The Effects of Super Speed 100 on Reading Fluency Jennifer...

THE EFFECTS OF SUPER SPEED 100 ON READING FLUENCY 1

The Effects of Super Speed 100 on Reading Fluency

Jennifer Thorne

University of New England


Abstract

The fluency activity, Super Speed, 100 was examined in a seventh grade class in North

Carolina to determine the effects on fluency and reading attitude. The students worked in

partners to alternately read aloud the 100 most frequently used words. Students were

intrinsically motivated by the competition to beat their personal record. The findings indicate

that Super Speed 100 positively impacts reading fluency, which could boost reading

comprehension.

Keywords: Super Speed 100, Whole Brain Teaching, reading fluency, fluency


Table of Contents

Title Page 1

Abstract 2

Table of Contents 3

Introduction 4

Participants 4

The School and Community 5

The Class and Students 6

Research Questions 6

Hypothesis 6

Ethical Considerations 7

Review of the Literature 7

Introduction 7

Background to the Study 8

Rationale 9

Physical Components of Reading 9

Whole Brain Teaching 10

Super Speed 100 12

Methodology 13

Sources of Data 13

Data Collection Procedures 13

Data Analysis 14

Data Validity Discussion 14


Results 16

Findings from the Student Survey 16

Super Speed 100 Findings 24

Discussion 30

Limitations of the Study 31

Action Plan 32

Conclusions 33

Further Research 34

References 35

Appendices 37

Introduction

Participants

The researcher, Jennifer Thorne, has been teaching Language Arts at Clayton Middle

School in North Carolina for eight years. Clayton Middle School is in the Johnston County

School District. The researcher has a Bachelor of Science degree from The Pennsylvania State

University in Education, English & Communications; she is working on a Master’s of Science in

Literacy from the University of New England.

Clayton Middle School is located in North Carolina. During the 2011-2012 school year,

there are approximately 761 students enrolled at Clayton Middle School, with 254 students in the

seventh grade. The majority of the student population, 61%, consists of Caucasian students, 23%

of the students are African American, 12% are Multi-racial, 3% are American Indian, and 1% is

Asian or Pacific Islander. Although the school has a growing Hispanic population, there is no


data to show how many Hispanic students are enrolled. Of the total population, 33% is

considered economically disadvantaged based on free and reduced lunch status. Students

enrolled in the Exceptional Children’s Program account for approximately 19% of the

population. Additionally, 4% of students receive additional classroom support through tier one

and tier two of the Response to Intervention initiative. Students with Limited English

Proficiency make up approximately 4% of the population. Finally, gifted students account for

about 9% of the school.

68 seventh grade students will be directly involved in the research. The student

population is composed of 34 male students and 34 female students. Although English is the

primary language for most students, seven students have Limited English Proficiency. The

students range from 11 to 15 years of age. Multiple ethnic groups are represented—Caucasian,

African American, Hispanic, and Multi-racial. Table 1 shows the breakdown of the ethnic

makeup of the students involved in the study.

Table 1

Ethnic Makeup of Students

Ethnicity Total Number Percentage (rounded)

Caucasian 33 49%

Hispanic 16 24%

African American 14 21%

Multi-racial 5 7%

Note: two Hispanic students withdrew from classes during the study.

The School and Community

Clayton Middle School is located in Clayton, North Carolina, which is approximately 17

miles from the State Capitol, Raleigh. Clayton and the surrounding area is home to


approximately 28,000 residents. Clayton Middle School is one of 13 middle schools in the

Johnston County School District, which is the sixth largest school district in North Carolina.

Clayton Middle is a School of Distinction.

The Classes and Students

The 68 7th grade students are in three classes of 24 students, 25 students and 19 students.

Each class has 60 minutes of instructional time for Language Arts.

The students are acclimated to the five rules of Whole Brain Teaching: follow directions

quickly, raise your hand for permission to speak, raise your hand to leave your seat, make smart

choices, and keep your teacher happy. The research will specifically target the effectiveness of

one Whole Brain Teaching Activity that develops fluency called Super Speed 100. Students read

100 of the most common sight words alternately with a partner in one minute during the Super

Speed 100 activity.

Research Questions

• How does Super Speed 100 improve reading fluency (specifically speed)?

• What is the effect of Super Speed 100 on reading fluency?

• How do Whole Brain Teaching activities effect the students’ attitudes and feelings about

reading?

• How does Super Speed 100 engage students as a fluency activity?

Hypotheses

Many of the students struggle with text features, literary elements and vocabulary, which

can impact their fluency.

Students will become engaged and motivated by the Whole Brain Teaching strategies and

activities, which will improve reading speed. As speed increases, students may improve reading


with prosody. As these skills improve, students will be able to focus on content, which will

improve their overall reading comprehension.

Ethical Considerations

The Principal determined that a consent form is not necessary because Whole Brain

Teaching Strategies are used daily at the school and fluency development is a natural part of the

curriculum. Student names will be changed to protect their identities and information. Students

are aware that their class assignments are used for examples outside of the class for research and

data analysis purposes.

