Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Mentoring teachers in systematic phonics instruction: effectiveness of an intensive year-long program for kindergarten through 3rd grade teachers and their students

Reading and Writing volume 31, pages 425–456 (2018)Cite this article

Abstract

Teaching systematic phonics effectively to beginning readers requires specialized knowledge and training which many primary grade teachers lack. The current study examined effects of a year-long mentoring program to improve teachers’ knowledge and effectiveness in teaching phonics and the extent that it improved students’ achievement in reading and spelling. Teachers in urban, lower SES schools completed a 45 h course followed by 90 h of in-school training. Mentors (N = 29) worked with kindergarten, 1st, 2nd, and 3rd grade teachers (N = 69) twice a week for 30 weeks during the year. Each visit included a 45 min prep period plus 45 min of modeling and feedback in the classroom. Mentors taught teachers how to provide systematic phonics instruction to their students (N = 1,336). Monthly ratings by mentors revealed that teachers improved their phonics teaching skills with many reaching the highest ratings by May. Teachers who were non-native speakers of English took a bit longer to learn the English sound system for letters, mainly because they lacked sufficient knowledge of English sounds and had to learn them. Given the increasing diversity of the teacher work force, future research is needed to study this difficulty, its solution, and impact on students. Teachers’ agreement with principles of phonics instruction remained strong or increased from fall to spring. Students’ reading and spelling skills showed large gains during the year and far exceeded effect sizes from comparable data sources. Students met grade-level expectations at the end of kindergarten and first grade but fell short in second and third grades. General education students outperformed bilingual/ELL and special needs students although all subgroups made large gains. Findings reveal the effectiveness of an intensive mentoring model of professional development applied to a subject that is difficult to teach and to a student population known for lower reading achievement. Findings point to the need for better pre-service teacher preparation coupled with appropriate curricula and PD from districts in order to improve students’ reading achievement.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant access to the full article PDF.

USD 39.95

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Fig. 1

References

  • Adams, M. J. (1990). Beginning to read: Thinking and learning about print. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, R. C., Hiebert, E. H., Scott, J. A., & Wilkinson, I. A. G. (1985). Becoming a nation of readers: The report of the Commission on reading. Washington, D.C.: National Institute of Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Babayigit, S. (2015). The relations between word reading, oral language, and reading comprehension in children who speak English as a first (L1) and second language (L2): A multigroup structural analysis. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 28, 527–544.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Binks-Cantrell, E., Washburn, E., Joshi, R. M., & Hougen, M. (2012). Peter effect in the preparation of reading teachers. Scientific Studies of Reading, 16(6), 526–536.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bos, C., Mather, N., Dickson, S., Podhajski, B., & Chard, D. (2001). Perceptions and knowledge of preservice and inservice educators about early reading instruction. Annals of Dyslexia, 51, 97–120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brady, S. (2011). Efficacy of phonics teaching for reading outcomes: Indications from post-NRP research. In S. Brady, D. Braze, & C. Fowler (Eds.), Explaining individual differences in reading: Theory and evidence (pp. 69–96). New York, NY: Psychology Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brady, S., Gillis, M., Smith, T., Lavalette, M., Liss-Bronstein, L., Lowe, E., et al. (2009). First grade teachers’ knowledge of phonological awareness and code concepts: Examining gains from an intensive form of professional development and corresponding teacher attitudes. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 22, 425–455.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brady, S., & Moats, L. (1997). Informed instruction for reading success: Foundations for teacher preparation. A position paper of the International Dyslexia Association. Baltimore, MD: International Dyslexia Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carlisle, J., & Berebitsky, D. (2011). Literacy mentoring as a component of professional development. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 24, 773–800.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carlisle, J., Correnti, R., Phelps, G., & Zeng, J. (2009). Exploration of the contribution of teachers’ knowledge about reading to their students’ improvement in reading. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 22, 457–486.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carlisle, J. F., Kelcey, B., Rowan, B., & Phelps, J. (2011). Teachers’ knowledge about early reading: Effect on students’ gains in achievement. Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, 4(4), 289–321.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carreker, S., Joshi, M., & Boulware-Gooden, R. (2010). Spelling-related teacher knowledge: The impact of professional development on identifying appropriate instructional activities. Learning Disability Quarterly, 33, 148–158.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chall, J. S. (1983). Stages of reading development. New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chatterji, M. (2006). Reading achievement gaps, correlates, and moderators of early reading achievement: Evidence from the early childhood longitudinal study (ECLS) kindergarten to first grade sample. Journal of Educational Psychology, 98, 489–507.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavior sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Connor, C. (2011). Child characteristics—Instruction interactions: Implications for students’ literacy skills development in the early grades. In S. Neuman & D. Dickinson (Eds.), Handbook of early literacy research (Volume 3) (pp. 256–275). New York, NY: Guilford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cunningham, A., Perry, K., Stanovich, K., & Stanovich, P. (2004). Disciplinary knowledge of K-3 teachers and their knowledge calibration in the domain of early literacy. Annals of Dyslexia, 54(1), 139–167.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Darling-Hammond, L., Wei, R. C., Andree, A., Richardson, N., & Orphanos, S. (2009). Professional learning in the learning profession: A status report on teacher development in the United States and abroad. Palo Alto, CA: School Redesign Network at Stanford University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Desimone, L. (2009). Improving impact studies of teachers’ professional development: Toward better conceptualizations and measures. Educational Researcher, 38(3), 181–199.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ehri, L. C. (2005). Development of sight word reading: Phases and findings. In M. Snowling & C. Hulme (Eds.), The science of reading: A handbook (pp. 135–154). Oxford: Blackwell.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Ehri, L. C. (2014). Orthographic mapping in the acquisition of sight word reading, spelling memory, and vocabulary learning. Scientific Studies of Reading, 18(1), 5–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ehri, L. C., Nunes, S., Stahl, S., & Willows, D. (2001). Systematic phonics instruction helps students learn to read: Evidence from the National Reading Panel’s meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 71, 393–447.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elish-Piper, L., & L’Allier, S. (2011). Examining the relationship between literacy mentoring and student reading gains in Grades K-3. The Elementary School Journal, 112(1), 83–106.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garet, M., Cronen, S., Eaton, M., Kurki, A., Ludwig, M., Jones, W., et al. (2008). The impact of two professional development interventions on early reading instruction and achievement. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Educational Evaluation and Regional Assistance.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gillingham, A., & Stillman, B. W. (1997). The Gillingham manual: Remedial training for children with specific disability in reading, spelling, and penmanship (8th ed.). Cambridge, MA: Educators Publishing Service.

