Running head: READERS THEATER MOTIVATION AND FLUENCY

Readers Theater and Kindergarten Reading Fluency and Motivation Jennifer Zagiba East Carolina University

READERS THEATER MOTIVATION AND FLUENCY Abstract The purpose of this one-group-pretest-posttest study was to determine the change scores that the intervention of Readers Theater had on student fluency and Student Attitudes toward reading. The sample included 18 Kindergarten students all instructed by the same teacher. The students were involved in a 5-week implementation of Readers Theater instead of their usual Smartboard/Worksheet unit lesson on Fridays. Pre and posttest raw scores, mean scores and change scores indicated a significant growth with increases in student reading fluency scores most likely as a result of Readers Theater implementation (positive mean score = 7.6111 for fluency rubric pretest and positive mean score= 9.1111 for posttest for fluency rubric). The positive change score for the fluency rubric assessment was an increase of 1.5. Pre and posttest mean scores and change scores indicated a significant growth with increases in student attitudes toward reading scores most likely as a result of Readers Theater implementation (mean score = 64.5555 for pre-test and mean change score= 68.7777 for pre-test). The positive change score for the student attitudes assessment was an increase of 4.6666.

READERS THEATER MOTIVATION AND FLUENCY Readers Theater and Kindergarten Reading Fluency and Motivation The research on fluency and comprehension is becoming increasingly pertinent in education, and future educators need to be sure they are supporting student fluency in their classrooms. Also, all educators have always been concerned about students

attitudes toward reading and this concern must continue to be addressed in the present. Millin and Rinehart (1999) found that Readers Theater implementation provided students with significant gains in the words they could read per minute, reading comprehension, oral reading ability, and positive attitudes toward reading. Fluency is defined as reading with automaticity, accurate structure of syntactical units according to prosodic characters appropriately to assist in the comprehension of text (McCormick & Zutell, 2003). The research on fluency and comprehension has many researchers suggesting stronger fluency allows for a more accurate interpretation of text. The purpose of Readers Theater and Kindergarten Reading Fluency and Motivation , this research project, is to investigate how the implementation of Readers Theater will affect Kindergarten students fluency levels and attitudes toward reading. A literature review that supports the research question follows. Literature Review Research has suggested that in order for students to achieve comprehension, students must be motivated readers with the ability to decode text fluently. Many studies have been conducted on Readers Theater and the effects that this method of instruction has on childrens reading development. These studies focus on increasing fluency and motivation. This action research project will examine the degree to which the Readers Theater intervention enhances student fluency at the Kindergarten grade level.

READERS THEATER MOTIVATION AND FLUENCY Research is conclusive containing evidence regarding the Readers Theater learning

experience correlating with an increase in student motivation and fluency growth levels. This documented growth has been reported to carry over to unfamiliar texts (Adams, Farris, Patterson, Santiago & Secrist, 2007). Therefore, students implement their novel literacy skills obtained through Readers Theater consistently throughout all genres of their reading. An example of benefits in students oral reading fluency and attitudes toward reading and reading instruction as a result of readers theater is a study conducted by Sandra Millin and Steven Rinehart. The name of the study is Some of the Benefits of Readers Theater participation for second-grade Title one students. This study was conducted over a 9-week period. There were two groups involved in the study. One group was involved in an intensive readers theater program and one group was involved in the normal title one instruction without Readers Theater. The quantitative data was collected through the use of a pre-test posttest design with a control group. The QRI was used to assess oral reading ability. The result determined that the readers theater implementation group had a mean increase of 5.81 on the scores compared to the control group. The quantitative data for the oral reading rate was even more statistically significant, which resulted in a positive mean difference for the readers theater implementation group of 23.12. The researchers found qualitative and quantitative data to support the hypothesis that the implementation of readers theater does enhance students oral reading abilities and attitudes toward reading and reading instruction. The qualitative data was obtained through interviews and observation indicating the biggest growth in confidence and motivation (Millin &

READERS THEATER MOTIVATION AND FLUENCY Rinehart 2010). This study provides ample evidence that readers theater implementation does improve oral reading fluency and attitudes toward reading and reading instruction. What is Fluency?

It is my professional belief that there are many misconceptions of the definition of fluency in the professional education field today. For example, in the Words Their Way text they fear fluency as it pertains to emergent readers (Bear et al., 2012). The authors have this specific fear of fluency because of a common misbelief, which is if an educator is hoping to develop fluency with a student, then all the educator is looking for is an increase in the students reading rate (Bear et al., 2012). The authors describe this read fast current fluency concern as a disturbing trend (Bear et al., 2012). Some researchers even suggest that fluency is the amount of words per minute or the amount of correct words per minute (Leslie & Caldwell, 2011). However, for the purpose of this study I intend to define and assess multiple aspects of reading fluency, not simply the rate of the reader. Reading fluency has two fundamental aspects; automaticity and prosody (Rasinski & Padak, 2008). Automaticity refers to the speed in which a student is able to decode words accurately within a given text. Decoding words in a given text is accomplished by obtaining an established sight word vocabulary and a basic accurate understanding of phonemic awareness (Bear et al., 2012). However, the other fundamental aspect of reading fluency is prosody; which is defined by reading aloud with expression, accentuating on the appropriate accent, emphasis, pauses, and rhythm (Henderson, Templeton, & Bear, 1992). It is my professional belief that fluency can only

READERS THEATER MOTIVATION AND FLUENCY be properly documented if both aspects of the literacy skill are incorporated in the assessment implemented by the educator. When students reread text, they increase their automaticity of decoding words, which will lead to becoming a more fluent reader (Moran, 2006). The student automaticity section of reading fluency is most frequently assessed by an examination the pace that the student will read a given text aloud (Young & Rasinski, 2009). However, it is imperative that the educators assess fluency addressing each aspect of this literacy skill. Other areas of this literacy skill that should be assessed are proper attention to prosody. Prosody includes syntactical unit, and appropriate reading tone (McCormick & Zutell, 2003).