Review of the Literature

Introduction

Without adequate reading fluency, students struggle with reading comprehension. In his

article, “Assessing Reading Fluency,” Dr. Timothy V. Rasinki (2003) stated:

“For years teachers thought that if students could learn to decode words accurately, they

would be successful in reading printed text. While it is true that accuracy in decoding is

important for fluency, it is not the entire story. Readers not only need to decode the words

accurately; they also need to decode them effortlessly or automatically. Fluency is

important in reading, then, because it affects how well readers understand what they

read.”

Therefore, one way to increase comprehension is to improve fluency.

It is estimated that non-fluent readers read less than readers of average fluency. Reading

can increase fluency and comprehension gaps among students. In fact, non-fluent readers, who

avoid reading, begin to exhibit a deterioration of reading skills and then fall behind in

achievement (Huang, Nelson, & Nelson, 2008).


Background to the study

Fluency weaves together three important skills—reading accuracy, speed, and prosody.

According to Gail E. Tompkins (2009) in Literacy for the 21st Century, “accuracy is the ability to

recognize familiar words automatically without conscious thought, and to identify unfamiliar

words almost as quickly.” She defines reading speed as “at least 100 words per minute,” which is

reached by most students in the third grade. Finally, Tompkins (2009) defines prosody as “the

ability to orally read sentences expressively.” However, Rasinski (2009) uses a different scale

for fluency; his scale is also measured in words read correctly per minute, but has different

norms. See Table 2. Yet another definition of fluency arises in William Grabe’s article,

“Fluency in Reading—35 Years Later,” when he states that fluency is the “ability to read rapidly

with ease and accuracy…to read with appropriate expression and phrasing… and text

comprehension is the expected outcome” (2010). All definitions of fluency agree that students

should be able to read automatically, accurately with expression and have the intent of

comprehension.

Table 2

Oral Reading Fluency (ORF) Target Rate Norms

Words Read per Minute (WPM)

Grade Fall Winter Spring

1 2 3 4

30-60 50-90 70-110

10-30 50-80 70-100 80-120

30-60 70-100 80-110 100-140

5 6 7 8

80-120 100-140 110-150 120-160

100-140 110-150 120-160 130-170

110-15- 120-160 130-170 140-180

Note: WPM indicates words read per minute. Target rates are established during the fall, winter and spring.


Rationale

Teachers must focus on all areas of fluency—speed, accuracy, and prosody to have

successful fluency instruction. If teachers focus primarily on reading rate and neglect expression

and accuracy, students will fail to comprehend the text they are reading (Rasinki, 2003). The

biggest challenge for teachers is how to increase fluency rates. Repeated readings provide

students with frequent opportunities to practice and increase their proficiency (Alber-Morgan,

2006). Another way to increase reading fluency is to provide performance feedback, which can

consist of the number of words students read correctly or incorrectly in one minute. Repeated

one-minute reading of the same text, in which the teacher or students track their progress, is

another way to help students improve their fluency (Nation, 2009). Students increase their

reading speed when involved in timed reading activities (Chang, 2010). Furthermore, when

students improve their reading fluency, they should be praised and rewarded in some way, even

tangible ways if necessary. As they continue to grow the rewards should diminish in frequency

in hopes that the student begins to read for pleasure. Finally, teachers should monitor students’

progress on a chart or graph because this enhances the effectiveness of the fluency instruction

(Alber-Morgan, 2006). Regular reading fluency instruction and assessment leads to successful

gains in reading fluency and eventual improvement in comprehension (Rasinki, 2003). In order

to read fluently, students should be taught to read and use words fluently and to recognize them

automatically (Grabe, 2010).

Physical Components of Reading

Students’ oral and silent reading fluency is connected. Most readers “hear” or use an

inner voice when reading silently, and readers can develop this voice and their fluency by

reading both orally and silently (Rasinki, 2003). Furthermore, to be able to increase reading


fluency, teachers must understand the physical component of reading—eye movements. Skilled

readers do not fixate on all the words in a reading passage; most skip over unimportant words,

such as “the” and “to.” The longer or more difficult a word is, the more likely a reader is to

fixate on it. Readers jump on average 1.2 words or eight letters when reading. Skilled readers

make about 15 regressions for every 100 fixations. Regressions occur because the reader made

too large of a jump or the reader did not comprehend what was read. Regressions are one way

readers self-monitor their reading (Nation, 2009). The number of words read correctly per

minute is important because if students are reading too little, then they are not fluent readers

because they are likely fixating on units smaller than words, spending a long time on each

fixation, or making many regressions. However, if students read too fast, they are scanning or

skimming the text and will not be able to answer comprehensive questions about the text

(Nation, 2009). Fluency, then, can be thought of like Goldilocks: the rate should be just right so

that reader can read accurately, automatically and expressively with the goal of comprehending

what was read.

