ESL- First Grade Language Arts, Small Group Instruction/Comprehension

Instruction:
To ensure that all students understood what the expectations were for each lesson, the
objectives were verbalized and discussed in an age appropriate language. Students within this
group had a limited ability to read and/or distinct IEP goals, thus I found that engaging in a
detailed explanation prior to the lesson would be most beneficial for students to comprehend all
goals and objectives that were aligned to the MCCRS standards and Essential Skills and
Knowledge sought out for each lesson. The objectives for these lessons aligned to the reading
literature standards including RL1: Ask and answer questions about key details in a text. The
essential skills and knowledge required for this standard included applying appropriate strategies
before reading, viewing, or listening to a text by using prior knowledge and experiences to make
connections to the text, and making predictions or asking questions about the text by examining
the title, cover, illustrations/photographs/text, and familiar author or topic. They must also apply
appropriate strategies to monitor understanding during reading, viewing, or listening to a text by
recalling and discussing what is understood, identifying and questioning what did not make
sense, rereading difficult parts and using their own words to restate, and making, confirming, or
adjusting predictions. To demonstrate understanding after reading, viewing, or listening to a text,
students must retell and discuss the text and engage in conversation to understand the text.
Objectives have been derived specifically from the essential skills and knowledge to meet
MCCRS. Each day we built upon the previous days objectives of utilizing strategies in order to
scaffold the students skills.
The pre-assessment used before the three-day lesson was the Fountas & Pinnell
Benchmark Assessment System (BAS). This tool identified instructional and independent

reading levels within this small group. The assessment accurately identified all students to be
reading on level A. For my first lesson, the literature The Fox on the Box was based on the
results of the BAS to ensure that all students could successfully read an appropriately leveled
book for the lesson in order to apply the necessary reading strategies.

To assess if the objectives were appropriate and being met each day, a checklist as well
as anecdotal notes were used to monitor the skills students should be learning. On day one a

checklist, anecdotal notes, and a comprehension worksheet were used to reflect on the days
instruction. These informal assessments displayed students strong uses of prediction strategies
while all other areas were either progressing or in need of improvement. Anecdotal notes and the
comprehension worksheet showed a lack of interest in the literature. Students were not as
engaged in the literature as I would like. To address this for day 2, I revised the lesson and chose
a level A book, Maria Counts Pumpkins that correlated with the students upcoming events of
Halloween and a field trip to a pumpkin patch. Changing the subject matter for day two
drastically improved the level of engagement students had for the reading. All students were
more engaged as they had a lot of background knowledge and interest in pumpkins as well as
counting to seven. Utilizing the same checklist for day two displayed great improvement in all
areas including prediction, background knowledge, rereading, retelling, decoding, and their
overall understanding of the reading.

To motivate and engage students I implemented behavior management strategies, as all

students within this small group required strategies to maintain their attention. Students were
given opportunities to earn tokens when they were on task, modeling exceptional behavior, or
answering questions with great insight. This really helped keep all students excited to learn and
go above and beyond during the lessons. The token system was also used to give students
feedback back when they were answering questions successfully and being actively engaged in
the lesson. Students were also given a speaking animal, which is a stuffed animal they held as
they took turns speaking during instruction. This kept students engaged as they participated and
listened to others as they spoke.
In this unit, new strategies and skills were introduced to promote students overall
comprehension abilities while reading. Students were introduced to new strategies of prediction,
using background knowledge, rereading and/or adjusting predictions, and retelling to support
their comprehension of the texts. The three lessons of this unit included all three objectives to
reiterate how to use these strategies effectively and appropriately. The objectives included: 1.
Students will be able to apply appropriate strategies of background knowledge and prediction
before reading, viewing, or listening to a text by examining the title, cover, and illustrations of
the text as well as examining if the author or topic is familiar. 2. Students will be able to apply
appropriate strategies of rereading and/or confirming/adjusting predictions to monitor

understanding during reading, viewing, or listening to a text by identifying and questioning

