwon and to any of my future unborn children.
I pray you become lost in books, as I started to once as a child and still do today.
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 4
Table of Contents
List of Tables .................................................................................................................................. 8
List of Figures ............................................................................................................................... 10
Abstract ......................................................................................................................................... 11
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................... 12
Introduction of the Problem of Practice ............................................................................ 12
Organizational Context and Mission ................................................................................ 12
Organizational Performance Status ................................................................................... 13
Related Literature.............................................................................................................. 13
Importance of a Promising Practice Study ........................................................................ 14
Organizational Performance Goal and Current Performance ........................................... 14
Description of the Stakeholders ........................................................................................ 14
Stakeholders’ Performance Goals ..................................................................................... 15
Stakeholder Group for the Study ...................................................................................... 17
Stakeholder of Focus Critical Behaviors .......................................................................... 17
Purpose of the Project and Questions ............................................................................... 17
Conceptual and Methodological Framework .................................................................... 18
Definitions......................................................................................................................... 18
Organization of the Study ................................................................................................. 19
CHAPTER TWO: REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE ................................................................ 20
Developing Literacy.......................................................................................................... 20
Foundational Reading Skills ................................................................................. 20
Reading Comprehension ....................................................................................... 21
Learning Theoretical Framework ..................................................................................... 22
Piaget..................................................................................................................... 22
Vygotsky ............................................................................................................... 22
Reading and Learning ....................................................................................................... 23
Neuroscience of Learning to Read ........................................................................ 23
Adolescent Readers ............................................................................................... 25
Middle School Reading Performance as a Predictor of High School Performance and ... 27
College Readiness ............................................................................................................. 27
Reading as an Early Indicator and Predictor of Academic Outcomes .................. 27
Middle and High School English Language Arts Standards ................................ 27
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 5
Reading Skills and College Readiness .................................................................. 29
Instruction and Intervention .............................................................................................. 30
Traditional Direct Instruction and Intervention .................................................... 30
Blended Learning Design ..................................................................................... 32
Summary ............................................................................................................... 34
Conceptual Framework ..................................................................................................... 35
Stakeholder Knowledge, Motivation and Organizational Factors .................................... 35
Knowledge and Skills ........................................................................................... 35
Motivation ............................................................................................................. 43
Organization .......................................................................................................... 51
Summary ........................................................................................................................... 56
CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY ..................................................................................... 57
Purpose of the Project and Questions ............................................................................... 57
Conceptual and Methodological Framework .................................................................... 57
Assessment of Performance Influences ............................................................................ 59
Knowledge Assessment ........................................................................................ 59
Motivation Assessment ......................................................................................... 62
Organization/Culture/Context Assessment ........................................................... 66
Participating Stakeholders and Sample Selection ............................................................. 69
Sampling ............................................................................................................... 70
Recruitment ........................................................................................................... 70
Instrumentation ................................................................................................................. 71
Interview Protocol ................................................................................................. 71
Observation Protocol ............................................................................................ 71
Document Analysis Protocol ................................................................................ 72
Data Collection ................................................................................................................. 72
Interviews .............................................................................................................. 72
Observations ......................................................................................................... 72
Document Analysis ............................................................................................... 73
Data Analysis .................................................................................................................... 73
Interviews .............................................................................................................. 73
Observations ......................................................................................................... 74
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 6
Documents ............................................................................................................ 74
Trustworthiness of Data .................................................................................................... 74
Role of Investigator........................................................................................................... 75
Limitations ........................................................................................................................ 75
CHAPTER FOUR: RESULTS AND FINDINGS ........................................................................ 76
Participating Stakeholders ................................................................................................ 76
Data Validation ................................................................................................................. 77
Results and Findings for Knowledge Assets .................................................................... 78
Declarative Factual Knowledge ............................................................................ 79
Conceptual Knowledge ......................................................................................... 82
Procedural Knowledge .......................................................................................... 85
Metacognitive Knowledge .................................................................................... 89
Results and Findings for Motivation Assets ..................................................................... 93
Value ..................................................................................................................... 94
Self-Efficacy ......................................................................................................... 98
Emotion ............................................................................................................... 102
Attribution ........................................................................................................... 107
Results and Findings for Organization Assets ................................................................ 108
Cultural Setting ................................................................................................... 109
Cultural Model .................................................................................................... 111
Policies and Procedures ...................................................................................... 113
Resources ............................................................................................................ 115
Summary of Validated Influences .................................................................................. 116
Knowledge .......................................................................................................... 116
Motivation ........................................................................................................... 117
Organization ........................................................................................................ 118
CHAPTER FIVE: RECOMMENDATIONS AND EVALUATION ......................................... 120
Purpose of the Project and Questions ............................................................................. 120
Recommendations to Address Knowledge, Motivation, and Organization Influences .. 121
Knowledge Recommendations ........................................................................... 122
Motivation Recommendations ............................................................................ 130
Organization Recommendations ......................................................................... 136
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 7
Summary of Knowledge, Motivation and Organization Recommendations .................. 142
Knowledge Recommendations Summary ........................................................... 142
Motivation Recommendations Summary ........................................................... 143
Organization Recommendations Summary ........................................................ 144
Integrated Implementation and Evaluation Plan ............................................................. 144
Organizational Purpose, Need and Expectations ................................................ 144
Implementation and Evaluation Framework ....................................................... 146
Level 4: Results and Leading Indicators ............................................................. 147
Level 3: Behavior ................................................................................................ 149
Level 2: Learning ................................................................................................ 154
Level 1: Reaction ................................................................................................ 159
Evaluation Tools ................................................................................................. 160
Data Analysis and Reporting .............................................................................. 162
Summary of the Implementation and Evaluation ............................................... 162
Limitations and Delimitations ......................................................................................... 166
Recommendations for Future Research .......................................................................... 167
Conclusion ...................................................................................................................... 168
References ................................................................................................................................... 170
Appendix A: Interview Items Bank ............................................................................................ 181
Appendix B: Observation Protocol ............................................................................................. 184
Appendix C: Document Analysis Protocol ................................................................................. 186
Appendix D: Level 1 and 2 Evaluation Instrument Immediately Following the Program ......... 187
Appendix E: Evaluation Instrument Delayed for a Period After Program Implemnetation ....... 189
Appendix F: Data Reporting Dashboard Example ..................................................................... 192
Appendix G: Informed Consent and Information Sheet ............................................................. 193
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 8
List of Tables
Table 1: Organizational Goal and Mission ................................................................................... 16
Table 2: Summary of Assumed Knowledge Influences on Teachers’ Ability to Achieve the
Performance Goal ......................................................................................................................... 42
Table 3: Summary of Assumed Motivation Influences on Teachers’ Ability to Achieve the
Performance Goal ......................................................................................................................... 50
Table 4: Summary of Assumed Organization Influences on Teachers’ Ability to Achieve the
Performance Goal ......................................................................................................................... 55
Table 5: Summary of Knowledge Influences and Method of Assessment ................................... 60
Table 6: Summary of Motivation Influences and Method of Assessment.................................... 64
Table 7: Summary of Organization Influences and Method of Assessment ................................ 68
Table 8: Participant Demographics ............................................................................................... 77
Table 9: Assumed Knowledge Assets........................................................................................... 79
Table 10: Keywords Related to Modifying Instruction ................................................................ 81
Table 11: Assumed Motivation Assets ......................................................................................... 94
Table 12: Keywords Related to Feeling Positive Implementing Components of Blended Learning
..................................................................................................................................................... 102
Table 13: Assumed Organization Assets .................................................................................... 109
Table 14: Characteristics Indicating a Standardized Program .................................................... 114
Table 15: Summary of Assumed Knowledge Assets Validation ................................................ 117
Table 16: Summary of Assumed Motivation Assets Validation ................................................ 118
Table 17: Summary of Assumed Organization Assets Validation ............................................. 119
Table 18: Summary of Knowledge Influences and Recommendations ...................................... 123
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 9
Table 19: Summary of Motivation Influences and Recommendations ...................................... 132
Table 20: Summary of Organization Influences and Recommendations ................................... 138
Table 21: Outcomes, Metrics, and Methods for External and Internal Outcomes ..................... 148
Table 22: Critical Behaviors, Metrics, Methods, and Timing for Evaluation ............................ 150
Table 23: Required Drivers to Support Critical Behaviors ......................................................... 152
Table 24: Evaluation of the Components of Learning for the Program ..................................... 159
Table 25: Components to Measure Reactions to the Program .................................................... 160
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 10
List of Figures
Figure 1: Sequence of steps in the Gap Analysis Process ............................................................ 58
Figure 2: References to Mastery and Goal Setting ..................................................................... 107
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 11
Abstract
This study uses Clark and Estes’ (2008) gap analysis performance model which systematically
analyzes organizational goals to identify current performance levels and stakeholder assets or
needs within an organization. In this study, the model was adapted as a promising practice
approach to identify the knowledge, motivation, and organizational assets of rotational blended
learning teachers from the highest performing middle schools in Jiminy Public Schools. This
organization was identified as a promising practices because their students’ foundational reading
skills rose at a higher rate than all other comparative schools. Seven teachers were interviewed,
observed, and document analyses were conducted on their lesson resources. The data was coded
and analyzed to identify the assets and needs to effectively implement a blended learning reading
intervention program at Jiminy Public Schools. Findings from the study indicate a number of
knowledge, motivational, and organizational assets that can be adopted at other school sites,
particularly with how deliberately teachers plan the execution of lessons and design the
classroom environment. This study makes recommendations for other school sites to adopt the
teacher assets through ongoing training and coaching supports to ensure effective
implementation of the blended learning model.
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 12
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION
Introduction of the Problem of Practice
The general problem of practice addressed in this case study is one of foundational
reading achievement in middle school. All middle schools measure incoming students’ reading
levels at the start of the school year through a computer adaptive test called Reading Inventory.
Students who score below a certain cutoff score are then identified as challenged readers and are
enrolled in a blended learning program called System 44 that helps students master their
foundational reading skills. The program focuses on explicit instruction in phonics acquisition,
comprehension, and writing. Some schools outperform others in growing their students’ reading
levels.
Organizational Context and Mission
Jiminy Public Schools is a network of public charter schools serving the greater Los
Angeles, California; Memphis, Tennessee; and Washington State. The mission of Jiminy Public
Schools is to help transform public education so all students graduate prepared for college,
leadership, and life. The organization works to fulfill that mission with an approach that
emphasizes effective teaching, strong school leadership, college-preparatory curriculum,
comprehensive supports, community engagement, and replicability. Using the small school
model, Jiminy Public Schools are designed to meet individual student needs, combining rigorous
curriculum with academic counseling and individualized support. The people involved in the
study are teachers from the highest performing middle schools in Jiminy Public Schools who
raised students’ foundational reading skills at a higher rate than other teachers. Other
stakeholders include administrators who are responsible over the English department and/or
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 13
English Language Development program, and provide instructional coaching to teachers. The
last stakeholder group are the students who demonstrate the most growth.
Organizational Performance Status
Distinct in the nation for a non-profit charter management organization, Jiminy Public
Schools is the leading charter school operator in Los Angeles. Jiminy Public Schools outperform
neighboring schools with the same student population, lower per pupil funding than the district,
and similar unionized workforce. One area of academic performance is the growth of student
reading achievement in middle schools, but even within the organization some schools are
outperforming others. An end of year report in June 2017 revealed that three middle schools
demonstrated higher levels of reading achievement growth than all other middle schools in the
organization. Students in Jiminy Public Schools on average increase their reading levels by at
least one grade level, but students in three middle schools tripled the average growth. Thus, these
three middle schools are model schools within the organization. This is a promising practices
study in which these three high performing schools’ practices will be examined to provide
recommended best practices for other Jiminy schools that are lower performing. The impact of
the performance on achieving the organization’s mission is all Jiminy Public Schools students
should receive a high quality education to be prepared for life after graduation, but that may not
happen if their reading achievement varies across different schools within the organization.
Related Literature
The general background literature about this problem says that phonics is one of the five
recommended pillars of literacy instruction, which also includes phonemic awareness, fluency,
vocabulary, and comprehension (Cassidy, Valadez, & Garrett, 2010). Additionally, systematic
instruction was found to be effective for at-risk students (Cassidy, Valadez, & Garrett, 2010).
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 14
Importance of a Promising Practice Study
It is important to examine these schools’ performance in relationship to their performance
goal of raising student reading skills as a promising practice for a variety of reasons. Reading
skills are a requisite for academic achievement and related to the Jiminy Public School’s mission
of preparing students for college, leadership, and life. Studying promising practices can help
identify appropriate training and support strategies so these practices can be shared with lower
performing schools. With adequate training and supports in place, all students can increase their
reading levels to work towards closing the achievement gap.
Organizational Performance Goal and Current Performance
The goal of the organization then is to increase all 6th-9th students’ foundational reading
levels as measured by the blended learning program System 44 by the time they start high school
so that 100% of students have either increased one level from the Beginner to Developing level
or from the Developing to Read 180-ready reading level, which is the next intervention program
that builds on System 44. A related broader reading achievement goal within the organization is
to increase students’ reading levels starting in the middle school at a rate of two grade levels
each year or until students are reading at grade level.
Description of the Stakeholders
The organization’s stakeholders for this study are the members of Jiminy Public School’s
highest performing middle schools. This includes teachers from the highest performing middle
schools in Jiminy Public Schools who raised students’ foundational reading skills at a higher rate
than others. Other stakeholders include administrators who are responsible over the English
department and/or English Language Development program, and provide instructional coaching
to teachers. The last stakeholder group are the students who demonstrate the most growth. This is
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 15
a promising practices study in which high performing schools’ practices will be examined to
provide recommended best practices for other Jiminy schools that are lower performing.
Stakeholders’ Performance Goals
The goals for the stakeholders are for administrators to evaluate their familiarity of the
System 44 program and identify any structural barriers to supporting the teachers of the class.
Teacher goals are to evaluate with how much fidelity the System 44 program is being
implemented in their classes. Student goals are to increase their reading levels and increase their
awareness of their reading goals.
The goals for the organization and the three primary stakeholders to implement the
blended learning program System 44 are shown in Table 1.
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 16
Table 1
Organizational Goal and Mission
Organizational Mission
The mission of Jiminy Public Schools is to help transform public education so all students
graduate prepared for college, leadership, and life.
Organizational Global Goal
By June 2025, all alumni will graduate from four-year colleges at the same rate as their more
affluent peers.
Stakeholder Goal
Teachers
By June 2025, all reading
intervention teachers will
effectively implement the
blended learning model,
System 44, so that all
students are raising their
reading levels by one or more
full grade levels each year.
Stakeholder Goal
Site Administrators
By June 2025, the
administrator over the
humanities department and/or
English Language
Development program will
put into place the processes
that will support, reinforce,
monitor, encourage, and
reward effective
implementation of the
blended learning model,
System 44, so that all students
are raising their reading levels
by one or more full grade
levels each year.
Stakeholder Goal
Students
By June 2025, all students in
reading intervention classes
and receiving System 44
support will raise their
reading levels by one or more
grade levels each year or until
they meet appropriate grade
level reading skill
requirements.
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 17
Stakeholder Group for the Study
The stakeholder of focus for this study are teachers because they have the biggest impact
in the quality of reading interventions in the classroom, which should lead to the biggest growth
in student reading levels.
Stakeholder of Focus Critical Behaviors
Critical behaviors are defined as the specific actions that are necessary for a group to take
to have the greatest impact on desired results (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016).
The three critical behaviors required for teachers to achieve their goal are:
1. Implementing with high fidelity the blended learning model of System 44 which includes
three main components: adaptive instructional software, small group explicit instruction,
and both modeled and independent reading
2. Modifying instruction with appropriate instructional strategies based on ongoing student
performance data
3. Creating a positive classroom community and culture that promotes learning
Purpose of the Project and Questions
The purpose of the study is to study the model schools’ performance related to a larger
problem of practice, lagging student reading achievement. The analysis will focus on the
stakeholder assets in the areas of knowledge and skill, motivation, and organizational resources.
While a complete study would focus on all stakeholder, for practical purposes the stakeholder to
be focused on in this analysis is high performing middle school teachers. Schools invest
resources into the System 44 reading intervention program which include technology materials,
licenses, pullout training days for teachers, and ongoing professional development throughout
the year. Identifying how all these resources are working together to create a robust reading
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 18
intervention program is one of the larger purposes of this project. Thus the questions that guide
this study are:
1. What knowledge, motivation and organizational assets do Jiminy Public Schools middle
teachers have that have contributed to the use of the blended learning program System 44
that resulted in high student achievement in foundational reading skills?
2. What solutions and recommendations in the areas of knowledge, motivation, and
organizational resources may be appropriate for achieving similar results in other Jiminy
middle schools?
Conceptual and Methodological Framework
The conceptual framework I will use is Clark and Estes (2008) gap analysis framework
that focuses on closing gaps and achieving organizational goals. The Clark & Estes (2008)
methodological framework will use a qualitative data gathering and analysis process to study
high performing middle schools’ assumed assets in the areas of knowledge, motivation, and
organizational resources. These assets will be studied and data will be gathered through the use
of interviews, observations, and document analyses.
Definitions
Some terms used in the study have specific meaning and are operationalized as follows:
● System 44: Reading intervention program that supports challenged readers to develop
foundational reading skills through a rotational blended learning design (Houghton
Mifflin Harcourt, 2015)
● Lexile: A numeric representation of an individual’s reading ability or a text’s readability
and difficulty level (Lexile Framework for Reading, 2019)
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 19
● RI: Reading inventory adaptive assessment for universal screening, instructional
placement, and growth monitoring (System 44 Experience, 2015)
● PI: Phonics inventory assessment that measures fluency of the phonological decoding
and sight word reading of older, struggling readers (System 44 Experience, 2015)
Organization of the Study
The study is organized as five chapters. Chapter One provides readers with the key
concepts and ideas found in discussions of improving foundational reading skills in middle
schools. The organization’s mission, goals, and stakeholders in addition to a review of the
promising practice framework was also provided. Chapter Two reviews the current literature
related to the background of the study. Chapter Three discusses the methodology with choice in
participants, data collection methods, and analysis. Chapter Four focuses on the data analysis and
results of the study. Finally, Chapter Five offers future recommendations based on the data and
literature.
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 20
CHAPTER TWO: REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE
The purpose of this literature review will be to examine what components contribute to
the process of developing literacy and learning to read, to examine the relationships between
reading and college readiness, and to identify recommended instructional practices and
appropriate interventions for struggling readers. This review of the literature will also analyze the
knowledge and skills, motivation, and organizational assets influencing reading intervention
teachers through the lens of critical behaviors identified in chapter one.
Developing Literacy
Foundational Reading Skills
The development of literacy starts with the acquisition of foundational reading skills that
is best delivered with targeted instruction (Institute of Education Sciences, 2016; National
Reading Panel, 2000). According to the National Reading Panel (2000), the best approach to
reading instruction is one that holistically incorporates explicit instruction in phonemic
awareness, systematic phonics instruction, strategies to improve fluency, and a gradual process
to increase comprehension. Then, instructors can utilize supplemental strategies such as teacher-
guided oral reading, explicit vocabulary word instruction, and the modeling of reading
comprehension strategies (National Reading Panel, 2000). Additionally, recommendations made
by the Institute of Education Sciences (2016) emphasize the importance of developing awareness
of the different sounds in speech, understanding how the sounds relate to letters, and the process
of decoding words, analyzing parts of words, and finally writing and recognizing words.
Evidence supports early readers needing to have frequent practice that focuses on fluency,
accuracy, and comprehension (Institute of Education Services, 2016; Slavin, Lake, Davis, &
Madden, 2011). Therefore, explicitly teaching foundational reading skills is found to be most
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 21
effective when it includes a tiered approach of required skills that build upon each other
(Institute of Education Sciences, 2016; National Reading Panel, 2000). Although strong literacy
development begins with acquiring foundational reading skills, obtaining reading comprehension
skills is the next stage to becoming an independent learner.
Reading Comprehension
Reading comprehension emphasizes understanding both what the author has written in
addition to the readers’ ability to construct meaning from what was read (Institute of Education
Sciences, 2010). Reading comprehension is a complicated process that synthesizes a multiple
array of skills including word-level skills, knowledge of vocabulary, oral language skills, broad
conceptual knowledge, an understanding of text structures, analytical and reasoning skills, and
finally an underlying motivation to make meaning from reading and progress toward academic
goals (Institute of Education Sciences, 2010). For these reasons, students need explicit
instruction around developing their reading comprehension skills and guidance on how to apply
the appropriate strategies (Institute of Education Sciences, 2010). Reading comprehension beings
with sequential skills that build on each other, but students also need practice with focused, high
quality discussions, be exposed to a wide range of purposefully selected texts and practice
reading for a variety of purposes, and be exposed to highly interesting engaging content (Institute
of Education Sciences, 2010). Therefore, students need reading comprehension skills to interact
with new information and mature into independent learners of complex content (Institute of
Education Sciences, 2010). Literacy development requires learning foundational reading skills
and reading comprehension, which can be understood more deeply by examining the impact
learning theory has on how literacy is taught and learned.
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 22
Learning Theoretical Framework
Piaget
Piaget’s four stages of cognitive development along with the principles for intellectual
growth are particularly insightful to understanding how individuals develop and learn (Piaget,
1952). Piaget (1952) claimed two key principles guide the intellectual growth of individuals
particularly with how organization and adaptation worked. Piaget (1952) asserted that children
organize meaning by creating schema as mental representations of the world and their
experiences are driven by how their experiences meet or invalidate their pre-existing schema.
Furthermore, constructivist theory emphasizes how learners use assimilation and accommodation
(Piaget, 1952). Therefore, Piaget’s cognitive theory was foundational to understand intellectual
development and the individualized approaches to student learning (Piaget, 1952). Although
Piaget’s research is commonly considered one of the most influential theorists in cognitive
theory in the last century, the later research by Vygotsky is also important to consider for
learning and cognitive development.
Vygotsky
Vygotsky asserted that human development was embedded in the interactions individuals
had with the sociocultural environment and within their culture, and that cognitive development
was intertwined with social relationships (Vygotsky, 1978). Moreover, he claimed the
acquisition of language reflected the process of development, and the maturation of children and
the ability to connect symbols to meaning was a uniquely human experience (Vygotsky, 1987).
Experiments revealed that children first spoke, described, analyzed situations, and speech was
used to plan solutions to problems (Vygotsky, 1978). Children developed private speech as they
developed and internalized their thoughts, as language functions to reflect the external world
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 23
(Vygotsky, 1978). From all this Vygotsky (1978) had the idea of a Zone of Proximal
Development that emphasized how scaffolds and peer support can assist individuals with
meaning making and learning.
Despite the many similarities found in how Piaget and Vygotsky understood
development, some key differences between their theories add unique understanding to learning
and developmental psychology (Lourenco, 2012). Two of the differences were around the
relationships among peers and authorities as sources of learning and the role of personal
reconstruction in meaning making compared to that of transmission and social influence
(Lourenco, 2012). Thus, Vygotsky placed a high emphasis on the social and cultural roles in
cognitive development instead of seeing individuals learning in isolation (Lourenco, 2012). In
addition to learning theory, understanding how the brain works with reading and learning is also
important to consider.
Reading and Learning
Neuroscience of Learning to Read
Recent studies in neuroscience have shed light on how the brain learns to read and
provides insight into how interventions in particular are helpful for struggling readers with a
wide range of reading skills (Coch, 2010; Fernandez, Goldberg, & Michelon, 2013; Gabrieli,
Christodoulou, O’Louglin & Eddy 2010). According to Gabrieli et al. (2010) the human brain
not evolving to read may partially explain why reading must be explicitly taught and why
children struggle to read. Using neuroimaging to map the brain’s activities, the left posterior of
the brain was found to become activated while learning to read and this particular section is used
during the decoding process, when letters and sounds are matched to make words and meaning
(Gabrieli et al., 2010). Furthermore, mastering new skills builds and strengthens neural
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 24
connections while neuroplasticity refers to the brain’s ability to react to new learning (Fernandez
et al., 2013). This idea supports the idea that students can learn, re-learn, and assimilate to new
experiences regardless of their age (Fernandez et al., 2013). In fact, activity in the brain shows
that neurons that fire together then can become wired together (Fernandez et al., 2013).
Therefore, the brain can be optimized and learning can occur throughout life, pushing the current
educational trend toward academic interventions that are personalized and rigorous regardless of
age restrictions, and with the underlying belief that all students are capable of learning
(Fernandez et al., 2013).
A critical component of interventions is taking into consideration sound-based practices
to construct a reading brain (Coch, 2010 & Gabrieli et al., 2010). According to Coch (2010),
reading interventions that incorporate the practice of letter-sound mapping was found to have a
positive impact on improving reading skills. Current reading instruction and designed
interventions that apply this concept has been foundational to language acquisition because they
prioritize increasing phonological awareness, or the understanding the relationship between
sounds or phonemes and words (Coch, 2010). Furthermore, Gabrieli (2010) posits that this
process is a challenging one because learners can take up to three years to become a skilled
reader in English, especially when taking into consideration the intricacies of the language; for
example, in the English language a single grapheme, how sounds are written, can potentially
have up to 30 pronunciations. As a result, age is an important factor that needs to be carefully
considered when learning to read.
A meta-analysis on reading interventions for older struggling readers revealed that
although reading comprehension can be improved, the instructional practices with proven
effectiveness with younger emergent readers were not found to be as effective with populations
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 25
comprised of older struggling readers (Edmonds, Vaughn, Wexler, Reutebuch, Cable, Klingler
Tackett, & Wick Schnakenber, 2009). However, the International Literacy Association (2015)
did find that evidence-based literacy skills practices have been proven to improve learners’
reading skills despite their age or grade level. Additional intervention research found two
variables to be particularly effective on older students, mainly structures that increased the
duration of practice and reduced group sizing (Vaughn, Cirino, Wanzek, Wexler, Fletcher,
Denton, … Francis, 2010). The neuroscience of learning emphasizes that struggling readers are
more likely to improve their reading skills when evidence-based intervention practices are
implemented in the classroom to help bridge the literacy skills gap regardless of the age of
learners. Despite evidence pointing to how all learners can benefit from targeted interventions,
the unique challenges faced by adolescent struggling readers need to be carefully considered.
Adolescent Readers
Struggling adolescent readers benefit from a combination of quality direct instruction,
high interest reading options, and frequent opportunities to make personal connections to the text
(Ivey & Baker, 2004; National Assessment of Educational Progress [NAEP], 2017). Specific
attention is needed for adolescent reading instruction, as evidenced by recent national reading
results which show stagnated reading performance (NAEP, 2017). Although a prevailing
consensus has not been reached by researchers on the most effective or appropriate instructional
methods, there is agreement that instruction must include more than phonics acquisition (NAEP,
2017). Phonics instruction in isolation has not been found to be beneficial for struggling
adolescent readers, especially for those who have struggled for extended periods of time (Ivey &
Baker, 2004). Instead, targeted interventions should prioritize not only improving student reading
skills but also increasing student desires to read (Ivey & Baker, 2004).
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 26
Researchers have found it beneficial to increase opportunities for learners to exercise
independent choice and autonomy with high interest engaging texts and content (Atwell, 2007;
Gallagher, 2009; Ivey & Baker, 2004; Steinburg & McCray, 2012). Instruction should revolve
around age-appropriate texts and content while contextualizing reading comprehension skills
such as how to identify and analyze main ideas or themes of the reading (Ivey & Baker, 2004).
Additionally, Steinburg and McCray (2012) posit that rich and diverse text sets are particularly
important for motivating middle school students to stay engaged with the reading. Direct
instruction is still an important component, but sustaining reading skills development and
cultivating critical and life-long readers requires the consideration of these motivating factors
(Atwell, 2007; Gallagher, 2009; Steinburg & McCray, 2012). In fact, Beers (2013) describes
several hidden benefits that can arise from engaging struggling adolescent readers. Beers (2013)
points to how schools can leverage the act of reading in order to cultivate soft skills such as
intellectual curiosity while negating academic apathy. Beers (2013) also criticizes the prevailing
philosophy that emerged from the nearly nation-wide adoption of Common Core standards
because of how limited and exclusionary they are in dismissing the power of reader responses in
favor of close reading of texts and argumentative writing. While that may be beneficial to
learners at grade level, that kind of philosophy moves to further isolate certain groups of learners
and widening the gap between reader skills (Beers, 2013). Although direct teacher intervention is
the main focus of instructional change, students are still required partners in the learning
experience and it is imperative that they carry the cognitive load (Beers, 2013). Thus, struggling
middle school readers equally need motivational support and purposeful opportunities to practice
their reading skills not just in preparation to enter high school, but to close the reading
achievement gap and graduate college ready. Therefore, it is important to consider the
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 27
relationship between early reading success and future academic performance in high school and
beyond.
Middle School Reading Performance as a Predictor of High School Performance and
College Readiness
Reading as an Early Indicator and Predictor of Academic Outcomes
Although research is limited in linking childhood, elementary, or middle school
performance with postsecondary success, certain indicators and predictors are strongly correlated
with improved postsecondary outcomes (Bigozzi, Tarchi, Vagnoli, Valente, & Pinto, 2017;
Hume & Snowling, 2011; Silver & Saunders, 2008). Bigozzi et al. (2017) found a strong
correlation between reading fluency and school outcomes across all levels of schooling. One of
the most important predictors of all literacy-based subjects was reading rapidity, or the level of
effortlessness and automaticity in reading skills (Bigozzi et al., 2017). Moreover, Silver and
Saunders (2008) found a correlation between achieving literacy by the time an individual entered
third grade with proficiency on standardized state assessments in middle school. Hulme and
Snowling (2011) examined the nature and causes on reading comprehension difficulties and
concluded that reading fluency and comprehension in particular were interrelated with positive
school outcomes. In conclusion, early reading achievement is found to be beneficial for later
academic success, even when success is codified by a set of nationally-adopted standards.