    Google Scholar 

  • Joshi, R. M., Dahlgren, M., & Boulware-Gooden, R. (2002). Teaching reading in an inner city school through a multisensory teaching approach. Annals of Dyslexia, 52, 229–242.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Juel, C., & Minden-Culp, C. (2000). Learning to read words: Linguistic units and instructional strategies. Reading Research Quarterly, 35(4), 458–492.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Litcher, J. H., & Roberge, L. P. (1979). First grade intervention for reading achievement of high risk children. Bulletin of the Orton Society, 24, 238–244.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MacGinitie, W., MacGinitie, R., Maria, K., & Dreyer, L. (2000). Gates-MacGinitie reading tests (4th ed.). Itastca, IL: Riverside Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maria, K., & Hughes, K. (2008). Gates-MacGinitie reading tests: Technical report supplement. Rolling Meadows, IL: Riverside.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mather, N., Bos, C., & Babur, N. (2001). Perceptions and knowledge of preservice and inservice teachers about early literacy instruction. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 34, 472–482.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCutchen, D., Abbott, R. D., Green, L. B., Beretvas, S. N., Cox, S., Potter, N. S., et al. (2002a). Beginning literacy: Links among teacher knowledge, teacher practice, and student learning. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 35(1), 69–96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCutchen, D., Green, L., Abbott, R., & Sanders, E. (2009). Further evidence for teacher knowledge: Supporting struggling readers in grades three through five. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 22, 401–423.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCutchen, D., Harry, D., Cunningham, A., Cox, S., Sidman, S., & Covill, A. (2002b). Reading teachers’ knowledge of children’s literature and English phonology. Annals of Dyslexia, 52, 207–228.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moats, L. (1994). The missing foundation in teacher education: Knowledge of the structure of spoken and written language. Annals of Dyslexia, 44, 81–102.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moats, L. (2003). Language essentials for teachers of reading and spelling (LETRS). Longmont, CO: Sopris West.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moats, L. (2009). Knowledge foundations for teaching reading and spelling. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 22, 379–399.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moats, L. (2014). What teachers don’t know and why they aren’t learning it: Addressing the need for content and pedagogy in teacher education. Australian Journal of Learning Difficulties. doi:10.1080/19404158.2014.941093.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morrison, J. (1951). Morrison-McCall spelling scale. New York, NY: Harcourt, Brace & World.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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: Report of the subgroups. National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, and the National Instititue for Literacy.