whether what they read makes sense, then rereading and restating in their own words. 3. Students
will be able to demonstrate understanding of the text after reading, listening, or viewing the text
by retelling the story in their own words and engaging in conversation to facilitate their complete
understanding of the text.
To put into age appropriate terms I restated the objectives at the beginning of each lesson
as well as before modeling each strategy to make sure students were following along and
understanding the task. Objective one was re-stated as, Today we will use prediction to help us
understand what might happen in the story. We use the word prediction when we are guessing
what we think the book might be about before reading by looking at the cover, title, and pictures.
Today we will also use what we already know from our past experiences to help us in our
predictions about the book before reading. Before the reading of each text, I added and
reviewed new words found within the reading to a word wall for students to refer back to when
they had a difficult time reading and also to build upon their background knowledge of the new
words they will encounter. For each lesson I applied the objective by first modeling how to use
prediction and background knowledge. I used the teaching strategy of a think aloud to describe
aloud what I was thinking as I inspected the title, cover, and illustrations. The Fox on the Box
and Maria Counts Pumpkins were used over the course of three days to demonstrate how to
use prediction and background knowledge. For guided practice, students were given the
opportunity to use their own predictions and background knowledge to guide them through the
reading as we engaged in a grand conversation. This encouraged critical and creative thinking
skills as students discussed amongst each other what they thought might happen in the story by
using what they already knew about each topic. For independent practice, students were asked

individually about what their predictions were about the text before reading. When asked,
students had to explain in detail how they used their background knowledge to aid in their
predictions.
Objective two was also put into more age appropriate terms for first graders. Objective
two was restated, Along with using prediction and background knowledge to help us better
understand what we are reading, we will reread parts of the story to help us when we do not
understand what we just read. We will also look back at our predictions and see if they were
right. We will ask ourselves if we should keep our original guess or change them? These
objectives, as mentioned before, were restated as I introduce each new skill/strategy, since they
are very detailed objectives that are being addressed in every lesson. For each lesson I modeled
how to reread when I did not understand a part in the reading by thinking aloud when read to
the students. To model, I read allowed each page first. When a part of the story seemed
confusing or if I wanted to check for understanding, I demonstrated by rereading that section as
well as explaining why I needed to reread the section. For guided practice, students would
engage by echo reading and choral reading. Students were questioned after each page for
understanding. They were asked, does this page make sense? and do I need to reread to have
a better understanding?
Half way through the reading, I thought aloud once again to model how I readdressed my
prediction that I made at the beginning of the story. After modeling, I guided students to readjust
or confirm their predictions to encourage the development of critical and creative thinking
skills, I would ask students if their predictions still made sense now that we had read half of the
story. Students verbalized if they thought their predictions were correct or needed to be adjusted
before moving forward in the story.

Objective 3 was restated, After reading we will retell the story in our own words to
show that we understand what we just read. At the end of each story students were questioned
individually about what happened, in the beginning, middle, and end of both stories The Fox on
the Box and Maria Counts Pumpkins. Students engaged in critical and creative thinking when
asked what they thought were the most important part of the story. In detail, students described
their thoughts on the most important part of each story. The group then engaged in a grand
conversation to clear up any misconceptions and review what was read. For The Fox on the
Box students completed a comprehension worksheet that required them to write a sentence and
draw a picture about the most important part of the book. Along with the grand conversation, the
worksheet allowed me to assess whether students understood what they had read.
After reviewing the formative assessments from The Fox on the Box, day two spent
the first ten minutes reviewing from the day before. Students were given feedback on their
comprehension worksheet. Students were explained to that a complete understanding of the story
was not displayed in the formative assessments, so students needed to engage in additional
independent practice, utilizing the new strategies they learned the day before. I reminded them
of all the strategies that we had learned. I felt it necessary to have students engage in extra
practice to encourage further critical and creative thinking about the appropriate strategies they
should be using before reading the story Maria Counts Pumpkins so that students would have a
better understanding of how to use their strategies more effectively when reading a new story.
The extra practice proved beneficial. I observed students and completed a checklist as well as
took anecdotal notes. Students showed improvement from reading The Fox on the Box to
reading Maria Counts Pumpkins. Many students improved from N (needing improvement) to P
(progressing) or from P to M (meets requirements).