Middle and High School English Language Arts Standards
Recent changes to nationally-adopted standards have driven the decisions around how
English language arts and literacy skills across content should be taught to prepare students for
college (Common Core State Standards Initiative [CCSI], 2018). According to the CCSI, (2018),
a uniform set of standards have been adopted by 41 states thus far with intentions to prepare the
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 28
nation’s students for the knowledge and skills required to succeed in college, career, and life.
English and literacy standards across K-12 grades and across content to inform instruction in
history and social studies, science, and technical subjects (CCSI, 2018). The Common Core
standards emphasize analytical skills, critical thinking, and the application of problem solving
skills (CCSI, 2018). College and career readiness anchor standards exist for reading, writing,
speaking and listening, and language, with learning through texts acting as the driving force
(CCSI, 2018). Reading for literature and informational texts span across grades K-12, but
reading foundational skills stop at the elementary level (CCSI, 2018).
These standards are also assessed differently across states, but one of the more adopted
assessments is the Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium (Smarter Balanced Assessment
Consortium [SBAC], 2018). In 2010, the U.S. Department of Education awarded a $176 million
grant to develop a uniform assessment system aligned with the Common Core State Standards
(SBAC, 2018). The summative assessments were developed by multiple stakeholders consisting
of teachers, higher education faculty, and other educators and ready to be used by school districts
in 2015 (SBAC, 2018). With a goal of preparing for students for college and careers, the
assessments were designed to measure essential skills such as critical thinking, writing, and
problem solving (SBAC, 2018). Testing technology included an adaptive computer software
portion and are higher education approved (SBAC, 2018). The assessments are grounded on the
claims that college and career readiness in English language arts and literacy were tantamount to
predict future success (SBAC, 2015). Out of the four major claims assessed, the first requires
students to conduct close reads and analyze a range of increasingly complex literary and
informational texts (SBAC, 2015). Thus, analytically reading a range of complex texts and using
textual evidence to demonstrate critical thinking is considered a cornerstone to be deemed
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 29
college or career ready (SBAC, 2013). Therefore, the Common Core standards and Smarter
Balanced Assessment Consortium work hand in hand to drive what college readiness looks like
in the majority of states.
Reading Skills and College Readiness
College readiness can include a variety of factors, but reading skills and literacy
development are consistently found to be important foundations for learning (College and Career
Readiness and Success Center at American Institutes for Research [CCRSC], 2018; Rasinski,
2017). Although the California Department of Education (CDE) has not formally adopted a
college readiness definition, support was provided for the adoption of common standards on the
knowledge and skills students need for postsecondary success (CCRSC, 2018). Two important
factors that continue to be highlighted as important for college readiness are the accuracy with
word recognition and the automaticity with reading (Rasinski, 2017). Studies conducted showed
a significant positive correlation between accuracy and automaticity with college entrance exams
such as the ACT reading subtest and composite scores (Rasinksi, 2017). Other attributes to
consider when rethinking college readiness include a comprehensive examination of key
cognitive strategies, content knowledge, academic behaviors, and contextual skills (Conely,
2008).
A closer look at California as a state reveals trends of underperformance in preparing
students for college (CDE, 2009; Lucile Packard Foundation, 2010). The CDE (2009) measures
college readiness by the number of 12th grade students who meet the criteria for entry into the
University of California (UC) and/or the California State University (CSU) schools (CDE, 2009).
However, only one-fifth of students meet that criteria by graduating with a C or better in college
preparatory classes accepted by the UC and CSU school systems (Lucile Packard Foundation,
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 30
2010). Being deemed college ready can encompass multiple skills, but developing literacy and
reading skills are integral in secondary schools in order to actually be eligible to attend UC or
CSU universities in California. Therefore, with reading skills being a critical component to be
considered college ready, how students are being prepared in secondary schools with instruction
and intervention is important to examine.
Instruction and Intervention
Traditional Direct Instruction and Intervention
Traditional classroom instruction of reading strategies emphasizes targeted instruction of
specific academic skills, explicit demonstrations prior to practice, and the modeling from the
teacher as an expert (Marchand-Martella, Martella, Modderman, Petersen, & Pan, 2013;
Swanson, Hoskyn, & Lee, 1999). Swanson, Hoskyn, and Lee (1999) found in a meta-analysis of
instructional outcomes that explicit direct instruction promotes mastery of reading skills,
especially when the instruction is fast-paced and carefully planned in detail. Instruction was also
found to be effective when delivered in small groups with frequent opportunities to provide
feedback on student performance (Swanson et al., 1999). This is particularly helpful for
struggling readers because they benefit from a predictable structure that includes modeling of
correct responses, leading students to repeat correct answers, and testing to provide immediate
feedback (Swanson et al., 1999). Explicit instructional practices were found to be more effective
than discovery-based approaches using constructivist models, especially with struggling learner
populations. Explicit direct instruction should include a holistic approach by targeting five key
areas of learning in word study, vocabulary, fluency, comprehension, and improved motivation
(Marchand-Martella et al., 2013). For older struggling readers who had deficits in learning
phonemic awareness and phonics understanding the recommendation is that instructors revisit
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 31
the foundational pieces in order to reteach specific skills explicitly and systematically
(Marchand-Martella et al., 2013).
Similar conclusions were found for traditionally struggling student populations (Hall,
Roberts, Cho, McCulley, Carroll, Vaughn, 2017; Shanahan & Beck, 2006; Shippen, Houchins,
Steventon, Sartor, 2005; Swanson et al., 1999). In a study about developing literacy for English
language learners, Shanahan and Beck (2006) found that explicit vocabulary instruction had a
positive impact on minority children and youth reading outcomes. In addition, it was found that
English language instruction that was embedded into multiple content area instruction was an
effective practice to developing literacy for struggling EL readers (Shanahan & Beck, 2006).
Hall et al. (2017) found that effective reading comprehension strategies should be taught to
struggling readers so they can improve in questioning, summarizing, predicting, visualizing,
making personal connections, and other comprehension monitoring techniques while reading.
Furthermore, all instruction was recommended to structure in opportunities for students to
actively participate in discussions and conduct writing assignments over sustained periods of
time (Hall et al., 2017). Regarding interventions for students with learning disabilities, a meta-
analysis review found that despite having potential differences in language processing, memory,
learning strategies, or information processing from average achieving peers, students with
learning disabilities still benefited from receiving purposeful, well-sequenced, and teacher-
guided instruction (Swanson et al., 1999). In a study comparing two direct instruction reading
programs for urban middle school students, they were both found to have positive outcomes on
struggling readers regardless of how decoding strategies were taught (Shippen et al., 2005). The
main recommendation to arise from that comparative study was the importance of explicit
instruction that focused on increasing the skills of struggling readers (Shippen et al., 2005).
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 32
However, the effectiveness of focused direct instruction does not minimize other instructional
strategies that incorporate intervention techniques, especially when considerations are taken to
meet the learning needs of students with varying skill levels.
In an attempt to rethink strategic instruction, a study contrasting teacher guided direct
instruction was found to be less successful than one that included computer assistance in addition
to teacher instruction and guided practice (Lenhard, Baier, Endlich, Schneider, Hoffman, 2013).
Instruction that takes into account cognitive approaches should have teachers facilitating a
process that includes students reflecting, discussing, and following modeled strategies in class
(Lenhard et al., 2013). These strategies are even more effective with the inclusion of practice
opportunities and frequent feedback (Lenhard et al., 2013). Yet, if a classroom structure can
include components of teacher instruction and guided practice, encourage students to employ the
strategies mentioned above, and receive additional personalized assistance with technology, then
students would have increased amounts of guided practice time because they would not be
limited to waiting for teacher support (Lenhard et al., 2013). Thus with historical and current
research emphasizing the effectiveness and efficiency of direct instruction to improve struggling
readers’ skills, complementary elements provided by technology have been found to improve
student reading outcomes.
Blended Learning Design
Contextually, the push to re-imagine what instruction can look like with blended learning
models arose especially in the last decade with increasingly conflicting demands and exhausted
resources related to stagnant student achievement (Moran, Ferdig, Pearson, Wardrop, &
Blomeyer, 2008; U.S. Department of Education, 2010;). According to the U.S. Department of
Education’s (2010) meta-analysis of evidence-based practices in online learning, one possible
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 33
solution to the challenge of meeting diverse needs of individual students are blended learning
designs that include technology components. Among many models (face-to-face driver model,
flex model, online lab school model, online driver model, self-blend model) the rotational model
is a variation that focuses on learning stations within the classroom where at least one of the
stations involves direct face time with teachers and another station involves working with
technology (U.S. Department of Education, 2010). Moran et al. (2008) found technology having
positive impacts in the classroom when purposefully included to impact reading comprehension
outcomes. Struggling readers can benefit the most from program adoptions as long as other
considerations such as unique needs are met with interventions (Moran et al., 2008).
One caveat to consider is how the push for blended learning designs did not necessitate a
total re-imaging of traditional instruction and instead studies around effective blended learning
programs found that traditional elements with quality instruction still existed (Rhodes, 2011;
Vasileiou, 2009). Vasileiou (2009) argued that classrooms with online components should still
include a framework that implements successful structures of traditional classrooms such as (a)
collaborative learning from peers; (b) transparent incentives and motivational aspects for
learning; (c) methods and opportunities to reinforce student learning. Vasileiou (2009) further
stressed that with traditional structures acting as a foundation, the benefits of online learning
components can be leveraged to afford the individualization of learning that is often required
with differentiation, but not possible with the limitations of a traditional classroom. In a short
literature review, Rhodes (2001) pointed out trends of effective blended learning systems which
prioritize the internalization and personal meaning-making from the learner as opposed to
surface-level rote memorization. Effective learning environments are just as critical then to
provide learners with a community of learners to tap into for collaboration opportunities
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 34
(Rhodes, 2011). Essentially, blended learning programs still need all the components one would
imagine in a traditionally structured and effective classroom.
Finally, several additional benefits seem to arise from a blended learning structure that
improves motivational qualities for learners (Kavadella, Tsiklakis, Vougiouklakis, & Lionarakis,
2012; Rockman, Sloan, Akey, Farr, Pereira-Leon, Shapiro, & Clark, 2007; Staker, 2011).
Blended learning models offer a more personalized approach to teaching with individualized
pacing in the lesson that results in learners growing to become more self-directed with increased
feelings of self-efficacy (Staker, 2011). With increased self-direction and self-efficacy, learners
are no longer strictly reliant on the teacher for evaluative feedback (Staker, 2011). In a study
funded by the U.S. Department of Education, Rockman et al. (2007) found that students
receiving at least some elements of online instruction performed as well as or better than
traditional classroom counterparts, but developed increased motivation to improve their learning.
Kavadella et al. (2012) found that blended learning benefits include increased student
engagement and satisfaction, which is critical to address with traditionally struggling readers.
The motivational benefits combined with high achievement levels as a result of blended learning
programs suggests that the recommendation for adoption should be considered in a variety of
contexts (Kavadella, 2012). The blended learning model is found to be effective because it
enhances the traditional teaching model, mainly because students have additional opportunities
to grow as self-directed learners while benefiting from differentiated input and feedback.
Summary
Teaching foundational reading skills for older struggling readers is found to be most
effective using a tiered approach with evidence-based intervention practices. Piaget’s cognitive
theory and the neuroscience of learning suggest taking into consideration the intellectual
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 35
development and individual approaches to student learning. Finally, the blended learning model
is found to be effective because learners have opportunities to receive differentiated instruction.
This study examines the use of a blended learning design to improve middle school reading
achievement.
Conceptual Framework
Clark and Estes (2008) emphasize the importance of identifying barriers to fulfilling
goals and the need to closely analyze gaps in order to close them. The perceptions people have
about the performance gaps and what is needed to accomplish their goals are important to the
process of closing gaps (Clark and Estes, 2008). Through the analysis process, what the
organization then needs to take action upon becomes more clear (Clark and Estes, 2008).
Clark and Estes (2008) identified three specific critical factors and how they must be
examined during the performance gap analysis. Knowledge, motivation, and organizational
factors were identified as the main drivers of performance, and any attainment of goals depends
largely on individuals having the knowledge and skills, motivation, and the organization’s role in
the process. This literature will examine these three factors starting with Jiminy Public Schools
teachers’ knowledge and skills, their motivation, and the organizational factors.
Stakeholder Knowledge, Motivation and Organizational Factors
Knowledge and Skills
Anderson and Krathwohl (2001) define knowledge as consisting of four different types
which include (a) factual; (b) conceptual; (c) procedural; (d) metacognitive. These four different
categories of knowledge are organized and structured by the learner. This study will examine the
current literature and research around the knowledge and skills of Jiminy Public Schools
teachers’ adoption of blended learning program to build students’ reading foundational skills.
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 36
The teachers’ critical behaviors will be analyzed through the lens of the four types of knowledge
defined by Anderson and Krathwohl (2001).
Declarative factual knowledge influences. Declarative factual knowledge is knowing
the basic elements and simple parts that experts rely on when working in their field,
understanding the work, and organizing the knowledge in a hierarchical and systematic structure
(Anderson & Krathwohl, 2001). Anderson and Krathwohl (2001) categorizes factual knowledge
to include types of knowledge such as components, knowledge of strategies, and knowledge of
elements.
Teachers know the main components of blended learning models. Picciano (2009)
emphasizes the teacher’s responsibility within six pedagogical objectives and knowing which
approaches can be leveraged to achieve them by identifying (a) content; (b) social/emotional
needs; (c) dialectic/questioning; (d) synthesis/evaluation; (e) collaboration/student generated
content; and finally (f) reflections in the form of blogs and journals. Furthermore, Kearns (2017)
points to how teachers need to be familiar with a potentially typical school day within the
blended learning model that can include instruction to small groups, instruction catered to the
individual, collaborative peer work, and independent practice. Kearns (2017) also emphasizes
how within the rotational model, students are able to rotate through different learning stations,
usually including online learning with technology. Suprabha and Subramonian (2015) highlight
how multiple pedagogical approaches can be layered within blended learning models, but
teachers need to know how to combine instructional technology with face-to-face teacher
facilitated instruction.
Teachers know the appropriate strategies for modifying instruction. The role of the
teacher becomes elevated in a blended learning environment because of how effective individual
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 37
instructional time can become (Dziuban, Graham, Moskal, Norberg, & Sicilia, 2018).
Additionally, Dziuban et al. (2018) emphasize how the teacher’s responsibility is to design
deliberate and varied pedagogical arrangements to individualize instruction.
Teachers know the elements of a positive classroom environment. Meaningful
connections between teachers and students must be cultivated and maintained since relationships
are the avenue through which mutual trust develops (Fassbender, Lucier, & Fink, 2014). Similar
to a traditionally structured classroom, students in blended learning environment learn better
when they feel valued (Fassbender et al., 2014). The recommendation is that teachers instruct
and celebrate student progress by effectively communicating how students must learn the
content, set goals, and identify learning objectives (Fassbender et al., 2014). Additionally,
student perception of a positive learning climate is integral to their learning experience (Gillen,
Wright, & Spink, 2011). Gillen et al. (2011) recommend five dimensions of a classroom climate
that students perceive are conducive for learning starting with (a) physical decor; (b) order and
organization; (c) engaging lesson content and clear delivery; (d) relationships among peers and
between the teacher and student. A positive classroom environment and positive student-teacher
relationship are critical factors for learning to thrive (Fassbender et al., 2014).
Conceptual knowledge influences. Anderson and Krathwohl (2001) define conceptual
knowledge as knowing categories, classifications, and the relationships between knowledge
constructs. Conceptual knowledge is the interrelationships and the interactivity between the
simple elements described in the factual knowledge.
Teachers know the interactivity among main components of the blended learning
model and know how they relate to reading achievement. In an exploration of the impact of
engaged teachers on implementation fidelity and reading skills gains within a blended learning
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 38
reading program, it was found that teacher engagement positively correlated to a significant
impact on student usage of the program along with the amount of progress students made within
the software (Schechter, Kazakoff, Bundschuh, Prescott, & Macaruso, 2017). The findings were
based on how weekly program usage targets were met by students in a blended learning program
compared to students in a traditional learning environment (Schechter, 2017). Additionally,
Hilliard (2015) points out how teachers need to understand that blended learning models go
deeper than simply adding technology into the classroom, but at its core the model promotes the
symbiotic relationship between student-driven and teacher-led learning. Suprabha and
Subramonian (2015) emphasize how teachers need to be responsible for the instructional design
of the blended learning component and how continuous monitoring of the program’s curriculum,
units, and materials to meet learning objectives are critical to maintaining a highly effective
program. Thus, Payne and Eckert’s (2010) recommends offering a standardized training program
to increase the quality of the program’s implementation and how teachers can impact its intended
effectiveness on raising achievement.
Teachers explain the rationale behind the steps taken to design a positive learning
environment. Positive and genuine relationships between teachers and students are critical to
improving academic outcomes (Vega, Moore, & Miranda, 2015). Positive learning environments
should start with simply taking the time to build relationships as entry-points to creating a
positive learning environment (Vega et al., 2015). McDonald (2010) then recommends
implementing a positive learning framework so all learners can thrive. According to McDonald
(2010), teachers need to build interventions to engage disinterested students and classroom
management should work from a preventative and corrective perspective instead of a punitive
one. Additionally, the focus on prevention frees up energy and resources to focus on high quality
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 39
instruction (McDonald, 2010). Finally, McDonald (2010) recommends that teachers include
positive strategies to address vulnerable students and any challenging behaviors.
Teachers know the relationship among clear expectations, community, rigor and
reading achievement. A comparative study revealed how classroom disciplinary climate
influences reading achievement (Ning, Van Damme, Van, Yang, & Gielen, 2015) Ning et al.
(2015) identified how classroom climate based on positivity and an environment that promoted
learning was significantly associated with better school-wide reading outcomes. In fact, the
general comfort of students was important to consider because of how it impacted learning
(Gillen, Write, & Spink, 2011). A part of building a learning community is the recommendation
to include student voice in decision-making processes to increase the motivation to learn, stay
connected with the classroom, and develop an academic identity (Gillen et al., 2011).
Moving from conceptual understanding to practical application requires teachers to
combine several skills and purposefully execute a few critical moves.
Procedural knowledge influences. Procedural knowledge as defined by Anderson and
Krathwohl (2001) is the “knowledge of how” to do something and take action, the methods of
inquiry, and the criteria for using skills and techniques involved with the action. Procedural
knowledge also includes knowing the exact steps to accomplish a goal.
Teachers know when to use each major component of a blended learning program. In
an effort to ensure that teachers are competent and skilled enough to implement a blended
learning program, teachers need to receive appropriate and ongoing training (Moskal, Patsy,
Dziuban, Charles, & Hartman, 2013). Quality training is particularly emphasized because
educators need to be prepped on how to effectively integrated technology into the classroom
(ISTE, 2008).
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 40
Teachers know how to modify instruction using appropriate strategies. Hilliard (2015)
emphasizes the importance of providing teacher training around blended learning
implementation, understanding of the educational tools available, and recognizing how the
program impacts student outcomes. A key component of teacher knowledge is analyzing student
data in order to make instructional adjustments and provide individualized differentiated support
(Hilliard, 2015).
Teachers know how to plan for positive learning environments. Teachers need to
implement specific strategies and management techniques to build a positive learning climate
(Gillen, Wright, & Spink, 2011). Components of that training should include learning how to
leverage the start of the lesson by greeting all students, creating and communicating clear
learning objectives, incorporating frequent opportunities for students to learn from their peers,
displaying student work, and finally using positive language to raise students’ self-esteem
(Gillen et al., 2011).
Metacognitive knowledge. Metacognitive knowledge as defined by Mayer (2011) is the
learner’s knowledge about how they learn and the thought processes that occur during learning.
Anderson and Krathwohl (2001) define metacognitive knowledge about knowledge about the
cognition and thinking, including the awareness of one’s own cognition.
Teachers reflect on the effectiveness of components of blended learning programs in
order to identify strengths and growth in instruction. Teachers need opportunities to self-
reflect, evaluate, and modify their instructional practices as a result of their conclusions (Hilliard,
2015). The practice of reflecting is important to assess student needs, monitor software
component usage, evaluate student progress and various benchmarks, and use student data to
inform any adaptations to instructional plans (Hilliard, 2015).
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 41
Teachers reflect on their own effectiveness in assessing student performance, and
modifying their instruction. Schechter et al. (2017) emphasize how teachers should use any
available dashboards within the blended learning program to keep track of student progress
reports in order to adapt lessons appropriately. Student data needs to be at the center of any
adjustments and teachers can practice regular reflections to become more skilled with analyzing
data (Schechter et al., 2017).
Teachers assess and evaluate to what extent the classroom is a positive learning
environment. An element of assessing and evaluating the learning environment of a classroom
requires teachers to think about both preventative and responsive actions when disciplinary
issues arise (McDonald, 2010). Therefore, teachers can purposefully promote a positive learning
environment based on the action steps they plan and take (McDonald, 2010). According to Vega
et al. (2015) teacher introspection is a requisite to understanding adult and student relationships
and how these relationships can be nurtured to promote student success.
Table 2 summarizes the knowledge influences and the related literature for each
influence.
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 42
Table 2
Summary of Assumed Knowledge Influences on Teachers’ Ability to Achieve the Performance
Goal
Assumed Knowledge Influences Research Literature
Author, Year; Author, Year.
Factual
Teachers know the main components of blended
learning models.
Dziuban (2018)
Fassbender (2014)
Gillen (2011)
Kearns (2017)
Picciano (2009)
Suprabha (2015)
Factual
Teachers know the appropriate strategies for
modifying instruction.
Factual
Teachers know the elements of a positive classroom
environment.
Conceptual
Teachers know the interactivity among main
components of a blended learning model and know
how they relate to reading achievement.
Gillen (2011)
Hilliard (2015)
McDonald (2010)
Ning (2015)
Payne (2010)
Schechter (2017)
Suprabha (2015)
Vega (2015)
Conceptual
Teachers explain the rationale behind the steps
taken to design a positive learning environment.
Conceptual
Teachers know the relationship among clear
expectations, community, rigor and reading
achievement.
Procedural
Teachers know when to use each major component
of a blended learning program.
Gillen (2011)
Hilliard (2015)
ISTE (2008)
Moskal (2013)
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 43
Procedural
Teachers know how to modify instruction using
appropriate strategies.
Procedural
Teachers know how to plan for positive learning
environments.
Metacognitive
Teachers reflect on the effectiveness of components
of blended learning programs in order to identify
strengths and growth in instruction.
Hillard (2015)
Schechter (2017)
McDonald (2010)
Vega (2015)
Metacognitive
Teachers reflect on their own effectiveness in
assessing student performance, and modifying their
instruction.
Metacognitive
Teachers assess and evaluate to what extent the
classroom is a positive learning environment.
Motivation
As defined by Clark and Estes (2008), motivation is the product of interaction between
people and their environment. Schunk, Pintrich, and Meece (2008) define motivation as how
goal-directed activities are started and sustained. In order to increase motivation, Clark and Estes
(2008) highlight the importance of guiding people to understand the impression they create in
others, about their own abilities to complete a job, and their beliefs about individual and
collective benefits from accomplished goals. Clark and Estes (2008) identify three specific
indicators as observable for motivation: active choice, persistence, and mental effort. Active
choice is the intention and action individuals have when pursuing a goal (Clark & Estes, 2008).
Persistence is defined as continuing an action despite distractions and barriers to accomplishing a
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 44
goal (Clark & Estes, 2008). Mental effort is identified as the mental investment required when
accomplishing a goal (Clark & Estes, 2008).
Value. Value as described by Clark and Estes (2008) is the preferences that influence
individuals to take action and persist despite distractions. Individuals engage in tasks when they
have a desire to do a task and have a reason for it (Schunk, Meece, & Pintrich, 2008). Individuals
value what they believe will help them and reject what they believe will be obstacles (Clark &
Estes, 2008).
Teachers value all components of the blended learning model. The technology
component needs close attention especially because integrating it into the classroom in blended
learning models can be challenging if teachers do not understand nor believe in the purpose of
integration (Kale & Akcaoglu, 2018). Therefore, teachers need to believe in the benefits for
learning and their own teaching practice in order to adopt the blended learning model with
technology (Kale & Akcaoglu, 2018). Guiding teachers to make connections with future teaching
needs helped teachers identify the utility value of incorporating technology (Kale & Akcaoglu,
2018). Purposeful professional development is also needed for teachers to receive training
around technology integration (Ertmer, Ottenbreit-Leftwich, Sadik & Sendurur, 2012).
Teachers value the utility of modifying instruction. Kale and Akcaoglu (2018) point to
how teachers can be motivated to integrate technology into the blended learning design if they
understand how it will help students develop behaviors to seek out information instead of
passively being reliant on the teacher. Additionally, teachers need to see how integrating
technology can assist with meeting diverse needs (Kale & Akcaoglu, 2018).
Teachers value creating a positive learning environment. Teachers understanding one
of the aspect associated with the blended learning model, mainly technology integration, can
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 45
potentially help motivate teachers to value the positive benefits technology can have on
classroom management (Kale & Akcaoglu, 2018). Furthermore, having a learner-centered view
of the classroom was associated with teacher positive perceptions about the learning environment
(Kale & Akcaoglu, 2018).
Self-efficacy. Self-efficacy as defined by Bandura (2006) is the individual’s evaluation of
their own capabilities to organize and execute courses of action required to attain designated
types of performance. Schunk, Meece, and Pintrich (208) highlight how an individual with low
self-efficacy will avoid a task while an individual with high self-efficacy will participate.
Confidence is often used as a measure and construct related to self-efficacy (Schunk, Meece, &
Pintrich, 2008).
Teachers are confident they can effectively implement all components of the blended
learning program. Kissau and Algozzine (2015) emphasize how teachers need frequent
opportunities to apply their learning in order to experience increased confidence in their own
abilities to deliver instruction. Additionally, specific to technology integration in the classroom,
adopting a constructivist belief system in the classroom for students and teachers to grow in the
process was found to be helpful in building teachers’ self-efficacy (Hsu, 2016). Aside from belief
systems, practical measures such as providing professional development to teachers (Reynolds,
2018) and providing opportunities to practice implementation prior to and during the school year
(McDonald, 2010) are important to increasing teacher self-efficacy.
They are confident they can consistently analyze student data and make informed
adjustments to differentiate instruction based on the data. Reynolds (2018) found that
particular focus is need around training teachers on how to differentiate their instructional
strategies in a blended learning program. In fact, Reynolds (2018) recommended that school
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 46
districts adopt a bank of universal instructional strategies to modify instruction in a blended
learning curriculum. Therefore, investing additional resources into blended learning programs
and being able to meet the needs of diverse students seems to increase teacher perceptions
around their levels of self-efficacy (Kellerer. P., Kellerer, E., Weth, E., Werth, L., Montgomery,
Clyde, … & Kennedy, 2014).
They are confident they can design and manage a positive learning environment.
Similar to preparing and practicing instructional techniques, teachers gain positive perceptions
around teaching blended learning programs when they have opportunities to prepare and
thoughtfully design the learning environment (McDonald, 2010). Like a positive feedback loop,
teachers who had positive perceptions about how they implement a blended learning design
seemed to think positively about classroom management and their own efficacy (Werth, E.,
Werth, L., & Kellerer, 2013). In fact, self-determination theory can be applied to teacher
perceptions around teaching blended learning and creating a positive environment since the level
of competence developed is seen as instrumental to teachers developing intrinsic motivation to
persist in their efforts (Sorebo, Halvari, Gulli, & Kristiansen, 2009).
Emotion. Schunk, Meece, and Pintrich (2008) connect emotions with mood and the
general feelings individuals have without a real understanding as to the exact cause of the
emotion. Positive emotions are associated with individuals enjoying, hoping, feeling gratitude
and admiration, while negative emotions are associated with examples such as boredom, anxiety,
or anger (Schunk, Meece, & Pintrich, 2008).
Teachers feel positive about implementing all components of the blended learning
program, using student performance data to modify instructional strategies, and creating a
positive learning environment. Part of the blended learning program involves increasing student
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 47
roles in their own learning which relates to teachers feeling positive about implementing
strategies to promote students’ self-directed learning (Ertmer et al., 2012). Additionally, with
technology playing an integral role within the blended learning model, the quality of
incorporating technology into the classroom is contingent upon teachers feeling positive about
this practice (Kale & Akcaoglu, 2018). Anderman and Anderman (2006) also connect emotions
to individuals’ self-esteem and how positive emotions can be generated when achievements are
accomplished. Teachers who then feel positive about fulfilling a responsibility or task will
become motivated to continue the task. Therefore, teachers who feel positive about
implementing the blended learning program, analyzing student data and modifying instruction,
and building a positive culture to promote learning will continue these behaviors to improve
learning outcomes for students.
