Marie Clay's Search for Effective Literacy Instruction: a Contribution to Reading Recovery and Small-Group Teaching

University of Northern Iowa UNI ScholarWorks

Curriculum & Instruction Faculty Publications Faculty Work

Spring 2015

Salli Forbes University of Northern Iowa

Linda J. Dorn University of Arkansas at Little Rock

Let us know how access to this document benefits ouy

Part of the Curriculum and Instruction Commons

Recommended Citation Forbes, Salli and Dorn, Linda J., "Marie Clay's Search for Effective Literacy Instruction: a Contribution to Reading Recovery and Small-Group Teaching" (2015). Curriculum & Instruction Faculty Publications. 27. https://scholarworks.uni.edu/ci_facpub/27

This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Faculty Work at UNI ScholarWorks. It has been accepted for inclusion in Curriculum & Instruction Faculty Publications by an authorized administrator of UNI ScholarWorks. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Celebrating 30 Years

Marie Clay’s Search for Effective Literacy Instruction: A Contribution to Reading Recovery and Small-Group Teaching

Salli Forbes, University of Northern Iowa Linda J. Dorn, University of Arkansas at Little Rock

This year Reading Recovery® zer, 1994; Schwartz, 2005). Reading treatments, but small-group celebrates 30 years in the U.S., Recovery teachers provide powerful instruction taught by trained where more than 50,000 Read- one-to-one instruction for the lowest- Reading Recovery teachers was the ing Recovery-trained teachers have performing students at the optimum second most effective. The expertise served over 2.2 million children in time in their literacy development of the teachers, developed through Reading Recovery lessons during and schooling (Schwartz). While Reading Recovery training, also con- this time period. In addition, these the most-effective literacy interven- tributed to the effectiveness of the Reading Recovery teachers have tion by far is Reading Recovery, the teachers’ instruction of students in instructed approximately 8.8 mil- influence of Marie Clay’s discoveries small groups. lion other children in small group or goes beyond the one-to-one Reading classroom settings during the same Recovery intervention. The theories Strategic Activity Versus 3 decades. Reading Recovery has a and processes upon which Read- solid research base that is recognized ing Recovery is based have wider Items of Knowledge In order to recognize the influence of by the USDE What Works Clearing- implications for reading instruction Clay’s contribution to the instruction house (WWC) as the strongest of all in general, including instruction in of struggling readers, it is important beginning reading programs reviewed small-group settings. to revisit what is known about the (WWC, 2008, 2013). The benefit The reality is that most Reading instructional practices for struggling and effectiveness of Reading Recov- Recovery-trained teachers provide readers prior to implementing ery are widely recognized—as dem- instruction to children in other set- Reading Recovery in the U.S. onstrated in reviews by the WWC, tings the other part of their teaching the National Center for Response to Richard Allington’s (2011) examina- day, including small-group reading Intervention, and the National Cen- tion of reading interventions over intervention, special education, ESL, ter for Intensive Intervention—as well time provides educators with a histor- and classroom. They deliver instruc- as by other researchers in the field of ical glance at the influence of policy tion to struggling readers across literacy (Allington, 2005; Johnston, and research on instructional pro- multiple grade levels and they share 2005a, 2005b). grams for struggling readers. In his specific principles, procedures, and study of remedial programs, Alling- Several research studies reveal the assessments with classroom teach- ton (2006) identified common beliefs effectiveness of the instruction ers. The Reading Recovery teachers’ and practices associated with teaching Reading Recovery teachers provide, expertise, developed through Reading low-performing students. From his in which the teacher must “design a Recovery training and their experi- early observations, he concluded that superbly sequenced series of lessons ence in teaching many children with remedial practices consisted primarily determined by the child’s competen- unique paths to literacy, informs the of students’ completing skill lessons cies, and make highly skilled deci- teaching they do in other settings and in workbook or worksheet activities sions moment by moment during the their interactions with other teachers. with the teacher serving as a manager. lesson” (Clay, 2005a, p. 23. See also In a research study by Pinnell et al. In this role, the remedial reading Pinnell, DeFord, & Lyons, 1988; (1994), Reading Recovery was the teacher offered little or no construc- Pinnell, Deford, Lyons, Bryk, & Selt- most effective of the four intervention