After reflecting on day twos lesson as well as reviewing the checklists and anecdotal
notes, I decided to revise the final day by reviewing both stories before completing each
assessment. While students were showing improvement, as shown on the checklist and in the
anecdotal notes, students were not at the point where they were able to read these stories
independently and apply the necessary strategies. Practice will need to continue in small group
after the three-day unit is complete. The final day of the unit involved reviewing both stories and
completing a summative assessment that assessed their overall comprehension of The Fox on
the Box and Maria Counts Pumpkins. All objectives were restated again as we reviewed each
story along with our strategies. Students within this small group were given an opportunity to
engage in critical and creative thinking by reviewing directly before the summative assessment.
In this time, students were able to put their newly learned strategies into use and discuss openly
with a partner or me about any difficulties or questions they had about what and how they were
reading. Reviewing the stories directly before the summative assessment also addressed students
attention difficulties and learning objectives stated on their IEPs. The assessment that correlated
with The Fox on the Box required students to match the cloze sentence with the correct
statement to complete the sequence of what happened in the beginning, middle, and end of the
story. In order for students to show their mastery of the objectives, students were asked to go
back to the story and use any strategies that they may find useful to determine an accurate
answer including, prediction, background knowledge, rereading, and retelling. For the story
Maria Counts Pumpkins, students were given an assessment that required them to match what
happened in sequential order after rereading the story. Again, students were asked to go back to
the story and use any strategies that they may find useful to determine an accurate answer.

The students within this small group either had IEPs or displayed great difficulty in their
reading and comprehension abilities. To address the needs of these students I differentiated
instruction in all aspects of this lesson. Each objective had specific goals of learning a new
strategy, including prediction, using background knowledge, rereading and/or adjusting
predictions, and retelling. To ensure that students understood how to use each strategy
effectively and appropriately, I scaffolded instruction. Before I began to explain and introduce
the new reading strategies I scaffolded by introducing new sight words that would be found in
the story. We reviewed these words 2-3 times before activating the use of strategies for reading.
When introducing a new strategy I first modeled how to use the strategy in the proper way. I did
think alouds to show students how I used each strategy before I read or as I was reading.
Students followed as they echoed my reading for guided practice. Students were also allowed to
ask other students for help or refer to the word wall if they needed help with reading a word.
Students were questioned throughout the lesson on how they used each strategy. This allowed
them to engage in independent practice, as they verbalized how they implemented each strategy
along the way.
All learning abilities, through differentiated instruction, were addressed within each
objective, as students had the opportunity to show what they knew by listening, reading, or
viewing the story. Some students were readers that were more fluent while others struggled and
relied on me to read aloud to them. One student within the group, who is non-verbal, lacks motor
skills, and relies on eye movements to communicate, was able to view and listen to the story
during instruction. To assess her comprehension skills, her assessments were modified to give
her two options to choose from when asked what the story was about. Each page was read
allowed to her and then she was asked what happened in the story. She had two images to choose

from that depicted an event within the story. I addressed her abilities by giving her the chance to
show what she knew through eye movements.
The students within this small group also completed tasks at varying rates. Some students
finished much earlier than others did. To address this I differentiated by adding centers that
students could work at to continue independent practice. Students could choose from working on
Sight words using the word wall, engaging in a CVC word activity (students use a series of 3
dice that when rolled creates a CVC word/nonsense word) or a Word work activity on their
device. While these centers did not address the objectives, they were added as an enrichment
activity to aid in their guided reading lessons.
In concluding this unit, students were able to complete all objectives according to their
learning goals and/or objectives on their IEPs. The important points of this unit included the
methods I used for engaging students to activate their creative and critical thinking skills. To do
this I displayed teaching strategies of modeling appropriate and effective ways to use reading
strategies, engaging students in guided practice, and in independent practice to encourage
confidence in their newly learned skills. Scaffolding all aspects of instruction for this small
group with specific needs also encouraged the progressing development of the students learning
of new skills and knowledge. In addition to researched-based teaching strategies, the use of
assessment guided the unit. The pre-assessment determined the placement of students in terms of
guided reading levels, which assisted me in grouping these five students together for a more
scaffolded instruction. The formative assessments guided me from one lesson to the next,
determining if instruction needed to be modified in conjunction to students learning. The
summative assessment gave me the opportunity to conclude whether students achieved all goals

and objectives for the unit, whether they needed further remediation, and if instruction was
successful and beneficial to all students within this small group.