Some studies make a distinction between reading rate and purpose for reading. For

instance, students have an baseline reading rate when reading to learn, a slower rate when

memorizing, and a faster rate when skimming (Chang, 2010).

Whole Brain Teaching

Whole Brain Teaching was once known as Power Teaching. The main principle of

Whole Brain Teaching is to engage students mentally, emotionally and even kinesthetically to

increase attention to class topics and decrease behavior disruptions. In fact, Whole Brain

Teaching addresses both academics and behaviors simultaneously by using short lessons,

competitive games and student involvement (Biffle). “Whole Brain Teaching keeps students


engaged in learning and makes classrooms easy to manage because it combines auditory, verbal,

and visual elements of teaching instruction” (Palasigue, 2009).

Whole Brain Teaching Rules. Teachers motivate and engage students by following five

simplified rules and by incorporating various teaching strategies and games. Each rule has a

gesture, which is taught when the rules are reviewed, so when a student breaks a rule, the teacher

can simply make the gesture. Also, some teachers have students practice the rules and gestures

during lunch or recess to dissuade them from breaking them repetitively (Biffle). The rules are:

follow directions quickly, raise your hand for permission to speak, raise your hand for

permission to leave your seat, make smart choices, and keep your dear teacher happy. In order to

get the attention of the class, the teacher simply says “class” and the class responds “yes.” The

class responds in whatever manner the teacher says class, so if the teacher says “classity class,”

the response is “yesity yes.” If the teacher wants students to pay particular attention to

instructions, the teacher says “hands and eyes” and the students place their hands on their desks

and focus intently. This alerts students to something important. Whole Brain Teaching

recommends teaching in short segments, then having students digest the information. One way

to have the students comprehend the information is to teach it to a partner; this method is called

“Teach-Okay.” The teacher says “teach” and the students respond “okay,” then teach the lesson

to their partner. When the teacher says “switch,” the students respond “okay,” then the other

student begins teaching. During these strategies, the teacher uses gestures and various tones,

which the students copy, so the students are constantly engaged visually, auditory, and

kinesthetically (Palasigue, 2009).

Whole Brain Teaching recognizes that students are motivated by competition, so one

technique to manage classroom behavior is the scoreboard. The scoreboard is used to motivate


students to follow directions, rules or other objectives identified by the teacher. Whole Brain

Teaching also incorporates academic games in which the object is for students to beat their

personal highest score. One of these games is called Super Speed 100, which is a game aimed at

developing reading fluency.

Super Speed 100

Super Speed 100 contains 100 sight words that make up approximately half of the words

students read. Sight words, such as “the, to, and, of” are some of the most common words in

English, so students should be able to read these words rapidly and automatically in order to be

successful in the classroom (Biffle, 2007). The words in Super Speed 100 are arranged by

frequency, thus “the” is the first word. According to the game’s creator, Chris Biffle, the words

are a combination of words from the Dolch and Frye sight word lists. They are arranged into

levels and every ten levels there is a challenge. The last challenge, level 100, should be

completed in 60 seconds. If students complete the final challenge, they move on to Super Speed

1000. The game is played in pairs; the students read alternate words on the list and if one partner

does not know a word or mispronounces a word, then the other partner helps. After they

complete a challenge, the students record their record (Biffle, 2007).

Super Speed 100 and Reading Fluency. Super Speed 100 provides students with the

opportunity to increase their reading fluency. First, the activity is repeated. Also, it helps

students focus on building automaticity because they are learning to read frequently used sight

words quickly. The students are challenged and motivated by the game and competitive nature

of beating their personal best scores. They receive feedback from their peers and the teacher and

their progress is automatically charted when they complete the activity so the student can see

their results.


Methodology

Sources of Data

Four sources of data were used and analyzed in this study—the student surveys, student

record logs (the recorded number of words read during Super Speed 100), the cloze assessment,

and teacher observation logs. The information gained from all four sources helped to determine

the impact of the Super Speed 100 reading fluency activity on students’ reading fluency—

specifically reading speed.

Data Collection Procedures

Clayton Middle School is committed to improving reading proficiency and decreasing the

number of office referrals for undesired behaviors and disruptions. The Whole Brain Teaching

strategies are can potentially improve reading proficiency while simultaneously creating an

engaging classroom environment that leads to less disruptions. The administration is supportive

of the implementation of Whole Brain Teaching strategies. Therefore, teachers are able to

implement strategies that align to the School Improvement Plan and the curriculum.

Students completed the final challenge of Super Speed 100, which contains 100 of the

most commonly used sight words in the English language. The activity was completed in pairs,

with students reading every other word aloud with a 60 second time limit. Afterwards, students

recorded the number of words they read on their record sheets. While students completed the

activity, the researcher recorded irregularities, distractions, influences, and comments on the

observation sheet. In order to assess changes or growth that could be attributed to the Super

Speed 100 activity, students were assessed before and after the study. The survey, completed at

the beginning and end of the study, was used to determine if Super Speed 100 impacted their

feelings or attitudes toward reading. Also, the results of the cloze assessment students


completed at the beginning of the study were compared to the results of the same cloze

assessment at the end of the study in order to evaluate reading fluency.