Extensive research indicates a more specific definition of fluency as reading with automaticity, accurate structure of syntactical units according to prosodic characters appropriately to assist in the comprehension of text (McCormick & Zutell, 2003). A common misconception in literacy education today is that automaticity is the only aspect of fluency. Rasinski and Padak (2008), found when students were pressured to read as fast as they could, the students could finish reading assignments at a faster pace, however when asked questions about their reading students were unable to answer the questions indicating proper understanding of the text. This research is conclusive in evidence that reading fluency is much more than merely the speed of reading (Rasinski & Padak, 2008). Why is Fluency Important? Reading fluency provides a bridge for students from reading to comprehension. According to the Perfetti (1988) hypothesis students that do not develop automaticity

READERS THEATER MOTIVATION AND FLUENCY necessary for fluency, then comprehension will become an active challenge for that

particular student (Leslie & Caldwell, 2011). Without fluency, students have the chance to become disconnected from the text, which could result in a decrease in comprehension (Rasinski & Padak, 2008). Research has reported a very strong connection between reading aloud with expression, indicating a strong level of fluency, and comprehension levels of silent reading (Young & Rasinski, 2009). Although reading with expression is only one aspect of reading fluency, expressional reading is a fundamental representative of reading fluency. Fluency is essential when monitoring student reading performance. Slower reading paces should prompt educators to form concerns about a students decoding skills (Adams, Farris, Patterson, Santiago & Secrist, 2007). Educational leaders have realized the importance of fluency to develop successful student readers (Clark, Morrison & Wilcox, 2009). Accordingly, educational leaders have established a multitude of fluency assessments such as running records and other oral reading assessments. An example of an assessment that has been developed for fluency assessment is the reading rate portion of the Qualitative Reading Inventory (QRI-5) (Leslie & Caldwell, 2011). Educators have evaluated the problem of student reading fluency and taken action in the form of assessment, but the quality instruction for teaching fluency is still highly overlooked (Clark, Morrison & Wilcox, 2009). How will Readers Theater enhance student Fluency? Students that read a passage once often make multiple mistakes and dismiss them without realizing the impact this kind of error has on their comprehension (Young & Rasinski, 2009). Conversely, if students are working on Readers Theater they will be

READERS THEATER MOTIVATION AND FLUENCY motivated to continue reading and rereading. When students are rereading text they increase their automaticity of decoding words, which will lead to more fluent readers (Moran, 2006). Rather than trying to speed though the text, Readers Theater scripts allow students to remain focused on reading their lines with emotion for better understanding of text (Young & Rasinski, 2009). Research that has been studied and gathered throughout this project provides strong evidence that Readers Theater is the best strategy to achieve motivation for diverse classroom populations. Re-reading texts with automaticity and prosody fluently continues to support this evidence (Moran, 2006). Readers Theater improves student reading fluency through motivating students to read with emotion and read their scripts over and over again (Adams, Farris,

Patterson, Santiago & Secrist, 2007). Readers Theater gives students the opportunity to practice reading with a proper speaking voice. Also, encouraging students to read in their best voice instead of quickest pace will allow students time to process the words they are reading (Rasinski & Padak, 2008). Overall, Readers Theater enhances the growth for every student in the classroom because students on varying levels can experience an entertaining and challenging literacy lesson (Moran, 2006). What is Readers Theater? Moore (2001) explains Readers Theater as a simple staged presentation of a given text for an audience. Performers are given scripts and assigned a part to read for the presentation. Students also practice or rehearse their script, where the student reads and re-reads a specific text, their script. The lines are read directly from the scripts and theatrical lighting and props are kept to a minimum. She describes how

READERS THEATER MOTIVATION AND FLUENCY students will be reading directly off the script they hold in hand for the audience during the presentation (Moore, 2011). In an unflawed Readers Theater implementation the main focus should always remain strictly on the text. The goal of Readers Theater is for students to practice reading their lines until they feel comfortable with all of the vocabulary in each of their speaking parts. Students will have to read and re-read their lines to eliminate any ambiguous lines. This process will require students to look up new vocabulary words and read aloud to practice using the correct inflectional endings. As the Readers

Theater process evolves over time, the students develop a personal connection with the text and allow themselves to become one with the text (MacRae & Pardue, 2007). How will Readers Theater enhance student motivation to read? One of the biggest issues in education today is motivating reluctant readers. Nell Duke, a supporter of authentic literacy, has inspired the foundational belief to provide students with an organic purpose for reading. In another article The Real-World Reading and Writing U.S. children need, there is a quote that really defines how children can achieve authentic literacy. The article states Using real-world texts for real-world reasons (Duke, 2010). This is a great statement to use as a building block for the concept of authentic literacy. When students are looking into the text for realworld reasons they are developing an authentic purpose. A seventh grade student in a study conducted by Stayter and Allington describes an experience reading text The more we practiced the more we got into it (Stayter & Allington, 1991). When students want to be successful in reading for their own benefit the desire becomes more tangible. Giving students a reason why they need to conduct

READERS THEATER MOTIVATION AND FLUENCY the reading process inspires the students to continue practicing their reading skills.

10

When students can become motivated to read for their own enjoyment, the students will carry that desire with them for future reading purposes. Therefore, the goal for any reading teacher is to assist in the process of building an innate true love for reading within a student. Educators are consistently looking for new strategies to inspire students with the love of reading. After a student engages in current reading fluency assessments they immediately have a decrease in interest to read for enjoyment (Rasinski & Padak, 2008). In Young and Rasinskis (2009) study on Readers Theater, it was noted that the students would begin working on their scripts without prompting as soon as they entered the classroom. Throughout the process of Readers Theater students read and reread texts labeling this action rehearsing (Adams, Farris, Patterson, Santiago , & Secrist, 2007). When students rehearse their Readers Theater script, students are participating in an organic process to read and re-read text. Correspondingly, studies that have been conducted have proven Readers Theater as an effective organic approach to enhance student motivation in literacy. Not only does Readers Theater provide a great approach to motivate students to organically develop the desire to read text; it also encourages even the most reluctant student readers to read and reread text (Moran, 2006). For example, Clark, Morrison, and Wilcox (2009) highlight a reluctant reader Andy, in a research study providing evidence of the effects of Readers Theater. In an interview post-Readers Theater intervention Andy explained that he would read and reread words he missed so he would not miss the word again. This student is re-reading for intrinsic reasons that

READERS THEATER MOTIVATION AND FLUENCY Readers Theater has generated within him. Readers Theater has established long lasting love for reading without offering any extrinsic form of motivation. Conclusion Readers Theater is an authentic approach to building reading fluency in all

11

practices required of the strategy. The disruption in reading fluency caused by errors in speech is apparent to anyone listening (Henderson, Templeton, & Bear 1992). Readers Theater has been proven the best approach to eliminate this kind of error from student reading. Overall, the research is conclusive that in an effort to increase student fluency, and aim to inspire students to be intrinsically motivated to read, Readers Theater is the best intervention to try in your classroom. For my study the researcher wanted to concentrate on how Readers Theater improves these two key elements in emergent readers. The researcher has planned to address this process by maintaining all aspects of current knowledge on student fluency. The researcher will also ensure that all activities planned for motivational enhancement are organic. Methodology My study is a one-group-pretest-posttest design. The researcher is aware that this is a weaker experimental design. However, because the researcher is a full-time graduate student and not an employed teacher, the researcher believes this experimental design is most appropriate to conduct my study. The researchers intervention has both an independent and dependent variable. The independent variable for the study is fifteen minutes practicing two times a week the implementation of Readers Theater. There are two dependent variables