28 Journal of Reading Recovery Spring 2015 Celebrating 30 Years

tive feedback to promote students’ students with the opportunity to encourages the reader to engage in self-correcting behaviors. And to read continuous text, which they strategic activity. Instructional deci- make matters worse, struggling read- could read at 90% accuracy or bet- sions, based on the observation of a ers were asked to read texts that were ter, and valuing their self-correcting student’s reading, allow the teacher to too difficult, thus denying them the efforts. These recommendations have scaffold the student’s development of opportunity to develop reading pro- influenced instructional and assess- independent self-regulation of strate- ficiency through successful practice. ment practices in both small groups gic activity and development of inner Based on this simple theory, remedial and classrooms, as well as in Read- control of the reading process. instruction focused on curing deficits ing Recovery. Teachers use running There are several key instructional within the student, in contrast to records, which Clay developed as a concepts, which Clay included in the building on the student’s strengths. research data collection tool for her development of Reading Recovery, The notion of observing students’ dissertation study, to not only iden- that support the reader’s develop- reading behaviors to inform teaching ment of effective strategic process- decisions was simply not a part of the ing. Those concepts include creating instructional landscape. Prior to the imple- ample opportunity for the student to Beginning with her dissertation mentation of Reading read and write continuous text; facili- study, completed in 1966, Marie Recovery, the notion tating the reciprocal learning from Clay’s research focused on the reading and writing; providing book observation of children’s reading of of observing students’ introductions to orient the reader to continuous text. In that study she reading behaviors to the text in order to provide the opti- collected data from 100 students in inform teaching deci- mal opportunity for a successful first their first year of formal schooling. sions was simply not a reading; teaching with precision and These observational data revealed an economy of language; and orga- the reading behaviors and patterns of part of the instructional nizing for the development of fast high-, high-middle-, low-middle-, and landscape in the U.S. recognition or production of letters, low-performing students (Clay, 1966, letter clusters, and words that the 1991). By observing and recording reader knows. All of these concepts, students’ reading of little books (con- which are features of Reading Recov- tify students’ accuracy percentage and tinuous text), she was able to capture ery instruction, are also important instructional text levels, but also their patterns in the reading behaviors of components of effective small-group self-correcting ratios. The objective is both proficient and low-performing instruction. for students to have a self-correction students. The patterns of the readers ratio between 1:2 and 1:5, the range Only through reading continuous in the high group revealed that they that Clay found that the good read- text does the reader have the oppor- read long stretches of text correctly, ers in her dissertation study exhibited tunity to develop early behaviors making only one error in 37 or more (Clay, 1966, 1991). (one-to-one matching, directionality, words. “Error was embedded in long and locating known words) and to stretches of correct reading,” (Clay, Clay introduced the concept of develop strategic activities (self-moni- 1991, p. 297). The high-performing observing closely reading behaviors to toring, searching, cross-checking, and readers also self-corrected errors far determine what sources of informa- integrating sources of information). more frequently than the lower-per- tion a child may be using or neglect- While reading continuous text, the forming readers. ing to self-monitor, problem solve at reader practices problem-solving and point of difficulty, and self-correct As a result of this study and other decision-making processes using dif- while reading continuous text. This research she conducted, Clay empha- ferent kinds of information. Through systematic observation provides the sized the importance of providing this frequent practice, the reader teacher with the opportunity to all students with the same experi- acquires automaticity in assembling prompt the reader to use neglected ences that the better readers had strategic working systems, which sources of information, which also been given. This included providing leads to more-efficient and flexible