Data Analysis

Because Super Speed 100 is a timed activity, the words read per minute each time the

students complete the activity will determine how students are progressing. As the numbers

steadily increase, students’ fluency skills will be improving; if the words read per minute

decrease or are stagnant, then the fluency is not improving.

Student responses on the questionnaires will be analyzed for changes in attitude or

feelings towards reading or fluency from the onset of the study.

Data Validity Discussion

In order to guarantee thorough research, teacher researchers must consider validity,

reliability, and generalizability of the research (Mills, 2011 p. 101). Validity measures the

accuracy of the tests or surveys used in research. Valid tests and surveys accurately measure the

skills the researcher is targeting. Reliability refers to the consistency of a test. In a study, it is

important to have both a valid and reliable test, because researchers want to consistently measure

the correct variable. Finally, the research should be applicable in various settings or schools with

the goal of improving education; therefore, research should be generalizable.

The researcher discussed the validity of the research with the school’s principal,

technology specialist, and the Response to Intervention (RTI) specialist during separate

meetings. The two main data component, the student survey and the reading records were

discussed. The students will complete one survey at the beginning and a follow-up survey at the

end of the research period. The students will also record their reading times.


The principal expressed a concern about integrating the Whole Brain Teaching

philosophy and fluency activities into the classroom with fidelity. He believes that the activities

must be completed with fidelity in order to have the greatest impact on student performance.

Because of this concern, students completed the Super Speed 100 fluency activity two to three

times each week during the research data collection period. Students are familiar with Whole

Brain Teaching practices, reading activities and class rules. Completing the activity frequently

throughout the week will promoted reliability within the research.

The technology specialist has been involved in classroom research and has worked in a

variety of classroom settings. She suggested the use of an observation form, which would track

idiosyncrasies with student performances, absences or positive influences. The researcher used a

simple form that logged student interest in the activity, distractions, comments made during the

activity and positive or negative influences on the students at the time of the fluency activity.

Finally, the RTI specialist was consulted for her input on fluency assessment and data

analysis. She agreed that the pre and post student survey would be helpful to determine how

students’ attitudes change as a result of the fluency activities. However, she recommended

testing each student’s development actual Oral Reading Fluency (ORF) levels. The students

completed a cloze passage in Social Studies, so it was decided that that the data from the cloze

passage would be used for the pre-assessment and would be compared to the same cloze

assessment which will be completed at the end of the study period. However, both agreed that a

Maze assessment would have better assessed students’ ORF levels. Because data had been

collected, it was determined that it was too late to get an accurate baseline measure which could

be used to compare scores to at the end of the study. The close passage is a valid source,


however, there was some concern that students would recall the vocabulary words and inherently

receive a higher score on the ensuing completion.

After input from three colleagues, it was determined that the study needed to maintain

fidelity. A researcher observation form and Oral Reading Fluency assessments will be added to

the student survey and time logs in order to enhance the data collection and analysis during the

research study. This will give the research four total data resources. In his book about Action

Research, Geoffrey E. Mills (2011) refers to the “use of multiple resources of data” as

triangulation. Mills states that “researchers should not rely on any single source of data,

interview, observation, or instrument” when conducting Action Research (Mills 2011, p. 92).

Therefore it is necessary to include the student survey, ORF assessment, teacher observations,

and completion times on the fluency activity.

Results

Findings from Student Survey

The first information collected in the study was the student survey, which was used to

gain a baseline for the students’ feelings toward reading. The survey allowed students to respond

to questions by selecting one of five answer choices, which were arranged on a scale. At the end

of the study (approximately five weeks later), students completed a survey with identical

questions and three additional questions about Super Speed 100. In general, the most popular

answer was the average, indifferent, or the central answer choice. At the time of the first survey,

68 students were enrolled in the classes, but two students transferred and did not take the follow-

up survey.


According to the first round of the survey, 33 students felt that they read at an average

speed, whereas 22 students responded that they read somewhat fast or fast and 13 students said

they read somewhat slow or slow. On the second round, 38 students felt they read at an average

speed, with 23 stating they read somewhat fast or really fast and five stating that they read below

the average rate. Figure 1 shows the total number of student responses when students were

asked “how fast do you think you read?” on both rounds of the survey.

Figure 1

Figure 1. Students’ personal indications of their own reading speed. Each bar indicates the total

number of student responses when asked how fast they read before and after completing Super

Speed 100.

Student responses differed when they were asked how fast they read aloud. Figure 2

shows that 41 students stated that they read at an average rate when reading orally. However, 9

stated that they read aloud somewhat fast or fast and 18 stated that they read somewhat slow or

very slow when reading aloud. After they completed the Super Speed 100 activity for

58

33

20

214

38

18

5

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Very Slow Somewhat Slow

Average Somewhat Fast Really Fast


approximately five weeks, 38 students said they read at an average rate orally, while nine

reported that they were somewhat fast or really fast and 19 believed they read somewhat slow or

very slow when reading orally.