Goal Orientation. According to Rueda (2011), goal orientation is how individuals
perceive approaching, being engaged with, and reacting to achievement behaviors. Pintrich
(2000) describes two types of goal orientation with mastery goal orientation and performance
orientation. Mastery-based goal orientation involves continuous learning and making progress
with difficult tasks (Pintrich, 2000). Conversely, performance-based goal orientation refers to
how individuals look in front of others, the pursuit of public recognition, comparisons with
others, and avoiding judgment (Pintrich, 2000). Research demonstrates that developing mastery-
oriented goals may be preferred in most applications, however adopting performance-oriented
goals can be beneficial to certain scenarios (Rueda, 2011).
Teachers focus on mastery and set goals for themselves to improve the implementation
of blended learning programs. Teachers’ goals and perceived expectations drive their
motivation to design and implement blended learning goals (Cho & Shim, 2013; Ciani,
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 48
Summers, & Easter, 2008). The quality and degree of teachers developing achievement goals are
contingent upon their perceptions of outside expectations (Cho & Shim, 2013). The likelihood
increases of teachers pursuing ambitious teaching goals grounded in student achievement if
outside expectations are aligned to their personal values and goals (Cho & Shim, 2013). Thus,
teachers who perceive mastery-oriented goals from the school were more likely to adopt
mastery-oriented goals for their students and themselves (Cho & Shim, 2013). Ciani et al. (2008)
conducted a “top-down” analysis of teacher motivation in high schools and found that teacher
perceptions around the school’s mastery goals were significantly related to how students
perceived their own performance and identity. Therefore, the adoption of positive goals and
pursuit of mastery inevitably becomes shared by multiple stakeholders (Ciani et al., 2008).
Attributions. Attribution as defined by Schunk, Meece, and Pintrich (2008) involves the
perceived causes of outcomes. Attribution theory focuses on the analysis of individual’s beliefs
as to why certain events occur and the correlation of those beliefs to motivation (Anderman &
Anderman, 2006).
Teachers attribute student growth and lack thereof to how effectively students self-
regulate their own learning and how engaged students are in the learning environment.
Teachers attribute student success in blended learning environments to the quality of student
self-regulation and a feelings of community in the classroom culture (Elen, n.d.; Ziegler, Paulus,
& Woodside, 2006). Elen (n.d.) emphasized how teachers in blended learning environments need
to intentionally plan to promote student reflection and calibration while still providing teacher-
facilitated scaffolds and positive interactions. Ziegler et al. (2006) points out how a blended
learning environment promotes student success based on the level of engagement students
portray. Therefore, the teacher has tremendous influence over how classroom structures are
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 49
designed to promote active student participation (Ziegler et al., 2006). Teachers can design
learning experiences in blended learning programs that provide students with personalization and
engagement.
Table 3 summarizes the assumed motivation influences on teachers’ ability to achieve the
performance goal in raising students’ foundational reading skills.
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 50
Table 3
Summary of Assumed Motivation Influences on Teachers’ Ability to Achieve the Performance
Goal
Assumed Motivation Influences Research Literature
Author, Year
Value
Teachers value all components of the blended learning
model.
Ertmer (2012)
Kale (2018)
Value
Teachers value the utility of modifying instruction.
Value
Teachers value creating a positive learning environment.
Self-Efficacy
Teachers are confident they can effectively implement all
components of the blended learning program.
Hsu (2016)
Kellerer (2014)
Kissau (2015)
McDonald (2010)
Reynolds (2018)
Sorebo (2009)
Werth (2013)
Self-Efficacy
Teachers are confident they can consistently analyze the data
and make informed adjustments to differentiate instruction
based on the data.
Self-Efficacy
Teachers are confident they can design and manage a
positive learning environment.
Emotion
Teachers feel positive about implementing all components
of the blended learning program.
Anderman & Anderman (2006)
Ertmer (2012)
Kale (2018)
Emotion
Teachers feel encouraged by using student performance data
to modify instructional strategies
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 51
Emotion
Teachers feel positive about creating a positive learning
environment.
Goal Orientation
Teachers focus on mastery and set goals for themselves on
improving the implementation of blended learning programs.
Cho & Shim (2013)
Ciani (2008)
Attributions
Teachers attribute student growth and lack thereof to how
effectively students self-regulate their own learning and how
engaged students are in the learning environment.
Elen (n.d)
Ziegler (2006)
Organization
Clark and Estes (2008) explain that organizational goals are best accomplished by the
interaction of processes (work and material resources) that require knowledge, skills, and
motivation to operate successfully. Any deficit of effective and efficient organizational work
processes and material resources can contribute to performance gaps (Clark & Estes, 2008).
Cultural Setting. Clark and Estes (2008) define these as the core values, goals, beliefs,
emotions, and processes learned by individuals in a work environment to grow and develop.
Rueda (2011) defines this as the who, what, when, where, why, and how of the routines in the
workplace, and any adjustment to these routines impacts the cultural setting. Gallimore and
Goldenberg (2001) define cultural setting as the result of whenever two or more people join, over
time, to accomplish a goal.
Teachers have role models and mentors who can facilitate their development in
effectively implementing blended learning programs. According to Stevens and Frazer (2005),
mentors can accelerate the development of individuals and shorten the learning curve. Although
Stevens and Frazer (2005) state that effective coaching helps learners progress from knowledge-
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 52
based understanding to an action-oriented phase where true application can occur. Several
components of effective coaching entail diagnosing performance, providing frequent and small
doses of feedback, modeling demonstrations, and reinforcing desired behaviors (Stevens &
Frazer, 2005). Similarly, Boone (2015) highlights the importance of coaches developing
individual interpersonal skills because of how critical communication is to developing. Boone
(2015) also prioritizes the importance of mentors setting concrete tasks and goals while
rewarding small steps when making progress. Although these studies originated in the business
context, the lessons are still applicable to the education field with teachers. Therefore, teachers
can benefit from having mentors who apply the same best practices to improve their instruction
of blended learning programs
Teachers have incentives to implement blended learning programs effectively and
receive recognition on their efforts to improve student achievement. Seung-Won and Lim
(2007) point to the importance of incorporating incentives such as feedback, rewards, resources,
and institutional support to complement training in order to produce positive outcomes.
Furthermore, Al-busaidi and Al-shihi (2012) emphasize teaching awards, promotions, and tenure
for educators to integrate blended learning programs as new initiatives. Another key factor that
contributed to increased satisfaction was how teachers who had personal innovativeness were
found to have higher levels of satisfaction teaching blended learning models (Al-busaidi & Al-
shihi, 2012). Therefore, incentives are extrinsic factors that contribute to higher teacher
satisfaction with blended learning models.
Cultural Model. Gallimore and Goldenberg (2001) introduced the concept of cultural
models as the individuals who are visible but not explicitly noticed by those who hold them.
Gallimore and Goldenberg (2001) elaborated that cultural models define for other individuals the
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 53
way things are and should be. Rueda (2011) explain how cultural models help shape
organizational structures and even values, policies, practices, reward structures.
Teachers adopt the goals embedded in the school’s culture to adopt blended learning
programs to bridge the gap in foundational reading skills. Teachers feel a part of the
implementation team for successful program adoption. Kouzes and Posner (2007) emphasize
how gaining widespread adoption of a vision initially begins with open discussions about
everyone’s role within the vision and how the group’s collective action drives the vision forward.
Therefore, teachers who understand how their individual actions contribute toward a common
goal such as student achievement will more likely lead to adoption and implementation of the
blended learning model.
Policies and procedures. Policies are the guiding rules created by an organization and
procedures inform the action and practices individuals conduct (Clark & Estes, 2008). The
policies and procedures should align with the expectations of the organizational culture while
misalignment leads to performance issues (Clark & Estes, 2008).
A standardized blended learning program increases the success of implementation and
allows for better monitoring of the program. The quality of implementation of a blended
learning program increases with norming with the creation of standards for several aspects of the
program (Payne & Eckert, 2010). The prevailing idea is that standardized programs are more
easily adopted because trainings, communication around the program, and the monitoring of
implementation become more accessible and likely to develop compared to situations when
diverse agendas make quality control difficult to manage (Payne & Eckert, 2010). As such,
developing a standardized uniform policy and creating best practices around procedures will
likely lead to successful implementation by teachers of the blended learning program.
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 54
Resources. Organizations require tangible materials to accomplish goals, but they also
need time to practice actions and utilize any materials (Clark and Estes, 2000).
Teachers have sufficient time to develop the blended learning program and teachers
receive high quality training that increases their ability to implement the program. Teachers
require high quality training along with time to learn initiatives and program in order for
successful implementation to occur (Brodersen & Melluzzo, 2017; Means, Toyama, Murphy, &
Baki, [n.d]); Payne & Eckert, 2010) In the context of school-based programs, Payne and Eckert
(2010) highlight how teachers need time with a program in order for the quality of
implementation to increase. This is true because by building familiarity with the program,
teachers can then continue to identify what works and what needs to be modified (Payne &
Eckert, 2010). In addition to time, teachers also need high quality and relevant training so as to
develop a holistic understanding of the program and meet certain criteria levels (Payne & Eckert,
2010). Finally, the implementation of any program is more likely to occur at successful rates
when resources are provided and offered during normal school operating hours (Payne & Eckert,
2010). Furthermore, Means et al. (n.d.) emphasize the importance of creating opportunities for
learners to interact with each other and provide collaborative support in addition to having the
time and training for implementation. However, an important consideration is that not all
learners require the same resources, so differentiating the allocation of resources while also
providing personalized training will likely results in positive program implementation
(Broderson & Melluzzo, 2017). Thus, high quality and training and time allows teachers to grow
their expertise in a program before implementing it.
The summary of assumed organizational influences from expected teachers’ critical
behaviors when implementing blended learning programs are demonstrated in Table 4. Table 4
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 55
details the assumed organizational influences at Jiminy Public Schools, which include but are not
limited to cultural model, cultural setting, policies and procedures, and resources.
Table 4
Summary of Assumed Organization Influences on Teachers’ Ability to Achieve the Performance
Goal
Assumed Organization Influences Research Literature
Author, Year; Author, Year.
Cultural Model
Teachers have role models and mentors who can facilitate
their development in effectively implementing blended
learning programs.
Al-busaidi (2012)
Boone (2015)
Seung-Won (2007)
Stevens (2005)
Cultural Model
Teachers have incentives to implement blended learning
programs effectively and receive recognition on their
efforts to improve students achievement.
Cultural Setting
Teachers adopt the goals embedded in the school’s culture
to adopt blended learning programs to bridge the gap in
foundational reading skills.
Kouzes (2007)
Cultural Setting
Teachers feel a part of the implementation team for
successful program adoption.
Policies/Procedures
A standardized blended learning program increases the
success of implementation and allows for better monitoring
of the program.
Payne (2010)
Resources
Teachers have sufficient time to develop blended learning
programs and teachers receive high quality training that
increases their ability to implement the program.
Brodersen (2017)
Means (n.d.)
Payne (2010)
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 56
Summary
In this chapter, the knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences were explored
using available literature. These influences are then used as the foundation for determining the
assets and needs of teachers to achieve the goal of increasing the foundational reading skills of
students. The review was organized using Clark and Estes’ (2008) gap analysis. The assumed
influences were identified in Table 2, Table 3, and Table 4. While peer reviewed research was
discussed in this chapter, Chapter 3 will describe in detail the methodology for the study and the
process of collecting and validating data on the assumed knowledge, motivation, and
organizational influences outlined in this chapter.
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 57
CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY
Purpose of the Project and Questions
The purpose of the study is to examine the assets of high performing middle school
teachers that relate to a larger problem of practice, lagging student reading achievement. The
analysis will focus on the stakeholder assets in the areas of knowledge and skill, motivation, and
organizational resources. While a complete study would focus on all stakeholders, for practical
purposes the stakeholder to be focused on in this analysis is high performing middle school
teachers. Jiminy Public Schools has invested resources into the System 44 reading intervention
program which include technology materials, licenses, pullout training days for teachers, and
ongoing professional development throughout the year. Identifying how all these resources are
working together to create a robust reading intervention program is one of the larger purposes of
this project. Thus the questions that guide this study are:
1. What knowledge, motivation and organizational assets do Jiminy Public Schools middle
teachers have that have contributed to the use of the blended learning program System 44
resulting in high student achievement in foundational reading skills?
2. What solutions and recommendations in the areas of knowledge, motivation, and
organizational resources may be appropriate for achieving similar results in other Jiminy
middle schools?
Conceptual and Methodological Framework
This study will use the Gap Analysis Process (Clark & Estes, 2008) in order to examine
the data for foundational reading skills improvement. The process follows seven specific steps.
Figure 1 illustrates the steps as described in Clark and Estes’ (2008) model:
1. Step 1: Goals: Identify measurable performance goals.
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 58
2. Step 2: Current achievement: Quantify the performance status at each level.
3. Step 3: Gaps: Determine the gap between goals and current performance.
4. Step 4: Root Causes: Hypothesize and validate the causes of the gap; knowledge and
skills, motivation, and organization.
The additional three steps in the Clark and Estes’ (2008) gap analysis model will be discussed in
Chapters Four and Five of this study:
5. Step 5: Promising Practices: Identified promising practice to close the gap.
6. Step 6: Implementation: Plan for implementing the promising practices.
7. Step 7: Evaluate and modify for continual improvement.
Figure 1 shows the sequence of steps in the Gap Analysis Process.
Figure 1. Sequence of steps in the Gap Analysis Process
For this study, the gap analysis approach will be adapted to focus on the underlying
knowledge, motivation, and organizational assets and challenges, if any, that are related to the
successful results due to the performance of teachers implementing the blended learning system.
Each potential asset is assumed until validated or invalidated. Thus, the gap analysis framework
that drives the methodology facilitates the understanding of the influences that lead to the
promising practice.
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 59
Assessment of Performance Influences
In order to examine the promising practices in middle schools with blended learning
systems that lead to improved student foundational reading skills, the gap analysis framework as
cited by Clark and Estes (2008) will be used. The framework focuses on examining stakeholders’
knowledge and skills, their motivation to meet a goal, and the organizational barriers (KMO)
(Clark & Estes, 2008). The purpose of the KMO promising practice gap analysis is to identify
whether or not the assumed knowledge, motivation, and organizational support of teachers is
allowing them to accomplish their goals. The KMO table as referenced in the tables details the
assumed assets and the methods of assessments with interviews, observations, and document
analyses.
Knowledge Assessment
According to Clark and Estes’ (2008), it is important to identify whether or not teachers
know who, what, when, where, why, and how to achieve the performance goals. The assumed
knowledge influences were drawn from Chapter Two’s Assumed Knowledge Influence table.
Anderson & Krathwohl’s (2001) revised taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing will be
used. According to Anderson and Krathwohl (2001), the four domains that categorize knowledge
are (a) factual knowledge; (b) conceptual knowledge; (c) procedural knowledge; (d)
metacognitive knowledge. Table 5 shows the assumed knowledge influences from Chapter Two,
and the proposed method of assessment.
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 60
Table 5
Summary of Knowledge Influences and Method of Assessment
Assumed
Knowledge
Influences
Interview Item
P = Primary
question
FU = Follow up
questions
Document Review Observation
Factual (terms, facts,
concepts)
Teachers know the
main components of
the blended learning
model.
P. Tell me about the
blended learning
model of System 44.
FU. What is each
component of the
blended learning
model?
Do teachers plan for
the major components
of the blended
learning model in
their lesson plan?
Teachers know the
appropriate strategies
for modifying
instruction.
P. Tell me about the
strategies you use to
modify instruction.
Do teachers plan
appropriate strategies
to modify instruction
in their lesson plan?
Teachers know the
elements of a positive
classroom
environment.
P. Tell me about your
classroom
environment.
FU. What elements
make up a positive
classroom
environment?
Do teachers plan
elements of a positive
classroom
environment?
What evidence of a
positive classroom
environment is there?
Examples may
include physical
layout, walls, teacher
action and words,
student action and
words.
Conceptual
(categories, process
models, principles,
relationships)
Teachers know the
FU. How do the main
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 61
interactivity among
main components of
a blended learning
model and know how
they relate to reading
achievement.
components of the
blended learning
model interact?
P. How does each
component relate to
reading achievement?
Teachers explain the
rationale behind the
steps taken to design
a positive learning
environment.
FU. What steps do
you take to build a
positive learning
environment?
Teachers know the
relationship among
clear expectations,
community, rigor,
and reading
achievement.
FU. Describe how
clear expectations,
community, rigor,
and reading
achievement are
related.
Procedural
Teachers know when
to use each major
component of a
blended learning
program.
P. Please explain how
you use each
component of the
blended learning
program?
Observe how teachers
use each component
of the blended
learning program.
Teachers know how
to modify instruction
using appropriate
strategies.
FU. Please explain
the steps you take to
modify instruction
using appropriate
strategies?
Observe how teachers
modify instruction.
Teachers know how
to plan for positive
learning
environments.
FU. Please explain
the steps you take to
design a positive
learning
environment?
Observe teacher
words and actions
that contribute to a
positive learning
environment.
Metacognitive
Teachers reflect on
the effectiveness of
P. Please explain how
you reflect on the
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 62
components of
blended learning
programs in order to
identify strengths and
growth in instruction.
effectiveness of each
component of the
blended learning
program?
Teachers reflect on
their own
effectiveness in
assessing student
performance, and
modifying their
instruction.
FU. Please explain
how you reflect on
the effectiveness of
the assessments and
modifications you
make of your
instruction?
Teachers assess and
evaluate to what
extent the classroom
is a positive learning
environment.
FU. Please explain
how you reflect on
the extent of the
positive learning
environment of your
class?
Motivation Assessment
According to Schunk, Meece, and Pintrich (2008) motivation is defined as the process in
which individuals begin and sustain goal-directed behaviors. Clark and Estes (2008) outline three
influences as requisites for an individual to fulfill a goal, including (a) choosing to work towards
a goal; (b) persisting in the work until the goal is fulfilled; (c) investing mental effort to complete
the task.
In Chapter Two of this study, the assumed motivational influences were described in
detail and will be validated predominantly through interviews and observation. Clark and Estes
(2008) describe value as how individuals adopt and persist in a set of actions despite distractions
and obstacles. Value will be assessed through interviews and observations. Bandura (2006)
defines self-efficacy as the individual’s judgement and perception of their own capabilities to
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 63
accomplish goals. Self-efficacy will be assessed through interviews asking how confident an
individual is to accomplish the goal. Schunk, Meece, and Pintrich (2008) denote emotions as the
positive or negative feelings one has because of a single cause. Emotion will be assessed through
interviews. Zimmerman (2008) describes goal-orientation as a proactive self-regulated process
that is used to accomplish tasks. Goal-orientation will be measured using interview items.
Schunk, Meece, and Pintrich (2008) define attribution as a type of motivational influence that
centers around the perceived cause of an outcome. Attribution will be assessed using interview
items. Table 6 shows the motivation influences and how they will be assessed in this study.
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 64
Table 6
Summary of Motivation Influences and Method of Assessment
Assumed
Motivation
Influences
Interview Item
P = Primary
question
FU = Follow up
questions
Document Review Observation
Motivation
Indicators
Teachers choose to
use the blended
learning system
Teachers persist in
using the system
Teachers apply
mental effort (seek
new knowledge) in
using the system
Observation of
teachers in action of
the three constructs
Value
Teachers value all
components of the
blended learning
model.
P. Some people say
they do not see the
value in this blended
learning model. How
would you respond?
FU. Could you
discuss some reasons
why teachers should
apply all components
of the blended
learning model?
Teachers value the
utility of modifying
instruction.
FU. Some teachers
say they do not value
modifying
instruction. How
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 65
would you respond?
Teachers value
creating a positive
learning environment.
FU. Could you
discuss some reasons
why teachers should
create a positive
learning
environment?
Self-Efficacy
Teachers are
confident they can
effectively implement
all components of the
blended learning
program.
P. How confident do
you feel
implementing all
components of the
blended learning
program?
Teachers are
confident they can
consistently analyze
the data and make
informed adjustments
to differentiate
instruction based on
the data.
FU. How confident
do you feel analyzing
student performance
data and adjusting
instruction?
Teachers are
confident they can
design and manage a
positive learning
environment.
FU. How confident
do you feel designing
and managing a
positive learning
environment?
Emotion
Teachers feel positive
about implementing
all components of the
blended learning
program.
P. How do you feel
about implementing
the different
components of the
blended learning
program?
Teachers feel
encouraged by using
student performance
data to modify
FU. How do you feel
using performance
data to modify
instruction?
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 66
instructional
strategies
Teachers feel positive
about creating a
positive learning
environment.
FU. How do you feel
about creating a
positive learning
environment?
Goal Orientation
Teachers focus on
mastery and set goals
for themselves on
improving the
implementation of
blended learning
programs.
P. Describe how you
focus on mastery and
set goals to improve
program
implementation?
How do you respond
when faced with
challenges in using
the blended learning
system?
Attributions
Teachers attribute
student growth and
lack thereof to how
effectively students
self-regulate their
own learning and
how engaged students
are in the learning
environment.
P. To what do you
attribute the success
or lack of success
using the blended
learning system to
bring about student
growth?
Organization/Culture/Context Assessment
According to Clark and Estes (2008) organizational barriers are the remaining source that
cause a gap, once knowledge and motivation influences are ruled out. In this study,
organizational influences contributing to the promising practice will be examined. Clark and
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 67
Estes (2008) defines culture as the core values, beliefs, goals, emotions, and processes
individuals learn over time in their work environment. Policies and procedures are defined as the
guidelines that support the accomplishment of goals (Payne, 2010). Resources is defined as the
tangible supplies and equipment required to accomplish goals (Clark & Estes, 2008). The
assumed organizational assets were identified in Chapter Two of this study. The method of
assessments for each influence is shown in Table 7 using the instruments of interviews and
document analysis for the cultural model, cultural setting, policies and procedures, and resources.
All organizational influences will be assessed with interview questions, observations, and
document analyses.
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 68
Table 7
Summary of Organization Influences and Method of Assessment
Assumed
Motivation
Influences
Interview Item
P = Primary
question
FU = Follow up
questions
Document Review Observation
Cultural Setting
Teachers have role
models and mentors
who can facilitate
their development in
effectively
implementing
blended learning
programs.
P. Explain how role
models and mentors
support your
implementation of the
blended learning
program?
Teachers have
incentives to
implement blended
learning programs
effectively and
receive recognition
on their efforts to
improve student
achievement.
FU. What kind of
incentives do you
receive for
implementing the
blended learning
program?
FU. How are your
efforts to implement
the blended learning
program recognized?
Are there any visible
evidence of
incentives and
recognition?
Cultural Model
Teachers adopt the
goals embedded in
the school’s culture
to adopt blended
learning programs to
bridge the gap in
foundational reading
skills.
P. To what extent
have you adopted the
blended learning
program goals?
FU. How does the
culture of the school
support your adoption
of the blended
Are there any visible
evidence of goal
adoption?
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 69
learning program
goals?
Teachers feel a part
of the implementation
team for successful
program adoption.
FU. Please explain
how members of your
staff help each other
implement the
program?
Policies/Procedures
A standardized
blended learning
program increases the
success of
implementation and
allows for better
monitoring of the
program.
P. Please explain the
policies and
procedures of the
school that increases
implementation of the
program?
FU. To what extent is
the blended learning
program
standardized?
Verify if document
exists and review
documents if it/they
exist
Resources (time;
finances; people)
Teachers have
sufficient time to
develop blended
learning programs
and teachers receive
high quality training
that increases their
ability to implement
the program.
P. What resources
will you need to
develop the blended
learning program?
FU. What available
training do you
receive to implement
the program?
Verify is available
time and training is
scheduled into the
teachers’ school
calendars,
Participating Stakeholders and Sample Selection
At Jiminy Public Schools, there are approximately 20 teachers who teach System 44, the
available blended learning program that targets foundational reading skills. The stakeholder
group of focus for this study will be the seven middle school teachers at Jiminy Public Schools
who implement the blended learning program resulting in high student achievement. This
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 70
population will be solicited for interviews. Those who participate in the interview will be asked
to participate in a follow up observation. Those who participate in the observation will be asked
for documents to analyze, mainly in the form of lesson plans.
Sampling
This study will use Merriam and Tisdell’s (2016) description of typical purposeful
sampling to identify the interview participants. The criteria that will be used in the sampling for
this study will be teachers who have demonstrated higher than average growth in foundational
reading skills achievement within the blended learning program of System 44. Those who agree
to participate in the interview will be asked to volunteer to participate in observations and asked
to submit documents for analysis. The purpose of including multiple instruments is to triangulate
the data collected in the interview with observations and document analyses.
Recruitment
For this study, the author will initially approach the chief academic officer for permission
to conduct the study and the vice president of schools for access to the 2018 student performance
data. Once access to the data is granted, the researcher will examine the reading achievement
levels to confirm the performance of the previously identified three model schools from the
student performance data in 2017. The next stage in the recruitment strategy begins by
communicating with the administrators at each high performing schools and asking for
permission to contact the teachers of high performing classes. Once permission is received, the
researcher will personally visit each school site and request participation for an interview. At the
interview, an observation participation along with document submission will be requested.
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 71
Instrumentation
The instrumentation used for this study will include a semi-structured interview protocol,
an observation protocol, and a document analysis protocol. The instrument of surveys will be
omitted because of the small sample size and limited number of participants.
Interview Protocol
The initial data will be collected through semi-structured open-ended interviews with
volunteer teachers who have been identified by their above average high achieving System 44
classes from the previous school year. The interview questions that will be asked are listed in
Table 4 for knowledge, Table 5 for motivation, and Table 6 for organization factors. The
interview protocol and bank of questions can also be found in Appendix A. The interview will be
scheduled to last no more than one hour for each participants. The interview will be comprised of
14 primary questions with 22 available follow up questions. An example of a factual knowledge
interview question that will be asked is “Tell me about the instructional strategies you modify?”
An example of a motivation follow up interview question that will be asked is “How do you
value a positive learning environment?” An example of an organizational follow up interview
question will be “Please explain how role models and mentors support your implementation of
the blended learning program?”
Observation Protocol
The teachers who participate in the interviews will be asked to volunteer a lesson to be
observed. The observations will occur in the System 44 blended learning program class and
period of their choice. The observable items are listed in the Knowledge and Organizational
assumed influences tables (Table 4 and Table 6) which include observational items such as
teacher words and actions that contribute to a positive learning environment and organizational
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 72
resources in addition to any visible evidence of incentives and recognition. The observation
protocol can also be found in Appendix B. In addition, observations will include whether
teachers choose, persist, and apply mental effort to using the system.
Document Analysis Protocol
For additional triangulation of the data, teacher lesson plans, unit plans, and curriculum
maps will be analyzed. A key emphasis will be on obtaining any standardization of classroom
content along with any training resources used by each instructor. The document analysis
protocol can also be found in Appendix C. Jiminy Public Schools will also be asked to provide
relevant documentation on existing policies and procedures that govern the implementation of
blended learning programs, as shown in Table 3.
Data Collection
Following University of Southern California Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval,
the researcher solicited participants via e-mail to participate in either an in-person or phone
interview. The procedure for data collection is described in the following sections.
Interviews
The interviews are anticipated to run no longer than 60 minutes and will be scheduled
with each teacher ahead of time, ideally 14 days before the interview date. The interviewees will
be given the option to conduct the interview either in person or over the phone. The interviewees
will also be given preference as to the location of the interview to choose a place that is most
comfortable and convenient for them. Each interview will be recorded and then transcribed.
Observations
The teachers who were interviewed will be asked to be observed during a single lesson in
their System 44 class that incorporates the blended learning program. All teachers who volunteer
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 73
to participate in the observation will be observed at least once until saturation (Merriam &
Tisdell, 2016) of the findings is reached. Observer as participant (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016) will
be the role of the observer in this study. The observer’s presence and actions will be obvious to
the individuals in the classroom where the observation is scheduled to take place. The
observations will be scheduled ahead of time (at least 14 days before the observation date) and
should not last longer than 60 minutes per classroom. All notes will be taken on a notebook and
the observation will not be recorded with any video or voice recording device.
Document Analysis
The documents to be analyzed include resources used for the lesson including lesson
plans, powerpoints, slides, handouts. Additional resources to be collected if available are the
policies and procedures governing the practice of the blended learning program as described in
Table 3. Access to any documentation will be requested from the chief academic officer and the
vice president of schools, along with the principal at each school site. With approval, the policies
and procedures will be gathered through Jiminy Public School’s internet network and district
website.
Data Analysis
Interviews
The recorded interviews will be transcribed and combined with the personally written
memos from each interview. The transcribed document will be reviewed and coded using Tables
4, 5, and 6 and based on Clark and Estes’ (2008) knowledge, motivation, and organization
framework using frequency, patterns, and emergent themes. The frequencies and themes in
knowledge will be categorized into factual, conceptual, procedural, and metacognitive
knowledge types. From the interview, frequencies and themes in motivation will then be
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 74
categorized into value, self-efficacy, emotion, goal-orientation, and attribution. Finally, the
variable associated with the organization will be categorized into cultural model, cultural setting,
policies and procedures, and resources. Any findings not included in one of the previously
mentioned categories will be analyzed using grounded theory to identify emerging themes
(Corbin and Strauss, 2008).
Observations
In accordance with Merriam and Tisdell’s (2016) recommendation, the organization and
analysis of the data will occur simultaneously as the ongoing data collection process. Artifacts,
observer comments, and field notes will be the main sources of data during the observations, as
recommended by Merriam and Tisdell (2016). Teacher implementation of all the main
components of the blended learning program will be observed. The documented observational
notes will be coded using coding schemes based on Tables 4, 5, and 6.