Spring 2015 Journal of Reading Recovery 29 Celebrating 30 Years

processing (Clay, 2001). Effective group instruction embraces ample opportunities for students to read continuous text, including rereading familiar books to develop orchestra- tion of these working systems and applying decision-making strategies for solving problems in new texts. The reader then becomes self-regulat- ing and the learning is self-extending. Reading Recovery teachers develop their understanding and practice to support each student’s active engagement with reading work and development of independence on what the student knows and knows how to do. Reading Recovery teachers continu- The influence of Marie Clay’s discoveries goes beyond the one-to-one Reading ously work on observing teaching Recovery intervention. The theories and processes upon which Reading Recovery is and learning to refine their scaffold- based have wider implications for reading instruction in general, including ing of each student’s development of instruction in small-group settings like this one in Texas. independence. Teachers of reading intervention groups can also teach for students’ active learning and develop- focus on developing independence is was the focus of the teacher’s instruc- ment of independence and mastery extremely important for all intervention before, during, and after the of what they learn. Interventions, tion instruction. Developing indepen- first reading. While this description such as those in the Comprehensive dence with new learning requires the of instruction is familiar to Reading Intervention Model (Dorn, Soffos, & teacher to both support each student’s Recovery teachers, it is also applicable Doore, 2015), teach within a cogni- reading and writing work and to con- to effective small-group instruction. tive apprenticeship approach that tinuously teach in such a way so that Reading volume is essential to read- includes explicit teaching and model- there is a release of responsibility for ing success. Struggling readers need ing, guided practice, scaffolding, and the learning to the student. to read a lot because it is during the independent practice. Providing introductions to new books actual reading that they can practice In Reading Recovery and effective orients children so that their first flexible strategies and skills for con- small-group instruction, teachers reading is successful and they can structing meaning from the text. The provide scaffolded instruction which extend their problem-solving com- theory of volume reading is evident in both calls on students to use what petencies. The teaching on that new the Reading Recovery lesson, where they know independently and to book is purposeful, with the intention Reading Recovery children read 4–5 develop independence with new of determining the level of contin- books daily with the potential to read learning. Teachers provide opportuni- gent support that each child needs over 400 books during a 20-week ties for students to engage in indepen- to both produce a successful reading series of lessons. In the process, read- dent work throughout the series of and learn strategic activities and skills ing proficiency develops through lessons. “In Reading Recovery inde- that can later be transferred to other strategic activity on texts that increase pendent work in reading and writing reading. Taking a running record of in complexity and difficulty over is passed to the child in the first week the second reading of the new book time. Clay’s theory of text reading of the programme for any part of the provides the teacher information has influenced small-group interven- child’s tasks that he or she already about whether the student assumed tions in significant ways, including controls,” (Clay, 2001, p. 220). The responsibility for the learning that the need for students to read whole

30 Journal of Reading Recovery Spring 2015 Celebrating 30 Years

books with teacher scaffolding and to the goal of any literacy instruction have served in reading positions as practice fluency and independence on for students who are not proficient interventionists, classroom teachers, easy texts. in reading and writing. To achieve literacy coaches, and special educa- accelerated learning, teachers must tors. These individuals have assumed Effective literacy instruction includes reflect daily on their teaching deci- leadership roles in supporting effec- a writing component to optimize the sions and students’ responses to their tive literacy instruction in the class- advantages of the reciprocal learning teaching moves. Teachers must reflect room and designing small-group between reading and writing. Sev- on the level of independence students interventions for struggling readers. eral models of group instruction demonstrate in all of the items and Their influence within schools can do include writing. Some of those processes they are learning, with a be observed in instructional decisions models recognize the changing recip- focus on looking for change over such as matching books to readers, rocal benefits of writing to reading time in students’ control of what they using observational data to inform development as students advance in know and processing they can do. instruction, prompting for strategic literacy achievement. In early inter- Simply put, teachers must teach for activity, teaching for independence, ventions, such as those which include independence and transfer, which and building on the strengths of a version of interactive writing, the means avoiding a strict sequence, the learner. writing facilitates the emergent and while acknowledging the scope of beginning reader’s learning of early Teaching and learning are recipro- what students need to learn. They behaviors of one-to-one word-print cal processes, and any meaningful must continuously bear in mind the matching, directional movement, left- change within a school begins with capabilities of proficient readers and to-right visual scanning, and sound a significant change within the writers at that grade and age level, as analysis to problem solve unknown teacher. The teacher’s beliefs about a goal for the learning of the students words. As the reader progresses or for low-performing students will affect they teach in interventions. those students who receive interven- the methods she uses to assess and tion beyond the early levels, writing instruct her students. Ask most any provides opportunities for learning Closing Thoughts Reading Recovery teacher, whether and using various language struc- From the beginning, Clay incorpo- former or current, about how tures, particularly those that are liter- rated the observation of teaching and Reading Recovery has influenced her ary or genre specific. Writing also collaborative learning in the design of instructional practice and you will gives the learners opportunities for teacher training in Reading Recovery. frequently hear, “I will never view using and developing knowledge of The coconstructed understanding, teaching in the same way.” We believe new vocabulary, expanding and clari- checked against actual observation of that to focus only on Reading fying distinctive features of various teaching and learning, develops the Recovery as a one-to-one interven- genres, and deepening their under- expertise of teachers’ understanding tion for low-performing first-grade standing of the topics or concepts and instructional decision making. children is to overlook the systemic from their reading. This same approach to teacher train- nature of its professional development ing has been included in effective design and the wider implications All of these contributions from small-group training models. It is of teacher knowledge on reading Marie Clay have shifted instructional essential for teachers to engage in instruction. practices of many teachers from a collaborative learning communi- remedial model for low-achieving ties in which they observe teaching readers—as described by Alling- References and learning, while developing and ton (2011) in which progress was Allington, R. L. (2005). How much evi- expanding their understandings and slow—to the intervention model dence is enough evidence? The Journal expertise through articulating what which focuses on accelerated learn- of Reading Recovery, 4(2), 8–11. they observe. ing and closing the gap between not Allington, R. L. (2006). What really mat- proficient and proficient readers and Over the past 3 decades, thousands ters for struggling readers: Designing writers. Accelerated learning must be of Reading Recovery-trained teachers research-based programs (2nd ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