Figure 2

Figure 2. Students’ personal indications of their oral reading speed before and after completing

Super Speed 100. Each bar indicates the total number of student responses for each answer

choice.

Students mostly felt indifferent or disliked reading aloud in class. Before beginning

Super Speed 100, 51 students were indifferent or disliked reading aloud in class and 16

responded favorably. In the post survey, the responses were similar, with 51 students stating that

they felt indifferent or disliked reading in class (see Figure 3).

3

15

41

8

12

17

38

7

2

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Very Slow Somewhat Slow

Average Somewhat Fast Really Fast


Figure 3

Figure 3. Total number of student responses about reading aloud in class. Each bar indicates the

total number of student responses for each answer choice before and after completing Super

Speed 100.

Students were asked to rate to rate their attitude toward reading from dislike to love to

show how they felt about reading. The results for this question were relatively balanced,

although most students sated that they felt indifferent about reading; see Figure 4. In the initial

survey, 27 students gave a positive response, 22 were indifferent, and 19 provided a negative

response. In the follow-up survey, 31 students provided a positive response, 16 were indifferent

and 19 gave negative responses.

1214

25

12

4

9

18

24

12

3

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Strongly Dislike Dislike Indifferent Like It Love It


Figure 4

Figure 4. Students’ personal feelings toward reading before and after completing Super Speed

100. Each bar indicates the total number of student responses for each answer choice.

Although students ranged from strongly disliking reading to feeling indifferent toward

reading, all but 11 students considered themselves average or above average readers. Of the 68

students surveyed on the initial survey, 3 students stated that they were terrible readers, 8 said

they were bad readers, 30 said they were average readers, 21 stated they were good readers and

the remaining 6 said they were fantastic readers. Figure 5 shows how students rated their

reading abilities differently before and after completing Super Speed 100 for approximately five

weeks. In the follow-up survey, 21 students felt like average readers, whereas 8 rated themselves

as below average readers and 37 students said they were good or fantastic readers.

11

8

22

1413

6

13

16

22

9

0

5

10

15

20

25



Figure 5

Figure 5. Student responses to survey indicating their own reading ability before and after

completing Super Speed 100. Each bar indicates the total number of student responses for each

answer choice.

Students were asked about two components of being a good reader—comprehension and

reading with expression. Most students indicated that they understood what they read, see Figure

6, but many thought they read with average or below average amounts of expression, which is

indicated in Figure 7.

3

8

30

21

64 4

21

25

12

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

Terrible Bad Average Good Fantastic


Figure 6

Figure 6. Students’ personal indications of their reading comprehension. Each bar indicates the

total number of student responses for each answer choice before and after completing Super

Speed 100.

Figure 7

Figure 7. Student responses about their reading expressiveness before and after completing

Super Speed 100. Each bar indicates the total number of student responses for each answer

choice.

46

24

21

12

4 3

24 25

10

0

5

10

15

20

25

30


10

17

29

10

1

8

21 21

13

3

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

None Almost None Average Some A Lot


Students were asked how often they read at home. Figure 8 shows that student responses

were balanced.

Figure 8

Figure 8. Reading habits of students at home. Each bar represents the student reponses on the

survey conducted before completing the Super Speed 100 activities.

Super Speed 100 focuses on the most common reading words, so students were asked

about their vocabulary knowledge and ability to sound out unfamiliar words. As see in Figure 9,

all but six students believe they had an average or above average vocabulary. Figure 10, shows

that all students, except 10, believe they have an average or above average ability to sound out

unfamiliar words.

9

19

10

18

11

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

20

Never Rarely A Little Sometimes A Lot


Figure 9

Figure 9. Students’ rating of their vocabulary knowledge before completing Super Speed 100.

Figure 10

Figure 10. Students’ self-assessment at sounding out unfamiliar words.

Super Speed 100 Findings

Overall, most students improved from the first time they completed the Super Speed 100

oral reading fluency activity to the last time they completed the activity. Some students

improved from reading approximately 34 words per minute to 100 words per minute. The

average reading rate for all three classes was 71 words per minute (for each pair of students)

15

29

23

9

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35


3

7

2225

10

0

5

10

15

20

25

30



during the first week. By the fifth week, the average reading rate per minute (for each pair of

students) was 95 words per minute.

The 24 students in class one showed improvement from the first series, where the average

rate was 70 words per minute to the fifth, were the average reading rate was 88 words per

minute. Figure 11 shows overall growth for each student and the total number of words read

over the five series. Although many students read a small number of words per minute in the

first series, they improved over the ensuing activities.

Figure 11

Figure 11. Results of Super Speed 100 in Class 1. Each bar indicates one student and the color

denotes the student’s progress during each week. The highest possible words read per minute

each week is 100, with a highest possible total of 500. Students with missing data were absent.