Documents
As suggested by Clark and Estes’ (2008) framework, any documents on the policies and
procedures of blended learning program will be collected and reviewed. Teacher created
resources from the lesson will also be reviewed. The analysis of the documents collected will
rely on coding schemes identified in Tables 4 and 6.
Trustworthiness of Data
In order to maintain the credibility and trustworthiness of this study, triangulation will be
used. Merriam and Tisdell (2016) define triangulation as using multiple investigators, sources of
data, or methods to confirm evolving findings. This study will triangulate the findings through
the use of multiple instruments in order to increase the trustworthiness of the data.
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 75
Role of Investigator
The investigator in this study will provide context and purpose to the teachers who
volunteer for the study. The author of this study is the subject matter expert, a former English
teacher and current supervising administrator over both the humanities department and the
English Language Development program. The role of the author is to identify promising
practices and implement solutions to increase student achievement. The blended learning
program is used both in middle and high schools, and the author has access to share best practice
findings with the directory of literacy over the district and other school site administrators who
oversee similar programs. The author will be aware of the role and impact on professional and
personal relationships with teachers as people rather than as subjects for this study. The author
will consider ahead of time, the protection of the participants, discuss their right to privacy,
confidentiality, and be fully transparent with them in the submission to the institution’s Internal
Review Board.
Limitations
The limitations of this study are the small sample size of schools and teachers, making
the findings not generalizable to a larger context. The main stakeholder identified teach in
charter middle schools with a small school model. Therefore, the recommendations will only be
relevant and appropriate for schools within Jiminy Public Schools. The promising practices
identified cannot be generalized to other larger and non-charter schools. The author of the project
works at a high school within Jiminy Public Schools which may add bias to the study, especially
since the author will interpret the data to validate all assumptions as assets.
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 76
CHAPTER FOUR: RESULTS AND FINDINGS
The assumed knowledge, motivation, and organization assets related to teacher
perceptions on improving foundational reading skills growth delineated in Chapter Three were
assessed. Multiple sources of qualitative data were collected to validate the assumed assets.
Specifically, interview, observation, and artifact data were collected to understand the
knowledge, motivational, and organizational assets teachers encounter improving foundational
reading skills at Jiminy Public Schools. Interviews were the main instrument to understanding
teacher perceptions and conducted first in order to establish a baseline understanding. Then,
observations were conducted to contextualize and support the data gathered from interviews.
Finally, when applicable artifacts in the form of teacher lesson materials were collected for
additional triangulation. The results have been organized into knowledge, motivation, and
organization domains.
Participating Stakeholders
Middle school teachers who teach foundational reading courses were the stakeholders of
interest in this study and provided all of the interview, observation, and artifact data. Seven
teachers participated in 60-minute interviews, allowed 60-minute classroom observations, and
provided lesson material artifacts. Six were female and one was male with all participants in
possession of a master’s degree or higher. The average years of experience teaching was 7 years,
the shortest was 2 years, and the longest was 16 years. Participant demographics are presented in
Table 8.
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 77
Table 8
Participant Demographics
Race/Ethnicity Total Percentage
White/Caucasian
African American
Hispanic or Latino
2
2
3
29%
29%
42%
Data Validation
Interview, observation, and artifact data were collected in order to assess teachers’
knowledge, motivation, and perceptions of organization assets related to improving foundational
reading skills in Jiminy Public Schools. Chapter Three includes a discussion of the assumed
assets and which assets were assessed using interview, observation, and document analysis. Not
all assets were assessed by every instrument. Data was analyzed using the constant comparative
method (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016) to compare similarities and differences between subjects in
order to identify emerging thematic trends. Although the study was informed by a grounded
theory design (Glaser & Strauss, 1967), the overall purpose and focus was not on developing
theory.
Three sources of data were collected for triangulation purposes. Interviews were
conducted first to learn about teacher experiences with teaching foundational reading skills and
their perceptions on their knowledge, motivation, and organization assets. Then, classroom
observations were conducted with the same pool of participants in order to examine observable
behaviors. Finally, lesson materials, artifacts, and documents were collected to be analyzed to
corroborate and strengthen the triangulation of data. Interview responses were collected until
saturation was reached for majority of the responses. Observations were conducted with field
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 78
notes being taken and analyzed immediately after each observation. Observations were
conducted until saturation was reached from the notes and no new themes emerged. The artifacts
were collected for review with both teacher-created and curriculum provided lesson plans,
resources, and materials making up the bulk of artifacts.
Assumed assets were considered validated if at least five out of seven interviews,
observations, or document analyses were in agreement and demonstrated similar characteristics.
Efforts were made to find a high frequency of agreement among all three instruments when
applicable for each assumed assets. This process was used to demonstrate that assumed assets
consistently existed and interviewed teachers perceived that the asset had a positive impact on
student learning.
Results and Findings for Knowledge Assets
In Chapter Three, the assumed knowledge assets of teachers were described, categorized
into four groups, and assessed by interviews, observations, and document analyses. The results
and findings of the knowledge assets were reported using the knowledge categories and assumed
knowledge influence in each category. The four categories are factual knowledge, conceptual
knowledge, procedural knowledge, and metacognitive knowledge (Anderson & Krathwohl,
2001). The 12 assumed knowledge assets are abbreviated and summarized below in Table 9 with
8 of the assets validated.
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 79
Table 9
Assumed Knowledge Assets
Assumed Asset Validated Not Validated
Know blended learning model components
Know strategies to modify instruction
Know elements of a positive classroom environment
Know interactivity among blended learning model and reading
achievement
Explain rationale behind design of classroom environment
Know relationship among expectations, community, and rigor
Know when to use blended learning model component
Know how to modify instruction
Know how to plan a positive learning environment
Reflect on effectiveness of components of blended learning model
Reflect on assessing performance and modifying instruction
Assess and evaluate extent of positive learning environment
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Declarative Factual Knowledge
Influence 1. Teachers know the main components of the blended learning model.
Survey results. Surveys were not conducted for this influence.
Interview findings. All seven teachers interviewed were able to identify the main
components of the blended learning model from the reading program System 44. Each teacher
without being prompted used the terms: “rotations,” “adaptive computer software,” “independent
reading books,” and “small group instruction with Real books.” All teachers were also able to
expand on small group instruction by explaining how teacher-facilitated lessons were taught
through the curriculum with textbooks. All seven teachers had the declarative factual knowledge
of the main components of the blended learning model.
Observation. Observations were not conducted for this influence.
Document analysis. Teacher lesson materials were collected in the form of lesson plans,
handouts, or powerpoint slides. Six out of seven teachers’ artifacts that were collected supported
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 80
their knowledge of the main components of the blended learning model. The six artifacts had
evidence of planning for all three components. One teacher’s artifacts included student reading
logs that normally would be used during independent reading, but students only experienced the
adaptive software during the observation. Six teachers’ artifacts demonstrated the declarative
factual knowledge of the main components of the blended learning model.
Summary. All teachers knew the main components of a blended learning model in their
interviews and six out of seven (85.71%) of participants demonstrating their knowledge in the
lesson artifacts that were collected. The assumed knowledge asset of teachers knowing the main
components of a blended learning model was validated.
Influence 2. Teachers know the appropriate strategies for modifying instruction.
Survey results. Surveys were not conducted for this influence.
Interview findings. All seven interview participants communicated their understanding of
key signature teaching strategies to modify instruction. One teacher stated: “I have to make
adjustments constantly because my students have such varied reading needs.” Similarly, other
teachers communicated the importance of knowing how to modify their instruction, especially
during small group. For example, one teacher claimed: “When I look ahead to small group
instruction, you know, I preview the vocabulary and reading skills needed for each section, and
then I try to think about three subgroups ahead of time by considering high, mid, and low-skilled
students. I pretty much try to think of common misconceptions and the prior knowledge students
have to pre-plan how I should respond in case students kind of don’t get it.” The majority of
teachers mentioned similar keywords related to modifying instruction which was summarized in
Table 10 below.
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 81
Table 10
Keywords Related to Modifying Instruction
Teacher Differentiation Making data-informed
decisions
Subgroups Checks for
understanding
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
All seven teachers had the declarative factual knowledge of the appropriate strategies for
modifying instruction.
Observation. Observations were not conducted for this influence.
Document analysis. The teacher lesson materials collected did not show any evidence of
teachers modifying instruction. During the interviews, all participants mentioned some elements
of pre-planning questions based on anticipating the adjustments that need to be made, however
this was not evident in any of their artifacts. None of the teachers’ artifacts demonstrated the
declarative factual knowledge of the main components of the blended learning model.
Summary. All teachers interviewed communicated knowing strategies to modify
instruction. However, no evidence of strategies was found in lesson-related documents or
artifacts collected. The assumed knowledge asset of teachers knowing the appropriate strategies
for modifying instruction was not validated.
Influence 3. Teachers know the elements of a positive classroom environment.
Survey results. Surveys were not conducted for this influence.
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 82
Interview findings. When asked about the classroom environment, all seven interview
participants mentioned the same elements using similar vocabulary. All teachers mentioned
“peer interactions” and “setting clear expectations” more than five times during the interview.
Three teachers described the teacher evaluation rubric, the College Ready Teaching Framework
(CRTF) used annually during their performance evaluations, as a guide to how they were trained
on building a positive classroom culture. As one teacher stated: “The CRTF rubric helped me
focus on setting clear expectations and teaching students how to behave appropriately so that
distractions can be minimized and students can pretty much focus on learning.” Another teacher
mentioned that: “I really worked on improving student to student interactions based on the CRTF
rubric.” All seven teachers had the declarative factual knowledge of the elements of a positive
classroom environment.
Observation. Observations were not conducted for this influence.
Document analysis. Document analysis was not conducted for this influence.
Summary. All teachers knew the elements of a positive classroom environment in their
interviews. The assumed knowledge asset of teachers knowing elements of a positive classroom
environment was validated.
Conceptual Knowledge
Influence 1. Teachers know the interactivity among main components of a blended
learning model and how they relate to reading achievement.
Survey results. Surveys were not conducted for this influence.
Interview findings. When asked about how elements of the blended learning model
interact with each other, not all teachers were able to articulate how the software, independent
reading, and small group instruction components were interconnected. Most teachers were able
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 83
to explain how each component helped students learn distinct reading skills, but only two
teachers articulated how the different components support each other. One teacher said: “The
software portion is adaptive and really targets key skills that students have gaps in, while the
independent reading portion gives them the opportunity to practice those skills by reading books
at their level. Finally, the small group instruction is where students are able to practice the skills
with peers and focus on reading comprehension.” Two teachers had the conceptual knowledge of
the interactivity of the main components of a blended learning model and how they relate to
reading achievement.
Observation. Observations were not conducted for this influence.
Document analysis. Document analysis was not conducted for this influence.
Summary. Two teachers knew the interactivity among blended learning model
components. This assumed knowledge asset was not validated.
Influence 2. Teachers explain the rationale behind the steps taken to design a
positive learning environment.
Survey results. Surveys were not conducted for this influence.
Interview findings. Six out of seven (85.71%) teachers explained how they molded
positive classroom culture. One teacher stated: “When I received my first summer training on
teaching this course, one of the largest tenets that resonated with me was the importance of
creating a safe environment for each and every one of my students. This was like my biggest
takeaway because I realized that struggling readers needed to feel like they can take risks, needed
to believe in themselves, and really really needed to have champions to support them during the
learning process. I realized I needed to be hyper aware of that.” Similarly, another teacher
described: “Because this class only has struggling readers, students who historically struggled
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 84
every single year they were in school, I believe they need to feel like change is possible. And,
that kind of agency is cultivated when everyone supports each other.” The one teacher who did
not explain the rationale behind designing a positive learning environment made a general
reference to the importance of classroom management to run a smooth classroom, but did not
specifically refer to a positive environment. Six teachers had the conceptual knowledge of the
rationale behind the steps taken to design a positive learning environment.
Observation. Observations were not conducted for this influence.
Document analysis. Document analysis was not conducted for this influence.
Summary. With the exception of one teacher, all other participants explained their
rationale behind the steps taken to design a positive learning environment. This assumed
knowledge asset was validated.
Influence 3. Teachers know the relationship among clear expectations, community,
rigor, and reading achievement.
Survey results. Surveys were not conducted for this influence.
Interview findings. All seven interview participants referred to the training they received
prior to teaching the blended learning program and how the training taught them that student
reading achievement will improve at a faster rate if teachers hold all students to “high
expectations,” build a strong sense of “community,” and raise the “rigor demanded” in all
learning tasks. All seven teachers used those terms at least once in the interview to describe how
their plans affect reading achievement. When asked how reading intervention classes differ from
any other class, one teacher articulated: “Strong classroom management is imperative for good
teaching, but when students are particularly disadvantaged in their skill level, it is so important
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 85
for them to succeed.” Seven teachers had the conceptual knowledge of the relationship among
clear expectations, community, rigor, and reading achievement.
Observation. Observations were not conducted for this influence.
Document analysis. Document analysis was not conducted for this influence.
Summary. The assumed knowledge asset of teachers knowing the relationship among
clear expectations, community, rigor, and reading achievement is supported by interviews. All
teachers articulated how struggling readers benefit from a positive classroom culture where
students also feel connected to each other. This assumed knowledge asset was validated.
Procedural Knowledge
Influence 1. Teachers know when to use each major component of a blended
learning program.
Survey results. Surveys were not conducted for this influence.
Interview findings. Teachers were asked to outline the sequence of a typical lesson that
incorporates the major components of the blended learning program. 100% of teachers described
the adaptive software, independent reading, and small group instruction. 100% explained how
each component did not necessarily have to be experienced in a specific order, since System 44
used a rotational model with the class separated into three different groups. Two teachers
described whole group instruction as an integral part of the program, while four teachers did not
consider whole group instruction as a component of the blended learning, and one teacher did not
mention whole group instruction at all. Seven teachers had the procedural knowledge of when to
use each major component of a blended learning program.
Observation. Five of the seven (71.42%) teachers were observed demonstrating when to
use each blended learning components by implementing them during the lesson. Two of the
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 86
teachers did not have all students rotate through all components and instead had their students
only experience one component of the model, the adaptive software. Teacher 3 explained the
rationale for that choice to the students by stating: “Today everyone is going to maximize
software time because it’s a short period and you guys are already caught up with this week’s
lessons. Therefore, we’re doing to spend today either catching up in minutes or getting ahead of
your minutes goals.” Teacher 6 did not explain the rationale, but immediately after all students
completed the Do Now task in the first three minutes, without being prompted all students either
went to the computers against the wall or grabbed laptops from the technology corner. The
physical layout of all seven classrooms did include three distinct spaces for each component of
the blended learning model with labels such as: “Independent reading corner,” “Software
stations,” and “Small group section.” All seven classrooms also had a row of desks that faced the
wall with computers for the software section and desks grouped together for the small group
section. Six teachers had the procedural knowledge of when to use each major component of a
blended learning program.
Document analysis. Examining the lesson materials provided by teachers, five teachers’
artifacts outlined how the lesson incorporates different components of the blended learning
model. Three groups of students were identified in the powerpoint slides and a timer was
included to denote the duration of each group’s rotation in software, independent reading, and
small group instruction. Two teachers had students travel with a learning log to record their key
takeaways and reflections from each station. These were printed on a template that each student
was tasked with picking up from the back of the room. Two teachers did not have lesson
materials that included all three components. Five teachers’ artifacts demonstrated the procedural
knowledge of when to use each major component of a blended learning program.
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 87
Summary. The majority of teachers demonstrated when to use each component of the
blended learning model with five out of seven of teachers (71.42%) having explicit plans laid out
in powerpoint slides, lesson plan materials, or handouts provided to students. Two teachers had
discussed the importance of each component but did not plan for all components. This assumed
knowledge asset was validated.
Influence 2. Teachers know how to modify instruction using appropriate strategies.
Survey results. Surveys were not conducted for this influence.
Interview findings. Teachers were provided with a hypothetical scenario and asked what
action steps they would take a student when a student demonstrates confusion pronouncing a
word and when a student does not fully comprehend the reading assignment. Three teachers
accurately explained how they would adjust their instruction by leveraging a peer to provide
additional support. One teacher stated: “If it was only one student, I would ask the peers for their
response and return to the struggling student. However, if multiple students demonstrated
confusion, I would pause and re-teach the phoneme by sight or referring students to their
reflection journals.” Another teacher communicated something similar: “After identifying the
confusion after a quick check for understanding, I would provide a min-lesson and practice
verbalizing sight words. Yeah, sight words are important.” Three teachers had the procedural
knowledge of when to use each major component of a blended learning program.
Observation. Two teachers were observed modifying instruction using appropriate
strategies. Both teachers asked a peer student for what they thought the correct answer was and
returned to the original student for the answer. One teacher modified instruction by asking three
students in the small group to continue with the lesson while the confused student was guided to
practice sounding out and identify other words with similar sounds. The teacher was observed
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 88
saying, “Guys you guys move on to this section and I’ll catch up. (To the one student) Okay,
now let’s practice our -ch sounds.” Two teachers had the procedural knowledge of when to use
each major component of a blended learning program.
Document analysis. Document analysis was not conducted for this influence.
Summary. Although teachers could state what strategies they would apply to modify
instruction, only three out of seven (42.86%) of participants applied them during the hypothetical
question in the interview and only two out of seven (28.57%) of participants were observed
modifying instruction. This assumed knowledge assed was not validated.
Influence 3. Teachers know how to plan for positive learning environments.
Survey results. Surveys were not conducted for this influence.
Interview findings. When asked about how teachers plan for positive classroom learning
environment, all seven interview participants described in detail the specific steps they took to
design their classrooms. One teacher emphasized: “The first two weeks of the school year is
dedicated to team-building, co-constructing classroom norms, and creating a classroom belief
system. It’s like setting the vision for your class you know. All students are taught the
importance of relationships in this classroom and they lean on each other throughout the year.
Students who improve are celebrated collectively and students who fall behind are encouraged
and supported by like-minded peers. For example, last year we really worked on growth mindset.
So, that was like important for me to pass on.” All teachers identified a positive classroom
environment as pivotal in their students’ success. Seven teachers had the procedural knowledge
of how to plan for positive learning environments.
Observation. Observations were not conducted for this influence.
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 89
Document analysis. Six out of seven (85.71%) teachers’ lesson materials included
encouraging words and positive messages that were described during their interviews. Two
teachers additionally created space on student handouts for students to receive feedback from
their peers on their assignments. For example, one handout required students to check in with a
shoulder partner at the end of the period in order to answer the question, “On a scale of 1-4, how
productive was your partner today and why? Provide at least 1 concrete detail.” Another teacher
used words like “teammate,” “supporter,” and “community member” when having students
record responses from their peers. Six teachers’ artifacts’ demonstrated the procedural
knowledge of how to plan for positive learning environments.
Summary. All teachers knew how to plan a positive classroom environment in their
interviews, with 85.71% of participants demonstrating their knowledge in the lesson artifacts that
were collected. The assumed knowledge asset of teachers knowing elements of a positive
classroom environment was validated.
Metacognitive Knowledge
Influence 1. Teachers reflect on the effectiveness of components of blended learning
programs in order to identify strengths and growth in instruction.
Survey results. Surveys were not conducted for this influence.
Interview findings. All teachers reflected on the effectiveness of different aspects of the
blended learning program and described their own instructional strengths and growths. The
majority of teachers (85.71%) expressed the impact of the adaptive software and how students
would not be able to demonstrate rapid growth in reading skills without it. As one respondent
noted:
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 90
I always found it challenging to meet all learners’ needs, especially teaching with our
student population. It takes so much time to differentiate every lesson, especially when
we think about students who don’t have all the skills to pronounce every word. That
makes it super tough. But, the software really is a wonderful tool because every time a
student is using it, it’s almost like having several additional teachers in the room. (laughs)
I mean that, no joke. The software is able to identify what skills students need to improve
upon and allows them to individually practice those skills. It’s by no means perfect,
especially if there are other extenuating factors that prevent student progress, like
attendance issues. But, I believe it’s really the most important part of System 44.
This response exemplifies the ability to reflect on the blended learning program’s
effectiveness to improve students’ foundational reading skills.
In one teacher’s reflection, the small group instruction was identified as the most critical
component of the program. The teacher attributed her own growth as a teacher to the small group
portion because as she communicated: “I need to meet the learning needs of a small group while
managing the classroom environment for two other groups. Also besides my improved managing
skills, anticipating learning needs for three mini-lessons for each class was an early challenge
when I first started teaching the course, but something I’m much better at now.” Seven teachers
had the metacognitive knowledge of reflecting on the effectiveness of components of blended
learning programs in order to identify strengths and growth in instruction.
Observation. Observations were not conducted for this influence.
Document analysis. Document analysis was not conducted for this influence.
Summary. 100% of teachers accurately reflected on the effectiveness of the major
components of the blended learning program. The majority identified the software portion as the
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 91
most effective, but one teacher identified the small group instruction as the most critical
component. All teachers communicated how they were being challenged by learning to teach
System 44, but how they all improved as a result. This assumed knowledge asset was validated.
Influence 2. Teachers reflect on their own effectiveness in assessing student
performance and modifying their instruction.
Survey results. Surveys were not conducted for this influence.
Interview findings. All teachers were asked to reflect on how effectively they were able
to assess student performance and all teachers described the frequency of examining multiple
student performance data. The data mentioned by all teachers were the minutes students spent on
software and the words read tracker. As one teacher stated: “One metric that I examine daily is
the amount of minutes students accumulate on software because I’ve been trained that it’s a clear
indicator of whether students are improving their decoding and reading skills. There are some
instances where it’s just not accurate because of prolonged absences or students not being on
task, but then it’s easy to just reset their status.” Three teachers made a reference to the series
software progress report, which they normally reviewed in their instructional coaching sessions
with either a curriculum specialist or their administrator coach. One teacher communicated: “I
appreciate my admin coaching sessions because he always reminds me to look at what series
students are in and to provide additional support for students who are lagging behind the other
students.” However, only two out of the seven teachers described how they modified instruction
after assessing student performance. One teacher explained: “After looking at the data reports,
I’m able to provide additional support such as sentence frames and vocabulary definitions in
advance to my most struggling students during small group instruction.” A second teacher
explained: “I would like to see the skills students work on during software and make adjustments
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 92
to how I approach small group instruction, but I don’t have the capacity to do it every lesson. I’m
hoping that by next year when I have more experience with the program, I can improve how I
differentiate lessons.” Two teachers had the metacognitive knowledge of reflecting on their own
effectiveness in assessing student performance and modifying their instruction.
Observation. Observations were not conducted for this influence.
Document analysis. Document analysis was not conducted for this influence.
Summary. All seven (100%) of teachers reflected on their own effectiveness in assessing
student performance, but only two teachers (28.57%) described how they modified instruction.
One teacher described in detailed the steps they take to adjust their instruction during small
group while the other teachers explained her lack of confidence in her ability to adjust
instruction. The other five teachers made no mention about how they adjust instruction. This
assumed knowledge asset was not validated.
Influence 3. Teachers assess and evaluate to what extent the classroom is a positive
learning environment.
Survey results. Surveys were not conducted for this influence.
Interview findings. When asked about the extent of their classrooms being positive
learning environments, six out of seven teachers mentioned similar descriptions using words
such as: “supportive,” “peer to peer interactions,” “encouragement,” “celebrating success,”
care,” and “joy.” Three teachers also compared how their intervention classes that use the
blended learning model feels differently than other classes they taught. One teacher stated: “I’m
not sure if it’s because all the students have bought in to improving their reading, but I have
never seen students support each other as I do in my intervention courses. I believe they
genuinely care for each other which is why they celebrate each other so hard and authentically.
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 93
Another teacher communicated that this was the only course she ever taught, but when she hears
other teachers talking about their classes, she believes her class’ environment is more positive.
Six teachers had the metacognitive knowledge to assess and evaluate to what extent the
classroom is a positive learning environment.
Observation. Observations were not conducted for this influence.
Document analysis. Document analysis was not conducted for this influence.
Summary. Six out of seven teachers assessed to what extend their classroom is a positive
learning environment by using common descriptors and making comparison statements to either
their other classes or to how peer teachers described their classroom environment. This assumed
knowledge asset was validated.
A summary of all results and findings is presented at the end of this chapter.
Results and Findings for Motivation Assets
Teachers’ motivation was assessed by interviews, observations, and document analyses.
The results are presented for each assumed asset and categorized under value (Clark & Estes,
2008), self-efficacy (Bandura, 2006), emotion (Schunk, Meece, & Pintrich, 2008), goal-
orientation (Zimmerman, 2008), and attribution (Schunk, Meece, & Pintrich, 2008). The results
are used to validate whether or not teachers have the assumed assets within Jiminy Public
Schools. The 11 assumed motivation assets are summarized below in Table 11 with 7 of the
assets validated.
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 94
Table 11
Assumed Motivation Assets
Assumed Asset Validated Not Validated
Value all components of the blended learning model
Value the utility of modifying instruction
Value creating a positive learning environment
Confidence in implementing all components of a blended learning
program
Confidence in analyzing data and making informed adjustments to
differentiate instruction
Confidence in designing and managing a positive learning
environment
Feeling positive implementing all components of a blended learning
program
Feeling encouraged using student performance data to modify
instructional strategies
Feeling positive about creating a positive learning environment
Focus on mastery and set goals on improving implementation of
blended learning programs
Attribute student growth and lack thereof to student self-regulation
and engagement
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Value
Influence 1. Teachers value all components of the blended learning model.
Survey results. Surveys were not conducted for this influence.
Interview findings. All seven teachers communicated how critical each component of
System 44 was for students in their classroom to demonstrate improvement. As one teacher
stated: “The software, independent reading, and small group instruction are all integrated to
teach students new skills and to provide communal and independent practice opportunities to
hone those skills.” Another teacher emphasized the importance of each of the components by
describing the effects of what can happen when a student falls behind in any of them. The
teacher shared: “You can see how students who miss software time don’t progress through the
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 95
series or how students who dismiss independent reading end up improving the least.” One
teacher communicated how despite her lack of teaching experience, learning how to manage all
three major components elevated her teaching practice. The teacher explained: “I’m only in my
second year of teaching, but learning how to implement the rotations really helped me in a lot of
ways. I’m better at planning the flow of a lessons, making group structures, pacing out the entire
day, backwards planning, everything.” Seven teachers demonstrated they valued all components
of the blended learning model.
Observation. From the observations, five out of seven teachers 5/7 teachers (71.42%)
were observed implementing all components of the blended learning model, and out of the seven,
four communicated to their students the importance of each rotation to their learning. One
teacher stated: “Remember that you need to be 100% focused in reading, software time, and
when you’re in small group with me.” Another teacher maintained a feeling or urgency by
reminding students about the times in each rotation and how many minutes remained before
students switched stations. The teacher explained: “Remember class, every minute counts, so
when the bell sounds, remember to move to the next station in 30 seconds.” and reminded
students: “There are three minutes remaining for the independent readers. Make sure you are
ready to switch to software time.”
As part of the observation protocol, the physical decor and layout of the classroom was
also documented. All seven classrooms observed dedicated a full wall to each station. The
software station had labeled and numbered desktops or a laptop cart. The independent reading
section had multiple bookshelves organized by reading skill level. The small group station had
desks pre-arranged in either a circular or rectangular format with space for the teacher at the
center. Each station had several posters that communicated the directions and norms for conduct.
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 96
For example, posters communicated: “CHAMPS behavioral expectations,” “Best practices,”
“NORMS,” or “Technology rules.” The posters and labeled made it clear that there was a
physical space dedicated for each component of the blended learning model. Seven teachers
demonstrated they valued all components of the blended learning model.
Document analysis. Document analysis was not conducted for this influence.
Summary. Seven out of seven teachers (100%) interviewed demonstrated that they valued
all components of the blended learning model with all of them also reinforcing it in the
classroom observations. The classroom observations focused on the physical layout and space
dedicated for each component in addition to the words and directions communicated on posters
throughout the walls. This assumed motivation asset was validated.
Influence 2. Teachers value the utility of modifying instruction.
Survey results. Surveys were not conducted for this influence.
Interview findings. When asked about the utility value of modifying instruction in their
classes, five teachers communicated that modifying instruction was a critical skill needed to meet
the needs of their diverse learners. One teacher stated: “I know it’s important to stay up to date
with the data so I know how students are showing progress and which need the most support.”
Out of the five teachers, three communicated that modifying instruction was the most
challenging aspect of teaching this course, but also the most impactful. The three teachers
described “time” and “experience” as the only barriers to thrive in this area of modifying
instruction. Five teachers demonstrated they valued the utility of modifying instruction.
Observation. Observations were not conducted for this influence.
Document analysis. Document analysis was not conducted for this influence.
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 97
Summary. Five out of seven (71.42%) teachers affirmed they value the utility of
modifying instruction through interviews. Three communicated how challenging the task can be,
but how the teaching practice of modifying instruction may be the most important component to
teaching a blended learning program.
Influence 3. Teachers value creating a positive learning environment.
Survey results. Surveys were not conducted for this influence.
