Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Validation of an instrument for assessing elementary-grade educators’ knowledge to teach reading

  • Published:
Reading and Writing Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In theory, teacher knowledge predicts instructional practice, thus impacting student outcomes. When it comes to knowledge to teach elementary-grade reading, most previous surveys have focused on knowledge essential for word reading development; few surveys have provided a picture of educator knowledge to teach both word reading and language comprehension. This article describes the development and validation of the Teacher Understanding of Literacy Constructs and Evidence-Based Instructional Practices (TULIP) survey, which assesses teacher knowledge in the domains of (a) phonological awareness, (b) phonics, decoding, and encoding, (c) reading fluency, (d) oral language, and (e) reading comprehension. The TULIP survey was created using an iterative development process involving a systematic review of research, expert review of items, field testing, and a pilot study. A validation study of the resulting TULIP survey was conducted with a sample of 313 in-service elementary-grade teachers of reading. Confirmatory factor analyses revealed that both one-factor and five-factor models of the survey had acceptable fit. The overall TULIP scale had good reliability, and subscales representing knowledge within specific literacy domains had acceptable reliability (with the oral language subscale having lower reliability than the other four subscales). Knowledge overall and within each literacy domain was significantly related to education level, such that teachers with more education had higher scores.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Bandalos, D. L. (2018). Measurement theory and applications for the social sciences. Guilford Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baumert, J., Kunter, M., Blum, W., Brunner, M., Voss, T., Jordan, A., Klusmann, U., Krauss, S., & Neubrand, M. (2010). Teachers’ mathematical knowledge, cognitive activation in the classroom, and student progress. American Educational Research Journal, 47(1), 133–180.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Binks-Cantrell, E., Joshi, R. M., & Washburn, E. K. (2012). Validation of an instrument for assessing teacher knowledge of basic language constructs of literacy. Annals of Dyslexia, 62(3), 153–171.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brady, S. (2020). A 2020 perspective on research findings on alphabetics (phoneme awareness and phonics): Implications for instruction. The Reading League Journal, 1(3), 20–28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brady, S., Gillis, M., Smith, T., Lavalette, M., Liss-Bronstein, L., Lowe, E., North, W., Russo, E., & Wilder, T. D. (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, 22(4), 425–455.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carlisle, J. F., Cortina, K. S., & Katz, L. A. (2011). First-grade teachers’ response to three models of professional development in reading. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 27(3), 212–238.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carlisle, J. F., & Fleming, J. (2003). Lexical processing of morphologically complex words in the elementary years. Scientific Studies of Reading, 7(3), 239–253.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Castles, A., Rastle, K., & Nation, K. (2018). Ending the reading wars: Reading acquisition from novice to expert. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 19(1), 5–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cervetti, G. N., Pearson, P. D., Palincsar, A. S., Afflerbach, P., Kendeou, P., Biancarosa, G., Higgs, J., Fitzgerald, M. S., & Berman, A. I. (2020). How the reading for understanding initiative’s research complicates the simple view of reading invoked in the science of reading. Reading Research Quarterly, 55(S1), S161–S172.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, D. K., Raudenbush, S. W., & Ball, D. L. (2003). Resources, instruction, and research. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 25(2), 119–142.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, R. A., Mather, N., Schneider, D. A., & White, J. M. (2017). A comparison of schools: Teacher knowledge of explicit code-based reading instruction. Reading and Writing, 30(4), 653–690.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cunningham, A. E., Perry, K. E., Stanovich, K. E., & Stanovich, P. J. (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 

  • Davis, D. S., Samuelson, C., Grifenhagen, J., DeIaco, R., & Relyea, J. (2022). Getting KnERDI with language: Examining teachers’ knowledge for enhancing reading development in code-based and meaning-based domains. Reading Research Quarterly, 57(3), 781–804.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deutskens, E., De Ruyter, K., Wetzels, M., & Oosterveld, P. (2004). Response rate and response quality of internet-based surveys: An experimental study. Marketing Letters, 15(1), 21–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duguay, A., Kenyon, D., Haynes, E., August, D., & Yanosky, T. (2016). Measuring teachers’ knowledge of vocabulary development and instruction. Reading and Writing, 29(2), 321–347.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fielding-Barnsley, R., & Purdie, N. (2005). Teachers’ attitude to and knowledge of metalinguistics in the process of learning to read. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 33(1), 65–76.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Foorman, B., Beyler, N., Borradaile, K., Coyne, M., Denton, C. A., Dimino, J., Furgeson, J., Hayes, L., Henke, J., Justice, L., Keating, B., Lewis, W., Sattar, S., Streke, A., Wagner, R., & Wissel, S. (2016). Foundational skills to support reading for understanding in kindergarten through 3rd grade (NCEE 2016–4008). National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance (NCEE), Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Foorman, B. R., & Moats, L. C. (2004). Conditions for sustaining research-based practices in early reading instruction. Remedial and Special Education, 25(1), 51–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • National Science Foundation and the Institute of Education Sciences. (2018). Companion guidelines on replication & reproducibility in education research: A Supplement to the Common Guidelines for Education Research and Development. https://www.nsf.Gov/pubs/2019/nsf19022/nsf19022.