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24

Series5

Series4

Series3

Series2

Series1


Students in class two improved their average reading rate from 66 words per minute in

the first week to 98 in the fifth week. By the fourth week, many students were reading

approximately 80 or more words per minute; see Figure 12 for class two’s specific results.

Figure 12




The students in class 3 started with an average reading rate of 76 words per minute (for

each pair of students) and improved to 99 words per minute. The overall class average was the

highest of the three classes and several students in this class reached 100 words per minute in the

second or third week. Figure 13 shows the results of the Super Speed 100 reading activity for

students in class three. Of the 19 total students in class three, eight students regressed for at least

one week during the five week period, even though their oral reading rate progressed overall.

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

Series5

Series4

Series3

Series2

Series1


Figure 13




Overall, students increased an average of 24 words per minute. When asked how the

Super Speed 100 activity impacted their reading and reading speed, eight students said that it had

no impact and nine students reported that it had almost no impact. Just as many students, nine,

reported that Super Speed 100 helped them a lot with their overall reading and seven stated that

it aided their reading speed a lot. Most students believed that Super Speed 100 had some

impact—29 students reported that the activity helped their reading speed and 24 said it helped

their reading overall. The rest of the surveyed students stated that Super Speed 100 helped them

an average amount, although more believed Super Speed 100 helped an average amount with

reading speed. Specifically, 16 students said Super Speed 100 helped with reading speed an

average amount and 13 students reported that the activity helped an average amount with overall

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19

Series5

Series4

Series3

Series2

Series1


reading abilities. Figure 14 shows how students felt Super Speed 100 impacted their reading

speed and reading abilities.

Figure 14

Figure 14. Student responses when asked if Super Speed 100 improved their reading and

reading speed. Each bar indicates the total number of student responses for each answer choice.

Many students were excited to complete Super Speed 100. When they began the activity,

they would say “yes!” or “oh, I like this.” Oftentimes, when students reached 100 words at the

end of the 60 seconds, they would express their excitement by saying “yes” or “we beat our

record!” Occasionally, when students did not beat their record or make it to 100 words

(especially if they were close), they would be disappointed. Some students would say “oh man”

and two different pairs of students hit their desk because they were so close to reaching 100

words. Two groups of students competed, which seemed to motivate their efforts, and when one

pair read more words than the other, they said “we beat you!” and the other pair said they would

beat them the next time.

8 9

16

24

98 913

29

7

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

Not at All Almost None Average Some A Lot

Reading Speed


Some students did not appear to be very motivated. One boy did not like his partner and

when the activity would begin, he would not have his materials ready, so they did not begin on

time. One pair of girls started later than the rest of the class, but then tried to continue after time

expired and were told a second time that they had run out of time. Some groups of students

would occasionally start slower than the rest of the class, which occurred with more frequency as

the students became more familiar with Super Speed 100 and showed more improvement with

the activity. When a student was absent, the present partner would be reassigned a temporary

partner within the class. Absences led to some missing data for students. Figure 15 shows how

students felt about completing the Super Speed 100 activity (when they were asked on the follow

up survey). Overall, 17 students rated it as an average activity, 13 students gave the activity a

negative rating, and 32 gave the activity a positive rating.

Figure 15

Figure 15. Student responses when asked if Super Speed 100 was engaging and an enjoyable

activity.

5

8

20

16 17

0

5

10

15

20

25

Strongly Dislike

Dislike Indifferent Like It Love It


Discussion

Changes in Student Feelings. When asked how well they comprehended what they

read, student results changed slightly after being exposed to Super Speed 100. In the pre-survey,

10 students stated that they had below average comprehension, 25 stated their comprehension

was average and 33 stated they had above average comprehension. After Super Study, the

students rated their comprehension slightly higher. Seven students said they had below average

comprehension, the same number, 24, said they had average comprehension levels, and 35 said

they had above average comprehension. When asked if they were good readers, which

encompassed both comprehension and fluency, 41 students said they were terrible, bad or

average in the pre-survey, and 29 said they were terrible, bad or average in the post-survey.

Furthermore, ten more students classified themselves as good or fantastic readers from the pre-

survey to the follow up survey. Initially, 27 students said they were good or fantastic readers,

but in the follow up survey, 37 students said they were good or fantastic readers. This does not

align with the students’ scores on the previous year’s End-of-Grade Test, completed in May of

their sixth grade year. Table 3 shows the sixth grade EOG scores for the students involved in

this study.

Table 3

Student Proficiency on Previous Year End-of-Grade Reading Assessment

Level Proficiency Level Total Competency Level

No Score Unknown 7

Level 1 Not Proficient 1 Below Average

Level 2 Not Proficient 11 Below Average

Level 3 Proficient 40 Average

Level 4 Proficient 9 Above Average


Positives gains can be attributed to consistent fluency practice. Students were motivated by

internal competition to do better than their own previous score and their peers’ scores. All but 17

students attributed some reading improvement to Super Speed 100; therefore, the evidence

suggests that Super Speed 100 increased fluency, which increased comprehension and reading

confidence.