Interview findings. When asked to respond to a hypothetical scenario where someone did
not think the learning environment was as important as the curriculum, six teachers
communicated their disagreement and prioritized a positive learning environment. As one
teacher stated: “A positive learning environment is the baseline necessity to establish a space
conducive for System 44 to be successful, especially because the teacher is leading a small group
throughout the entire class.” Additionally, another teacher expanded on the importance of
students supporting each other in their learning. The teacher stated: “Although learning to read
can be a personal and intimate experience, many of the students in here feed off of and carry
each other to new heights. I think it helps that they’re all struggling in some way or form, which
makes it easier to offer and accept help.” One teacher agreed that curriculum is important, but
communicated that the learning environment was a close second if not just as important. Six
teachers demonstrated they valued creating a positive learning environment.
Observation. With the observation protocol, all teacher classrooms exhibited more than
twelve separate items related to positivity, care, and support in the form of posters and messages
on the walls and boards. Some examples of these were posters that stated: “Follow your dreams,”
You never fail until you stop trying,” “Positive quote corner,” and “Open your mind. Open a
book.” Five teacher classroom also exhibited student work that ranged in level of skill with both
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 98
“masterpieces” and “most improved scholar” student work displayed. Six of the classrooms also
had personalized spaces where students wrote their names and displayed information about
themselves such as a list of favorite movies or family photos. All seven teachers demonstrated
they valued creating a positive learning environment.
Document analysis. Document analysis was not conducted for this influence.
Summary. Five teachers demonstrated they value creating a positive learning
environment in their interviews and all teachers demonstrated this value when their classrooms
were observed. This assumed motivation asset was validated.
Self-Efficacy
Influence 1. Teachers have confidence in implementing all components of a blended
learning program.
Survey results. Surveys were not conducted for this influence.
Interview findings. Three teachers communicated their confidence in implementing all
components of System 44. All three teachers were the most experienced of the participants. The
four teachers who expressed reservation pointed to different component as challenge areas. One
teacher shared: “Independent reading has always been a challenging rotation in my class because
it’s difficult for me to track student progress outside of what they report. From my perspective,
it’s hard to really know their takeaways and struggles.” Another teacher pointed out a different
component as an area of improvement. The teacher explained: “In the beginning, transitions and
setting clear expectations for each station was something I needed to work on. Now, I’m trying
to up my small group game by getting more intimate with the data. This year, we also have some
new curriculum, so it’s going to take some time for me to become familiar with the readings and
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 99
questions.” Three teachers were confident in implementing all components of a blended learning
program.
Observation. During the first classroom observation, two components of the rotation
occurred with minimal prompting because the teacher spent the majority of time in small group
instruction. Therefore, for all subsequent observations, I made sure to position myself next to the
small group station for at least the first 20 minutes to see how the station was implemented from
beginning to end. In the next six observations, three teachers were observed having to interrupt
the mini-lesson to address students outside of the group at least on two separate occasions during
a twenty minute span. Two of these three teachers were the same teachers who communicated
that small group instruction was their biggest challenge. During the mini-lesson, the three
teachers also had to pause to re-read the directions to themselves and each teacher had moments
when students experienced procedural directions. For example, one student asked the teacher:
“I’m not sure which section we’re supposed to turn to right now,” and the teacher responded
with: “You know, I’m not sure either, give me a second to figure this out.” Several similar
moments occurred during the small group instruction rotation. Four teachers demonstrated
confidence in implementing all components of a blended learning program.
Document analysis. Document analysis was not conducted for this influence.
Summary. Three out of seven teachers (42.85%) communicated they had confidence in
implementing all components of a blended learning program. Participants pointed to different
components of the program as challenge areas. Four out of seven teachers (57.14%) exhibited
confusion during one of the components of the class, the small group portion of their lesson. This
assumed motivation asset was not validated.
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 100
Influence 2. Teachers have confidence in analyzing data and making informed
adjustments to differentiate instruction.
Survey results. Surveys were not conducted for this influence.
Interview findings. When asked about the data analysis responsibility and differentiating
instruction based on the data, six out of seven teachers (85.71%) expressed their confidence in
their practice. Five of the teachers mentioned that looking at some form of data was a daily
practice, while one teacher communicated that she dedicated every Wednesday and Friday
afternoon to extract meaning from multiple data sets, spending the most time consistently
tracking “software minutes” and “series progress.” With differentiating instruction, all six
teachers provided at least two different strategies that they often lean on to modify their students’
learning experience. One teacher stated: “purposeful partnering” and “individual sentence
frames” were often used. Six teachers demonstrated confidence in implementing all components
of a blended learning program.
Observation. Observations were not conducted for this influence.
Document analysis. Document analysis was not conducted for this influence.
Summary. Six out of seven teachers (85.71%) expressed their confidence in
implementing all components of a blended learning program while communicating how they
differentiate instruction based on the data. Though the frequency in which teachers examined
data differed slightly, all teachers communicated that data was visible to them at least two times
a week. This assumed motivation asset was validated.
Influence 3. Teachers have confidence in designing and managing a positive
learning environment.
Survey results. Surveys were not conducted for this influence.
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 101
Interview findings. When asked about designing and managing a positive learning
environment, all seven teachers (100%) communicated this as one of their strongest assets. One
teacher stated: “I can’t believe how far I’ve come in the last five years, but teaching System 44
really helped solidify my classroom management skills. Admin now rely on me to train the new
teachers coming into our school which is a testament to how much I’ve improved because
originally I was the one who needed extra training. Similarly, one teacher stated: “I used to
always have at least one challenging class, but after learning how to teach intervention, I have
zero difficult classes. I think all of that is to the community that we build from the beginning of
the year. Seven teachers communicated their confidence in designing and managing a positive
learning environment.
Observation. In six out of the seven teacher classrooms (85.71%) observed, there was
minimal to zero need for the teacher to address any student misconduct or off task behaviors.
And in the one class where redirection was required, once the teacher restated expectations and
corrected a student who interrupted the behavioral procedures, the class returned to a positive
learning environment. All teachers demonstrated their confidence in designing and managing a
positive learning environment.
Document analysis. Document analysis was not conducted for this influence.
Summary. 100% of teachers in interviews and observations demonstrated confidence in
designing and managing a positive learning environment. Often times, zero redirections were
required and in the one classroom where reminders were necessary, the teacher’s prompt
redirection resulted in a quick return to normal procedures. This assumed motivation asset was
validated.
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 102
Emotion
Influence 1. Teachers feel positive implementing all components of a blended
learning program.
Survey results. Surveys were not conducted for this influence.
Interview findings. When interviewed, all seven teachers acknowledged that they felt
positive in implementing all components of a blended learning program. The teachers explained
that they received ongoing training throughout the year and were able to work out challenges
with others while receiving professional development around best practice.
The majority of teachers mentioned similar keywords related to feeling positive which
was summarized in Table 12 below.
Table 12
Keywords Related to Feeling Positive Implementing Components of Blended Learning
Teacher Experience Ongoing Training Collaboration
with Peers
Favorite Class
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
All teachers felt positive implementing all components of a blended learning program.
Observation. Observations were not conducted for this influence.
Document analysis. Document analysis was not conducted for this influence.
Summary. 100% of teachers communicated that they feel positive implementing all
components of a blended learning program. The most frequently used reason to indicate their
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 103
positive feeling was how they received ongoing training throughout the year. This assumed asset
was validated.
Influence 2. Teachers feel encouraged using student performance data to modify
instructional strategies.
Survey results. Surveys were not conducted for this influence.
Interview findings. Three out of seven (42.85%) of teachers communicated that they felt
encouraged using student performance data to modify instructional strategies. The majority of
teachers explained that while they received support around analyzing data, most of them did not
feel that translated directly to modifying instruction. For example, one teacher stated: “My
administrators and coaches consistently empower me to look at how my students are performing,
especially because there’s such a wealth of data available using the program. However, I still
find it hard to modify instruction and differentiate what students learn.” Another teacher said
something similar with: “I think it’s going to take me a few years to really learn how to
differentiate instruction. I have my go to strategies, but I’m still learning the skills students need
to read at grade level.” Three out of seven teachers felt encouraged about modifying instructional
strategies after examining student performance data.
Observation. Observations were not conducted for this influence.
Document analysis. Document analysis was not conducted for this influence.
Summary. Although teachers appreciated the support they received from administrators
and instructional coaches and felt encouraged to examine data, the majority of them did not
believe that translated directly to feeling encouraged to modify instructional strategies. This
assumed motivation asset was not validated.
Influence 3. Teachers feel positive about creating a positive learning environment.
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 104
Survey results. Surveys were not conducted for this influence.
Interview findings. Six out of seven teachers stated that they are more than satisfied with
how they designed their classroom culture. As one teacher communicated: “It’s really exciting to
see the hard work I put in over the summer paying off. I know it was also helpful to purposefully
dedicated time during the first two weeks of school to really set an appropriate tone. But, none of
this would be possible without the amazing students we have on our campus because they set the
culture.” The only teacher who did not feel positive about the learning environment explained
that consistency is something she is still striving to meet every day. The teacher shared: “Most of
my students and classes are thriving, but I’m looking for 100% compliance, 100% effort, and
100% students to support anyone in need not the majority of time, but 100% of the time we’re in
class together.” This same teacher explained her rationale as: “We’re in a state of educational
emergency because these kids can’t read. If they can’t read by next year, I know where their
trajectory will be in high school. That’s why I need 100% and every minute counts.” Six out of
seven teachers communicated that they feel positive about creating a positive learning
environment.
Observation. Observations were not conducted for this influence.
Document analysis. Document analysis was not conducted for this influence.
Summary. Six out of seven (85.71%) communicated that they feel confident in creating a
positive learning environment. The one teacher who did not feel positive focused on consistency
issues. This assumed motivation asset was validated.
Goal-Orientation
Influence 1. Teachers focus on mastery and set goals on improving implementation
of blended learning programs. Yes
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 105
Survey results. Surveys were not conducted for this influence.
Interview findings. Speaking with teachers, five out of seven (71.42%) communicated
several factors to explain how mastery orientation and goal-setting improved their
implementation of System 44. As one teacher stated: “This is my fifth year teaching the class and
it looks completely changed when I compare it to my first year.” Another teacher similarly
stated: “I’m fortunate that my admin didn’t demand perfection when I first started because I was
so far from that.” The five teachers communicated how they are coached to set goals and how to
model that process for students. One of the teachers communicated: “I’m formally evaluated, but
a lot of that is based on the skills that I identify as critical for growing. I’m not evaluated on how
my students perform, so one of my goals this year focused on clean and tight rotations so I
become better at classroom management.” Another teacher said, “During my interim guiding
conference, which is space for me to set SMART goals around my practice, I chose two key
areas to improve in for the 2019 school year. I focused on the level of questions students are
being asked and how I structure partner work time. Both areas I felt needed to improve in and are
critical for students to maximize their reading improvement.” All five teachers made references
to their administrators and spoke positively about how they are evaluated as teachers, but how
the process focuses on growth and improvement. One teacher commented: “I think teachers in
traditional districts may not like the formal evaluation cycle, but I look forward to it because I
know how much I’m going to improve. It’s a pain in a butt, but it’s almost like a guarantee to get
better as long as I put in the work. What kind of work gets better than that?” Five teachers
communicated they focus on mastery and set goals on improving implementation of the blended
learning program.
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 106
Observation. Five out of seven (71.42%) of teachers were observed focusing on mastery
and setting goals on improving implementation of blended learning programs. Although teachers
were not observed in their official goal-setting meetings they have with their evaluating
administrator or instructional coach, during the classroom observation they made several
references to that practice. Teacher 2 and Teacher 6 made zero references to mastery or goal
setting practices, but all other teachers referred to both practices at least once during the
observation. Two teachers described their own practice of goal-setting at least four times. As one
teacher stated: “Guys as we transition into the next rotation, remember our goal of moving in 30
seconds or less. This is something I’ve been working on all year long and I know I’ve been
improving in my goal, but I can’t do it without your participation.” Five teachers made a
reference to mastery at least once as one teacher described the practice as: “Nobody starts off as
perfect reader guys, or perfect in anything for that matter. For example, I needed to master these
mini-reading lessons but that took me years and to be honest, I’m still working on it.” The
number of references made to mastery and goal setting are both summarized in Figure 2 below.
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 107
Figure 2. References to Mastery and Goal Setting
Document analysis. Document analysis was not conducted for this influence.
Summary. In both interviews and observations, five out of seven (71.42%) of teachers
focused on mastery and setting goals on improving implementation of the blended learning
program. During interviews, teachers described how they apply both practices both informally
and formally during evaluation sessions. During observations, teachers alluded to their
professional practice in front of students. This assumed motivation asset was validated.
Attribution
Influence 1. Teachers attribute student growth and lack thereof to student self-
regulation and engagement.
Survey results. Surveys were not conducted for this influence.
Interview findings. Four teachers attributed student growth and lack thereof to student
self-regulation and engagement. One teacher explained: “Each class requires students to track
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 108
their own reading journey by looking at far they’ve come and how they’re going to reach goals.
The goals can be around software minutes, the books they’ll read, or just about anything. But it
requires a lot of autonomy on their own end.” Another teacher said: “The classes have movement
several times throughout the lesson which helps to change things up and makes them feel like a
lot is going on. I think that helps with students staying focused and on task.” However, three
teachers attributed more of student success to how much support they receive from their peers
than self-regulation and goal setting. Four teachers attributed student growth and lack thereof to
student self-regulation and engagement.
Observation. Observations were not conducted for this assumed influence.
Document analysis. Document analysis was not conducted for this assumed influence.
Summary. Four out of seven (57.14%) of teachers attributed student reading growth to
self-regulation and goal setting practices. The teachers who did not attribute it to these practices
did not disagree but prioritized other skills such as peer support. This assumed motivation asset
was not validated.
A summary of all results and findings is presented at the end of this chapter.
Results and Findings for Organization Assets
Teachers’ perceptions on assets related to improving foundational reading skills through
a blended learning program were assessed through interviews, observations, and document
analyses. Results of interviews, observations, and document analyses are presented for each
assumed asset and categorized under cultural setting, cultural model, policy and procedures, and
resources within Jiminy Public Schools. The six assumed motivation assets are summarized
below in Table 13 with five of the assets validated.
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 109
Table 13
Assumed Organization Assets
Assumed Asset Validated Not Validated
Have role models and mentors who can facilitate their development
Have incentives to implement blended learning programs and receive
recognition on efforts to improve student achievement
Adopt goals embedded in school’s culture
Feel a part of the implementation team
Standardized blended learning program increases success of
implementation and allows for better monitoring of the program
Have sufficient time to develop blended learning program and receive
high quality training
X
X
X
X
X
X
Cultural Setting
Influence 1. Teachers have role models and mentors who can facilitate their
development in effectively implementing the blended learning program.
Survey results. Surveys were not conducted for this influence.
Interview findings. All seven teacher participants described professional relationships
with at least two individuals who have helped them improve in teaching System 44. All teachers
discussed the instructional coaching they receive with their administrators. One teacher stressed:
“I’m pretty new to the field, but I’m able to meet with my principal at least once a week. This
was something I requested when I agreed to teach this prep (System 44), and it’s been amazing
how much I’m able to improve after each session with him.” Another teacher emphasized:
“Fortunately, I’ve been at this school long enough to work with several different admin. I think
their caseload changes every so often. But, each admin has helped me in a myriad of ways from
fine-tuning my classroom management to unpacking standards when planning the mini-lessons.”
Aside from receiving instructional coaching through an administrator, all teachers also
recognized the role at least one peer teacher had in their schools who helped improve their
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 110
teaching practice. Four teachers pointed to a peer teacher who taught the same class and who
they shared best practices with. One teacher stated: “I share the same prep period with this co-
teacher so we usually spend at least two hours a week planning future lessons together, analyzing
data, and really just pushing each other’s’ practice.” Similarly, another teacher shared: “I feel as
if my learning curve was accelerated because I have a veteran teacher who shares everything
with me. In my first year I didn’t really have to create anything because I just took everything
she did and implemented it. This year I’m starting to modify things and personalize certain
systems or how I roll things out.” All teachers shared that they have role models and mentors
who can facilitate their development in effectively implementing the blended learning program.
Observation. Observations were not conducted for this assumed influence.
Document analysis. Document analysis was not conducted for this influence.
Summary. All teachers (100%) interviewed identified at least one administrator mentor as
influential to their development in implementing the blended learning program. Additionally,
four teachers identified peer teacher mentors who helped in their development. This assumed
organization asset was validated.
Influence 2. Teachers have incentives to implement the blended learning program
effectively and receive recognition on their efforts to improve student achievement.
Survey results. Surveys were not conducted for this influence.
Interview findings. When asked about incentives or recognition, one out of seven
(14.28%) teachers made a reference to a yearly award ceremony that teachers in the organization
could potentially receive. However, the teacher admitted uncertainty around how the awards
were given. “When you say incentives, I immediately think about external things like a yearly
award ceremony where teachers get awards, similar to the Oscars. But, I don’t think it’s directly
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 111
related to teaching System 44.” Another teacher described weekly teacher of the week
recognitions, but did not associate it with her teaching the intervention course. The teacher
stated: “We have weekly teacher awards that are teacher nominated and announced during our
morning meetings. But, I would not consider that an incentive to teach interventions well.” Zero
teachers communicated having incentives to implement the blended learning program effectively
and receive recognition on their efforts to improve student achievement.
Observation. None of the classrooms observed displayed any evidence of incentives or
recognition for the teacher.
Document analysis. Document analysis was not conducted for this influence.
Summary. Zero teachers identified incentives or recognition as having an impact on their
efforts to implement the blended learning program and student reading achievement. There was
also zero evidence of teacher incentives and recognition during observations. This assumed
organization asset was not validated.
Cultural Model
Influence 1. Teachers adopt the goals embedded in the school’s culture to adopt the
blended learning program to bridge the gap in foundational reading skills.
Survey results. Surveys were not conducted for this influence.
Interview findings. Five of seven teachers (71.42%) communicated their adoption of the
school’s culture goals and how it aligned with the priorities and goals of System 44. One teacher
stated: “I love the small school model of (Jiminy Public Schools) and especially how my school
interprets ensuring the success of all students. As a middle school, it’s tantamount that my
students leave here having learned how to read because so much of their future success is
contingent upon that.” Another teacher shared similar sentiments, focusing on how peer to peer
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 112
support is highlighted in her classroom. The teacher shared: “Because this class has too many
moving parts, I really lean on students helping each other. I use some of our mottos like
‘Teamstrong’ and ‘Passion for Excellence’ as yearly themes and the crazy thing is our students
start using that language. Like, the other day a student yelled out that someone needs to be
teamstrong and not be so negative. I love that.” Two teachers who did make a connection
between the school culture’s goals with ones shared in System 44 stated that they’re unsure of
what those school-wide goals are, but they think alignment is probably there. Five teachers
shared that they adopted the goals embedded in the school’s culture to adopt the blended learning
program to bridge the gap in foundational reading skills.
Observation. Five of the teachers observed (71.42%) demonstrated adopting goals from
their school’s culture into their classroom space. Three teachers had their school-wide principles
displayed on the wall with: “Own it,” “Stretch it,” It’s all about the students,” We are
teamstrong,” and “Get it right” on visual posters. Two teachers made verbal references to at least
one of the principles. One teacher stated: “Remember guys, it’s all about you guys and the
progress you make today.” Another teacher told her students during small group instruction: “I
want you guys working with a shoulder partner during this segment and using the A-B speaking
protocol. Make sure everyone is being team strong.”
Document analysis. Document analysis was not conducted for this influence.
Summary. Five teachers were observed adopting goals embedded in the school’s culture
into their blended learning program to bridge the gap in foundational reading skills. This
assumed organization asset was validated.
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 113
Influence 2. Teachers feel a part of the implementation team for successful program
adoption.
Survey results. Surveys were not conducted for this influence.
Interview findings. Six of the teachers interviewed communicated they feel part of the
implementation team for successful program adoption. One teacher stated: “Every year our
school has a committee to help set the teaching assignment lines for the next school year. I’ve
been a part of this team for four years, which is why I feel like my voice is being heard when I
advocate to teach intervention.” Another teacher stated: “My admin always asks me for input at
least once a quarter for how System 44 can be improved, including questions about the roster,
grows and glows, and what supports I need. This makes me feel like I can shape how System 44
is taught on my campus.” The majority of teachers believe they are part of both the decision-
making process and the ongoing monitoring of the class’ success. Six out of seven teachers
(85.71%) feel a part of the implementation team.
Observation. Observations were not conducted for this assumed influence.
Document analysis. Document analysis was not conducted for this influence.
Summary. Six of the seven interviewed teachers feel a part of the implementation team
because they feel like their input is a valuable resource to the decision-making process. The
majority of teachers feel connected with their administrators who have influence over the
program. This assumed organization asset was validated.
Policies and Procedures
Influence 1. A standardized blended learning program increases the success of
implementation and allows for better monitoring of the program.
Survey results. Surveys were not conducted for this influence.
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 114
Interview findings. All seven teachers interviewed communicated several characteristics
of System 44 to indicate a standardized program. The most commonly described characteristics
are summarized in Table 14 below.
Table 14
Characteristics Indicating a Standardized Program
Teacher Minutes on
Software
Total Number
of Sessions
Course at a
Glance
Pacing
Guides
Strategies for
EL Students
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
All seven teachers mentioned “minutes on software” which refers to the amount of
minutes students spend completing the adaptive software component of System 44. The second
most commonly described component was “total number of sessions,” which also refers to a
software component and the learning lessons students practice. Five out of seven teachers
mentioned four of the five descriptions in their interviews indicating a standard blended learning
program across Jiminy Public Schools.
Observation. Observations were not conducted for this assumed influence.
Document analysis. Five out of seven teachers and the administrators at the school
shared artifacts that confirmed a standardized blended learning program while supporting the
most frequently mentioned characteristics during the interview phase. Guidelines for tracking
“Software minutes” and descriptions of total “Number of sessions” were paced out quarterly. A
uniform district-wide pacing guide was also collected. Finally, each school has an “English
Language Handbook” with “signature strategies” and “Target ELD standards” highlighted at
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 115
each school. Five teachers produced multiple artifacts to demonstrate a standardized blended
learning program.
Summary. All seven teachers demonstrated a standardized blended learning program to
suggest an increased success of implementation and better monitoring of the program through
their interviews. Five out of seven teachers (71.42%) shared artifacts that also supported a
standardized program. This assumed organization asset was validated.
Resources
Influence 1. Teachers have sufficient time to develop the blended learning program
and teachers receive high quality training that increases their ability to implement the
program.
Survey results. Surveys were not conducted for this influence.
Interview findings. Six out of seven teachers (85.71%) communicated that they have
sufficient time to develop the class and that they receive high quality training multiple times
throughout the year. One teacher stated: “I think what attracted to me to this organization is the
high number of touchpoints I have with people to support me teaching reading intervention. I
work with someone at least once a week if not more.” Another teacher shared: “We have
quarterly pullout trainings just to meet with all the other reading intervention teachers across all
the (Jiminy Public) schools where we share best practices and receive targeted training on areas
we’ve identified as growth areas.” The six teachers also mentioned ongoing professional
development they receive at their own school sites as spaces to improve classroom instruction.
Observation. Observations were not conducted for this assumed influence.
Document analysis. All seven teachers provided documents that supported teachers have
sufficient time to develop the blended learning program and the training they receive to
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 116
implement the program. District-level pull out training calendars and topics in addition to weekly
professional development calendars at each respective school site were provided. All seven
teachers provided evidence that Jiminy Public Schools provides teacher with the time and
training to support implementation of the blended learning program.
Summary. Six out of seven teachers communicated that they have sufficient time and
training support to teach the course while all seven provided documentation of artifacts that
indicates the same. The one teacher who did not believe sufficient time was provided
communicated that having to teach a separate prep period takes time away from focusing on
teaching the blended learning program. This assumed organization asset was validated.
Summary of Validated Influences
Knowledge
Assets in eight of the twelve assumed knowledge influences were validated through
interviews, observations, and document analyses. Table 15 presents an overview of the results of
the assessment of each assumed knowledge influence. Recommendations to adopt or maintain
each validated asset will be discussed in Chapter Five.
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 117
Table 15
Summary of Assumed Knowledge Assets Validation
Assumed Knowledge Influences Validated Not Validated
Declarative Factual
Know blended learning model components
Know strategies to modify instruction
Know elements of a positive classroom environment
Conceptual
Know interactivity among blended learning model and reading
achievement
Explain rationale behind design of classroom environment
Know relationship among expectations, community, and rigor
Procedural
Know when to use blended learning model component
Know how to modify instruction
Know how to plan a positive learning environment
Metacognitive
Reflect on effectiveness of components of blended learning model
Reflect on assessing performance and modifying instruction
Assess and evaluate extent of positive learning environment
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Motivation
Assets in seven of the eleven motivation influences were validated through interviews,
observations, and document analyses. Table 16 presents an overview of the results of the
assessment of each assumed motivation influence. Recommendations to adopt or maintain each
validated asset will be discussed in Chapter Five.
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 118
Table 16
Summary of Assumed Motivation Assets Validation
Assumed Influences Validated Not Validated
Value
Value all components of the blended learning model
Value the utility of modifying instruction
Value creating a positive learning environment
Self-Efficacy
Confidence in implementing all components of a blended learning
program
Confidence in analyzing data and making informed adjustments to
differentiate instruction
Confidence in designing and managing a positive learning
environment
Emotion
Feeling positive implementing all components of a blended learning
program
Feeling encouraged using student performance data to modify
instructional strategies
Feeling positive about creating a positive learning environment
Goal Orientation
Focus on mastery and set goals on improving implementation of
blended learning programs
Attribution
Attribute student growth and lack thereof to student self-regulation
and engagement
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Organization
Assets in five of the six assumed organization influences were validated through
interviews, observations, and document analyses. Table 17 presents an overview of the results of
the assessment of each assumed organization influence. Recommendations to adopt or maintain
each validated asset will be discussed in Chapter Five.
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 119
Table 17
Summary of Assumed Organization Assets Validation
Assumed Influences Validated Not Validated
Cultural Setting
Have role models and mentors who can facilitate their development
Have incentives to implement blended learning programs and receive
recognition on efforts to improve student achievement
Cultural Model
Adopt goals embedded in school’s culture
Feel a part of the implementation team
Policies and Procedures
Standardized blended learning program increases success of
implementation and allows for better monitoring of the program
Resources
Have sufficient time to develop blended learning program and receive
high quality training
X
X
X
X
X
X
Chapter Five will examine proposals to adopt or maintain each validated asset. Each
proposal will utilize evidence-based recommendations identified through relevant academic
literature and will be shared with leaders of the Jiminy Public Schools.
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 120
CHAPTER FIVE: RECOMMENDATIONS AND EVALUATION
Purpose of the Project and Questions
The purpose of the study is to study the model schools’ performance related to a larger
problem of practice, lagging student reading achievement. The analysis focuses on the
stakeholder assets in the areas of knowledge and skill, motivation, and organizational resources.
While a complete study would focus on all stakeholders, for practical purposes the stakeholder of
focus in this analysis is high performing middle school teachers. Schools invest resources into
the System 44 reading intervention program which include technology materials, licenses,
pullout training days for teachers, and ongoing professional development throughout the year.
Identifying how all these resources are working together to create a robust reading intervention
program is one of the larger purposes of this project. Thus the questions that guide this study are:
1. What knowledge, motivation and organizational assets do Jiminy Public Schools middle
teachers have that have contributed to the use of the blended learning program System 44
that resulted in high student achievement in foundational reading skills?
2. What solutions and recommendations in the areas of knowledge, motivation, and
organizational resources may be appropriate for achieving similar results in other Jiminy
middle schools?
The conceptual framework is Clark and Estes (2008) gap analysis framework that focuses
on closing gaps and achieving organizational goals. The Clark & Estes (2008) methodological
framework has been adapted to use a qualitative data gathering and analysis process to study
high performing middle schools’ assumed assets in the areas of knowledge, motivation, and
organizational resources. These assets will be studied to identify the recommend promising
practices that other schools can adopt. In this chapter, the critical behaviors identified from the
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 121
literature in Chapter Two and then validated in Chapters Three and Four are analyzed to inform
the recommendations. Chapter Five will then conclude with an application of how the New
World Kirkpatrick Model (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016) can be used to implement and
evaluate the suggested recommendations.
Recommendations to Address Knowledge, Motivation, and Organization Influences
The following section is organized into knowledge, motivation, and organization
domains. Each section contains a brief overview of the domain and the promising practice, or
influence, that was validated. The validated knowledge, motivation, and organizational
promising influence was considered a high priority when they had the largest impact on
improving students’ foundational reading skills in the classroom, were most closely related to the
goals of the organization, or were considered a key task that was deemed necessary to
accomplish before other tasks. Therefore, in an effort to make focused suggestions around which
influences could be adopted at a similar alternative site in order to accomplish similar high
performance in raising students’ foundational reading skills, not all influences were highlighted.
Recommendations and solutions were outlined for four validated knowledge influences: one
declarative factual, one procedural, one conceptual, and one metacognitive; four motivation
influences: one value, one self-efficacy, one emotion, and one goal-orientation; and four
validated organizational influences: one cultural model, one cultural setting, one policies and
procedures, and one resources.
The table includes the knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences and whether
or not the influence was considered a high priority. Additionally, evidence-based principles and
citations that support each recommendation are provided follow by context-specific
recommendations based on the principle identified. After each table, for each high priority
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 122
validated asset, a detailed discussion is provided with the principle, the recommended solution,
and literature to support each solution.
