read naturally

I use it. I tend to like it as a fluency program. Essentially the program consists of short selections that are of high interest. The student starts with four vocabulary words and a simple picture then makes a written prediction (can practice writing good complete sentences). Then the child is timed cold on a first oral reading and the time is recorded. Next the student reads the selection along with listening to it read on tape. The tape reads the selection three times, from slower to faster. Thus the student hears an appropriate model of oral reading and is instructed to follow along. Tnen the child may answer comprehension questions on the reverse side, 4 multiple choice and a short answer. Finally the student is instructed to write a summary. I omit the latter, primarily in the interest of time. I handle the writing separately and my goal is to get the students through the Read Naturally program at a good pace. The final act in the sequence is for the child to read the passage orally for a final time. Indeed, they ALWAYS improve their oral reading time significantly and this is very reinforcing.

The program gets the students enthused (my students ask to be placed in the program) and they can see their growth. It also gets them interacting daily with print, reading short interesting selections multiple times. This in itself is the best way to get more words into the student’s repertoire of “sight” words. Though the comprehension questions are not difficult, they do not ace them, so they are forced to go back to the text to search, reread and to think. I am getting improved word reading, fluency and even comprehension with these students. I do continue to recommend giving programs a year with LD populations. I really don’t often find short term gains with older students, instead I find that if keep doing the things that work, the students will show improvements.

As an aside, I am testing for the annual review of a fifth grader. He was placed two years ago. He made modest gains his first year in my program, despite what I felt was good teaching. I placed him in Read Naturally just over a year ago and now he is showing real gains on my testing. Read Naturally is not singularly responsible and the things I did over the first year really did enter into the equation.

I don’t know if any of you ever see this pattern with students who are placed, minimal gains the first year and great gains the second. It appears that sometimes it just takes time to get the skills taught and to get them orchestrated and working together. Of course, that first year I am struggling with what to tell parents.

Thanks for the information. Have you used the computer software version of Read Naturally?