Changes in Reading Speed. Every student involved in this study improved overall

reading speed from the first timed reading to the last timed reading on the Super Speed 100

reading activity. However, some students did not consistently improve and some students were

stagnant and received the same score each time during the timed activity. The study indicates

that Super Speed 100 positively impacts reading speed, which influences reading fluency.

Limitations of the Study

Students completed Super Speed 100 in pairs, so each student was impacted by their

partner. However, any changes in completion time were documented.

Because students were paired with a partner for this task, there was a possibility that the

students would lose focus or that students would lack motivation to beat their highest score.

Students were paired based on similar reading abilities based on scores on the North Carolina

End-of-Grade (EOG) reading test and the Discovery Education Assessment (DEA). Because

students were paired according to reading ability, they should be able to assist one another, but

there was a possibility that both students would fail to correct a pronunciation mistake. All

words were read aloud via choral reading to ensure that all students knew how to read and

rehearse the sight words. If one partner was absent, especially for an extended amount of time,

then this effected the other partner negatively. Some students were paired with another student


whose partner was absent or they joined a pair of students to complete the activity. Some

students were not pleased with their partner; however, caution was used when pairing students

and because the activity is short, they have a simple task on which to focus.

Student absences caused irregular fluency practice for both the absent student and the

partner. Although the student who was present for the day was matched with another student, it

caused some discomfort with students who were comfortable with partners. Furthermore,

partners were matched according to ability, and when one partner was absent, ability was not

considered when finding a temporary partner.

Some students were not comfortable with their initial partners. This happened with two

student pairings, which impacted four students total. In these cases, the students were able to

complete the assignment, although they had one timed reading impacted because they did not

start on time. With one pair, the students had materials, but did not want to share, so when time

started one student retrieved extra materials, causing the pair to start late. Another pair did not

share materials and one partner walked across the classroom to retrieve a pencil when time was

started.

Another influence on student achievement was the perception of this activity. Although

most students stated that they enjoyed this activity or were indifferent to the activity, 13 students

said they did not like it, which could impact the amount of effort they were willing to put into the

activity, and therefore impact the outcome of the activity.

Action Plan

Incorporating Super Speed 100 into classroom instruction must be done with fidelity in

order to ensure success. Initially, students must understand how to complete the activity quickly.


The activity should be set up as a game or break that allows students to compete with their

record, which helps engage and motivate them. Once students demonstrate mastery of the 100

sight words in Super Speed 100 by consecutively reaching 100 words, they are ready to continue

to Super Speed 1000, which includes 1000 sight words. Super Speed 1000 is completed in class

just as Super Speed 100—it includes the same time parameter and it requires students to track

their progress on the same record sheet. Figure 16 shows the action plan in which students

progress from Super Speed 100 to Super Speed 1000.

Figure 16

Figure 16. Students begin Super Speed 100, then reach the mastery level before progressing to

Super Speed 1000.

Because fluency is a major step toward comprehension, it is often addressed during

instructional planning. Super Speed 100 can be used to remediate students who struggle with

reading fluency and comprehension. This action plan was shared during a Professional Learning

Community meeting and during a faculty meeting.

Conclusions

The findings of the study indicate that the Whole Brain Teaching activity, Super Speed

100, has some impact on fluency. The average timed reading speed of each class improved

during the study. Furthermore, students were engaged by the activity and motivated by the

competition to beat their personal records. Students indicated that they enjoyed the activity and

Super Speed 100

0-100 WPM

Mastery of Super Speed 100

95-99 WPM

Consistantly

Super Speed 1000


the majority of students attributed their improvements to the rehearsed speed reading of Super

Speed 100.

Upon completion of the study, it was decided that a Maze assessment would have given a

more complete measure of each student’s Oral Reading Fluency than the cloze passage. This

would give more accurate data to indicate to what extent Super Speed 100 impacted actual

reading fluency, other than measured by the activity itself.

Further Research

Super Speed 100 is one activity within Whole Brain Teaching. The impact of Whole

Brain teaching strategies and classroom management needs further research. Specifically, how

these activities influence student performance in reading fluency and comprehension. Also,

more research about how Whole Brain Teaching activities motivate and engage students would

provide insight into how and to what extent these activities are successful. There is sufficient

research to support the hypotheses, which state that rehearsal of reading sight words will

improve reading fluency, which will in turn improve comprehension. However, the majority of

the research supports the link between fluency and comprehension. More research is necessary

to establish the link between rehearsed speed reading, like practiced with Super Speed 100, and

improvements in reading fluency.


References

Alber-Morgan, S. R. (2006). Ten ways to enhance the effectiveness of repeated

readings. Journal of Early and Intensive Behavior Intervention, 3(3), 2006.

Biffle, C. (2007). 60 power teaching case studies. Whole Brain Teaching. Retrieved from

http://www.wholebrainteaching.com/docman.html.