Knowledge Recommendations
Introduction. In the following knowledge domain, there are four subdomains comprised
of (a) declarative factual; (b) procedural; (c) conceptual; (d) metacognitive. Through data
collection and analyses in this study, a total of eight validated knowledge influences were
identified, but one was deemed as a high priority for each subdomain. Each validated influence
was identified and supported by the data gathered from interviews, observations, and document
analyses. The emphasized high priority validated influences and recommendations can be
adopted to effectively improve middle school students’ foundational reading skills in a blended
learning program.
Clark and Estes (2008) conceptual framework suggests using evidence-based and
context-specific recommendations for each influence. Therefore, Table 18 outlines the validated
knowledge influence, priority, principle and citation, and context-specific recommendation.
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 123
Table 18
Summary of Knowledge Influences and Recommendations
Assumed Knowledge
Influence
Priority
High
Low
Principle and
Citation
Context-Specific
Recommendation
Declarative Factual
Teachers know the main
components of the
blended learning model.
High Information learned
meaningfully and
connected with prior
knowledge is stored
more quickly and
remembered more
accurately because it
is elaborated with
prior learning (Schraw
& McCrudden, 2006).
Help individuals
identify and
understand important
points (Schraw &
McCrudden, 2006).
Provide tasks that
promote selecting,
organizing, and
integrating (see
Mayer, 2011, pp. 76-
81).
Prior to the start of the
school year, teachers
receive a training on
System 44’s blended
learning model. Require
teachers to identify the
unique elements in the
rotational model and
make connections with
the more traditional
gradual release
instructional model.
Teachers know elements
of a positive classroom
environment
Low How individuals
organize knowledge
influences how they
learn and apply what
they know (Schraw &
McCrudden, 2006).
Provide experiences
that help people make
sense of the material
rather than just focus
on memorization
(Schraw &
McCrudden, 2006).
Prior to the start of the
school year, teachers
receive a training on
positive classroom
environments by role-
playing teacher and
student experiences with
different classroom
expectations.
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 124
Procedural
Teachers know how to
plan for positive learning
environments.
High Targeting training and
instruction between
the individual’s
independent
performance level and
their level of assisted
performance promotes
optimal learning
(Scott & Palincsar,
2006).
Give people tasks that
fall within their ZPD
(i.e., tasks that are too
difficult to be
completed
independently, but can
be completed with
assistance; Scott &
Palincsar, 2006).
Have individuals
occasionally perform
difficult tasks in
partnership with
others (Scott &
Palincsar, 2006).
In heterogeneous groups
separated by years of
experience, teachers plan
preventative steps for
both frequently occurring
misbehaviors and
uniquely challenging
scenarios.
Teachers know when to
use blended learning
model component
Low Modeling to-be-
learned strategies or
behaviors improves
self-efficacy, learning,
and performance
(Denler, Wolters, &
Benzon, 2009).
Self-regulatory
strategies, including
goal setting, enhance
learning and
performance (APA,
2015: Dembo &
Eaton, 2000; Denler,
et al., 2009).
Teachers experience
rotations of each
component in the
blended learning model
and discuss their key
takeaways after each
rotation.
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 125
Help learners acquire
new behaviors
through demonstration
and modeling (Denler
et al., 2009).
Provide opportunities
for learners to check
their progress and
adjust their learning
strategies as needed
(Denler et al., 2009).
Conceptual
Teachers know the
relationship among clear
expectations, community,
rigor, and reading
achievement.
High Information learned
meaningfully and
connected with prior
knowledge is stored
more quickly and
remembered more
accurately because it
is elaborated with
prior learning (Schraw
& McCrudden, 2006).
How individuals
organize knowledge
influences how they
learn and apply what
they know (Schraw &
McCrudden, 2006).
Provide experiences
that help people make
sense of the material
rather than just focus
on memorization
(Schraw &
McCrudden, 2006).
Provide worked
examples (Kirshner et
al., 2006; Mayer,
2011; Van Gerven et
al., 2002).
Prior to the school year,
provide lesson plan and
video examples of
classrooms with high
reading achievement so
teachers can compare
evidence of clear
expectations, community,
and rigor.
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 126
Teachers explain the
rationale behind design of
classroom environment.
Low How individuals
organize knowledge
influences how they
learn and apply what
they know (Schraw &
McCrudden, 2006).
Help individuals
identify and
understand important
points (Schraw &
McCrudden, 2006).
Look at hypothetical
student misbehavior data
from classes with
different classroom
environments. Identify
the classroom
expectations that
influenced student
misbehaviors.
Metacognitive
Teachers reflect on the
effectiveness of
components of blended
learning programs in
order to identify strengths
and growths in
instruction.
High Self-regulatory
strategies, including
goal setting, enhance
learning and
performance (APA,
2015: Dembo &
Eaton, 2000; Denler,
et al., 2009).
Teach learners
strategies to manage
their motivation, time,
learning strategies,
control their physical
and social
environment, and
monitor their
performance (Dembo
& Eaton, 2000).
Provide opportunities
for learners to check
their progress and
adjust their learning
strategies as needed
(Denler et al., 2009).
During regular coaching
sessions with
administrators, teachers
create SMART goals
around 1-2 instructional
techniques, monitor their
progress, and make
adjustments.
Teachers assess and
evaluate extent of
positive learning
environment.
Low The use of
metacognitive
strategies facilitates
learning (Baker,
2006).
After drafting plans for
their own classroom
management, policies,
and procedures, teachers
use a rubric to rate their
own plans and explain
their rationale to peers.
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 127
Provide opportunities
for learners to engage
in guided self-
monitoring and self-
assessment (Baker,
2006).
Provide opportunities
for learners to debrief
the thinking process
upon completion of
learning task (Baker,
2006).
Declarative Factual knowledge assets. Teachers know the main components of the
blended learning model. Two declarative factual knowledge assets were identified and
validated, but the one above will be prioritized because the task is required before accomplishing
any other task. According to Schraw and McCrudden (2006) information learned meaningfully
and connected with prior knowledge is stored more quickly and remembered more accurately
because it is elaborated with prior learning. This would suggest that guiding learners to make
connections with what they already know would support their learning. The recommendation
then might be prior to the start of the school year, teachers receive a training on System 44’s
blended learning model and require them to identify the unique elements in the rotational model
while making connections with the more traditional gradual release model that they may already
know.
Kearns (2017) describes the rotational model as a variation of the blended learning model
and highlights how it allows students to rotate among different learning models, including online
learning with technology. In addition, Suprabha and Subramonian (2015) suggest that specific
training is paramount for instructors to facilitate the combination of instructional technology with
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 128
face to face teacher-led instruction. These studies suggest that providing training on System 44’s
unique model might benefit teachers.
Procedural knowledge assets. Teachers know how to plan for positive learning
environments. Two procedural knowledge assets were identified and validated, but the one
above will be prioritized because it will have the greatest impact on the teachers and the
organization. According to Scott and Palinesar (2006) targeting training and instruction between
the individual’s independent performance level and their level of assisted performance promotes
optimal learning. This would suggest that it would be beneficial to provide learners with an
opportunity to collaborate with peers who have slightly higher levels of proficiency and skill.
The recommendation then might be to create heterogeneous groups separated by skill level or
years of experience, and have teachers plan preventative steps for both frequently occurring
misbehaviors and uniquely challenging scenarios.
Vygotsky (1978) posited that the acquisition of language reflected the developmental
process of children and points to existence of a Zone of Proximal Development to underscore
how scaffolds and peer support can help children build on their learning. In addition, Scott and
Palinesar (2006) recommend giving people tasks that fall within their ZPD with tasks that are too
difficult to be completed independently, but can be completed with assistance so that individuals
can perform difficult tasks in partnership with others. These studies suggest that learning slightly
challenging tasks with purposefully mixed groups of learners might benefit teachers.
Conceptual knowledge assets. Teachers know the relationship among clear
expectations, community, rigor, and reading achievement. Two conceptual knowledge assets
were identified and validated, but the one above will be prioritized because the task is required
before accomplishing any other task. According to Schraw and McCrudden (2006) information
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 129
learned meaningfully and connected with prior knowledge is stored more quickly and
remembered more accurately because it is elaborated with prior learning. This would suggest that
learners would benefit from comparing examples of high functioning classroom with what they
already know and experienced. The recommendation then would be prior to the school year,
provide teachers with lesson plan and video examples of classrooms with high reading
achievement so they can compare evidence of clear expectations, community, and rigor.
Vega et al., (2015) conducted a qualitative investigation to explore African American and
Latino high school students’ perceived barriers to a positive educational experience. The findings
suggest that positive and genuine relationships with students can help with academic outcomes.
In addition, Ning et al., (2015) studied the effect of classroom disciplinary climate of schools on
academic achievement. Using hierarchical linear analyses with 65 participant countries showed
that a better disciplinary culture and climate in a classroom is significantly associated with higher
school reading performance. These studies suggest that learning the relationship between
positive classroom culture and reading achievement may benefit teachers.
Metacognitive knowledge assets. Teachers reflect on the effectiveness of components
of blended learning programs in order to identify strengths and growths in instruction.
Two metacognitive knowledge assets were identified and validated, but the one above will be
prioritized because it is closely tied to the mission of the organization and the primary objective
of the reading intervention course. Self-regulatory strategies, including goal setting, enhance
learning and performance (APA, 2015: Dembo & Eaton, 2000; Denler, et al., 2009). This would
suggest that learners would benefit from establishing targeted goals and use them as guidelines to
check their performance. The recommendation then would be during regular coaching sessions
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 130
with administrators, teachers create SMART goals around no more than two instructional
techniques, monitor their progress, and make adjustments.
Schechter et al., (2017) sought to study how teacher engagement and fidelity of
implementation to the program impacted student motivation and reading achievement in a
blended learning environment. In 624 schools, 19,366 students reading skills data were examined
in classrooms where teachers were identified as engaged implementers of the blended learning
reading program. A critical part of the program is having teachers monitor weekly program
usage targets and whether students are meeting their set usage and performance goals. Teachers
were considered engaged if they consistently demonstrated monitoring of their goals. Results
showed students making significant improvements in their reading skills compared to
neighboring classrooms with less engaged teachers of 171,850 students in the same 624 schools.
As the study suggests, teachers may benefit from being coached on how to self-identify
appropriate goals and self-regulate their progress towards those goals to improve students’
reading achievement.
Motivation Recommendations
Introduction. In the following motivation domain, four subdomains consist of (a) value;
(b) self-efficacy; (c) emotion; (d) goal-orientation. Through data collection and analyses in this
study, a total of four validated motivation influences were identified. One validated influence
was deemed as a high priority for each subdomain. Each validated influence was identified and
supported by the data gathered from interviews, observations, and document analyses. The
emphasized high priority validated influences can be adopted to effectively improve middle
school students’ foundational reading skills in a blended learning program.
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 131
Clark and Estes’ (2008) conceptual framework suggests using evidence-based and
context-specific recommendations for each influence. Therefore, Table 19 outlines the validated
motivation influence, priority, principle and citation, and context-specific recommendation.
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 132
Table 19
Summary of Motivation Influences and Recommendations
Assumed Motivation
Influence
Priority
High
Low
Principle and
Citation
Context-Specific
Recommendation
Value
Teachers value all
components of the
blended learning model.
High Rationales that
include a discussion of
the importance and
utility value of the
work or learning can
help learners develop
positive values
(Eccles, 2006;
Pintrich, 2003).
At all blended learning
trainings, provide
rationale around
students’ need to develop
reading skills and include
breakout opportunities
for teachers to hold small
group discussions around
how they value teaching
each component of the
program.
Teachers value the utility
of modifying instruction.
Low Rationales that
include a discussion of
the importance and
utility value of the
work or learning can
help learners develop
positive values
(Eccles, 2006;
Pintrich, 2003).
During coaching
sessions, include
modifying instruction as
a standing topic of
discussion.
Teachers value creating a
positive learning
environment.
Low Learning and
motivation are
enhanced if the learner
values the task
(Eccles, 2006).
Have teachers collaborate
with other teachers to
analyze and discuss the
importance of
establishing clear
expectations, norms, and
opportunities to celebrate
student growth as aspects
of the learning
environment.
Self-efficacy
Teachers have confidence
in designing and
managing a positive
learning environment.
High Feedback and
modeling increases
self-efficacy (Pajares,
2006).
All individuals who
provide coaching to the
teacher (administrators,
instructional coaches,
peer teachers) conduct
classroom observations
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 133
In providing feedback,
balance comments
about strengths and
challenges (Borgogni et
al., 2011).
to provide non-evaluating
feedback on the
classroom culture and
climate for learning,
making sure to include
both positive and
constructive feedback. A
portion of the feedback
will also include the
coaching technique of
modeling strategies
through the role-playing
of scenarios.
Emotion
Teachers feel positive
about creating a positive
learning environment.
High Positive emotional
environments support
motivation (Clark &
Estes, 2008).
Pair teachers with a
mentor or peer support
who provides scheduled
social emotional check
ins around the status of
the classroom learning
environment.
Teachers feel positive
implementing all
components of a blended
learning program.
Low Positive emotional
environments support
motivation (Clark &
Estes, 2008).
Increase individual
outcome expectancies
and sense of control
by avoiding
competitive structure
(Goette el al., 2012).
Provide teachers with
individual performance
reports that align with the
teacher’s goals and
anticipated performance
to avoid peer
comparisons.
Goal-Orientation
Teachers focus on
mastery and set goals on
improving
implementation of
blended learning
programs.
High Focusing on mastery,
individual
improvement,
learning, and progress
promotes positive
motivation (Yough &
Anderman, 2006).
Focus discourse on
mastery, learning, and
understanding
(Pintrich, 2003).
At the start of the school
year, guide teachers to
set quarterly benchmark
goals with blended
learning program
implementation and with
student achievement
scores to promote
incremental growth and
progress.
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 134
Value assets. Teachers value all components of the blended learning model. Three
value assets were identified and validated, but the one above will be prioritized because it will
have the greatest impact on motivating teacher performance. According to Eccles (2006) and
Pintrich (2003), rationales that include a discussion of the importance and utility value of the
work or learning can help learners develop positive values. This would suggest the value learners
place on the blended learning model would increase if they have an early understanding of how
all the different components, mainly the adaptive software, independent reading, and small group
instruction, contribute to bridging students foundational reading skills. The recommendation then
would be at all blended learning trainings, provide explicit rationale around students’ need to
develop reading skills and include breakout opportunities for teachers to hold small group
discussions around how they value teaching each component of the program.
Kale and Akcaoglu (2018) studied how teachers develop value and interest in tasks by
understanding the application levels for future use. Using pre- and post-test quasi-experimental
design with a mixed-methods approach, 111 preservice teachers demonstrated that reflecting on
how technology integration can impact future teaching practices increased their perceptions
around the utility of it. This study suggests that providing training around the utility value of
each component of the blended learning program might be beneficial to teachers.
Self-Efficacy assets. Teachers have confidence in designing and managing a positive
learning environment. Pajares (2006) found that feedback and modeling increases self-efficacy.
Borgogni et al. (2011) further notes that when providing feedback, balance comments about
strengths and challenges. This would suggest that teachers’ self-efficacy would increase as they
receive non-evaluative and frequent feedback on what is going well and what can be improved
around the elements contributing to their classroom environment. The recommendation would
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 135
then be that all individuals who provide coaching to the teacher (administrators, instructional
coaches, peer teachers) conduct classroom observations to provide non-evaluative feedback on
the classroom culture and climate for learning, making sure to include both positive and
constructive feedback. A portion of the feedback will also include the coaching technique of
modeling strategies through the role-playing of scenarios.
Kellerer et al. (2014) studied teacher perspectives around the implementation of blended
learning and its impact on student learning. A qualitative study was conducted with nineteen
randomly selected teachers and found teachers having increased levels of self-efficacy after fully
investing into the blended learning program, seeing higher levels of student engagement, and
identifying as facilitators of student learning. This study suggests that providing support to feel
confident about managing the learning environment would be beneficial to teachers.
Emotion assets. Teachers feel positive about creating a positive learning
environment. Two emotion assets were identified and validated, but the one above will be
prioritized because it is closely related to the other motivational assets and will have a larger
impact on influencing the stakeholder’s practice. According to Clark and Estes (2008), positive
emotional environments support motivation. This would suggest that learners would benefit from
working in a school environment where they receive emotional support from their professional
peers. The recommendation would then be to pair all reading intervention teachers with a mentor
or peer support who provides scheduled social emotional check ins around the status of the
classroom learning environment.
Goette et al. (2012) claims that increasing individual outcome expectancies and sense of
control can occur by avoiding competitive structures. Antisocial motivations and behaviors can
manifest as a result of competitive actions thus leading to better cohesion within one group while
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 136
causing conflict between group. This study suggests that minimizing feelings of competitiveness
and linking teachers with more effective peers so an organic support system can develop would
be beneficial to learners.
Goal-Orientation assets. Teachers focus on mastery and set goals on improving
implementation of blended learning programs. According to Yough and Anderman (2006)
and Pintrich (2003), focusing on mastery, individual improvement, learning, and progress
promotes positive motivation. This would suggest that learners would become more goal-
orientated as they determine performance goals that seek improvement from previous results and
have periodic benchmarks to track chunked gains. The recommendation would then be at the
start of the school year, guide teachers to set quarterly benchmark goals with blended learning
program implementation and with student achievement scores to promote incremental growth
and progress.
Cho and Shim (2013) examined how contextual and personal factors were related with
the goals teachers created. Using a hierarchical multiple regression analysis of 211 teachers
survey responses, it was found that teachers with high sense of efficacy were personally able to
maintain their own set of goals. This study would suggest that coaching teachers to create
incremental goals focused on improvement and mastery can benefit learners.
Organization Recommendations
Introduction. In the following organizational domain, there are four subdomains
consisting of a) cultural models; b) cultural setting; c) resources; d) policies and procedures.
Through data collection and analyses in this study, a total of five validated organizational
influences were identified. One validated influence was deemed as a high priority for each
subdomain. Each validated influence was identified and supported by the data gathered from
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 137
interviews, observations, and document analyses. The emphasized high priority validated
influences can be adopted to effectively improve school students’ foundational reading skills in a
blended learning program.
Clark and Estes’ (2008) conceptual framework suggests using evidence-based and
context-specific recommendations for each influence. Therefore, Table 20 outlines the validated
organizational influence, priority, principle and citation, and context-specific recommendation.
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 138
Table 20
Summary of Organization Influences and Recommendations
Assumed Organization
Influence
Priority
High
Low
Principle and
Citation
Context-Specific
Recommendation
Cultural Model
Teachers feel a part of the
implementation team for
successful program
adoption.
High Effective change
efforts insure that all
key stakeholders’
perspectives inform
the design and
decision-making
process leading to the
change (Clark and
Estes, 2008).
Hold regularly scheduled
meetings with individuals
from multiple levels in
the school and home
office in order to gather
input and generate ideas
on the direction of
program implementation.
As a part of this process,
require at least one
blended learning program
teacher from each school
site to participate and act
as a liaison for the
school.
Teachers adopt the goals
embedded in the school’s
culture to adopt the
blended learning program
to bridge the gap in
foundational reading
skills.
Low Effective
organizations insure
that organizational
messages, rewards,
policies and
procedures that
govern the work of the
organization are
aligned with or are
supportive of
organizational goals
and values (Clark and
Estes, 2008).
Conduct an informal
audit of each school’s
priorities drafted in the
long term strategic plans
and focus on the literacy
interventions in place to
check for alignment or
interference the school
goals.
Cultural Setting
Teachers have role
models and mentors who
can facilitate their
development in
effectively implementing
the blended learning
program.
High Effective change
efforts use evidence-
based solutions and
adapt them, where
necessary, to the
organization’s culture
(Clark and Estes,
2008).
Embed regular
opportunities for teachers
to meet and collaborate
with their mentors during
the school day. During
these collaboration
opportunities, implement
evidence-based
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 139
collaborative inquiry
practices to guide the
professional learning.
Policies and Procedures
A standardized blended
learning program
increases the success of
implementation and
allows for better
monitoring of the
program.
High Effective change
efforts utilize
feedback to determine
when/if improvement
is happening (Clark
and Estes, 2008).
Have administrators who
oversee the school’s
reading intervention
program become familiar
with all the available data
System 44 offers to
monitor student
performance. Have the
administrator facilitate a
system of feedback by
scheduling regularly
standing meetings with
each blended learning
teacher to review data
and make
recommendations for
adjustments as necessary.
Resources
Teachers have sufficient
time to develop the
blended learning program
and teachers receive high
quality training that
increases their ability to
implement the program.
High Effective change
efforts ensure that
everyone has the
resources (equipment,
personnel, time, etc)
needed to do their job,
and that if there are
resource shortages,
then resources are
aligned with
organizational
priorities (Clark and
Estes, 2008).
In addition to
incorporating regular
collaboration time during
the school day, schedule
multiple pullout trainings
in each quarter for
blended learning teachers
to receive ongoing
training on the program
with other teachers from
around the organization.
Cultural model assets. Teachers feel a part of the implementation team for
successful program adoption. Clark and Estes (2008) suggest that effective change efforts
insure that all key stakeholders’ perspectives inform the design and decision-making process
leading to the change (Clark and Estes, 2008). This would suggest that teachers need to act as
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 140
equal participants at high-level meetings when the school and organization’s goals are being
considered and monitored. The recommendation would then be to hold regularly scheduled
meetings with individuals from multiple levels in the school and home office in order to gather
input and generate ideas on the direction of how the program is being implemented. As a part of
this process, require at least one blended learning program teacher from each school site to
participate and act as a liaison for the school.
Clark and Estes (2008) recommends modeling the value of “cognitive diversity” by
expanding the membership of planning teams to include diverse thinkers, people with access to
different networks. Additionally, Kouzes and Posner (2007) recommend initiating a discussion to
see how individual actions can collectively contribute toward a shared goal. This suggests that
teachers who have a clear understanding of their role and how they contribute toward a goal will
support their implementation of the blended learning program.
Cultural settings assets. Teachers have role models and mentors who can facilitate
their development in effectively implementing the blended learning program. Clark and
Estes (2008) posit that effective change efforts use evidence-based solutions and adapt them,
where necessary, to the organization’s culture. This would suggest that teaching in isolation
should be avoided by leveraging the expertise of willing mentors. The recommendation would
then be to embed regular opportunities for teachers to meet and collaborate with their mentors
during the school day. During these collaboration opportunities, implement evidence-based
collaborative inquiry practices to guide the professional learning.
Stevens and Frazer (2005) posit that coaching is a critical component to provide an
effective and comprehensive blended learning program since coaches have mastery over the
content and can also provide quality feedback. Boone (2015) also suggests that having concrete
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 141
tasks and goals can help push small steps of progress. As such, it appears that the literature
would support the importance of including mentors in the learning process.
Policies and procedures assets. A standardized blended learning program increases
the success of implementation and allows for better monitoring of the program. Clark and
Estes (2008) argue that effective change efforts ensure that everyone has the resources
(equipment, personnel, time, etc) needed to do their job, and that if there are resource shortages,
then resources are aligned with organizational priorities. This suggests that teachers can benefit
from implementing a blended learning program that has pre-established and standardized
curriculum, routines, assessments. With this, people who provide support to teachers can then be
better trained on specific focus areas despite however complex the blended learning program is.
The recommendation would then be to have administrators who oversee the school’s reading
intervention program become familiar with all the available data System 44 offers to monitor
student performance. Have the administrator facilitate a system of feedback by scheduling
regularly standing meetings with each blended learning teacher to review data and make
recommendations for adjustments as necessary.
Building on previous research around factors that influence school-based intervention
programs, Payne and Eckert (2010) posited that standardized programs that are uniformly
adopted are better able to be implemented while also being supervised and monitored. Using a
series of multilevel models and data from a national sample of 3,730 program providers across
544 schools, Payne and Eckert (2010) found that the structure of a program was a greater
predictor of the quality of implementation more than any other factor. This study would suggest
that a standardized blended learning program with baseline requisite components would be
beneficial to learners.
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 142
Resources assets. Teachers have sufficient time to develop the blended learning
program and teachers receive high quality training that increases their ability to
implement the program. Clark and Estes point to how effective change efforts ensure that
everyone has the resources (equipment, personnel, time, etc) needed to do their job, and that if
there are resource shortages, then resources are aligned with organizational priorities. This
suggests that teachers need protected time to focus just on the blended learning program and how
they use that time must be carefully considered. The recommendation then would be, in addition
to incorporating regular collaboration time during the school day, schedule multiple pullout
trainings in each quarter for blended learning teachers to receive ongoing training on the program
with other teachers from around the organization.
Payne and Eckert (2010) emphasized the relative importance of teachers having high
quality training and purposeful time in order to successfully implement a program. In their study,
Payne and Eckert (2010) found that program implementation was more likely to be done well
when it was embedded into normal school hours. This study would suggest that teachers need
valuable time to dive into the blended learning program in order to have a positive impact.
Summary of Knowledge, Motivation and Organization Recommendations
Knowledge Recommendations Summary
The recommendation is proposed related to declarative factual knowledge. Prior to the
start of the school year, teachers receive a training on System 44’s blended learning model.
Require teachers to identify the unique elements in the rotational model and make connections
with the more traditional gradual release instructional model. The recommendation for
procedural knowledge is in heterogeneous groups separated by years of experience, teachers plan
preventative steps for both frequently occurring misbehaviors and uniquely challenging
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 143
scenarios. The recommendation for conceptual knowledge is prior to the school year, provide
lesson plan and video examples of classrooms with high reading achievement so teachers can
compare evidence of clear expectations, community, and rigor. Lastly, the recommendation for
metacognitive knowledge is during regular coaching sessions with administrators, teachers create
SMART goals around one or two instructional techniques, monitor their progress, and make
adjustments.
Motivation Recommendations Summary
The recommendation to increase the utility value is at all blended learning trainings,
provide rationale around students’ need to develop reading skills and include breakout
opportunities for teachers to hold small group discussions around how they value teaching each
component of the program. The recommendation for self-efficacy is for all individuals who
provide coaching to the teacher (administrators, instructional coaches, peer teachers) conduct
classroom observations to provide non-evaluating feedback on the classroom culture and climate
for learning, making sure to include both positive and constructive feedback. A portion of the
feedback will also include the coaching technique of modeling strategies through the role-
playing of scenarios. The recommendation for emotion is to pair teachers with a mentor or peer
support who provides scheduled social emotional check ins around the status of the classroom
learning environment. Lastly, the recommendation for goal-orientation, at the start of the school
year, guide teachers to set quarterly benchmark goals with blended learning program
implementation and with student achievement scores to promote incremental growth and
progress.
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 144
Organization Recommendations Summary
The recommendation for the cultural model is to hold regularly scheduled meetings with
individuals from multiple levels in the school and home office in order to gather input and
generate ideas on the direction of program implementation. As a part of this process, require at
least one blended learning program teacher from each school site to participate and act as a
liaison for the school. The recommendation for the cultural setting is to embed regular
opportunities for teachers to meet and collaborate with their mentors during the school day.
During these collaboration opportunities, implement evidence-based collaborative inquiry
practices to guide the professional learning. The recommendation for policies and procedures is
to have administrators who oversee the school’s reading intervention program become familiar
with all the available data System 44 offers to monitor student performance. Have the
administrator facilitate a system of feedback by scheduling regularly standing meetings with
each blended learning teacher to review data and make recommendations for adjustments as
necessary. Lastly, the recommendation for resources is in addition to incorporating regular
collaboration time during the school day, schedule multiple pullout trainings in each quarter for
blended learning teachers to receive ongoing training on the program with other teachers from
around the organization.
Integrated Implementation and Evaluation Plan
Organizational Purpose, Need and Expectations
The mission of Jiminy Public Schools is to help transform public education so all
students graduate prepared for college, leadership, and life. The organization works to fulfill that
mission with an approach that emphasizes effective teaching, strong school leadership, college-
preparatory curriculum, comprehensive supports, community engagement, and replicability.
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 145
Using the small school model, Jiminy Public Schools are designed to meet individual student
needs, combining rigorous curriculum with academic counseling and individualized support. The
goal of the organization then is to increase all 6th-9th students’ foundational reading levels as
measured by the blended learning program System 44 by the time they start high school so that
100% of students have either increased one level from the Beginner to Developing level or from
the Developing to Read 180-ready reading level, which is the next intervention program. A
related broader reading achievement goal within the organization is to increase students’ reading
levels starting in the middle school at a rate of at least one if not two grade levels each year or
until students are reading at grade level. The goals for the stakeholder of focus then is that all
English teachers with System 44 middle school classrooms will effectively implement
foundational reading skills interventions within the System 44 classroom design and curriculum
so that all students meet the recommended completion targets and reading growth goals of
increasing by at least one reading level.
This project examined the knowledge and skills, motivational, and organizational assets
that high performing reading intervention teachers had that could be adopted and recommended
for other teachers at other school sites. The proposed solution, a comprehensive training program
that starts in the summer and continues through the year, should produce the desired outcome--
an increase in the number of students growing one or more reading levels, in one school year.
The proposed solutions for external outcomes will allow teachers to a) increase the parents’
perception of the school as academically rigorous and preparing for college; b) increase the
reclassification rates for English Learner students; c) increase the percentage of students scoring
expanding or bridging on annual English Language Proficiency Assessments for California
(ELPAC). The proposed solutions for internal outcomes will allow teachers to a) decrease the
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 146
number of students enrolled in the intervention reading program System 44; b) increase the
average student scores on the Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Reading Inventory assessment; c)
decrease teacher use of ELD standards to create differentiated lessons; d) improve pedagogy in
reading intervention classes; e) increase collaboration among teachers at different school sites
within the same school district; f) increase student grades of “C” or better in English-related
courses; g) increase student positive perception around reading.