READERS THEATER MOTIVATION AND FLUENCY

12

included in this study. One dependent variable is the growth that the students make on their fluency rubrics. The second dependent variable is the changes that they students have made in their attitudes toward reading. The first dependent variable, student reading fluency, is defined by samples of student reading recorded on audiotape and assessed with a conclusive reading fluency rubric. The Garfields Attitudes Toward Reading Survey defines the second dependent variable, attitudes toward reading. Notes recorded in the Researcher Observation log are also being considered during assessment of the dependent variable to triangulate assessment. Participants and Setting Throughout my study pseudonyms will be used for names of locations and students to protect the identity of all the students involved in the study. My intervention was conducted in Paige Bruntons Kindergarten class at Green Park Primary in Eastern, North Carolina. Originally there were 19 students who gave consent to participate in the study. However, one student transferred during the midst of the invention exposing the study to mortality threat. At the end of the study with consent from all students, the study consisted of 18 students in the Kindergarten grade level with the age group ranging from 5 years old to 6 years old. There were 10 boys and 8 girls included in the study of which there are 10 Caucasian, 8 African American, and 1 Hispanic student. Of the following students, 6 receive specialized instruction through the pull out meeting for reading Green Park Primary is not a title one school with 49% of the student population qualifying for free and reduced lunch.

READERS THEATER MOTIVATION AND FLUENCY

13

The researcher has not held the role of a classrooms full time teacher because she entered graduate school at East Carolina University full-time after graduating from East Carolina University in May 2012. However, the researcher has complied significant evidence to move forward with this study, and will assume the role of the intervention teacher. As a result of the limited time spent in classrooms and the lack of accessibility to the classroom the researcher had to result in convenience sampling. The sample group being studied is one group that will be assessed prior to and after the intervention is completed. The classroom teacher Paige Brunton has 8 years of teaching experience. The researcher implementing the intervention completed her student teaching internship from 2011-2012 with Paige Brunton last year in the Kindergarten Grade level. Data Sources and Data Collection Procedures There are three different forms of assessment to allow for triangulation of data. The first form of assessment is a conclusive fluency rubric that assesses all aspects of student fluency. The researcher recorded a student reading for 1 to 2 minutes then used the fluency rubric to score student fluency levels. The rubric assessed four different aspects of student fluency and the researcher assigned each student a one reflecting poor fluency skills up to 4 for high fluency skills in each category. The researcher has validated the use of the fluency rubric selected through cross-exanimation of the levels of fluency with other creditable sources. The four levels on the rubric the researcher chose are comparable to the 4 levels of a fluency rubric in a text written by Rasinski and Padak 2008. The four levels the researcher will use to evaluate student fluency are rate, attention to punctuation, phrasing, and expression. The only difference in the four levels for assessing fluency is in the punctuation level.

READERS THEATER MOTIVATION AND FLUENCY The difference is that the creditable source labeled this level smoothness. However, given that this rubric can be used for self-evaluation, the researcher believes that the

14

rubric attached in the appendix [Xi] is much simpler to comprehend because it provides concise examples. The second form of assessment is Garfields Attitude Toward Reading Survey included in Appendix [X] (McKenna & Kear, 1990). The researcher analyzed the results from before the implementation of Readers Theater. Then after the implementation of Readers Theater, the researcher re-analyzed the data to compare the results from the pretests and posttests. Conclusively, the researcher evaluated these results to see if there is an increase in student motivation towards literacy. The final form of assessment that the researcher used for this study is a researcher log. The researcher carried a notebook with her throughout the entire course of the intervention. The researcher then recorded her observations while the students were practicing; presenting and watching classmates perform their different scripts. The observations serve as a source to monitor student growth continuously throughout the course of the study. The researcher log also informed the researcher in a formative way to ensure all student work was differentiated to the appropriate levels of student understandings. Intervention Every Friday the students participated in a smart board lesson, created by the researcher about the topic for the upcoming unit that the students will be learning about the following week to establish content knowledge. Without a background in content knowledge it will be almost impossible for students to create meaning of a novice text

READERS THEATER MOTIVATION AND FLUENCY

15

(Harvey & Goudvis, 2007). Every Friday as a part of the students weekly schedule, the students make a book that pertains to the Science or Social Studies Standard that the students will be studying that week. The book that the students create usually consists of six to seven pages. For this intervention the students received a packet with 5 to 10 pages to cut out and assemble into a book. The pages were numbered to help the students assemble the books in the popper sequence. When the students have completed their book the researcher will walk around the room ensuring the pages were sequential and stapled the pages together to make a book. After the students book was stapled, they began reading to themselves independently. Students were given one of two different books to use for Readers Theater. Both books had missing words the student had to fill in (see appendix E). I had the pages of both books side by side up on the smartboard; the students helped me fill in the correct word similar to a shared writing lesson. The students also wrote in the missing site words/or new vocabulary words on their own book in front of them. To differentiate, I created two different books to reflect the levels of which students could complete assignments on an instructional level. I explained to the students that we needed to have two groups so that each group would have an audience for their presentation. I do not believe the students knew the level difference between the two books. When the students completed their sentences in the books they were then be able to cut out, sequence the pages, and begin to read their book. The researcher took the books that the students made every Friday for five Fridays and developed two Readers Theater Scripts (see appendix D) from the books that the students created. I came on Mondays during their center time and introduced

READERS THEATER MOTIVATION AND FLUENCY each script to each of the four different guided reading groups. When the researcher

16

met with each group on Mondays, each group met for twenty minutes during their center time. Each student was given a role to read. Each role assigned contained one or two lines for the student to read for the Readers Theater production. The researcher used the observations from the group practice and the one-on-one session to determine the differentiation for the line each specific student should read in the following weeks Readers Theater script. The researcher printed each student a copy of their script and highlighted their line for them in a color specific to their line in order to limit confusion. The researcher then made a key for herself coded with colors and names. If a student forgot to bring their script back with them the researcher had extra s that she kept for the one-on-one practice and the actual presentation on Friday mornings. The students practiced their lines on Mondays and Wednesdays during center time throughout the course of the implementation. On Friday during the students Science and Social Studies block the students presented their Readers Theater Scripts for their classmates. The books were fill-in-the-blank to allow students to be able to present samples of their own writing. Also, because the students participated in the creation of the books using their own writing, the researcher differentiated the scripts to challenge advanced students and remediate students that were struggling. Trustworthiness of Study Most educational research studies have the following threats: History Threat, where outside events may occur between the time period of the pre/posttests. Human lives are very unpredictable and there is a great possibility that outside factors affected some of the students literacy scores skewing the results achieved from the

READERS THEATER MOTIVATION AND FLUENCY assessments the researcher administered. The researcher was sure to take several precautions to enhance the

