Curriculum Critique: Materials Evaluation Form SPED 447 Spring 2012 Curriculum: Leveled Literacy Intervention Publisher: Heinemann

Copyright: 2007 General description (core, supplemental, intervention) Targeted learner It is a supplemental intervention Students to benefit from program: -Readers and writers struggling in many aspects of reading overall Students who would not benefit: -Students struggling in one specific area of reading or writing -Students placed in groups that are not properly leveled

Evidence to support effectiveness

In the Ransford-Kaldon, et. al. article: -Looked at the effectiveness of Leveled Literacy Intervention (LLI) as a tier 2 Response to Intervention literacy intervention. -Wanted to compare the level of literacy progress for students who receive LLI compared to students who only get the regular classroom literacy instruction. -Also wanted to see if LLI was being implemented with fidelity to the developers program model. -For students who struggle with reading and writing the LLI program can improve literacy achievement to a greater degree than classroom instruction alone for students in kindergarten through second grade. -It is proven to be successful with students in special education as well as English Language learners. In the Harvey, M. W. article: -This study tried to figure out if Reading Recovery or Leveled Literacy Intervention was a better intervention for literacy in early elementary school. -The study found the students in each program made significant literacy gains. However, it was inconsistent from student to student as to which intervention was more effective. -This helps prove the effectiveness of LLI, but it also shows that different interventions work better for different people.

Evidence to deny effectiveness

Due to this curriculum is so new, there have not been enough research done including using large enough sample sizes to show if the curriculum is effective on a large scale. From the Ransford-Kaldon, et.al article, The study cannot be generalized to urban settings. Work on many components of reading Students are placed at their instructional reading level Small groups allow for easy monitoring of students Builds on Previous Skills Varies the reading level to allow students to be challenged one day, and then a comfortable level the next Since it focuses on a broad range of skills, if student struggle with a specific skill then it doesnt account for that There is no/minimal generalization aspect Depends a lot on having parents work at home on lessons Does not allow for choices within reading or activities We would recommend this curriculum for students who are struggling with reading in general, but we would also supplement activities or incorporate other interventions along with the curriculum to cover more specific student needs.

Benefits

Challenges

Recommendation

Best learning environment for implementation

Small groups of learners who are at the same instructional reading level