Implementation and Evaluation Framework
The model that was used to design this integrated implementation and evaluation plan is
the New World Kirkpatrick Model (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016) that is based on the
original Kirkpatrick Four Level Model of Evaluations (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2010).
Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick (2016) defines training as the process to increase participant
knowledge and skills, and it is essential to evaluate training programs for three key reasons:
1. To improve the program.
2. To maximize transfer of learning to behavior and subsequent organizational results.
3. To demonstrate the value of training to the organization.
The Kirkpatrick Model includes four levels that begins with Level Four, “Results,” which
focuses on to what degree learning events and reinforcement resulted in attaining targeted
outcomes (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). Level Three focuses on “Behavior” and examines
to what degree participants applied their learning from the training in their respective fields
(Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). Level Two is the “Learning” level that examines to what
degree participants acquired the knowledge, skills, and attitudes from the program (Kirkpatrick
& Kirkpatrick, 2016). Finally, Level One begins with “Reaction” and focuses on to what extent
participants had a favorable and positive reaction to the training program. The Kirkpatrick model
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 147
recommends that the training program begins the evaluation process backwards with Level Four
in order to understand the organizational goals and desired outcomes to build toward
(Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). The New World Kirkpatrick Model differs from the previous
one with added criteria in Level One with engagement and relevance now included with
satisfaction (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). Additionally, Level Two now includes
motivational and commitment components to the outcomes examined (Kirkpatrick &
Kirkpatrick, 2016). The different levels and training program recommendations are expanded in
more detail below.
Level 4: Results and Leading Indicators
Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick (2016) states that Level Four of the new Kirkpatrick model
essentially is related to the purpose and mission of the organization. Level Four measures to what
degree learning events and reinforcement resulted in attaining targeted outcomes (Kirkpatrick &
Kirkpatrick, 2016). Leading indicators are the short-term observations and measurements to
track whether critical behaviors are progressing and leading to the desired results (Kirkpatrick &
Kirkpatrick, 2016). The proposed leading indicators with external and internal outcomes,
metrics, and methods are outlined in Table 21 below that indicates teachers are achieving their
desired goal of raising students’ foundational reading levels.
Schools adopting these promising practice recommendations should be able to measure
their results and leading indicators as suggested in Table 21.
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 148
Table 21
Outcomes, Metrics, and Methods for External and Internal Outcomes
Outcome Metric(s) Method(s)
External Outcomes
Increase the parents’
perception of the school
as academically rigorous
and preparing for college.
Number of parent positive
feedback. Focus on number of
parents satisfied with the school
and recommending the school to
other parents.
School administration will
monitor the positive feedback
parents submit to the school’s
front office and district through
the annual stakeholder feedback
survey.
Increase in reclassification
rates for English Learner
students.
School Accountability Report
Card released annually by the
California Department of
Education.
School administration will
compare annual EL
reclassification rates.
Increase in percentage of
students scoring
expanding or bridging on
annual English Language
Proficiency Assessments
for California (ELPAC)
exam.
Test Operations Management
System (TOMS) released
annually by the California
Department of Education
School administration, the
district English Learner
coordinator, and EL Lead
teacher will compare annual
scores for all EL students.
Internal Outcomes
Decrease in number of
students enrolled in the
intervention reading
program, System 44.
Number of students enrolled in
System 44 after the first 30 days
of school.
School counselors will monitor
the number of students enrolled
in all System 44 classes.
Increase in average scores
on the Houghton Mifflin
Harcourt Reading
Inventory assessment.
The number of students scoring
higher than a 900 on the HMH
Reading Inventory.
School administration and
reading intervention teachers
monitor students’ scores three
times a year in August,
December, and May.
Decrease teacher use of
ELD standards to create
differentiated lessons.
Observation checklist to scan
posted objectives and standards.
Department chairs will conduct
bi-weekly classroom
walkthroughs.
School administration over
curriculum will conduct lesson
plan audits every month.
Improved pedagogy in
reading intervention
classes.
Observation checklist developed
by principal and teachers.
Informal unannounced
classroom walkthroughs every
week.
Increase collaboration
among teachers at
Number of pullout professional
development collaboration days
School administration will
monitor the number of subbed
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 149
different school sites
within the same school
district.
with reading intervention
teachers at other schools.
out days and the teacher sign in
logs that reading intervention
teachers participate in for
professional development with
other school sites.
Increase in grades of a
“C” or better in English-
related courses.
The number of C or better
grades reported at the end of
each semester.
The counselors and school
administration will monitor all
grades submitted each quarter.
Increase in student
positive perception around
reading.
The number of positive
responses on anonymous student
surveys.
Reading intervention teachers
will collect and monitor
anonymous student surveys at
the end of each quarter.
Level 3: Behavior
Critical behaviors. According to Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick (2016) Level Three
measures to what degree learners demonstrate and apply their learning from the training to their
work. Critical behaviors are defined as the observable actions to indicate a transfer from learning
to practice (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). The three critical behaviors for teachers, the
stakeholder of focus, is are outlined in Table 22. Schools that adopt the recommendations
proposed in this study should also consider adopting these critical behaviors to as guides to
measure teacher progress to meeting their goals. The metrics, methods, and timing to evaluate
each critical behavior are outlined in Table 22 below.
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 150
Table 22
Critical Behaviors, Metrics, Methods, and Timing for Evaluation
Critical Behavior Metric(s)
Method(s)
Timing
Implementing with
high fidelity the
blended learning
model of System 44
which includes three
main components:
adaptive instructional
software, small group
explicit instruction,
and both modeled and
independent reading.
Number of minutes
spent in each rotating
component of the
blended learning
model.
Site administration will
use a standard
observation checklist
that includes number of
minutes spent in each
rotation, number of
minutes spent
transitioning between
rotations, and
descriptions of teacher
and student actions.
Bi-weekly
observation
walkthroughs.
Modifying instruction
with appropriate
instructional strategies
based on ongoing
student performance
data.
Number of times in a
lesson during small
group instruction that
teacher executes a
strategy to modify
instruction.
Instructional coaches
and peer teachers in
department chair or
mentoring teacher roles
will observe one full
rotation of the reading
intervention teacher
leading small group
instruction to identify
and describe strategies
executed.
Monthly
unannounced
observation
walkthroughs.
Creating a positive
classroom community
and culture that
promotes learning.
Number of times
interactions between
teachers and students
reflect positive
messaging, support,
encouragement, and
other indicators of a
positive learning
community that
focuses on learning.
Site administration will
use a standard
observation checklist to
count number of
positive interactions and
describe what was said
and done in example
interactions.
Monthly
unannounced
observation
walkthroughs.
Required drivers. Required drivers are also included in Level Three. Kirkpatrick and
Kirkpatrick (2016) define required drivers as how critical behaviors are reinforced, monitored,
encouraged, and rewarded. Reinforcement is described as the reminders of learning and refresher
trainings, encouragement is described as a formal method of coaching and mentoring, rewarding
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 151
is described as structured incentives, and monitoring is described as how progress can be tracked
for accountability purposes (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). Teachers require the support of
multiple stakeholders including their school site administrators, instructional coaches, and their
teacher peers, therefore all these stakeholders will participate in managing the recommended
drivers to support the critical behaviors. Table 23 below outlines the required drivers to support
the recommended critical behaviors of teachers.
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 152
Table 23
Required Drivers to Support Critical Behaviors
Method(s) Timing
Critical Behaviors
Supported
1, 2, 3 Etc.
Reinforcing
Site administrators provide
teachers with follow-up
modules around program
implementation.
ongoing 1, 2, 3
Instructional coach provides
executive modeling around
planning and executing
rotations.
bi-weekly 1, 2
Site administrators provide
teachers with job aids with
full-time instructional aids or
student teachers to provide
push-in support for most
challenging classes.
ongoing 1, 3
Peer teachers (department
chair, mentor teachers)
conduct office hours to create
communities of practice. The
practice will focus on role-
playing exercises using
hypothetical scenarios to
refine classroom management
practices.
monthly 3
Site administrators will send
refreshers to spotlight
evidence-based practices with
the supporting research and
exemplar samples of how it
looks in practice.
ongoing 1, 2, 3
Encouraging
Site administrators will
conduct instructional coaching
as a follow up to observation
walkthroughs and as part of
the evaluation cycle.
ongoing 1, 2, 3
Instructional coaches will
provide targeted coaching
monthly 1, 2, 3
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 153
around instruction and
management techniques.
Peer teachers (department
chair or mentor teachers) will
proving mentoring around
pedagogy in addition to
providing social emotional
support.
ongoing 1, 3
Rewarding
Through the monitoring of
program implementation, site
administrators will nominate
teachers share best practices
with peer teachers at the
school site.
Annually 1, 2, 3
Through the monitoring of
student reading skills data,
site administrators will
nominate teachers to serve
professional development
leaders who lead the learning
for other reading intervention
teachers around the
organization.
Annually 1, 2, 3
Monitoring
Site administrators will
review school wide reading
skills data before the start of
fall semester, spring semester,
and at the end of the year to
track progress toward school
wide literacy goals and make
adjustments to practices.
Three times a year in August,
December, and May.
1
Reading intervention teachers
will administer anonymous
student surveys focused on
perceptions around learning,
motivation to improve, and
classroom environment.
Results from the survey will
be used to make adjustments
to classroom protocols and
instruction.
Four times year, at the end of
each quarter.
2, 3
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 154
Organizational support. Based on the recommendations above and to ensure the
implementation of the required drivers, the organization will need to provide support in the
following ways. First, teachers will need to be incorporated as equal participants at high-level
strategic planning and goal-setting meetings. These meetings will need to occur regularly with
individuals from multiple levels (curriculum directors, instructional coaches, school site
administrators, teachers) in order to gather input and generate ideas on the implementation of the
program. Next, embed regular opportunities throughout the school day when teachers can meet
and collaborate with mentor teachers using evidence-based collaborative inquiry practices to
guide their professional learning. Teachers will also need to connect with teachers outside of the
school, therefore protected time is needed to focus on blended learning program implementation.
In addition to the regular collaboration time, multiple quarterly pullout trainings should be added
to the school calendar so all blended learning teachers can receive the same training and build
collective best instructional practices. Finally, at each school site, the administrator overseeing
literacy and reading intervention programming needs to become familiar with all the available
data that System 44 offers in order to become familiar with how to monitor student performance.
The goal is for administrators to facilitate a streamlined system of feedback by scheduling
standing meetings with each blended learning teacher in order to review student data and
recommend adjustments as necessary.
Level 2: Learning
Learning goals. Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick (2016) define learning as the degree to
which participants acquire the knowledge, skills, and attitudes based on the training program
with the New World Kirkpatrick Model also including the acquiring of confidence and
commitment in Level Two. Confidence is defined as the level of certainty training participants
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 155
think they can act on their learning and commitment is defined as the level of intentions learners
have to apply the knowledge and skills gained from the training (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick,
2016). The degree to which teachers acquire the intended attributes will be positively correlated
to the quality of the learning goals attained, program implementation, and evaluation.
Learning goals. Upon completion of the proposed recommendations or solutions
teachers will be able to:
Knowledge
1. Identify the unique elements in the blended learning rotational model while making
connections with the more traditional gradual release model. (Declarative Factual)
2. Plan preventative steps for both frequently occurring misbehaviors and uniquely
challenging scenarios in collaboration with peers who have slightly higher levels of
proficiency and skill. (Procedural)
3. Knowing when and how to apply the steps to design and implement the components of
the blended learning model. (Procedural)
4. Compare evidence of clear expectations, community, and rigor using sample lesson plans
and classroom videos of teaching. (Conceptual)
5. Create SMART goals around 1-2 instructional techniques, monitor progress, and plan
adjustments during regular coaching sessions with school site administrators.
(Metacognitive)
Motivation
6. Value the different components in the rotational blended learning model. (Value)
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 156
7. Have confidence in designing and managing a positive learning environment by taking
both positive and constructive feedback and applying modeled strategies during the role-
playing of scenarios. (Self-efficacy)
8. Receive social emotional support from professional peers around the status of the
classroom learning environment. (Emotion)
9. Set quarterly benchmark goals with blended learning program implementation and with
student achievement scores to promote incremental growth and progress. (Goal-
orientation)
Program. The learning goals in the section above to increase the knowledge, skills, and
motivation of teachers who teach the blended learning model System 44 will be accomplished
through a recommended program that focuses on elevating teacher practice. Additional
recommendations also will be made for school site administrators, but because the primary focus
of this study was to change teaching practice, evaluation recommendations or tools will not be
suggested for administrator practices. Administrator roles will simply be highlighted to clarify
how their support is related to teacher success. The main priorities of the program’s content will
emphasize becoming data-driven, increasing the frequency of feedback being provided to both
teachers and students, and ensuring an appropriate allocation of resources to implement the
program.
Teachers. To develop teachers’ knowledge, skills, and motivation multiple trainings will
be offered throughout the academic school year. Starting in the summer, several full day
trainings will touch upon the unique elements of the blended learning model and detail all the
available metrics used to measure student reading progress. A portion of the training will include
developing a robust plan to create a positive learning environment that emphasizes creating a
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 157
culture of teacher and student to student peer support. The other recommendation is to design
sessions around goal-setting and adopting self-monitoring tools that teachers can initially benefit
from to track their own growth with program implementation, but then in turn teach students to
implement and monitor their own reading growth. These trainings will occur throughout the
school year in heterogeneous group settings so teachers can refine strategies collaboratively by
using group discussions and table talk to share best practices with other System 44 teachers. At
minimum, the recommendation is to host quarterly full day pullout trainings so teachers have the
resources throughout the school year to refine their practice. Teachers will also receive ongoing
support at their school sites by school site administrators who oversee the literacy program.
Additional support should be provided by teacher peers, but a part of that should be designed
into the master schedule so that reading intervention teachers have at least one partner to
collaborate with at all times.
Administrators. In order to support the development of teachers’ knowledge, skills, and
motivation, a deliberately designed administrator training program will also be beneficial to meet
reading achievement outcomes. Starting in the summer, school site administrators who are
inexperienced with the blended learning rotational model of System 44 will join teachers in their
training to learn about the unique components that differ from a traditional classroom. In a
separate summer training, administrators will learn about how to navigate the multiple data
sources to track student progress in their development of foundational reading skills. The final
component of their summer training will focus on learning best practices on monitoring student
data so they can stay just as informed as teachers. Using small group discussion and role-playing
with scenarios, administrators will practice identifying the appropriate coaching topic and
providing feedback to teachers. The training will be revisited twice during the school year, once
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 158
after the first semester and once in the spring, in order to monitor progress of the program and
make any adjustments necessary.
Evaluation of the components of learning. In an effort to meet performance goals,
teachers need the knowledge, skills, and motivation to apply their takeaways from the training
program. Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick (2016) emphasize the necessity of using both formative
and summative evaluation methods, including small group discussions, knowledge checks,
surveys, pre- and post-tests, and self-reports. These methods will be recommended to monitor
teachers’ attainment of the learning goals. Table 24 outlines the evaluation methods and timing
for the learning components.
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 159
Table 24
Evaluation of the Components of Learning for the Program
Method(s) or Activity(ies) Timing
Declarative Knowledge “I know it.”
Knowledge spot checks through table group
discussions during professional development
trainings
During the training
Whole group report out post table discussions During the training
Pre-test and post-test Before and at the end of training
Procedural Skills “I can do it right now.”
Checklist of lesson structure implementing all
components of the blended learning model
During the training
Using hypothetical scenarios in groups at
tables to apply appropriate strategies and
techniques.
During the training
Pre-test and post-test Before and at the end of training
Attitude “I believe this is worthwhile.”
Discussion about the value and rationale During the training
Discussion of any issues During the training
Survey with Likert scale After the trainings
Confidence “I think I can do it on the job.”
Small group discussion about concerns,
anticipated barriers, questions
During the training
Mentoring, coaching, peer support for new or
struggling reading intervention teachers
During and after the training
Survey with Likert scale After the training
Commitment “I will do it on the job.”
Discussion of any issues, praises if applicable During and after the training
Survey with Likert scale After the training
Level 1: Reaction
Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick (2016) define reaction as the degree to which participants
react favorably to the training program. The three main dimensions to reactions are customer
satisfaction, engagement, and relevance (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). Customer
satisfaction is described as how satisfied participants are with the training, engagement refers to
the level of participation and contribution participants demonstrate, and relevance is the
opportunity participants have to apply what they learned (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016).
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 160
Table 25 outlines the recommended methods to measure teacher reactions to the training
program.
Table 25
Components to Measure Reactions to the Program
Method(s) or Tool(s) Timing
Engagement
Attendance rate At the beginning of the training
Asking meaningful questions During the training
Active interaction during group activities During the training
Completion of hypothetical practice scenarios During the training
Survey with Likert scale After the training
Relevance
Debrief with school site administrators At the beginning of the fall semester before
data analysis
Pulse check with survey and/or informal
discussion
Before and after periodic breaks during the
training
Survey with Likert scale After the training
Customer Satisfaction
Discussion training evaluation After the training
Survey with Likert scale After the training
Evaluation Tools
Immediately following the program implementation. Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick
(2016) recommends both immediate and delayed evaluation tools following a training with
purposeful evaluations conducted after both Level One and Level Two of the training program.
After the training in Level Two, teachers will engage in post-tests as a follow up and aligned to
the pre-tests, complete surveys to demonstrate their learning and reactions with questions
ranging from multiple choice to free response to Likert scales, and share in discussions with
mentors and peer teachers to communicate their plan for applying the knowledge and skills of
what they learned. After the training in Level One, teachers will complete an anonymous survey
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 161
and participate in discussions to communicate their level of engagement, the relevance of the
training, and their satisfaction levels. See Appendix D for the survey and post-test.
Delayed for a period after the program implementation. According to Kirkpatrick
and Kirkpatrick (2016), both formative and summative assessments are critical to assess the level
of participant implementation after the training. In addition to an immediate evaluation,
Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick (2016) also recommend providing a delayed evaluation so
participants have more time to reflect on the impact of the program and apply what was learned.
Therefore, for the purpose of this program, the delayed evaluation will be sent out at end of the
first semester after 20 weeks and again at the end of the second semester at the 40-week mark.
Teachers will complete a post-test and survey to elicit feedback on the changes that may have
occurred as a result of the program and to determine if the targeted outcomes have been met
(Level Three/Four).
Teachers will complete a post-test and evaluation tool at the end of the school year to
determine if the targeted outcomes have been met (Level Three/Four). As part of the Level Four
evaluative tool, teachers will be asked to describe the success levels with the level of reading
levels gained by students in one school year. Additionally, in order to assess the application of
learning in Level Three, at minimum three times a year in August, December, and May teachers
will review school wide reading skills student data to track literacy goals and make necessary
adjustments. At the end of each quarter four times a year, teachers will complete open-ended and
multiple choice survey items to assess the level of engagement in the learning environment that
contributes to higher reading achievement. In Level Two, post-tests will be administered to
determine if the declarative factual knowledge, procedural knowledge, value, and confidence of
teachers increased as a result of the training. A survey will also be administered immediately
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 162
following the training program to assess teacher engagement, perceptions about relevance, and
satisfaction (Level One). See Appendix E for an early example of post-test and survey questions.
Data Analysis and Reporting
According to Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick (2016), the analysis of collected formative and
summative data can help determine the effectiveness and value of the training to the
organization. An analysis of findings will be presented primarily to the stakeholder of focus,
teachers; however, it would also be beneficial to share findings with other stakeholders who
contribute to the program’s success including, but not limited to, school site administrators,
instructional coaches, and other members of the reading intervention team. Findings will include
a synthesis of themes from both the immediate and delayed evaluation, the internal and external
outcomes from Level Four, and the metrics for the critical behaviors from Level Three. Student
reading achievement data will be shared both semesterly and at the end of the school year, with a
celebration organized at the end of the year for students with high achievement and largest gains
in reading skills growth. A dashboard will be created on the school website and front office
digital bulletin board to keep all stakeholders informed of semesterly and end of year school-
wide reading scores gains. An example of a dashboard can be seen in Appendix F. A separate
report will be created to summarize the Level Two and Level One findings and shared with just
the teacher stakeholder group to inform the direction and planning of future professional
development.
Summary of the Implementation and Evaluation
The New World Kirkpatrick Model (2016) was advantageous to design the
implementation and evaluation of this study for key stakeholders who are charged with teaching
foundational reading skills at middles schools across Jiminy Public Schools. Before the training
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 163
program was developed, knowledge, motivation, and organizational data was collected and
analyzed to identify trends of promising practices within the organization. These assumed assets
and influences were then validated through the analysis of interviews, observations, and
document analyses.
The New World Kirkpatrick Model (2016) emphasizes how training, implementation,
and evaluation are critical elements to ascertain the value of a training program. According to the
model, the four levels of the training program begin with Level Four, with the identification of
external and internal outcomes, metrics, and methods to evaluate whether targeted outcomes
were achieved. Then in the next Level Three, the program recommends detailing observable
critical behaviors to determine whether or not stakeholders are implementing the training.
Following with Level Two, learning outcomes are then identified with stakeholders assessed on
their learning of declarative factual knowledge and procedural skills, attitudes, confidence, and
commitment as a result of their training. Lastly in Level One, the program is assessed to evaluate
how stakeholders are reacting and implementing the training by assessing participant
engagement, perceptions about the relevance of the training, and finally their levels of
satisfaction.
During the training, stakeholder reactions and learning need to be assessed as checks for
understanding to determine if any changes need to be made to the program. If learning
expectations or learner reactions are not meeting the training expectation levels, the facilitator
can leverage spot checks, group discussions, scenario applications by asking questions or
suggestions to respond to any issues as they arise (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). Similarly, if
learning expectations and reaction levels are meeting the training expectation levels, the
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 164
facilitator can hold discussions to determine the appropriate reasons (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick,
2016).
After the training, if the results are not satisfactory to the level of training expectations,
then it is critical of facilitators to communicate with stakeholders to identify where issues arose
from the drivers and critical behaviors or why the application of learning did not occur. School
site leaders and program directors can also question why leading indicators and desired results
for Level Four are not progressing (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). Surveys, post-tests, and
both formal and informal discussions can be conducted by facilitators to identify what steps need
to be adjusted in order to meet the performance goal of raising middle school students’
foundational reading skills.
Lastly, a final report of training outcomes is required both at the site level and district
level. Training programs require organizational support to be successful (Kirkpatrick &
Kirkpatrick, 2016). Therefore, the recommendation for successful performance and results is to
provide these reports and structure regular touch points throughout the implementation process
(Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). School site and district leaders should receive evaluation
reports that address the relevance, credibility, and efficiency of the program in order to stay
engaged with the implementation of the training program (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016).
Summary of program recommendations. To summarize specific recommendations,
some additional components of the program that need to be started are described below.
Teachers need additional training that incorporates the use of models, exemplars, and worked
examples to eliminate the need of creating materials from scratch. For any observable behaviors
or teaching moves, scenarios should be created for teachers to practice their skills with an
emphasis on maximizing instructional time. For example, some of these observable behaviors
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 165
would include rotating through blended learning stations, fine-tuning the nuances of transitioning
between lesson segments, and practicing classroom management skills to build a positive student
culture. Additionally, an increase of celebrations and incentives is need because teachers
communicated that they feel motivated with the work, but lack confidence in key areas. This
would also be a great opportunity to promote desirable behaviors from other teachers who lack
these assets.
Specific components of the program that are being recommended to stop are described
next. Although teachers communicated the importance of receiving ongoing coaching, the
positive impacts were described as negated when there was misalignment among the coaching
received. Coaching in Jiminy Public Schools by multiple stakeholders was seen as a unique
benefit within the organization, but not when people were coaching with different agendas and at
times conflicting messaging. Additionally, the program should stop creating feelings of
information overload when too much information and training topics are provided. This
recommendation is more for newer teachers of the blended learning program, but is something to
keep in mind for all training designs. The final recommendation to stop is designing teaching
assignments at schools where the reading intervention blended learning teacher does not have
opportunities to collaborative with others because the individual is seen as the single intervention
teacher. This creates a barrier to seek ongoing improvement or creates unnecessary delays
because the teacher then has to look outside the school to connect with others.
Program recommendations to continue are described in this final portion. Trainings were
seen as valuable components of teacher improvement so these trainings should be offered
throughout the year. The program should continue providing mentoring support to teachers from
multiple stakeholders, with administrators, literacy coaches, and peer teachers all participating.
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 166
Trainings should continue emphasizing the importance of refining classroom management
techniques and building a positive climate since these are tantamount to running a high
functioning classroom. Finally, the training program should continue cultivating the intrinsic
motivation of teachers because all the high performing teachers in this study communicated how
much they believe in the work and how they finding themselves putting additional effort into the
reading intervention classes. This shared sentiment was based on how teachers had internalized
how mission-aligned the work was and the urgency behind needing to raise students’
foundational reading skills.
Limitations and Delimitations
Merriam and Tisdell (2016) emphasize how validity and reliability in addition to rigor
and trustworthiness are critical to conducting qualitative research. In this study, despite making
efforts to triangulate with interviews, observations, and document analyses to increase internal
validity, several limitations and delimitations still exist.
A limitation of this study was self-selection bias since only volunteers participated.
Additionally, seven teachers participated in the study but all teachers are current middle school
teachers in the same organization. This could hinder what Merriam and Tisdell (2016) refer to as
maximum variation sampling, because a diverse sample selection was not used. Therefore, it is
difficult to generalize the findings from this extended case study to a larger population. The
recommendations made would only be applicable to other middle schools, within the district,
because of the similar makeup of each school, student population, and resources available. An
additional limitation was the short duration of the study, with all the data being gathered in the
span of a few months. A final limitation is the researcher’s position or reflexivity because the
researcher works within the same organization, not as a blended learning program teacher, but as
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 167
a school site administrator. Therefore, during the study biases and assumptions could have
impacted multiple levels from the design of the methodology to the analysis of the data to the
organization of the findings.
A delimitation to this study was how the population of interest was bound to middle
school teachers within a charter organization in inner city schools. The study was also exclusive
to participants who are reading intervention teachers utilizing System 44, the rotational blended
learning model. Other individuals who are closely tied to reading intervention programs such as
school site administrators or instructional coaches were intentionally not included, though their
contributions would have been informative. Another delimitation of this study is that it did not
consider the needs of students with learning disabilities or English Learner newcomer
populations who need unique interventions. The methodology the study used was also a
delimitation because only qualitative data was gathered based on the small sample size. The final
delimitation was Clark and Estes’ (2008) Gap Analysis theoretical framework with a study of
promising practices conducted since only knowledge, motivational, and organizational assets
were examined.
Recommendations for Future Research
Future research can address the limitations and delimitations identified in this study. The
first recommendation is to enhance the triangulation model by increasing the number of
participants and diversifying the sample size to include teachers from a variety of districts
including both charter and traditional schools. Additionally, expanding the participant roles from
teachers to include other professionals who directly impact reading intervention programs, such
as school site administrators, area superintendents over curriculum, instructional coaches, etc.
The variety of perspectives from different vantage points can assist with what Merriam and
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 168
Tisdell (2016) refer to as crystallization, an important component of qualitative research with the
inclusion of multiple perspectives to contribute to rich data. Finally, future research can include
the instrument of anonymous surveys to gather data since participants may be more open to
providing honest or critical responses without a researcher in front of them to gather the data.
Since the focus of this study was an examination of promising practices, only the
assumed influences that were validated were used to inform the recommendations and evaluation
of a program. However, there were several assumed influences that were not validated but were
still supported by various existing literature as important aspects of both reading intervention for
struggling adolescent readers and for effective blended learning programming. These evidence-
based practices deserve additional analyses. One influence in particular, adjusting instruction
based on student performance data, should be examined more closely in future research because
teachers communicated the importance of it but neither demonstrated it explicitly in practice or
seemed motivated to implement it during small group instruction. Making this a priority in
addition to the recommendations made above, especially increasing the number and diversity of
the sample participants may be beneficial for future studies.
Conclusion
The organizational promising practices that this study focused on is how model middle
schools’ performance related to a larger problem of practice, lagging student reading
achievement. Several inner city schools within Jiminy Public Schools charter organization
outperformed neighboring comparative schools and this study aimed to analyze the knowledge
and skill, motivation, and organizational assets of the teachers, the stakeholder of focus.
Teachers were selected because they have the largest amount of exposure to students during the
school day. Though this study focused on reading achievement for middle school students in a
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 169
blended learning model, the recommendations and solutions discussed are applicable to
improving instruction across content and schools.
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 170
References
Al-busaidi, K., & Al-shihi, H. (2012). Key factors to instructors' satisfaction of learning
management systems in blended learning. Journal of Computing in Higher Education,
24(1), 18-39.
Anderman, E. & Anderman, L. (2006). Attributions. Retrieved from
http://www.education.com/reference/article/attribution-theory/
Anderson, L.W. & Krathwohl, D.R. (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A
revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives. New York: Longman.
Andrews, R. L., & Soder, R. (1987). Principal leadership and student achievement.
Educational Leadership, 44(3), 9-11.
Baker, E. L., Barton, P. E., Darling-Hammond, L., Haertel, E., Ladd, H. F., Linn, R. L.,
Ravitch, D., Rothstein, R., Shavelson, R. J., & Shepard, L. A. (2010). Problems
with the use of student test scores to evaluate teachers (Briefing Paper No. 278).
