TRANSFORMING STUDENT-ATHLETES INTO LIFE-LONG READERS & THINKERS : Meredith Breitling Reading Specialist Center for Student-Athlete Services Texas A&M University [email protected] “You know what makes a reader better? Confidence. I’m not there yet, but I feel better.” - Freshman Student-Athlete, Fall 2011 HISTORY 2008: Student-Athletes entered Texas A&M at lower reading levels  Within one sport, average reading levels upon entrance to Texas A&M fell from 11.3 in 2007 to 7.62 in 2009.  12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 2007 2008 2009 CENTER FOR STUDENT-ATHLETE SERVICES      3 Learning Specialists 2 Reading Specialists 1 Tutoring Coordinator 40 Learning Assistants 100+ Subject-Specific Tutors Common Reading Mistakes Choosing an answer because they recognize one of the words in the answer choice… not because they understand the question and answer choices.  Word callers vs. readers  Memorizing vs. Learning, Understanding & Applying  METHODS- ASSESSMENT Nelson-Denny Reading TestALL incoming student-athletes (whole group, comprehension and vocabulary scores)  Woodcock-Johnson Diagnostic Reading Battery- further assessment when needed (individualized)  WJ gives feedback for specific reading skills (decoding, vocabulary, comprehension, fluency)  MANDATED TESTS Accuplacer/THEA Must pass reading, writing, and math Accuplacer tests before enrolling in certain core courses  Our reading program works with the student learning center to count as the student’s remedial reading or writing course  METHODS- INSTRUCTION Individualized reading meetings 1-3 hours each week  Structured, routine time  Attendance is mandatory and enforced by coaches  Loose curriculum, firm philosophy  No “one size fits all” lessons!  METHODS- INSTRUCTION Based on student need and interest  Self-selected text: foundation of instruction  Paulson (2006) “Self-selected reading for enjoyment, with all its implementation challenges, is key to the goal of creating life-long readers at the college level.”  As the text is read, the instructor is able to teach - Comprehension strategies - Sight word recognition - Vocabulary - Fluency  METHODS- COMPREHENSION INSTRUCTION Metacognitive reading strategies are explicitly taught through the read-aloud process  Ditzel (2010) found a positive correlation between metacognitive strategy instruction and college students’ “ability to self-regulate while reading”  Self-Selected Texts METHODS- INSTRUCTION  Other interventions are implemented as needed such as: - Fluency passages for repeated readings - Structural analysis instruction - Phonics training METHODS- FLUENCY INSTRUCTION Short passage read for three consecutive meetings  Realistic goal setting  Progress is graphed for each student to track  METHODSSTRUCTURAL ANALYSIS/PHONICS INSTRUCTION We’ve found that talking to them as adults and using direct phonics and structural analysis instruction is the most beneficial method  Joshi, Treiman, Carreker, Moats, 2008 - “Good spelling is critical for literacy” - “Explicit instruction in language structure, and especially sound structure, is essential to learning to spell”  STAGES 2 & 3 Bridge skills to reading for content-area purposes  Methods for reading comprehension that are directly applied to academic reading such as study sheets, textbooks, and tests  Direct practice  Strategies for self-reading  Reading Strategies for College and Beyond Deborah Kellner  •Readers apply knowledge of reading from everyday literacy to academic texts (p24-25 Brozo) oTextbook organization (p297-298 Brozo) oPreviewing before beginning a chapter (p300 Brozo) oUsing adjunct displays (graphs, charts, tables, etc.) in text to further meaning (p3 Fisher) oUse fix-up strategies (p303 Brozo) oSummarize, take notes on textbook reading (p303-313 Brozo, p16&107 Fisher) Exiting the Program Different for each student  Passing Accuplacer  Scaffold to independence  REPORTING & ACCOUNTABILITY End of semester progress reports  Decisions related to class scheduling  Planning for reading interventions the following semester  READING ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM DATA- 2011-2012 READING ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM DATA- 2010-2011 Program Goals Meet students’ needs  Fill the gaps that have been left by previous educational experiences  Empower and uplift  Encourage and strengthen confidence  EDUCATE so they are ABLE!  Final Notes Ever-changing  Constantly adjusting and refining  Different for each student  Questions? Meredith Breitling [email protected] 979-862-6062 SOURCES       Ditzel, S.N. (2010). Metacognitive reading strategies can improve self-regulation. Journal of College Reading and Learning, 40 (2), 45-63. England, C. (2012). [Review of the Woodcock-Johnson III(r) Diagnostic Reading Battery]. In Mental measurements yearbook with tests in print. Available from library.tamu.edu Gordon, H. C. (2012). [Review of the Nelson-Denny Reading Test]. In Mental measurements yearbook with tests in print. Available from library.tamu.edu Joshi, R.M., Treiman, R., Carreker, S., Moats, L.C. (2008). How words cast their spell: Spelling is an integral part of learning the language, not a matter of memorization. American Educator, 32(4), 6-16, 42. Lo, Y., Cooke, N.L., Starling, A.L.P. (2011). Using a repeated reading program to improve generalization of oral reading fluency. Education and Treatment of Children, 34(1), 115-140. Paulson, E.J. (2006). Self-selected reading for enjoyment as a college developmental reading approach. Journal of College Reading and Learning, 36(2), 51-58. RESOURCES    Fisher, Douglas. 50 Content Area Strategies for Adolescent Literacy. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill/Pearson, 2007. Print. Brozo, William G., Michele L. Simpson, and William G. Brozo. Content Literacy for Today's Adolescents: Honoring Diversity and Building Competence. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill Prentice Hall, 2007. Print. Kellner, Deborah J. Reading Strategies for College and Beyond. San Diego: Cognella, 2012. Print.