17

trustworthiness of the study and ensure that extraneous variables were controlled to the best of the researchers ability. One of the extraneous variables that the researcher wanted to control was the amount of instruction time administered to each group. Therefore, the researcher had a timer and set it for the same amount of time every time she met with a group. Resulting in the each group having the same amount of instruction in every lesson with the researcher. Another precaution the researcher took to increase the trustworthiness of the study was the researcher went over the smartboard lesson plans as well as the books that the researcher would be implementing with the classroom teacher to ensure that the instruction that the researcher was providing for the students did not differ from the instruction that the classroom teacher would provide the students. If students do not have some background content information to link new information to then it becomes very difficult to obtain new information (Harvey, & Goudvis, 2007). The researcher wanted to be sure that the students did not receive any more or less of a content background knowledge than if the students were making and reading the books as a normal part of the schedule. Data Analysis The researcher used the pretest fluency scores on the rubric and compared the results with the posttest results on the fluency rubric. The researcher then compared the scores by looking at the number that the students received for each category for each administration of the assessment, pre and post intervention. Then the researcher

READERS THEATER MOTIVATION AND FLUENCY analyzed the results from the Attitudes toward reading survey. The researcher then compared the results from the survey to see if the results were in agreement with the results obtained from scores each student achieved on the fluency rubric. Finally, the researcher took all of the data the researcher collected and analyzed how my observations supported my findings in the other two assessments. Results

18

The results from my research suggest there is a positive correlation between the Readers Theater implementation and student fluency. Table 1 presents the data as defined for this specific assignment (p= 9.1111 for posttest and p= 6.7111 for pre-test). The mean change score for the Fluency rubric (see appendix C) resulted in a 1.5 increase on the posttest when compared to the pre-test. Following Table one is Figure The research also indicated a strong positive correlation between Readers Theater and Students Attitudes Toward Reading (p=68.7777 for posttest and p=64.5555 for pre-test). The mean difference for the GARS survey (see appendix A) resulted in a 4.6666 increase on the post assessment of the GARS survey. This table provides a clear way to present the quantitative results that suggest Readers Theater implementation has a positive correlation with enhancing student fluency and promoting positive attitudes toward reading.

READERS THEATER MOTIVATION AND FLUENCY Table 1 Quantitative Analysis of Pre-Post Test Mean Change Scores

19

Measures GARS

Mean (Pre-Test) 64.5555

Mean (Post Test) 68.7777

Mean Change Score 4.6666

Fluency Raw Scores

7.6111

9.1111

1.5

Figure 1.1 GARS Pre/Post Assessment Results

GARS Pre-Post Test Results

90 80 70 GARS Score 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 0 5 10 Students by number 15 20 Quentin, 27 Quentin, 58 Pre-test Posttest

READERS THEATER MOTIVATION AND FLUENCY

20

Figure 1.2 Fluency Rubric Pre/Post Assessment Results

Fluency Pre-Test-Posttest Scores

14 Fluency Raw Score Range 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 0 5 10 15 Students by number 20 Fluency RS Pre-test Fluency RS Posttest

Table 2 presents the data as defined for this specific assignment regarding the results on the fluency rubric assessment in regards to the expression component of the rubric (see appendix C) (p= 1.27777 for posttest and p= 2.1111 for pre-test). The mean change score for the Fluency rubric resulted in a 1 increase on the posttest when compared to the pre-test. Following Table one is Figure 2.1 The research also indicated a strong positive correlation between Readers Theater and students attitudes toward reading aloud on question 18 of the GARS assessment (see appendix A) (p=2.3888 for posttest and p=3.6666 for pre-test). The mean difference for this question on the GARS survey resulted in a 1.2222 increase on

READERS THEATER MOTIVATION AND FLUENCY

21

the post assessment of the GARS survey. This table provides a clear way to present the quantitative results that suggest Readers Theater implementation has a positive correlation with enhancing student fluency in regards to expression and promoting positive attitudes toward reading in regards to reading aloud.

Table 2 Quantitative Analysis of Pre-Post Test Specific Sections Mean Change Scores

Measures

Mean (Pre-Test)

Mean (Post Test)

Mean Change Score

GARS Question #18 Fluency Expression Raw Score

2.3888

3.6666

1.2222

1.2777

2.1111

READERS THEATER MOTIVATION AND FLUENCY Figure 2.1 Fluency Rubric Expression Pre/Post Assessment Results

22

Expression PRE/POST Fluency Scores

Expression Scores on fluency rubric 4.5 4 3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 0 0 5 10 15 Students by number 20 Quentin, 1 Quentin, 2 Expression PRE Expression POST

Figure 2.2 Fluency Rubric Expression Pre/Post Assessment Results

Question #18 on GARS Pre/Post Tests

4.5 GARS Question #18 Scores 4 3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 0 0 5 10 15 Students by number 20 Quentin, 1 Question 18 PRE Question 18 POST Quentin, 4

READERS THEATER MOTIVATION AND FLUENCY The student who showed the most quantitative growth through the Readers Theater intervention was Quentin. The classroom designated Quentin as a trouble

23

maker before the researcher was even able to get to know him. Although Quentin did cause some disruptions throughout the intervention, the researcher found the more responsibility she gave him, the less problematic behaviors were observed. However, at the researcher was sure to inform Quentin that if he wanted to continue with intervention and wanted to perform with his classmates that he needed to exhibit behaviors that prove to the researcher that he can handle these types of activities. Quentin had a positive change score throughout all of the assessments administered during the course of the study. On the GARS assessment he had a positive change score of an extraordinary 31 points. On question 18 of this assessment when the students were asked to provide an answer about their feeling toward reading aloud in class Quentin had a positive change score of 3 points. Providing the researcher with the understanding that prior to the intervention he felt strongly about his unwillingness to read aloud in class, whereas by the end of the intervention he felt strongly about how much he enjoyed reading aloud in class. Quentin also made significant gains in his fluency throughout the course of the intervention. Quentin had a positive change score of 1 point in his overall fluency. The increase was in the expression portion of the fluency rubric, which the researcher believes to serve as an even stronger correlation to the Readers Theater implementation and the students success in fluency. Overall, the majority of the quantitative data suggests that Readers Theater implementation has a strong positive correlation with increasing student fluency

READERS THEATER MOTIVATION AND FLUENCY especially, in regards to increasing appropriate expression. The quantitative data