  • Goldfeld, S., Snow, P., Eadie, P., Munro, J., Gold, L., Orsini, F., Connel, J., Stark, H., Watts, A., & Shingles, B. (2021). Teacher knowledge of oral language and literacy constructs: Results of a randomized controlled trial evaluating the effectiveness of a professional learning intervention. Scientific Studies of Reading, 25(1), 1–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • González, N., Moll, L. C., & Amanti, C. (Eds.). (2006). Funds of knowledge: Theorizing practices in households, communities, and classrooms. Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gough, P. B., & Tunmer, W. E. (1986). Decoding, reading, and reading disability. Remedial and Special Education, 7(1), 6–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hernandez, D. J. (2011). Double jeopardy: How third-grade reading skills and poverty influence high school graduation. Annie E. Casey Foundation. https://www.aecf.org/resources/double-jeopardy

  • Hoffman, J. V., & Roller, C. M. (2001). The IRA excellence in reading teacher preparation commission’s report: Current practices in reading teacher education at the undergraduate level in the United States. In C. M. Roller (Ed.), Learning to teach reading: Setting the research agenda (pp. 32–79). International Reading Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoover, W. A., & Tunmer, W. E. (2018). The simple view of reading: Three assessments of its adequacy. Remedial and Special Education, 39(5), 304–312.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • International Literacy Association. (2017). Standards for the preparation of literacy professionals. https://www.literacyworldwide.org/get-resources/standards/standards-2017

  • International Dyslexia Association. (2018). Knowledge and practice standards for teachers of reading. https://dyslexiaida.org/knowledge-and-practices/

  • International Literacy Association. (2020). What’s hot in literacy report. Author.

  • Jordan, J. A., McGladdery, G., & Dyer, K. (2014). Dyslexia in higher education: Implications for maths anxiety, statistics anxiety and psychological well-being. Dyslexia, 20(3), 225–240.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jordan, R. L., & Bratsch-Hines, M. (2020). Associations of reading knowledge with kindergarten and first grade teachers’ reported instructional strategies. Literacy Research and Instruction, 59(4), 277–297.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jordan, R. L., Bratsch-Hines, M., & Vernon-Feagans, L. (2018). Kindergarten and first grade teachers’ content and pedagogical content knowledge of reading and associations with teacher characteristics at rural low-wealth schools. Teaching and Teacher Education, 74, 190–204.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCutchen, D., Abbott, R. D., Green, L. B., Beretvas, S. N., Cox, S., Potter, N. S., Quiroga, T., & Gray, A. L. (2002). Beginning literacy: Links among teacher knowledge, teacher practice, and student learning. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 35(1), 69–86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McMahan, K. M., Oslund, E. L., & Odegard, T. N. (2019). Characterizing the knowledge of educators receiving training in systematic literacy instruction. Annals of Dyslexia, 69(1), 21–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moats, L. C. (1994). The missing foundation in teacher education: Knowledge of the structure of spoken and written language. Annals of Dyslexia, 44(1), 81–102.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moats, L. C. (2009). Knowledge foundations for teaching reading and spelling. Reading and Writing, 22(4), 379–399.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peltier, T. K., Washburn, E. K., Heddy, B. C., & Binks-Cantrell, E. (2022). What do teachers know about dyslexia? It’s complicated!. Reading and Writing, (pp. 1–31)

  • Phelps, G., & Bridgeman, B. (2022). From knowing to doing: Assessing the skills used to teach reading and writing. Reading and Writing, 35, 2023–2048.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Phelps, G., & Schilling, S. (2004). Developing measures of content knowledge for teaching reading. The Elementary School Journal, 105(1), 31–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Piasta, S. B., Bridges, M. S., Park, S., Nelson-Strouts, K., & Hikida, M. (2022). Teachers’ content knowledge about oral language: Measure development and evidence of initial validity. Reading and Writing, 35, 2131–2153.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Piasta, S. B., Soto Ramirez, P., Farley, K. S., Justice, L. M., & Park, S. (2020). Exploring the nature of associations between educators’ knowledge and their emergent literacy classroom practices. Reading and Writing, 33(6), 1399–1422.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pittman, R. T., Zhang, S., Binks-Cantrell, E., Hudson, A., & Joshi, R. M. (2020). Teachers’ knowledge about language constructs related to literacy skills and student achievement in low socio-economic status schools. Dyslexia, 26(2), 200–219.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Podhajski, B., Mather, N., Nathan, J., & Sammons, J. (2009). Professional development in scientifically-based reading instruction: Teacher knowledge and reading outcomes. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 42(5), 403–417.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Puliatte, A., & Ehri, L. C. (2018). Do 2nd and 3rd grade teachers’ linguistic knowledge and instructional practices predict spelling gains in weaker spellers? Reading and Writing, 31(2), 239–266.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scarborough, H. S. (2001). Connecting early language and literacy to later reading (dis)abilities: Evidence, theory, and practice. In S. B. Neuman & D. K. Dickinson (Eds.), Handbook of early literacy research (pp. 97–110). Guilford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shanahan, T., Callison, K., Carriere, C., Duke, N. K., Pearson, P. D., Schatschneider, C., & Torgesen, J. (2010). Improving reading comprehension in kindergarten through 3rd grade: IES practice guide. NCEE 2010–4038. What Works Clearinghouse.