  • Orton, S. T. (1937). Reading, writing and speech problems in children. New York, NY: Norton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Piasta, S., Connor, D., Fishman, B., & Morrison, F. (2009). Teachers’ knowledge of literacy concepts, classroom practices, and student reading growth. Scientific Studies of Reading, 13(3), 224–248.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rack, J., Hulme, C., Snowling, M., & Wightman, J. (1994). The role of phonology in young children’s learning of sight words: The direct-mapping hypothesis. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 57, 42–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rayner, K., Foorman, B., Perfetti, C., Pesetsky, D., & Seidenberg, M. (2001). How psychological science informs the teaching of reading. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 2, 31–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ritchey, K. D., & Goeke, J. L. (2006). Orton–Gillingham and Orton–Gillingham-based reading instruction: A review of the literature. The Journal of Special Education, 40(3), 171–183.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rose, S., & Nelson, G. (2012). Sunday is for the sun, Monday is for the moon: Teaching reading, one teacher and thirty children at a time. New York, NY: Reading Reform Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Share, D. L. (2008). Orthographic learning, phonology and the self-teaching hypothesis. In R. Kail (Ed.), Advances in child development and behavior (pp. 31–82). Amsterdam: Elsevier.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shaywitz, S. (2003). Overcoming dyslexia: A new and complete science-based program for reading problems at any level. New York, NY: Knopf.

    Google Scholar 

  • Silverman, R. D., Proctor, C., Harring, J., Hartranft, A., Doyle, B., & Zelinke, S. (2015). Language skills and reading comprehension in English monolingual and Spanish-English bilingual children in grades 2–5. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 28, 1381–1405.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Skibbe, L., Grimm, K., Bowles, R., & Morrison, F. (2012). Literacy growth in the academic year versus summer from preschool through second grade: Differential effects of schooling across four skills. Scientific Studies of Reading, 16(2), 141–165.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Slavin, R., Lake, C., Chambers, B., Cheung, A., & Davis, S. (2009). Effective reading programs for the elementary grades: A best-evidence synthesis. Review of Educational Research, 79, 1391–1466.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Snow, C., Burns, M., & Griffin, P. (Eds.). (1998). Preventing reading difficulties in young children. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spalding, R. B. (2003). The writing road to reading. New York, NY: Harper Collins.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spear-Swerling, L., & Brucker, P. (2004). Preparing novice teachers to develop basic reading and spelling skills in children. Annals of Dyslexia, 54(2), 332–364.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stanovich, K. (2000). Progress in understanding reading: Scientific foundations and new frontiers. New York, NY: Guilford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stephens, D., Morgan, D., DeFord, D., Donnelly, A., Hamel, E., Keith, K., et al. (2011). The impact of literacy coaches on teachers’ beliefs and practices. Journal of Literacy Research, 43(3), 215–249.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stoner, R. (1991). Teaching at-risk students to read using specialized techniques in the regular classroom. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 3, 19–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tunmer, W. E., & Nicholson, T. (2011). The development and teaching of word recognition skill. In M. L. Kamil, P. D. Pearson, E. B. Moje, & P. P. Afflerbach (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (Volume IV) (pp. 405–431). New York, NY: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Washburn, E., Joshi, R. M., & Binks-Cantrell, E. (2011). Teacher knowledge of basic language concepts and dyslexia. Dyslexia. doi:10.1002/dys.426.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This study was supported by a grant from the Reading Reform Foundation (RRF) to the Center for Advanced Study in Education (CASE) at the CUNY Graduate Center. The research was conducted independently of RRF. Contents of the report do not necessarily reflect the views of RRF. Neither author has ever been employed by or affiliated with RRF. There was no conflict of interest. The researchers were not in direct contact with mentors, teachers, or students. All data were collected by RRF as part of the program provided to schools and then were de-identified before being delivered to the researchers. Gratitude is expressed to the RRF staff for valuing research, and to the CUNY graduate student, Turkan Ocal, who assisted with data entry.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Program in Educational Psychology, Graduate Center of the City University of New York, 365 Fifth Avenue, New York, NY, 10016, USA

    Linnea C. Ehri

  2. Center for Advanced Study in Education, Graduate Center of the City University of New York, New York, NY, USA

    Bert Flugman

Authors
  1. Linnea C. Ehri
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Bert Flugman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Linnea C. Ehri.

Appendix

Appendix

See Table 6.

Table 6 Items assessing teachers’ views about reading and spelling (TVRS), scoring rubric reflecting consistency with RRF program teachings, and mean year-end ratings of teachers
Full size table

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ehri, L.C., Flugman, B. Mentoring teachers in systematic phonics instruction: effectiveness of an intensive year-long program for kindergarten through 3rd grade teachers and their students. Read Writ 31, 425–456 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-017-9792-7

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-017-9792-7

Keywords

search

Navigation