Reading Instruction By Classroom, Remedial, And Resource Room Teachers

Abstract

Reading instruction provided by classroom, remedial, and resource teachers in six schools was observed, in order to determine (a) whether remedial and resource teachers provided more proactive instruction than classroom teachers, (b) whether resource and remedial reading teachers engaged individuals more often than classroom teachers, and (c) whether there was congruence in the curriculum used by the three teacher groups. A time sampling procedure used to collect data indicated that, although resource teachers spent the most reading time on other academic subjects, the three groups did not differ in the proportion of time devoted to management, discipline, or proactive teaching techniques such as purpose setting, demonstration, or explaining how to do a reading task. Of the three teacher groups, remedial teachers were found to interact most often with individuals and least often with groups. Congruence in the curriculum used by the three teacher groups was supported by the finding that comparable time was devoted to comprehension, decoding, and indirect reading activities. Several interpretations are proposed for the finding of minimal differences in instruction between teacher groups. It is argued that findings do not provide support for widespread use of pull-out models of supplemental instruction.