Spring 2015 Journal of Reading Recovery 31 Celebrating 30 Years

Allington, R. L. (2011). Research on reading/learning disability interventions. About the Authors In S. J. Samuels & A. Farstrup (Eds.), What research has to say about reading instruction (4th ed.) (pp. 261–290). Newark, DE: International Reading Association. Ballantyne, A. (2014). Five foundational ideas: Still at the cutting edge. The Journal of Reading Recovery, 14(1), 5–18. Dr. Salli Forbes is the director of Linda Dorn is a professor of read- Clay, M. M. (1966). Emergent reading the Richard O. Jacobson Center for ing education at the University of behaviour. Unpublished doctoral dis- Comprehensive Literacy at The Uni- Arkansas at Little Rock, where she sertation. Auckland, New Zealand: versity of Northern Iowa, where she is the director of the Center for University of Auckland Library. oversees both the Reading Recovery Literacy. She is a Reading Recovery Program of Iowa and Partnerships in trainer and is former president of the Clay, M. M. (1991). Becoming liter- Comprehensive Literacy Model pro- Reading Recovery Council of North ate: The construction of inner control. gram for Iowa. Dr. Forbes’ interests America. Dr. Dorn is recognized Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. include teaching for and assessing nationally for her contributions to Clay, M. M. (2001). Change over time fluency, student engagement and literacy education and has presented in children’s literacy development. motivation, responsive teaching, at over 300 conferences at inter- Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. and educational change. She is co- national, national, and state levels. Clay, M. M. (2005). Literacy lessons editor of the books Changing Minds, She has published widely with eight designed for individuals part one: Why? Changing Schools, Changing Systems: books on literacy instruction, book when? and how? Portsmouth, NH: Comprehensive Literacy Design for chapters, articles, and media Heinemann. School Improvement (Hameray, 2015) publications. Among her most-recent Dorn, L., Soffos, C., & Doore, B. (2015). and Research in Reading Recovery books is Changing Minds, Changing A comprehensive intervention model: Volume Two (Heinemann, 2004), Schools, Changing Systems: Compre- A diagnostic, decision-making process and the author of several articles on hensive Literacy Design for School for closing the literacy gap. In L. J. topics related to early literacy. She is Improvement ( Hameray, 2015), Dorn, S. Forbes, M. Poparad, & B. currently vice president of the co-edited with Forbes, Poparad, Schubert (Eds.). Changing minds, North American Trainers Group. and Schubert. changing schools, changing systems: Comprehensive literacy design for school improvement (pp. 27–38). Los Angeles: Hameray Publishing Group. Pinnell, G. S., DeFord, D. E., & Lyons, Schwartz, R. M. (2005). Literacy learn- Johnston, P. (2005a). Revolutionary C. A. (1988). Reading Recovery: Early ing of at-risk first-grade students in contributions. The Journal of Reading intervention for at-risk first graders. the Reading Recovery early interven- Recovery, 4(2), 3–4. Arlington, VA: Educational Research tion. Journal of Educational Psychology, Johnston, P. (2005b). [Review of the book Service. 97(2), 257–267. Changing Futures: The Influence of Pinnell, G. S., Lyons, C. A., DeFord, D. What Works Clearinghouse (2008, Reading Recovery in the United States.] E., Bryk, A. S., & Seltzer, M. (1994). 2013). Beginning reading intervention The Journal of Reading Recovery, 5(1), Comparing instructional models for report: Reading Recovery. Washington, 58–59. the literacy education of high-risk first DC: U.S. Department of Education, graders. Reading Research Quarterly, Institute of Education Sciences. 29(1), 8–39.

32 Journal of Reading Recovery Spring 2015