Washington, DC: Economic Policy Institute.
Bandura, A. (2006). Guide for constructing self-efficacy scales. In F. Pajares & T. Urdan (Eds.),
Self-efficacy beliefs of adolescents (Vol. 5, pp. 307-337). Greenwich, CT: Information
Age Publishing.
Bigozzi, L., Tarchi, C., Vagnoli, L., Valente, E., & Pinto, G. (2017). Reading Fluency As a
Predictor of School Outcomes across Grades 4–9. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 200.
http://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00200
Boone, J. (2015). Leading learning organizations through transformational change. The
International Journal of Educational Management, 29(3), 275-283.
Braun, H. (2005). Using Student Progress to Evaluate Teachers: A Primer on Value-
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 171
Added Models. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
Brodersen, M. R., & Melluzzo, D. (2017). Summary of research on online and blended learning
programs that offer differentiated learning options. REL 2017-228. (). Regional
Educational Laboratory Central., 555 New Jersey Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20208.
Cho, Y., & Shim, S. (2013). Predicting teachers’ achievement goals for teaching: The role of
perceived school goal structure and teachers’ sense of efficacy. (Report). Teaching and
Teacher Education, 32.
Ciani, K., Summers, J., & Easter, M. (2008). Gender Differences in Academic Entitlement
Among College Students. The Journal of Genetic Psychology, 169(4), 332–344.
Clark, R. E. & Estes, F. (2008). Turning research into results: A guide to selecting the right
performance solutions. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing, Inc.
Coch, D. (2010). Constructing a reading brain. In Sousa, D.A. (Ed.), Mind, brain, and education:
Neuroscience implications for the classroom (139-161). Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree
Press.
College and Career Readiness and Success Center at American Institutes for Research (2018).
College and career ready definitions. Retrieved from: https://ccrscenter.org/ccrs-
landscape/state-profile/california
Common Core State Standards Initiative. (2018). About the common core state standards.
Retrieved from http://www.corestandards.org/about-the-standards/
Conley, D. (2008). Rethinking College Readiness. New Directions for Higher Education., (144),
3.
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 172
Dziuban, C., Graham, R., Moskal, P., Norberg, D., & Sicilia, A. (2018). Blended learning: The
new normal and emerging technologies. International Journal of Educational Technology
in Higher Education, 15(1), 1-16.
Edmonds, M., Vaughn, S., Wexler, J., Reutebuch, C., Cable, A., Klingler Tackett, K., & Wick
Schnakenber, C. (2009). A synthesis of reading interventions and effects on reading
comprehension outcomes for older struggling readers. Review of Educational Research,
79, 262-300. doi:10.3102/0034654308325998.
Elen, J. (n.d.). In search of attributes that support self-regulation in blended learning
environments. Education and Information Technologies., 22(4), 1395.
Ertmer, P., Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A., Sadik, O., & Sendurur, E. (2012). Teacher beliefs and
technology integration practices: A critical relationship. Computers & Education., 59(2),
423.
Fassbender, W. J., Lucier, J. A., & Fink, L. (2014). Equalizing the teacher-to-student ratio
through technology: A new perspective on the role of blended learning. Voices from the
Middle, 22(2), 21-28.
Gabrieli, J., Christodoulou, J.A., O’Louglin, T., & Eddy, M. D. (2010). The reading brain. In
Sousa, D.A. (Ed.), Mind, brain, and education: Neuroscience implications for the
classroom (113-136). Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree Press.
Gallimore, R., & Goldenberg, C. (2001). Analyzing Cultural Models and Settings to Connect
Minority Achievement and School Improvement Research. Educational
Psychologist, 36(1), 45–56.
Gillen, A., Wright, A., & Spink, L. (2011). Student perceptions of a positive climate for learning:
A case study. Educational Psychology in Practice.,27(1), 65.
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 173
Hall, C., Roberts, G. J., Cho, E., McCulley, L. V., Carroll, M., & Vaughn, S. (2017). Reading
instruction for english learners in the middle grades: A meta-analysis. Educational
Psychology Review, 29(4), 763-794.
Hilliard, Ann Toler. (2015). Global Blended Learning Practices for Teaching and Learning,
Leadership and Professional Development. Journal of International Education Research,
11(3), 179-188.
Houghton Mifflin Harcourt. (2015). Retrieved from https://www.hmhco.com/products/system-
44/
Hsu, P. (2016). Examining current beliefs, practices and barriers about technology integration: A
case study. TechTrends, 60(1), 30-40.
Hulme C., Snowling M. J. (2011). Children's reading comprehension difficulties: nature, causes,
and treatments. Curr. Direct. Psychol. Sci. 20, 139–142. 10.1177/096372111408673
Institute of Education Sciences (2016). Foundational skills to support reading for understanding
in kindergarten through 3rd grade. Retrieved from:
https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/Docs/PracticeGuide/20072004.pdf
Institute of Education Sciences (2010). Improving reading comprehension in kindergarten
through 3rd grade. Retrieved from:
https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/Docs/PracticeGuide/readingcomp_pg_092810.pdf
International Literacy Association. (2015). Collaborating for success: The vital role of content
teachers in developing disciplinary literacy with students in grades 6-12. (Position
statement). Retrieved from https://www.literacyworldwide.org/docs/default-
source/where-we-stand/ccssdisciplinary-literacy-statement.pdf?sfvrsn=12
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 174
ISTE. (2008). ISTE standards for teachers. Eugene, OR: International Society for Technology in
Education.
Ivey, G., & Baker, M. I. (2004) Phonics instruction for older students? Just say no. Educational
leadership, 61(6), 25-39. Retrieved from http://www.ascd.org/publications/educational-
leadership/mar04/vol61/num06/Phonics-Instruction-for-Older-Students%C2%A2-Just-
Say-No.aspx
Kale, U., & Akcaoglu, M. (2018). The role of relevance in future teachers’ utility value and
interest toward technology. Educational Technology Research and Development, 66(2),
283-311.
Kavadella, A., Tsiklakis, K., Vougiouklakis, G., & Lionarakis, A. (2012). Evaluation of a
blended learning course for teaching oral radiology to undergraduate dental students.
European Journal of Dental Education, 16, e88-e95. doi:10.1111/j.1600-
0579.2011.00680.x
Kearns, Larry. (2017). New Blueprints for K-12 Schools. Education Next, 17(3), Education
Next, 2017, Vol.17(3).
Kellerer, P., Kellerer, E., Werth, E., Werth, L., Montgomery, D., Clyde, R., . . . Kennedy, K.
(2014). Transforming K-12 rural education through blended learning: Teacher
perspectives. ().International Association for K-12 Online Learning. 1934 Old Gallows
Road Suite 350, Vienna, VA 22182.
Kirkpatrick, J. D., & Kirkpatrick, W. K. (2016). Kirkpatrick’s four levels of training evaluation.
Alexandria, VA: ATD Press.
Kissau, S., & Algozzine, B. (2015). The impact of mode of instructional delivery on second
language teacher self-efficacy. ReCALL : The Journal of EUROCALL, 27(2), 239-256.
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 175
Kouzes, J. and Posner, B. (2007), The Leadership Challenge (ISBN: 978-0-7879-8492-2), John
Wiley & Sons, San Francisco, CA.
Lenhard, W., Baier, H., Endlich, D., Schneider, W., & Hoffmann, J. (2013). Rethinking strategy
instruction: Direct reading strategy instruction versus computer-based guided practice.
Journal of Research in Reading, 36(2), 223-240.
Lexile Framework for Reading. (2019). Retrieved from
https://lexile.com/educators/understanding-lexile-measures/
Lourenco, O. (2012). Piaget and Vygotsky: Many resemblances, and a crucial difference. New
Ideas in Psychology, 30(3), 281-295.
Mayer, R. E. (2011). Applying the science of learning. Boston, MA: Pearson Education.
Moran, J., Ferdig, R., Pearson, P., Wardrop, J., & Blomeyer, R. (2008). Technology and Reading
Performance in the Middle-School Grades: A Meta-Analysis with Recommendations for
Policy and Practice 1. Journal of Literacy Research, 40(1), 6-58.
Marchand-Martella, N., Martella, R. C., Modderman, S. L., Petersen, H. M., & Pan, S. (2013).
Key areas of effective adolescent literacy programs. Education & Treatment of Children,
36(1), 161-184.
McDonald, T. (2010). Positive learning framework: Creating learning environments in which all
children thrive. Reclaiming Children and Youth, 19(2), 16-20.
Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and
implementation (4th Ed.). San Francisco, CA: Josey-Bass.
Means, B., Toyama, Y., Murphy, R., & Baki, M. (n.d.). The Effectiveness of Online and Blended
Learning: A Meta-Analysis of the Empirical Literature. Teachers College Record /,
115(3), 1.
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 176
Moskal, Patsy, Dziuban, Charles, & Hartman, Joel. (2013). Blended Learning: A Dangerous
Idea? Internet and Higher Education, 18(C), 15-23.
National Reading Panel (2000). Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the
scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction.
Retrieved from: https://www.nichd.nih.gov/publications/pubs/nrp/Documents/report.pdf
Ning, B., Van Damme, J., Van, D. N., Yang, X., & Gielen, S. (2015). The influence of classroom
disciplinary climate of schools on reading achievement: A cross-country comparative
study. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 26(4), 586-611.
Payne, A. A., & Eckert, R. (2010). The relative importance of provider, program, school, and
community predictors of the implementation quality of school-based prevention
programs. Prevention Science, 11(2), 126-41.
Piaget, J. (1952). The origins of intelligence in children. Retrieved from
http://www.pitt.edu/~strauss/origins_r.pdf
Picciano, A. G. (2009). Blending with purpose: The multimodal model. Journal of Asynchronous
Learning Networks, 13(1), 7-18.
Pintrich, P. (2000). Multiple Goals, Multiple Pathways: The Role of Goal Orientation in
Learning and Achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92(3), 544–555.
Rasinski, T. (2017). Reading Fluency and College Readiness. Journal of Adolescent & Adult
Literacy : A Journal from the International Reading Association., 60(4), 453.
Reynolds, C. B. (2018). Preparing for blended learning: Examining self-efficacy of secondary
teachers (Order No. 10787166). Available from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Full
Text; ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global. (2051919254).
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 177
Rhodes, E. (2011). Learning, teaching, and technology. A short literature review. Retrieved
from: http://www.aacte.org/Ressearch/lit_20review-revised.htm
Rockman, S., Sloan, K., Akey, T., Farr, B., Pereira-Leon, M., Shapiro, J., & Clark, L. (2007). Ed
pace final report. Retrieved from: www.rockman.com/projects/146.ies.edpace/finalreport
Rueda, R. (2011). The 3 dimensions of improving student performance. New York: Teachers
College Press.
Schechter, R. L., Kazakoff, E. R., Bundschuh, K., Prescott, J. E., & Macaruso, P. (2017).
Exploring the impact of engaged teachers on implementation fidelity and reading skill
gains in a blended learning reading program. Reading Psychology, 38(6), 553-579.
Schraw, G., & McCrudden, M. (2006). Information processing theory. Retrieved from
http://www.education.com/reference/article/information-processing-theory/
Schunk, D. H., Pintrich, P. R., & Meece, J. L. (2008). Motivation in education: theory, research,
and applications (6th ed.). Upper Saddle River, N.J.: Pearson/Merrill Prentice Hall.
Seung-Won, Y., & Lim, D. H. (2007). Strategic blending: A conceptual framework to improve
learning and performance. International Journal on ELearning, 6(3), 475-489.
Shanahan, T., & Beck, I. (2006). Effective literacy teaching for English language learners. In D.
L. August & T. Shanahan (Eds.), Developing literacy in second-language learners: a
report of the national literacy panel on language minority children and youth (pp. 415–
488). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Shippen, M. E., Houchins, D. E., Steventon, C., & Sartor, D. (2005). A comparison of two direct
instruction reading programs for urban middle school students. Remedial and Special
Education, 26(3), 175-182.
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 178
Silver, D., & Saunders, M. (2008). What factors predict high school graduation in the Los
Angeles unified school district? Santa Barbara, CA: University of California.
Slavin, R.E.., Lake, C., Davis, S., & Madden, N. (2011). Effective programs for struggling
readers: A best-evidence synthesis. Educational Research Review, 6(1), 1-6. Retrieved
from doi:10.1016/j.edurev.2010.07.002
Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium. (2013). Initial achievement level descriptors and
college content-readiness policy. Retrieved from:
https://portal.smarterbalanced.org/library/en/elaliteracy-alds-and-college-content-
readiness-policy.pdf
Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium. (2015). Content specifications for the summative
assessment of the common core state standards for English language arts and literacy in
history/social studies, science, and technical subjects. Retrieved from:
https://portal.smarterbalanced.org/library/en/english-language-artsliteracy-content-
specifications.pdf
Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium. (2018). What is smarter balanced? Retrieved from:
http://www.smarterbalanced.org/about/
Sorebo, O., Halvari, H., Gulli, V. F., & Kristiansen, R. (2009). The role of self-determination
theory in explaining teachers' motivation to continue to use e-learning technology.
Computers & Education, 53(4), 1177-1187.
Staker, H. (2011). The rise of K–12 blended learning: Profiles of emerging models. Retrieved
from: http://www.innosightinstitute.org/innosight/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/The-
Riseof-K-12-Blended-Learning.pdf
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 179
Steinburg, M., & McCray, E. (2012). Listening to their voices: Middle schoolers’ perspective of
life in middle school. The Qualitative Report, 17(34) 1-14.
Stevens, G. H., & Frazer, G. W. (2005). Coaching: The missing ingredient in blended learning
strategy. Performance Improvement, 44(8), 8-13.
Suprabha, K., & Subramonian, G. (2015). Blended learning approach for enhancing students'
learning experiences in a knowledge society. Journal of Educational Technology, 11(4),
1-7.
System 44 Experience. (2015). Retrieved from https://www.hmhco.com/products/system-
44/experience/teacher-facilitated.htm#tabset11
U.S. Department of Education. (2010). Evaluation of evidence-based practices in online
learning: A meta-analysis and review of online learning studies. Retrieved from:
https://www2.ed.gov/rschstat/eval/tech/evidence-based-
practices/finalreport.pdf?utm_campaign=elearningindustry.com&utm_source=%2F6-
blended-learning-models-blended-learning-successful-students&utm_medium=link
Vasileiou, I. (2009). Blended learning: The transformation of higher education curriculum. Open
Education: The Journal for Open & Distance Education & Educational Technology,
5(1), 77-87.
Vaughn, S., Cirino, P., Wanzek, J., Wexler, J., Fletcher, J., Denton, C., … Francis, D. (2010).
Response to intervention for middle school students with reading difficulties: Effects of a
primary and secondary intervention. School Psychology Review, 39, 3-21. Retrieved
from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3072689/
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 180
Vega, D., P.H.D., Moore, James L,I.I.I., P.H.D., & Miranda, A. H., P.H.D. (2015). In their own
words: Perceived barriers to achievement by african american and latino high school
students. American Secondary Education, 43(3), 36-59.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978) Mind in society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Werth, E., Werth, L., & Kellerer, E. (2013). Transforming K-12 rural education through blended
learning: Barriers and promising practices. (). International Association for K-12 Online
Learning. 1934 Old Gallows Road Suite 350, Vienna, VA 22182.
Ziegler, M., Paulus, T., & Woodside, M. (2006). Creating a climate of engagement in a blended
learning environment. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 17(3), 295-318.
Zimmerman, B. J. (2008). Goal setting: A key proactive source of academic self-regulation. In
D. H. Schunk & B. J. Zimmerman (Eds.), Motivation and self-regulated learning:
Theory, research, and applications (pp. 267-295). Mahwah, NJ, US: Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates Publishers.
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 181
Appendix A
Interview Items Bank
Tier 1 Priority Questions
1. Tell me about the blended learning model of System 44.
2. Tell me about your classroom environment.
3. How does each component relate to reading achievement?
4. Please explain the steps you take to modify instruction using appropriate strategies.
5. Please explain how you reflect on the effectiveness of each component of the blended
learning program.
6. Some people say they do not see the value in this blended learning model. How would
you respond?
7. How confident do you feel implementing all components of the blended learning
program?
8. How do you feel using performance data to modify instruction?
9. How do you feel about creating a positive learning environment?
10. Describe how you focus on mastery and set goals to improve program implementation.
11. How do you respond when faced with challenges in using the blended learning system?
12. To what do you attribute the success or lack of success using the blended learning system
to bring about student growth?
13. Please explain how members of your staff help each other implement the program.
14. What available training do you receive to implement the program?
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 182
Tier 2 If Time Permits Follow Up Questions
1. What is each component of the blended learning model?
2. How do the main components of the blended learning model interact?
3. Please explain how you use each component of the blended learning program.
4. What elements make up a positive classroom environment?
5. What steps do you take to build a positive learning environment?
6. Discuss some reasons why teachers should apply all components of the blended learning
model.
7. Some teachers say they do not value modifying instruction. How would you respond?
8. Discuss some reasons why teachers should create a positive learning environment.
9. How confident do you feel analyzing student performance data and adjusting instruction?
10. How do you feel about implementing the different components of the blended learning
program?
11. How confident do you feel designing and managing a positive learning environment?
12. Please explain the policies and procedures of the school that increases implementation of
the program.
13. To what extent is the blended learning program standardized?
Tier 3 Wish-list Questions
1. Describe how clear expectations, community, rigor, and reading achievement are related.
2. Please explain the steps you take to design a positive learning environment.
3. Please explain how you reflect on the effectiveness of the assessments and modifications
you make of your instruction.
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 183
4. Please explain how you reflect on the extent of the positive learning environment of your
class.
5. Explain how role models and mentors support your implementation of the blended
learning program.
6. What kind of incentives do you receive for implementing the blended learning program?
7. How are your efforts to implement the blended learning program recognized?
8. To what extent have you adopted the blended learning program goals?
9. How does the culture of the school support your adoption of the blended learning
program goals?
10. What resources will you need to develop the blended learning program?
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 184
Appendix B
Observation Protocol
Date of Observation:__________ Time In:_________ Time Out:_________
Grade:______ Class Observed: _______Total # Students Present: ________
Lesson Objective:
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
Drawing of Learning Environment Description of Learning Environment
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 185
Observable Criteria:
Mark an X for any blanks provided below.
Researcher Comments:
Record specifics of the lesson observed and
any additional details to explain
observations.
1____ Physical evidence of blended learning
model of System 44 in classroom design and on
walls.
2____ Physical evidence of a positive
classroom environment.
3____ Physical evidence of incentives and
recognition.
4____ Physical evidence of goal adoption.
5____ Physical evidence of student
performance data.
6____ Teacher uses of each component of the
blended learning program.
7____ Teacher modifies instruction.
8____ Teacher words and actions contribute to
a positive learning environment.
Brief description of the sequence of lesson activities: ___________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
Additional comments if needed:____________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 186
Appendix C
Document Analysis Protocol
Document Title: Review Date:
Item Y N Comments
The lesson materials includes an objective aligned to a content standard.
Includes a proving behavior for students to demonstrate attainment of the
objective.
Includes an agenda.
Includes all components of the blended learning model within the
sequence of the lesson structure.
Includes teacher plans to modify instruction based on student
understanding.
Includes criteria for success to meet or progress towards goal attainment.
Includes plan for classroom management and positive learning
environment.
Includes planned and expected student action.
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 187
Appendix D
Level 1 and Level 2 Evaluation Instrument Immediately Following the Program
Section 1
The following questions are related to components of your learning, mainly the knowledge and
skills you now have as a result of the training. Please select the best possible answer for
questions with multiple choices and be concise as possible for open-ended questions.
1. What are the unique elements of the blended learning rotational model?
a. Computer adaptive software, teacher guided small group instruction, collaborative
practice
b. Computer adaptive software, teacher guided small group instruction, independent
reading
c. Computer adaptive software, whole group instruction, teacher guided small group
instruction
d. Teacher guided small group instruction, collaborative practice, differentiated
independent proving behaviors
2. What are two ways the blended learning rotational model is similar and/or different to the
traditional gradual release model of instruction?
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
3. What steps would you take in the following scenario: In the middle of transitions, Student
A begins to chat with a neighbor and is seen not rotating to the next station. Several
others students have now gathered around Student A and the transitions timer is about to
beep. Briefly explain the rationale for the steps you would take.
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Section 2
The following questions are related to your attitude, confidence, commitment in addition to the
level of engagement, relevance, and satisfaction you now have as a result of the training. Please
select the number that that best correlates to how you feel about each statement, with a 5 to
indicate Strongly Agree and a 1 to indicate Strongly Disagree.
1. I believe in the importance of all the components of the blended learning
model.
1 2 3 4 5
2. After receiving feedback during the training, I feel confident to apply what
I learned into the classroom.
1 2 3 4 5
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 188
3. I am committed to applying what I learned during the training. 1 2 3 4 5
4. I believe the feedback I received during the role-playing of scenarios was
valuable to implementing the blended learning program.
1 2 3 4 5
5. I believe the feedback I received during the role-playing of scenarios was
valuable to designing a positive learning environment.
1 2 3 4 5
6. I was satisfied with the training on implementing the blended learning
program.
1 2 3 4 5
7. I was satisfied with the training on building a positive learning
environment.
1 2 3 4 5
Section 3
Please provide short answer responses for feedback purposes to the following questions.
1. Which part of the training did you believe was irrelevant for implementing the blended
learning program?
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
2. What is the most impactful practice you learned today that you plan to implement in your
classroom this school year?
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
3. What specific outcomes are you hoping to achieve as a result of the changes you will
implement after today’s training?
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 189
Appendix E
Evaluation Instrument Delayed for a Period After Program Implementation
Please rate your agreement with this statement on a scale of 1-5.
- 1 = Strongly Disagree
- 2 = Somewhat Disagree
- 3 = Neither disagree nor agree
- 4 = Somewhat Agree
- 5 = Strongly Agree
Level 4 - Results and Leading Indicators
The following questions evaluate the quality of performance results after program
implementation.
1. Parent perception of the school as academically rigorous and preparing for college has
increased.
1 2 3 4 5
2. Please describe how parent perception of the school as academically rigorous and preparing
for college has changed since the completion of the training program.
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
3. Teacher use of English Language Development Standards to differentiate lessons have
decreased.
1 2 3 4 5
2. Please describe how teacher use of ELD standards have decreased since the completion of the
training program.
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
4. Teacher pedagogy has improved in reading intervention classes.
1 2 3 4 5
5. Please describe how teacher pedagogy has improved in reading intervention classes since the
completion of the training program.
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 190
6. Collaboration among teachers at different school sites have increased.
1 2 3 4 5
7. Please describe how collaboration among teachers at different school sites have increased
since the completion of the training program.
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
8. Student positive perception around reading has increased.
1 2 3 4 5
9. Please describe how student positive perception around reading as increased since the
completion of the training program.
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
Level 3 - Behavior
The following questions evaluate changes in behavior as a result of the training program.
10. Since completion of the training program have you engaged in any of the following
activities?
Yes (1) No (2) Don’t
know
(3)
Implement all three components of the rotational blended
learning model. (1)
Modify instruction based on student performance data. (2)
Create a positive classroom community and culture to promote
learning. (3)
11. Since completion of the training program, have you used what you learned in training at
work? If so, what have you used?
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 191
Level 2 - Learning
The following questions evaluate elements of what you learned from the training program,
mainly any changes in your attitude, confidence, and commitment.
12. What is the importance of applying what was learned from the training program?
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
13. Please comment on how confident you feel about applying what you have learned to teaching
reading intervention with the blended learning model?
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
14. How do you plan to continue applying what you learned into your classroom instruction?
Level 1 - Reaction
The following questions evaluate your reactions to the training program.
15. I have been able to use what I learned from the training program to my job.
1 2 3 4 5
16. Please provide a concrete example of how you applied into the classroom what you learned
during the program training.
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
17. Looking back, participating in this training program was beneficial to my professional
practice.
1 2 3 4 5
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 192
Appendix F
Data Reporting Dashboard Example
Progress Test #1 Progress Test #2 Progress Test #3
Implementing with high
fidelity the blended learning
model of System 44 which
includes three main
components: adaptive
instructional software, small
group explicit instruction, and
both modeled and
independent reading.
Modifying instruction with
appropriate instructional
strategies based on ongoing
student performance data.
Creating a positive classroom
community and culture that
promotes learning.
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS 193
Appendix G
Informed Consent and Information Sheet
University of Southern California
Rossier School of Education
3470 Trousdale Pkwy, Los Angeles CA, 90089
IMPROVING FOUNDATIONAL READING SKILLS GROWTH IN MIDDLE SCHOOL:
A PROMISING PRACTICES STUDY
You are invited to participate in a research study. Research studies include only people who
voluntarily choose to take part. This document explains information about this study. You should
ask questions about anything that is unclear to you.
PURPOSE OF THE STUDY
This study aims to conduct an analysis of teacher assets in the areas of knowledge and skill,
motivation, and organizational resources necessary for teachers promising practice contributing to
raising student reading levels at a higher rate than other teachers in similar schools.
PARTICIPANT INVOLVEMENT
If you agree to take part in this study, you will be asked to participate in an interview, asked to
allow a follow up classroom observation, and asked to submit any resources used for the lesson
observed.
CONFIDENTIALITY
There will be no identifiable information obtained in connection with this study. Your name,
address or other identifiable information will not be collected.
The members of the research team and the University of Southern California’s Human Subjects
Protection Program (HSPP) may access the data. The HSPP reviews and monitors research studies
to protect the rights and welfare of research subjects.
When the results of the research are published or discussed in conferences, no identifiable
information will be used.
INVESTIGATOR CONTACT INFORMATION
The Principal Investigator is John Kwon (kwonjohn@usc.edu)
The Faculty Advisors are Kenneth Yates (kennetay@usc.edu) and Briana Hinga
(hinga@rossier.usc.edu)
IRB CONTACT INFORMATION
University Park Institutional Review Board (UPIRB), 3720 South Flower Street #301, Los
Angeles, CA 90089-0702, (213) 821-5272 or upirb@usc.edu
Abstract (if available)
Linked assets
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
Conceptually similar
PDF
A full inclusion model: a promising practice study
PDF
The implementation of a multi-tiered system of support at Downtown Unified School District: an analysis of teacher needs
PDF
The implementation of a multi-tiered system of support in Downtown Unified School District: an analysis of site administrator needs
PDF
Promoting a positive school culture from three perspectives: a promising practices study from the administrator perspective
PDF
Promoting a positive school culture from three perspectives: a promising practices study from the teacher perspective
PDF
Winning the organizational leadership game through engagement: a gap analysis
PDF
Building 21st century skills for school-age children in Colombia: lessons from a promising practice
PDF
Universal Wellness Network: a study of a promising practice
PDF
The interaction of teacher knowledge and motivation with organizational influences on the implementation of a hybrid reading intervention model taught in elementary grades
PDF
Examining third grade English language development teaching practices
PDF
Positive behavior intervention support plan: a gap analysis
PDF
A case study of promising practices mentoring K-12 chief technology officers
PDF
A promising practice case study from Singapore of socio-emotional development in a non-traditional context
PDF
An examination using the gap analysis framework of employees’ perceptions of promising practices supporting teamwork in a federal agency
PDF
The successful implementation of diversity and inclusion efforts: a study of promising practice
PDF
Increasing engagement and avoiding burnout of counselors of at-promise youth: a gap analysis approach for supervisors
PDF
A methodology for transforming the student experience in higher education: a promising practice study
PDF
An examination of supervisors’ perspectives of teamwork in a federal agency: promising practices and challenges using a gap analysis framework
PDF
STEM education in middle school: a promising practices study
PDF
Establishing a systematic evaluation of positive behavioral interventions and supports to improve implementation and accountability approaches using a gap analysis framework
Asset Metadata
Creator
Kwon, John
(author)
Core Title
Improving foundational reading skills growth in middle school: a promising practices study
School
Rossier School of Education
Degree
Doctor of Education
Degree Program
Education (Leadership)
Publication Date
04/28/2019
Defense Date
03/18/2019
Publisher
University of Southern California
(original),
University of Southern California. Libraries
(digital)
Tag
assets,blended learning model,differentiation,fluency,foundational reading skills,gap analysis,Knowledge,lesson planning,Motivation,OAI-PMH Harvest,organization,phonics,promising practice,public charter school network,reading intervention,rotational model,teacher perception
Format
application/pdf
(imt)
Language
English
Contributor
Electronically uploaded by the author
(provenance)
Advisor
Yates, Kenneth (
committee chair
), Hinga, Briana (
committee member
), Hong, Sue Jean (
committee member
)
Creator Email
johno.kwon@gmail.com,kwonjohn@usc.edu
Permanent Link (DOI)
https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c89-151453
Unique identifier
UC11660320
Identifier
etd-KwonJohn-7300.pdf (filename),usctheses-c89-151453 (legacy record id)
Legacy Identifier
etd-KwonJohn-7300.pdf
Dmrecord
151453
Document Type
Dissertation
Format
application/pdf (imt)
Rights
Kwon, John
Type
texts
Source
University of Southern California
(contributing entity),
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
(collection)
Access Conditions
The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the a...
Repository Name
University of Southern California Digital Library
Repository Location
USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA
Tags
assets
blended learning model
differentiation
fluency
foundational reading skills
gap analysis
lesson planning
organization
phonics
promising practice
public charter school network
reading intervention
rotational model
teacher perception