24

collected also suggests that the Readers Theater strategy encourages positive attitudes toward reading. This is especially evident in regards to improving their confidence to read aloud in front of their classmates as seen in Figure 2.1. Researcher Log I was able to track my observations throughout my implementation through the use of my Researchers Log. I recorded my notes in a note pad while I was the intervention was taking place. I recorded what we did everyday that I went into the school and any observations that I felt would be pertinent to the evaluation of my intervention and then transcribed these observations onto a google doc to have an electronic copy of my notes. Section of notes covering a Friday lesson, this particular topic was Presidents Day. 9:15-9:20 First I allowed 2-3 minutes for the students to practice reading their lines at their seats. During this time I come around to any of the students that have questions about their lines. Then I call the students from the blue/green group to come up to the front of the room in the order that they will be reading their lines. 9:20-9:40 The first group performs their readers theater script. We applaud and I call up the next group and they perform their script. We applaud and then the students go sit down. Then we talk about how next week we are going to perform new scripts about Presidents. 9:40-10:05 The students come down to the gathering place where I have a smartboard lesson on the topic for next week (Presidents Day). I have an interactive smartboard lesson about Presidents Day. I went over the key points of the topic for the

READERS THEATER MOTIVATION AND FLUENCY

25

upcoming week. The students come up and pull out different facts about the topic. Then at the end I had the students help me finish some of the lines using pictures first. 10:05-10:35 Next when the students went back to their seats they finished the sentences writing in the missing word. The group that is less advanced filled in a repetitive high frequency word. Whereas the group that is more advances filled in words using the pictures in the book like read and write. I also have the pages of the book up on the smartboard to help avoid confusion I have both pages on the smartboard at the same time. I used a line to show the separation between the two books. I explained we needed to have two different books because they need to have an audience for each script. Observations the researcher recorded of student behavior. The students did a much better job projecting their voices loud enough all audience members to hear. There are two students in particular that I plan to work on volume with during our oneon-one sessions next week. Even Henry and Jade did a better job projecting his voice. I think is because I reminded the students right before they began speaking and both students spoke at the beginning of their presentations. Students were still more confused than I would like at this point about the two different books. One student even called out Why dont I have THAT book?!. Fortunately when I explained that we needed to have to separate groups so that we can have an audience for each presentation the students seemed to understand where I was coming from. This book went much smoother than last weeks book. Student behavior was actually much better this week. Unfortunately, I had to make to a few students move their clip (which followed the classroom teachers

READERS THEATER MOTIVATION AND FLUENCY behavior management program), however after this happened the student behaviors changed immediately.

26

Reactions the researcher recorded of implementing the lesson. Overall I am very pleased with the performance of the Readers Theater scripts, smartboard lesson, and the process of making the book. The students are beginning to understand the flow of the lesson and adjust accordingly. I am also learning which strategies are effective for organizational purposes. I think that the interactive portion of the lessons where students come up and finish the sentence with a picture first really helps the students. Repetition seems to be the best way to help students when they are adjusting to change. There were certain themes that the researcher determined to be essential information to include because these observations lead to the ultimate results of the Readers Theater implementation. The researcher logged significant observations with improvements in reading fluency, confidence in reading aloud, and willingness to participate in reading activities. Prior to implementing the intervention the researcher had goals to achieve this kind of success in these particular areas. In the researcher log there was overwhelming evidence pertaining to student increase in reading fluency, especially pertaining to increasing the amount of expression used when reading aloud correctly and confidence in aloud reading behaviors. At the beginning of the intervention the researcher noted that several students were not using expression at all when reading aloud. With a focus on making the script presentation interesting for the students audience (other classmates) the students were able to understand completely authentically the importance of reading with expression aloud.

READERS THEATER MOTIVATION AND FLUENCY

27

Another problem that the researcher noted was at the beginning of the intervention most of the students that were reading with some expression when they were reading were in fact miss using their expression. The students were using the inflection in their voices on the wrong parts of the sentences. The researcher put an extensive amount of instruction time on modeling the correct inflection for reading with expression. An example of the following is with the student Leslie in the study. Leslie noticed the inflection in the researchers voice during the first lesson and throughout the intervention. When the researcher asked the students to use inflection in their own reading Leslie included this inflection, however she included the inflection in the wrong portions of the sentence. The line that was where she exhibited the most confusion was To reach for the stars, to change the world! Leslie placed the inflection only on the word for. When the researcher repeated the sentence back to her to show her what it sounded like she quickly agreed that the line did not sound right. Then the researcher repeated the line with inflection on the words stars and world. The researcher asked Leslie which reading of the line she liked better and she quickly responded with the second reading. The researcher then asked Leslie to repeat the line after her and Leslie read the lines with the correct emotion. The researcher was curious to see how Leslie would do with the reading of the script on the day of the presentation. The researcher recorded that Leslie read the line with the correct inflection and emotion. There are two different examples that provide very concrete evidence that the Readers Theater intervention provided students with a large increase in confidence and motivation to read. The first example is would be Mirandas situation that was observed by the researcher conducting the study, and the second was Natalies situation that was

READERS THEATER MOTIVATION AND FLUENCY observed mainly by the classroom teacher involved in the study. The first day the

28

researcher came into the classroom and introduced the idea of Readers Theater to the students the majority seemed to like the idea because they would be able to do something new and different. Unfortunately, Miranda was not excited about the new Readers Theater scripts. Miranda dramatically burst into tears and ran up to the researcher hugged her and shared a story about a horrible Pre-School experience. Apparently Miranda was forced onto a stage and she was supposed to recite some lines but she had forgotten them and just stood on stage and cried the entire time until the performance was over. The researcher reassured her there would be no ambiguity of her lines and she would know exactly what to say when she got in front of her classmates. Also, even thought Miranda would have ample practice reciting her line/lines and she did not have to remember the lines because she would be able to read the words off her script when her group was performing. This resistant reaction was the last thing the researcher would have expected from Miranda because she was very outgoing and did not seem shy any other time the researcher was in the classroom. On the morning of the first reading of the Readers Theater scripts the researcher was very nervous that the student was going to cry or get upset. However, much to the researchers surprise as soon as the researcher walked into the room Miranda put a huge smile on her face and even blurted out Are we going to read our scripts today Miss Z? The researcher was pleasantly surprised with Mirandas reaction, however, the researcher was still very nervous that the student would be afraid when she went to the front of the classroom. Then when the researcher called Mirandas name to come up to the front of the classroom for the presentation

READERS THEATER MOTIVATION AND FLUENCY Miranda was jumping up and down all the way to the front of the classroom because she could not hold in all of the excitement. Furthermore, she continued this behavior throughout the entire presentation and continued her excitement level throughout the remainder Readers Theater interventions.

29

Mirandas pre and post test positive change scores are dramatic and it is clearly evident that she has benefited from the Readers Theater instruction. Mirandas positive change score on the GARS assessment was an increase of 12 points. Mirandas positive change score on the Fluency Rubric was an increase of 3 points. On question 18 of the GARS assessment referring to attitudes towards reading aloud in class increased 2 points to provide evidence that she now really enjoys reading aloud in class, whereas prior to the intervention she reported not enjoying reading aloud very much at all. Conclusively, Mirandas positive change score in reading with expression had an increase of 2 points, which indicated that she improved from using but confusing reading with expression to reading with appropriate expression. Limitations There were many limitations for this particular study due to the fact that the researcher has never held the role of a classroom teacher and had to ask for a lot of permission to complete the study at all. One of the threats that the researcher believes to have affected the study was maturation Threat. The participants may have developed or changed during the experiment. Kindergarten is a period of time where you typically see dramatic growth in student literacy skills. Unfortunately, the researcher believes there was some threat that the growth seen in the change scores of assessments collected are descendent from other sources of learning. The researcher cannot

READERS THEATER MOTIVATION AND FLUENCY specifically distinguish that the growth in fluency achievement and the increase in

30

positive attitudes towards reading fluency is single-handedly related to Readers Theater implementation. One of the reasons the researcher believes that maturation threat affected the study is because the students were getting other reading instruction as normal every day. All the researcher can account for was the change in the unit lessons over the course of the 5-week implementation. Another reason the researcher believes the study was affected by maturation threat is because there was no control group due to limited access to students. Therefore, the researcher was unable to compare the intervention group with a control group for statistical purposes. This leads to another limitation in the study, which was there was no control group therefore it became impossible to report results as statistically significant or statistically insignificant. It is the researchers professional belief through analyzing the data that the researchers hypothesis was correct, however, there is no solid evidence the researcher can provide to declare that the reason for the increase in scores is solely a result of the Readers Theater implementation. Another possible threat to the study was the Selection Threat, because the group of participants was not randomly selected. Paige Bruntons class was the only classroom the researcher was able to implement the intervention in. Therefore, there was no ability for the researcher to utilize a group of randomized students. The reason the researcher was only able to implement the research in Paige Bruntons classroom is because she was the only teacher the researcher was able to obtain consent from and the researcher do not have a classroom of my own yet.

READERS THEATER MOTIVATION AND FLUENCY

31

Mortality Threat was a threat that affected my study. I started my study with 19 students that gave consent to participate in the study. However, then I unfortunately had one students move away during the study, which only left me with 18 participants in the study. Although it is an unlikely threat to face as a researcher, unfortunately this threat is one of the threats that have affected my study. To account for this particular threat in my study the researcher completely eliminated this students pre-test data from the analysis of the scores and removed his information from any researcher log observation notes. The threat that the researcher planned to be most cautious about throughout the course of the study was observer bias. This is the threat of the observer skewing data resulting from personal interests. The researcher was the only person that scored the students reading fluency on the rubric. In order to try to eliminate this bias the researcher tape-recorded each students reading therefore the researcher could be definite that the researcher scored the rubric properly. The researcher listened to the recording several times and if there were a few she was unsure if she scored correctly she would set the first scoring to the side and re-analyze that particular recording the next day with a fresh page to eliminate any emotion connected to the first scoring on the recording. However, there were other aspects of this threat the researcher had not accounted for, such as, the selection of text to use for students to read while the researcher recorded them. Not having been the students teacher prior to implementing the pre-test section of the study the researcher was not sure of the reading levels of each specific participant. The researcher used what knowledge she did have about the

READERS THEATER MOTIVATION AND FLUENCY students and found instructional leveled texts correlating with the information that was already known. Then the researcher did their best to find appropriate leveled texts based on their guided reading group. However, after working with the participants for over 5 weeks, the researcher was able to fully understand each students capabilities and provide more accurate leveled texts. The researcher believes that students might

32

have been scored on fluency texts that were too difficult in the beginning whereas after working with the students individually for 5 weeks I was better able to determine the level of which the student could perform accurately. This situation may have also caused some invalidity in the study. The researcher is also aware of the limitation of being unable to observe the students involved in the study on a regular ongoing basis.

Directions for Future Research There are many different strategies that the researcher would recommend to help make the intervention a smoother process for all people involved in the study. The first would be to implement the research in a classroom that the researcher is also the classroom teacher. There are many advantages to having your own classroom to implement these strategies in. The first advantage is that if a researcher has their own classroom then it will be easier to receive permission from a neighboring teacher to serve as a control group. This is very important because in future research the researcher believes the study will be given more credibility because the data collected will be either statistically significant or statistically insignificant.

READERS THEATER MOTIVATION AND FLUENCY

33

The researcher would also suggest test the students in small groups rather than a whole class method. The first time the researcher administered the GARS assessment the students were in a whole class setting. While trying to monitor to make sure students were taking the survey seriously and marking the answers as they truly felt about reading, unfortunately, it is the researchers professional belief that one student marked all of the highest scores just so that they were able to finish the assessment. The reasoning behind this belief was that after administering the assessment again in smaller groups the students answers seemed to correspond with the observations the researcher made throughout the study, whereas the other answers that the student provided did not match the researchers observations. Significance of Evidence One of the greatest pieces of evidence of the success in the implementation of Readers Theater came from the students classroom teacher. Mrs. Brunton explained how one of the students actually has a very small stuttering problem. The researcher was surprised to hear this at first but thinking back through the lessons she was able to see where Natalie, the student with the stuttering problem, would get stuck on a word time to time. In a conclusive conference at the end of the intervention the classroom teacher expressed her professional belief that the invention was a success especially in raising students confidence levels. Mrs. Brunton provided me with information Natalies mom shared with her, which was that it was Natalies moms observation that Natalie would not read aloud for anyone at any time. Mrs. Brunton said that observing Natalie read her line fluently in front of the entire class with no signs of fear was truly remarkable.

READERS THEATER MOTIVATION AND FLUENCY Natalies pre and post test positive change scores are dramatic and it is clearly

34

evident that she has benefited from the Readers Theater instruction. Natalies positive change score on the Fluency Rubric was an increase of 2 points. On the pre test administered for the fluency rubric assessment she scored the lowest in the class with a score of 5 points, however, on the post test she increased to a score of 7 points. Unfortunately, Natalie scored 11 points lower on the GARS assessment, which in my professional opinion is due to extraneous variables that are unavoidable in these types of studies. This professional opinion is based on the data collected for question 18 on the GARS assessment referring to attitudes towards reading aloud in class, which was an increase of 1 point in her positive change score from the pre and post assessments. This data provides evidence that she now somewhat enjoys reading aloud in class, whereas prior to the intervention she reported not enjoying reading aloud in any way at all. Conclusively, Natalies positive change scores in reading concerning fluency and her increase in confidence to read aloud, it is now evident that Natalie was able to really benefit from the Readers Theater intervention in ways that differ from normal reading instruction. Discussion According to the data collected it is the researchers professional opinion that the researchers hypothesis was correct. The purpose of this one-group-pretest-posttest study was to determine the correlation between Readers Theater and student fluency and students attitudes toward reading. According to the data collected, there is significant evidence to suggest that Readers Theater does indeed enhance both student fluency and positive attitudes toward reading surveys at the Kindergarten grade level.

READERS THEATER MOTIVATION AND FLUENCY The researcher was able to relate the positive correlation of Readers Theater

35

intervention and positive increase in student fluency to the study conducted by Millin & Rinehart 2010. However, this study provides that not only can this increase in fluency take place at a second grade level; you can also achieve an increase in student fluency in emergent grade levels (Millin & Rinehart, 2010). The major difference is that the researchers data that was collected was not statistically significant because there was no control group for the present study. If the researcher were to continue their research the researcher would focus on how to limit extraneous variables to determine if the true reason for the increase in student fluency and their increase in positive attitudes toward reading was solely because of their Readers Theater implementation. The researcher is also intrigued by the increase in student attitudes toward reading. As an observer and teacher of this intervention, the researcher was able to observe students jumping up and down with excitement when they were about to present. This behavior was exhibited from one of the same students, Miranda who started crying the first day of the implementation of the Readers Theater script. This behavior was also exemplified by several other students in the intervention. One particular aspect of Readers Theater implementation was the increase the researcher observered in students confidence to read out loud. Mirandas experience as well as the other students experiences noted in the observation journal kept by the researcher, and through conferencing with the classroom teacher also shows how Readers Theater can allow students to feel more confident in their own reading abilities. The researcher found it particularly interesting that all except 3 of the students marked

READERS THEATER MOTIVATION AND FLUENCY

36

question 18 (How do you feel when you read out loud in class?) on the Attitudes Toward Reading Survey with the highest score. Prior to the implementation only 5 students had marked question 18 with the highest score. This data is a very large indicator of the success achieved by the students building their confidence. Reflection The role of being a teacher researcher was very demanding. I knew how important it was not to mix personal opinions while assessing data. On the other hand, another challenge was the amount of time that was required to plan and construct lesson plans, then differentiate instruction using only the observations from the lessons and the data collected. To overcome this limitation, the researcher spent additional time in the classroom trying to get to know the students to make sure that I determined the correct level of difficulty for the books and scripts. Ensuring that all the activities are on the appropriate level is essential to developing student fluency and promoting students positive attitudes toward reading. The researcher learned an immense amount of information about the action research process through conducting their study. The greatest piece of knowledge the researcher has gained throughout the action research process is an appreciation for the well-established researchers. The researcher is so grateful that there are educational researchers to provide new teachers with the data that supports strategies that teachers can use in their classrooms on a day-to-day basis. The researcher has also gained a lot of content knowledge throughout the process of conceptualizing, planning, implementing, and assessing data. First the researcher had to think about what they thought would help students on the

READERS THEATER MOTIVATION AND FLUENCY Kindergarten level, which helped the researcher establish more concrete professional

37

beliefs about literacy. Then when the researcher conducted the research on these ideas to pick one that had a substantial amount of evidence to support my conceptualization, which helped me learn achieve a deeper more concrete understanding of several strategies, whereas prior to this research the researcher only knew a surface level amount about these topics. The researcher plans to continue to implement strategies as she ahs learned through her research to support her beliefs, as well as share her beliefs with colleagues and supervisors when appropriate. Next, when the researcher was deeply involved in researching Readers Theater, fluency, and how to support positive reading attitudes, the researcher learned key information pertinent for all teachers to understand about each of these vocabulary terms. The researcher actually cannot believe how much she did not know about fundamental reading terms necessary for all teachers to understand. An example of the learning that took place was in the term, fluency. The researcher had always thought of a fluent reader to be a fast reader all throughout her entire undergraduate experience, however do to her research she has discovered four levels of fluency that she is excited about implementing in her own classroom one day. Finally, the assessment process taught me how to accurately assess students, and what different components of assessments should be thoroughly planned before assessment begins. Text level is an essential piece of instruction in any form of literacy, however through the data collection processes the researcher was able to see the amount that text level can affect student fluency and motivation. The researcher is very proud of the work that she has done to ensure all students were reading scripts on an

READERS THEATER MOTIVATION AND FLUENCY appropriate level. The data collection portion of this study also helped the researcher understand how to score fluency on multiple levels. After the fluency was scored on multiple levels the data was available for the teacher to use to inform instruction. The

38

researcher was able to get a better understanding of what worked in the instruction and what the researcher needed to improve on for the next time the researcher implements this strategy in her classroom. Overall, the researcher believes that this research indicates that Readers Theater implementation is highly correlated with motivating students to read and also increasing student fluency. Throughout the process the researcher was worried that her data would not turn out to show any significant progress in the data to suggest that her hypothesis was correct. However, when the researcher calculated the research from the Attitudes Toward Reading Survey and the fluency rubric the researcher was very pleasantly surprised that almost all of the students have made tremendous growth in their obtaining more positive reading attitudes and a higher level of fluency most likely as a result of the implementation of the Readers Theater Strategy.

READERS THEATER MOTIVATION AND FLUENCY References Adams, T., Farris, W., Patterson, R., Santiago, C., & Secrist, J. (2007). The effect of

39

readers theater on the comprehension and f luency of spanish language learners whose first language is english a short case study in the san bernardino city unified school district. emurillo.org/Classes/Class2/.../SpanishLanguageAcquisition.doc Clark, R., Morrison, T., & Wilcox, B. (2009). Readers theater: A process of developing fourth-graders' reading fluency. Reading Psychology, 30, (4), 359-385. Retrieved from doi: 10.1080/02702710802411620 Duke, N. K., (2010). The real-world reading and writing U.S. children need. Kappan, 6871.http://jacquelinedennis.wikispaces.com/file/view/47944601informational+readi ng+and+writing.pdf Harvey , S., & Goudvis , A. (2007). Strategies that work. Portland, ME: Stenhouse Publishers. Henderson, E. H., Templeton, S., & Bear, D. R. (1992). Development of orthographic knowledge and the foundation of literacy: A memorial festschrift for Edmund H. Henderson. Hillsdale, N.J: L. Erlbaum Associates. Leslie, L., & Caldwell , J. (2011). Qualitative reading inventory-5. Boston, MA: Pearson Education, Inc. MacRae, N., & Pardue, K. (2007). Use of Readers Theater to enhance interdisciplinary geriatric education. Routledge, doi: 10.1080/3601270701328920

