Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Classroom teachers and reading specialists in two Midwestern elementary schools were interviewed to elicit evaluations of their Chapter 1 reading programs. Ethnographic interviews were conducted with three reading specialists and 27 classroom teachers who had children involved in the Chapter 1 programs in the two schools. Constant comparative data analysis was conducted with the transcribed interview data, and prominent themes emerged concerning the coherence and coordination that existed between specialists and classroom teachers. The results showed that specialists constructed their roles differently with each classroom teacher with whom they worked. Secondly, there was a lack of joint planning that occurred between the two groups of teachers. Third, specialists and classroom teachers had varied definitions of Chapter 1 program impact which reflected different goals of the two reading programs. Finally, different philosophies regarding the reading process were held by the two kinds of teachers in these schools. These findings suggest that all teachers who are responsible for the instruction of at-risk students must be given time and encouragement to communicate and coordinate their programs to meet the needs of the children in their schools.

References

Allington

R. L.

(1986). Policy constraints and effective compensatory reading instruction: A review. In Hoffman

(Ed.), Effective teaching of reading: Research and practice (pp. 261–289). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.

Allington

R. L.

(1991a). Children who find learning to read difficult: School responses to diversity. In Hiebert

E. H.

(Ed.), Literacy for a diverse society (pp. 237–252). New York: Teachers College Press.

Allington

R. L.

(1991b). How policy and regulation influence instruction for at-risk learners or why poor readers rarely comprehend well and probably never will. In Idol

Jones

B. F.

(Eds.), Educational values and cognitive instruction implications for reform (pp. 273–296). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Allington

R. L.

Broikou

K. A.

(1988). Development of shared knowledge: A new role for classroom and specialist teachers. Reading Teacher, 41, 806–811.

Allington

R. L.

Johnston

P. J.

(1986). The coordination among regular classroom reading programs and targeted support programs. In Williams

Richmond

Mason

(Eds.), Designs for compensatory education: Conference proceedings and papers (Pt. 6, pp. 6–40). Washington, DC: Research and Evaluation Associates.

Allington

R. L.

McGill-Franzen

(1989). Different programs, indifferent instruction. In Gardner

Lipsky

(Eds.), Beyond separate education (pp. 75–98). New York: Brookes.

Allington

R. L.

Shake

(1986). Remedial reading: Achieving curricular congruence in classroom and clinic. Reading Teacher, 39, 648–654.

Allington

R. L.

Stuetzel

Shake

M. C.

Lamarche

(1986). What is remedial reading? A descriptive study. Reading Research and Instruction, 26, 15–30.

Biklen

(1985). Achieving the complete school: Strategies for effective mainstreaming. New York: Teachers College Press.

10.

Bogdan

R. C.

Biklen

S. K.

(1982). Qualitative research for education. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.

11.

Cohen

E. G.

Intilli

J. K.

Robbins

S. H.

(1978). Teacher and reading specialists: Cooperation or isolation? Reading Teacher, 32, 281–287.

12.

Denzin

N. K.

(1978). Sociological methods. New York: McGraw-Hill.

13.

Fraatz

J. M. B.

(1987). The politics of reading. New York: Teachers College Press.

14.

Glaser

Strauss

(1967). The discovery of grounded theory. Chicago: Aldine.

15.

Good

(1983). Research on classroom teaching. In Shulman

L. S.

Sykes

(Eds.), Handbook of teaching and policy (pp. 42–80). White Plains, NY: Longman.

16.

Johnston

Allington

R. L.

Afflerbach

(1985). The congruence of classroom and remedial reading instruction. Elementary School Journal, 85, 465–478.

17.

Kimbrough

Hill

P. T.

(1981). The aggregate effects of federal education programs. Santa Monica, CA: Rand.

18.

LeTendre

M. J.

(1991). Improving Chapter 1 programs: We can do better. Phi Delta Kappan, 72, 577–580.

19.

McGill-Franzen

Allington

R. L.

(1990). Comprehension and coherence: Neglected elements of literacy instruction in remedial and resource room services. Journal of Reading, Writing, and Learning Disabilities, 6, 149–180.

20.

Moore

Hyde

Blair

Weitzman

(1981). Student classification and the right to read. Chicago: Designs for Change.

21.

Passow

A. H.

(1989). Curriculum and instruction in Chapter 1 programs: A look back and a look ahead. Office of Educational Research and Improvement, Washington, D.C. Columbia University. New York, Teachers College. (ERIC clearinghouse on Urban Education, OERI RI88062013).

22.

Patton

M. Q.

(1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

23.

Rowan

Guthrie

(1986). The design and implementation of Chapter 1 instructional services: A study of 24 schools. Final report to the Office of Educational Research and Improvement of Education, Department of Education (Proj. No. 400-85-1015). Far West Laboratory of Educational Research and Development.

24.

Slavin

R. E.

(1991). Chapter 1: A vision for the next quarter century. Phi Delta Kappan, 72, 586–592.

25.

Spradley

J. P.

(1979). The ethnographic interview. Chicago: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.

26.

Stringfield

Billig

S. B.

Davis

(1991). Implementing a research-based model of Chapter 1 program improvement. Phi Delta Kappan, 72, 600–606.

27.

Stringfield

Yoder

(1992). Toward a model of elementary grades Chapter 1 effectiveness. In Waxman

H. C.

deFelix

J. W.

Anderson

J. E.

Baptiste

H. P.

(Eds.), Students at risk in at-risk schools (pp. 203–222). Newbury Park, CA: Corwin.

28.

Wasik

B. A.

Slavin

R. E.

(1993). Preventing early reading failure with one-to-one tutoring: A review of five programs. Reading Research Quarterly, 28, 179–200.

Classroom Teachers and Reading Specialists Examine their Chapter 1 Reading Programs

Abstract

References