Eight Reading Intervention Models
Phonics and Spelling Videos
Administrators, special education teachers, ELD and EL coordinators, reading specialists, teachers, and parents need to work together to mesh Response to Intervention (RtI) guidelines with resources, personnel, and schedules to plan and implement effective reading intervention programs that will work for their own schools. Following are eight intervention models with proven track records. After all, why re-invent the wheel? Each of the following models is described and analyzed in pro-con format and includes suggestions for successful adaptations and preparations for your school site.
1. The Early-Late Reading/English-language Arts Model
Description
All students are grouped according to reading (or literacy) levels. The lower-middle group is scheduled to begin school, say 55 minutes before core instruction. The middle-upper group is scheduled to begin after the early group is dismissed. This traditional elementary school model has now been implemented by some middle schools. High schools and community colleges traditionally have larger student populations, which provide greater schedule flexibility with extended morning and afternoon classes at some sites.
Pro
*Reduces class size for both remedial and other readers
*Does provide a specific daily time for reading remediation
Con
*Reduces the instructional time for other content areas
*Arbitrary placement of students into “high” and “low” groups
Suggestions
*Make early-late placement flexible so students can transition from early to late and from late to early.
2. The After-School Remedial Reading Model
Description
Students are flexibly grouped according to reading levels. Teachers and/or instructional assistants provide compensatory instruction beyond the instructional day. Both full-year and half-year intensive programs are typically used in this model.
Pro
*Provides compensatory instruction so that students are able to “catch up” and “keep up” with grade-level instruction
*Is easily scheduled and allows for flexible student groupings and “in and out” transitions
Con
*Budgetary considerations
*Student and parent “buy-in”
Suggestions
*Explore flexible teacher scheduling e.g., split-schedules, part-time hires, shared contracts.
*Use a highly-trained reading teacher with excellent curricular resources.
3. The Pull-Out Remedial Reading Model
Description
Students are pulled from Reading/English-language Arts instructional blocks according to diagnostically assessed reading deficits and receive reading instruction, frequently from special education specialists.
Pro
*Does not disrupt student schedule
*Students can be remediated in ability groups
Con
*Interrupts student and teacher instruction and students miss out on core instruction
*Pull-outs can be perceived as embarrassing for students
Suggestions
*Pull out students at beginning or ending of period or during assigned reading time.
*Use a highly-trained reading teacher with excellent curricular resources.
4. The Reading Elective Model
Description
Students are assigned to a remedial reading class in lieu of their elective.
Pro
*Students can be scheduled throughout the day in roughly defined ability groups
Con
*Replaces the students’ elective choices
Suggestions
*Use a highly-trained reading teacher with excellent curricular resources.
5. The Replacement Model
Description
Students are assigned to a remedial reading class in lieu of their language arts, physical education, science, or social studies core classes, or combination thereof.
Pro
*Students can be scheduled throughout the day in roughly defined ability groups
Con
*Students miss out on grade level instruction
Suggestions
*Use a highly-trained reading teacher with excellent curricular resources.
6. The Reading/Language Arts Block Model
Description
The school schedules an extended period (or days) of reading/language arts with time within the block allocated to Tier I and II differentiated reading instruction.
Pro
*Does provide for a specific time for reading intervention
*Does not disrupt student schedules
Con
*Requires all teachers to be proficient in and committed to remedial reading instruction
*May not provide enough time for remedial reading instruction
Suggestions
*Need school-wide professional development in remedial reading instruction.
7. The Heterogeneously Grouped Differentiated Instruction Model
Description
Students are grouped heterogeneously with the expectation that teachers will teach Tier II or III reading skills through differentiated instruction.
Pro
*Mixed class provides opportunities for flexible grouping and peer tutoring
*Does not disrupt student schedule
Con
*Requires all teachers to be proficient in and committed to remedial reading instruction
*May not provide enough time for remedial reading instruction
Suggestions
*Need school-wide professional development in remedial reading instruction.
8. The ELD and SDAIE Grouped Instruction Model
Description
English-language learners are grouped according to CELDT or other assessments into leveled ELD or SDAIE classes to receive differentiated reading instruction, support content instruction, and maximize language acquisition. Separate newcomers classes are usually the norm.
Pro
*Narrows ability grouping by language development levels
*Differentiates instruction
*Provides extensive support for newcomers
Con
*Limits student scheduling
*Tracking affects student attitude and behavior
*Requires extensive ELD or SDAIE expertise
Suggestions
*Train a cadre of teachers in specific teaching strategies.
*Guarantee “in and out” program mobility for students.
The Science of Reading Intervention Program
The Science of Reading Intervention Program: Word Recognition includes explicit, scripted instruction and practice with the 5 Daily Google Slide Activities every reading intervention student needs: 1. Phonemic Awareness and Morphology 2. Blending, Segmenting, and Spelling 3. Sounds and Spellings (including handwriting) 4. Heart Words Practice 5. Sam and Friends Phonics Books (decodables). Plus, digital and printable sound wall cards and speech articulation songs. Print versions are available for all activities. First Half of the Year Program (55 minutes-per-day, 18 weeks)
The Science of Reading Intervention Program: Language Comprehension resources are designed for students who have completed the word recognition program or have demonstrated basic mastery of the alphabetic code and can read with some degree of fluency. The program features the 5 Weekly Language Comprehension Activities: 1. Background Knowledge Mentor Texts 2. Academic Language, Greek and Latin Morphology, Figures of Speech, Connotations, Multiple Meaning Words 3. Syntax in Reading 4. Reading Comprehension Strategies 5. Literacy Knowledge (Narrative and Expository). Second Half of the Year Program (30 minutes-per-day, 18 weeks)
The Science of Reading Intervention Program: Assessment-based Instruction provides diagnostically-based “second chance” instructional resources. The program includes 13 comprehensive assessments and matching instructional resources to fill in the yet-to-be-mastered gaps in phonemic awareness, alphabetic awareness, phonics, fluency (with YouTube modeled readings), Heart Words and Phonics Games, spelling patterns, grammar, usage, and mechanics, syllabication and morphology, executive function shills. Second Half of the Year Program (25 minutes-per-day, 18 weeks)
The Science of Reading Intervention Program BUNDLE includes all 3 program components for the comprehensive, state-of-the-art (and science) grades 4-adult full-year program. Scripted, easy-to-teach, no prep, no need for time-consuming (albeit valuable) LETRS training or O-G certification… Learn as you teach and get results NOW for your students. Print to speech with plenty of speech to print instructional components.
SCIENCE OF READING INTERVENTION PROGRAM RESOURCES HERE for detailed product description and sample lessons.
Get the SCRIP Comprehension Strategies FREE Resource:
Get the Diagnostic ELA and Reading Assessments FREE Resource: