International Journal of Research in Teacher Education
ISSN (Print): 1308-951X -

Research article    |    Open Access
International Journal of Research in Teacher Education 2019, Vol. 10(3) 1-17

Teacher preparation and school partners: Pre-service teachers' impact on third to eighth grade students identified with reading challenges

James E. Gentry & Chris Sloan

pp. 1 - 17

Publish Date: September 30, 2019  |   Single/Total View: 155/772   |   Single/Total Download: 259/1.430

PDF Download

Abstract

School partnerships are essential to teacher preparation programs. Within respective school settings, pre-service teachers have opportunities to experience authentic, problem-based learning (PBL) situations with students who are identified with reading challenges (SIwRC). Educators providing SIwRC research-based reading interventions selected from data-based decision making (DBDM) processes are crucial to teacher preparation curriculum. This study investigated the holistic impact of a university-based partnership with public schools serving 3rd-8th grade SIwRC. This partnership involved 123 tutors (i.e., pre-service teacher) applying research-based reading interventions from DBDM reflective processes. Tutees' respective independent reading grade levels and reading comprehension measures significantly increased. The results support the need for providing pre-service teachers opportunities to practice DBDM processes when applying research-based reading interventions with SIwRC.

Keywords: Teacher Preparation, Partner Schools, Reading Interventions

How to Cite this Article?

APA 7th edition
Gentry, J.E., & Sloan, C. (2019). Teacher preparation and school partners: Pre-service teachers’ impact on third to eighth grade students identified with reading challenges. International Journal of Research in Teacher Education, 10(3), 1-17.

Harvard
Gentry, J. and Sloan, C. (2019). Teacher preparation and school partners: Pre-service teachers’ impact on third to eighth grade students identified with reading challenges. International Journal of Research in Teacher Education, 10(3), pp. 1-17.

Chicago 16th edition
Gentry, James E. and Chris Sloan (2019). "Teacher preparation and school partners: Pre-service teachers’ impact on third to eighth grade students identified with reading challenges". International Journal of Research in Teacher Education 10 (3):1-17.

References
  1. Adams, C.M., & Palmer, A.H. (2017). Toward a Positive Explanation of Student Differences in Reading Growth. Teachers College Record, 119(9). 1-9. [Google Scholar]
  2. Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavior change. Psychological Review, 84,191-215. [Google Scholar]
  3. Bandura, A. (2010). Self-efficacy in Changing Societies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. [Google Scholar]
  4. Barron, L., & Wells, L. (2013). Transitioning to the Real World through Problem-Based Learning: A Collaborative Approach to Teacher Preparation. Journal of Learning in Higher Education, 9(2), 13–18. [Google Scholar]
  5. Borman, G. D., Slavin, R. E., Cheung, A., Chamberlain, A, Madden, N. A., & Chambers, B. (2007). Final reading outcomes of the national randomized field trial of Success for All. American Educational Research Journal, 44(3), 701–731. [Google Scholar]
  6. Brown, A. L. (2018). Metacognitive Development and Reading. In Theoretical issues in reading comprehension: Perspectives from cognitive psychology, linguistics, artificial intelligence, and education (Vol. 11, pp. 453-478). New York, NY: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. [Google Scholar]
  7. Bruner, J. S. (1977). The process of education. Cambridge, Massachusetts and London: Harvard University Press. [Google Scholar]
  8. Cecil, N. L., Gipe, J. P., & Merrill, M. (2017). Literacy in grades 4-8: Best practices for a comprehensive program (3rd ed.). London: Routledge. [Google Scholar]
  9. Cheung, A. C., & Slavin, R. E. (2016). Effects of Success for All on Reading Achievement. AERA Open, 2(4), 233285841667490. doi:10.1177/2332858416674902 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  10. Clarke, P. J., Paul, S. S., Smith, G., Snowling, M. J., & Hulme, C. (2017). Reading intervention for poor readers at the transition to secondary school. Scientific Studies of Reading, 21(5), 408-427. doi:10.1080/10888438.2017.1318393 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  11. Camacho, H., Coto, M., & Jørgensen, K. M. (2018). How Does Organisational Culture Influence the Process of Change towards PBL? Journal of Problem Based Learning in Higher Education, 6(2), 32–57. [Google Scholar]
  12. Cumming, G., & Calin-Jageman, R. (2017). Introduction to the new statistics: Estimation, open science, and beyond. New York: Routledge. [Google Scholar]
  13. Deno, S. (2016) Data-based decision-making. In S. Jimerson, M. Burns, & A. VanDerHeyden (Eds.), Handbook of response to intervention (2nd ed., pp. 9-28). New York, NY: Springer. [Google Scholar]
  14. Dewey, J. (1944). Democracy and education. New York: Free Press. [Google Scholar]
  15. Dewey, J. (1997). Experience and education. New York: Free Press. [Google Scholar]
  16. Efendioglu, A. (2015). Problem-based learning environment In basic computer Course: Pre-service teachers achievement and key factors for learning. Journal of International Education Research, 11(3), 205-216. doi:10.19030/jier.v11i3.9372 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  17. Filderman, M. J., Toste, J. R., Didion, L. A., Peng, P., & Clemens, N. H. (2018). Data-based decision making in reading interventions: A synthesis and meta-analysis of the effects for struggling readers. The Journal of Special Education, 52(3), 174-187. doi:10.1177/0022466918790001 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  18. Gentry, J., Baker, C., Lamb, H., & Pate, R. (2016). Professionalization of teaching in America: Two case studies using educational research experiences to explore the perceptions of pre-Service teachers/researchers. Administrative Issues Journal: Education, Practice, and Research, 6(1), 52-71. doi:10.5929/2016.6.1.2 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  19. Gentry, J. E., Sloan, C., Pate, R. S. (2018). The engaged learning model: The impact of digital literacy and problem- based learning on fourth graders’ vocabulary and general reading outcomes. Association of Literacy Educators and Research Yearbook, 40, 163-179. [Google Scholar]
  20. Gillett, E., & Ellingson, S. P. (2017). How will I know what my students need? Preparing preservice teachers to use running records to make instructional decisions. The Reading Teacher, 71(2), 135-143. doi:10.1002/trtr.1609 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  21. Glomb, N., & Mason, L. L. (2017). Strengthening university/school district partnerships. Redesigning Special Education Teacher Preparation, 173-193. doi:10.4324/9781315518459-11 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  22. Helfrich, S. R., & Clark, S. K. (2016). A Comparative examination of pre-service teacher self-efficacy related to literacy instruction. Reading Psychology, 37(7), 943-961. doi:10.1080/02702711.2015.1133466 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  23. McCray, E. D., Rosenberg, M. S., Brownell, M. T., deBettencourt, L. U., Leko, M. M., & Long, S. K. (2011). The Role of Leaders in Forming School-University Partnerships for Special Education Teacher Preparation. Journal of Special Education Leadership, 24(1), 47–58. [Google Scholar]
  24. Nel, C. (2018). A blueprint for data-based English reading literacy instructional decision-making. South African Journal of Childhood Education, 8(1). doi:10.4102/sajce.v8i1.528 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  25. Otaiba, S. A., Baker, K., Lan, P., Allor, J., Rivas, B., Yovanoff, P., & Kamata, A. (2019). Elementary teacher’s knowledge of response to intervention implementation: A preliminary factor analysis. Annals of Dyslexia, 69(1), 34-53. doi:10.1007/s11881-018-00171-5 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  26. Packhem, J. (2017, December 26). Can't read? Go directly to jail. Do not pass go. Retrieved June 18, 2019, from https://medium.com/@judysantillipackhem/cant-read-go-directly-to-jail-do-not-pass-go-17f26d286a83 [Google Scholar]
  27. Pallant, J. (2007). SPSS survival manual—A step by step guide to data analysis using SPSS for windows (3rd ed.). Maidenhead: Open University Press. [Google Scholar]
  28. Park, V., & Datnow, A. (2017). Ability Grouping and Differentiated Instruction in an Era of Data-Driven Decision Making. American Journal of Education, 123(2), 281-306. doi:10.1086/689930 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  29. Piaget, J. (1977). The development of thought: Equilibration of cognitive structures. New York: Viking Press. [Google Scholar]
  30. Rosenthal, R. (1994). Parametric measures of effect size. In H. M. Cooper & L. V. Hedges (Eds.), The Handbook of research synthesis (pp. 231-244). New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation. [Google Scholar]
  31. Rucklidge, J. J., Mclean, A. P., & Bateup, P. (2009). Criminal offending and learning disabilities in New Zealand youth. Crime & Delinquency, 59(8), 1263-1286. doi:10.1177/0011128709336945 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  32. Shanker, J. L., & Cockrum, W. (2014). Ekwall/Shanker reading inventory (6th ed.). New York, NY: Pearson. [Google Scholar]
  33. Sheskin, D. J. (2011). Handbook of parametric and nonparametric statistical procedures (5th ed.). Boca Raton, FL: Chapman & Hall/CRC Press. [Google Scholar]
  34. Simola, H., Kauko, J., Varjo, J., Kalalahti, M., & Sahlström, F. (2017). Dynamics in education politics and the Finnish PISA miracle. Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Education. doi:10.1093/acrefore/9780190264093.013.16 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  35. Strauss, V. (2016, November 01). Hiding in plain sight: The adult literacy crisis. Washington Post. Retrieved May 21, 2019, from https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/answer-sheet/wp/2016/11/01/hiding-in-plain-sight-the-adult-literacy-crisis/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.1e2e2ba743c6 [Google Scholar]
  36. Stoehr, T. (2005). Is It a crime to be illiterate? Changing lives through literature: Offenders program report. Change, 37(2), 28. [Google Scholar]
  37. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in Society: The development of higher psychological processes (14th ed.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. [Google Scholar]
  38. Wachira, P., & Mburu, J. (2017). Culturally responsive mathematics teaching and constructivism: Preparing teachers for diverse classrooms. Multicultural Learning and Teaching, 14(1). doi:10.1515/mlt-2016-0023 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  39. Wanzek, J., Stevens, E. A., Williams, K. J., Scammacca, N., Vaughn, S., & Sargent, K. (2018). Current Evidence on the Effects of Intensive Early Reading Interventions. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 51(6), 612-624. doi:10.1177/0022219418775110 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  40. Wasburn-Moses, L. (2018). An analysis of conditions and trends in student teaching in the United States. Teacher Development, 22(5), 703-716. doi:10.1080/13664530.2018.1474130. [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
Meta
Vol. 10 (3)
Download
Metric
History
Related

Volume 10 Issue 3

September 2019

All Manuscript

International Journal of Research in Teacher Education

Copyright © 2025 International Journal of Research in Teacher Education.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. CC BY
All elements of this website were created using the BOQ™ - Intelligent Webverse System.