Biffle, C. (2007). Superspeed 100. Retrieved from

http://www.wholebrainteaching.com/docman.html

Chang, A. C. S. (2010). The effect of a timed reading activity on EFL learners: speed,

comprehension, and perceptions. Reading in a Foreign Language, 22(2), 284-303.

Grabe, W. (2010). Fluency in reading—thirty-five years later. Reading in a Foreign

Language, 22(1), 71-83.

Huang, L. V., Nelson, R. B., & Nelson, D. (2008). Increasing reading fluency through

student-directed repeated reading and feedback. The California School Psychologist, 13,

33-40.

Mills, E.G. (2011). Action research: A guide for the teacher researcher (Fourth Edition).

Pearson: Boston, MA.


Nation, P. (2009). Reading faster. International Journal of English Studies, 9(2), 131-

144.

Palasigue, J. T. (2009). Integrating whole brain teaching strategies to create a more

engaged learning environment. (Master’s thesis). Available from ProQuest

database.

Rasinski, T. V. (2003). Assessing reading fluency. Pacific Resources for Education and

Learning, Retrieved from www.prel.org/programs/rel/rel.asp

Tompkins, G. E. (2009). Literacy for the 21st century. (5th ed.). Boston: Prentice Hall.


Appendix A

Student Questionnaire

1. How fast do you think you read?

Very Slow Somewhat Slow Average Somewhat Fast Really Fast

2. How often do you read at home?

Never Rarely A Little Sometimes A lot

3. How do you feel about reading aloud in class?


4. How do you feel about reading?


5. How much expression do you read with?

None Almost None Average Some A lot

6. Do you think of yourself as a good reader?


7. How fast do you read aloud?


8. How well do you understand what you read?


9. Do you think you have a good vocabulary?


10. How are you at sounding out familiar and unfamiliar words?



Appendix B

Cloze Reading Passage

Words:

business communism criticized government wealthy

communist own poor produce system

The ideas of capitalism became important during the Industrial Revolution. Capitalism

means people _______________ their own businesses and keep the profits they earn. Business

owners decide for themselves what they want to _______________.

Industry growth sometimes caused depressions, periods in which _______________

activity is very slow, causing people to lose jobs and become _______________.

Some people critiqued, or _______________, capitalism and said it allowed business

owners to become _______________ while their workers were poor. Some people thought that

socialism was better. Socialism is a _______________ in which the _______________ controls

some businesses and social service programs such as education and healthcare.

In 1848, Karl Marx wrote a book about _______________. Under this economic system,

the government owns land and businesses and makes all the decisions. _______________

governments allow people very little freedom.


Appendix C

Teacher Observation Form

Date and Time of Activity:

Overall Student Interest:

Rate overall student interest: 1 2 3 4 5

Comments made by students at the beginning of the activity:

Possible Distractions:

Negative influences:

Positive Influences:

Absences/Partner substitutions:

Comments made by students at the conclusion of the activity:


Appendix D

Super Speed 100 (Final Challenge) from Whole Brain Teaching

Final Challenge: Read these 100 words perfectly!, the 100 most common words in English. This

level must be completed in 60 seconds or less!

the, to, and, he, a, I, you, it, of, in, was, said, his,

that, she, for, on, they, but, had, at, him, with, up,

see, all, look, is, her, there, some, word, out, as,

be, each, have, go, we, am, then, little, down, do,

can, could, when, did, what, so, not, were, get,

them, like, one, this, my, would, me, will, yes,

big, more, went, are, come, if, number, now,

long, no, way, came, too, ask, very, than, an,

over, yours, its, ride, into, just, blue, red, from,

good, any, about, around, want, don’t, how,

know, part, right, put, sound

(Biffle, 2007)

THE EFFECTS

Appendix E

Personal Word Record Log (Words Read Per Minute) from Whole Brain Teaching

Super Speed Personal Record Stars

Place a checkmark in a star each time you

(Biffle, 2007)

EFFECTS OF SUPER SPEED 100 ON READING

Word Record Log (Words Read Per Minute) from Whole Brain Teaching

Speed Personal Record Stars

Place a checkmark in a star each time you break a personal record!

N READING FLUENCY 41

Word Record Log (Words Read Per Minute) from Whole Brain Teaching


Appendix F

Maze Assessment (Suggested)

Oral Reading Fluency (ORF)

Suggested resource to assess ORF


Follow-up Survey Super Speed 100

1. How fast do you think you read?


2. How much as Super Speed 100 helped your reading?

Not at All Almost None Average Some A lot

3. How do you feel about reading aloud in class?


4. How do you feel about reading?


5. How much expression do you read with?

None Almost None Average Some A lot

6. Do you think of yourself as a good reader?


7. How fast do you read aloud?


8. How well do you understand what you read?


9. How much as Super Speed 100 helped your reading speed?

Not at All Almost None Average Some A lot

10. Do you like Super Speed 100?

Strongly Dislike Dislike Average Some A lot

The Effects of Super Speed 100 on Reading Fluency Jennifer...

Documents

Transcript of The Effects of Super Speed 100 on Reading Fluency Jennifer...