READERS THEATER MOTIVATION AND FLUENCY

40

McCormick, Sandra (2011). Instructing students who have literacy problems (sixth edition). Boston: Pearson. McKenna, M.C., & Kear, D.J. (1990, May). Measuring Attitude Toward Reading: A New Tool for Teachers. The Reading Teacher, 43(8), 626639. doi: 10.1598/RT.43.8.3 Moore, M. (2011). Improving the reading comprehension of second grade struggling reader's through the instructional activity of readers' theater. (Master's thesis, Caldwell College), Available from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses. ((PQDT)) Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com.jproxy.lib.ecu.edu/docview/868328357 Moran, K. J. K, (2006). Nurturing emergent readers through Readers Theater. Early Childhood Education, 33(5), 317-323. doi: 10.10007/s10643-006-0089-8 Rasinski, T. V., & Padak, N. (2008). From phonics to fluency: Effective teaching of decoding and reading fluency in the elementary school. Boston: Pearson Allyn and Bacon. Rinehart, S. (1999). Dont think for a minute that Im getting up there: Opportunities for readers theater in a tutorial for children with reading problems. Reading Psychology, 20(1), 71-89. doi: 10.1080/027027199278510 Young, C., & Rasinski, T. (2009). Implementing readers theatre as an approach to classroom fluency instruction. International Reading Association, 63(1), 4-13. doi: 10.1598

READERS THEATER MOTIVATION AND FLUENCY Appendix [A]- Elementary Reading Aptitude Survey

41

READERS THEATER MOTIVATION AND FLUENCY Appendix [B]- Elementary Reading Aptitude Survey Score Sheet

42

Elementary Reading Attitude Survey Scoring Sheet

Student Name___________________________________________________ Teacher__________________________________________________________ Grade________________________ Administration Date______________________ Scoring Guide 4 points Happiest Garfield 3 points Slightly smiling Garfield 2 points Mildly upset Garfield 1 point Very upset Garfield Recreational reading Academic reading 1. ____ 1. ____ 2. ____ 2. ____ 3. ____ 3. ____ 4. ____ 4. ____ 5. ____ 5. ____ 6. ____ 6. ____ 7. ____ 7. ____ 8. ____ 8. ____ 9. ____ 9. ____ 10. ____ 10. ____ Raw Score: ____ Raw Score: ____ Full scale raw score . . . . . . . . . . . (Recreational + _____ Percentile ranks: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Recreational . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Academic Academic):

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Full scale

READERS THEATER MOTIVATION AND FLUENCY

43

Appendix [C]- Fluency Rubric

READERS THEATER MOTIVATION AND FLUENCY Appendix [D]- Sample of Readers Theater Scripts

44

Readers Theater Scripts Presidents Day

Reader 1: We celebrate all presidents on Presidents Day. Reader 2: Especially George Washington and Abraham Lincoln. Reader 3: We celebrate Presidents Day in February because it is closest to their birthdays. Reader 4: Can you guess the president? Lets see how much you know. Reader 5: He is on the five-dollar bill. Reader 6: He was our sixteenth president. Reader 7: He freed the slaves. Reader 8: He taught himself to read. Reader 9: He also taught himself to write Reader 10: Abraham Lincoln was a good man and a great president.

READERS THEATER MOTIVATION AND FLUENCY

45

Readers Theater Scripts Abraham Lincoln Reader 1: I see Abraham Lincoln. Reader 2: I see a flag. Reader 3: I see a hat. Reader 4: He wore a hat. Reader 5: I see an axe. Reader 6: He had an axe. Reader 7: I see a log cabin. Reader 8: He was born in a log cabin. Reader 9: I see a penny. Reader 10: He is on the penny.

READERS THEATER MOTIVATION AND FLUENCY

46

Appendix [E]- Sample of Readers Theater Scripts

READERS THEATER MOTIVATION AND FLUENCY

47

READERS THEATER MOTIVATION AND FLUENCY

48

READERS THEATER MOTIVATION AND FLUENCY

49

READERS THEATER MOTIVATION AND FLUENCY

50

10
0

READERS THEATER MOTIVATION AND FLUENCY

51

11
33

All backgrounds and frames can be found by visiting Tracee Ormans store. http://www.teacherspayteachers.com/Store?Tracee-Orman http://www.google.com/imgres?q=five+dollar+bill&um=1&hl=en&sa=N&tbo=d&bi w=1920&bih=878&tbm=isch&tbnid=n8XmMVXMwsnv8M:&imgrefurl=http://www .valdosta.edu/~lomartin/ebook3.html&docid=FYn7nVaVDLq1OM&imgurl=http: //ww2.valdosta.edu/~lomartin/fivedollarbill.jpg&w=850&h=357&ei=MjsUUc6CDc yC0QGz7IHwBA&zoom=1&iact=rc&dur=127&sig=100271102434434514522&page=1& tbnh=99&tbnw=229&start=0&ndsp=39&ved=1t:429,r:1,s:0,i:153&tx=80&ty=40 http://www.google.com/imgres?q=handcuffs+clipart&um=1&hl=en&tbo=d&biw=1 920&bih=878&tbm=isch&tbnid=86NwqCQtV7bxkM:&imgrefurl=http://reformed baptistblog.wordpress.com/&docid=wjaFpK_ZCX_gNM&imgurl=http://reforme dbaptistblog.files.wordpress.com/2011/07/handcuffs_clipart.gif&w=150&h=105&

READERS THEATER MOTIVATION AND FLUENCY

52

READERS THEATER MOTIVATION AND FLUENCY

53

READERS THEATER MOTIVATION AND FLUENCY

54

READERS THEATER MOTIVATION AND FLUENCY

55

All backgrounds and frames can be found by visiting Tracee Ormans store. http://www.teacherspayteachers.com/Store?Tracee-Orman http://www.google.com/imgres?q=five+dollar+bill&um=1&hl=en&sa=N&tbo=d&bi w=1920&bih=878&tbm=isch&tbnid=n8XmMVXMwsnv8M:&imgrefurl=http://www .valdosta.edu/~lomartin/ebook3.html&docid=FYn7nVaVDLq1OM&imgurl=http: //ww2.valdosta.edu/~lomartin/fivedollarbill.jpg&w=850&h=357&ei=MjsUUc6CDc yC0QGz7IHwBA&zoom=1&iact=rc&dur=127&sig=100271102434434514522&page=1& tbnh=99&tbnw=229&start=0&ndsp=39&ved=1t:429,r:1,s:0,i:153&tx=80&ty=40 http://www.google.com/imgres?q=handcuffs+clipart&um=1&hl=en&tbo=d&biw=1 920&bih=878&tbm=isch&tbnid=86NwqCQtV7bxkM:&imgrefurl=http://reformed baptistblog.wordpress.com/&docid=wjaFpK_ZCX_gNM&imgurl=http://reforme dbaptistblog.files.wordpress.com/2011/07/handcuffs_clipart.gif&w=150&h=105&

READERS THEATER MOTIVATION AND FLUENCY

56