  • Shanahan, T. (2014). Building up to frustration level. https://www.literacyworldwide.org/blog/literacy-daily/2014/09/02/building-up-to-frustration-level-text

  • Shulman, L. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57(1), 1–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Solari, E. J., Terry, N. P., Gaab, N., Hogan, T. P., Nelson, N. J., Pentimonti, J. M., Petscher, Y., & Sayko, S. (2020). Translational science: A road map for the science of reading. Reading Research Quarterly, 55(S1), S347–S360.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sparks, R. L., Patton, J., & Murdoch, A. (2014). Early reading success and its relationship to reading achievement and reading volume: Replication of ‘10 years later.’ Reading and Writing, 27(1), 189–211.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spear-Swerling, L., & Brucker, P. O. (2003). Teachers’ acquisition of knowledge about English word structure. Annals of Dyslexia, 53(1), 72–103.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spear-Swerling, L., Brucker, P. O., & Alfano, M. P. (2005). Teachers’ literacy-related knowledge and self-perceptions in relation to preparation and experience. Annals of Dyslexia, 55(2), 266–296.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spear-Swerling, L., & Cheesman, E. (2012). Teachers’ knowledge base for implementing response-to-intervention models in reading. Reading and Writing, 25(7), 1691–1723.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spear-Swerling, L., & Zibulsky, J. (2014). Making time for literacy: Teacher knowledge and time allocation in instructional planning. Reading and Writing, 27(8), 1353–1378.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • U.S. Census Bureau. (2020). National population by characteristics: 2010–2020. The Census Bureau.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vasquez, V. M. (2014). Negotiating critical literacies with young children. Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Washburn, E. K., Joshi, R. M., & Binks-Cantrell, E. S. (2011). Teacher knowledge of basic language concepts and dyslexia. Dyslexia, 17(2), 165–183.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Washburn, E. K., Mulcahy, C. A., Musante, G., & Joshi, R. (2017). Novice teachers’ knowledge of reading-related disabilities and dyslexia. Learning Disabilities: A Contemporary Journal, 15(2), 169–191.

    Google Scholar 

  • White, J., Mather, N., & Kirkpatrick, J. (2020). Preservice educators’ and noneducators’ knowledge and perceptions of responsibility about dyslexia. Dyslexia, 26(2), 220–242.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wijekumar, K., Graham, S., Harris, K. R., Lei, P. W., Barkel, A., Aitken, A., Ray, A., & Houston, J. (2019). The roles of writing knowledge, motivation, strategic behaviors, and skills in predicting elementary students’ persuasive writing from source material. Reading and Writing, 32(6), 1431–1457.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

This work was supported by the Harrison Family Foundation. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the Harrison Family Foundation.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Virginia, 405 Emmet Street S., Charlottesville, VA, 22904, USA

    Colby Hall, Emily J. Solari, Latisha Hayes, Katlynn Dahl-Leonard, Jamie DeCoster, Karen F. Kehoe, Carlin L. Conner, Alisha Demchak, Cassidi L. Richmond & Isabel Vargas

  2. Texas A&M University, College Station, TX, USA

    Alyssa R. Henry

Authors
  1. Colby Hall
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Emily J. Solari
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Latisha Hayes
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Katlynn Dahl-Leonard
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Jamie DeCoster
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Karen F. Kehoe
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Carlin L. Conner
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Alyssa R. Henry
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Alisha Demchak
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Cassidi L. Richmond
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  11. Isabel Vargas
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

We acknowledge the contributions of Rebecca Beegle, Jissel Anaya, Samantha Vann, and Katie Wilburn, who advised on Qualtrics survey design or provided feedback following review of the TULIP survey. We also would like to thank Jim Soland, Assistant Professor of Quantitative Methods at the University of Virginia, for initially reviewing and providing important feedback on our research questions and analytic plan. Finally, we would like to thank Emily Binks-Cantrell, Kate Cain, Young-Suk Kim, and Rollanda O’Connor, the expert reviewers of our initial set of survey items.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Colby Hall.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

Authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Hall, C., Solari, E.J., Hayes, L. et al. Validation of an instrument for assessing elementary-grade educators’ knowledge to teach reading. Read Writ (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-023-10456-w

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-023-10456-w

Keywords

Search

Navigation