2 0 WAYS T O . . .

Robin H. Lock, Dept. Editor

Increase Oral Reading

Fluency
R I C H A R D G. W E L S C H

Fluency (i.e., reading accurately and quickly) is a vital di- Use repeated reading with a teacher
mension of reading. Reading fluency is needed to be a 2 model. One procedure for enhancing fluency
successful reader. Our education system tends to over- is for teachers to model fluent reading by read-
look instruction on reading fluency, while stressing de- ing aloud to students (O’Donnell, McLaughlin,
coding and comprehension. Subsequently, many children & Weber, 2003). This listening preview provides
are not fluent readers, and a national concern has emerged
an opportunity for the learner to listen to a
(National Reading Panel, 2000). In fact, difficulty with
selection or a passage prior to instruction. Pre-
reading is one of the primary reasons students are referred
for special education services (Taylor, 2000), and chal- viewing increases the time a student interacts
lenges with reading fluency have long been considered a with the reading material and exposes students
common characteristic of students with disabilities and to the vocabulary, phrasing, and context before
special needs. The following strategies have been effec- reading the text themselves.
tive to increase oral reading fluency.
Use repeated reading with modeling
Use repeated reading. In this approach, 3 by a more proficient peer. In the context
1 learners practice reading one passage, at an of ongoing classroom organization, peers can
appropriate instructional level, until some pre- be used to model reading by reading aloud to
determined level of fluency is attained (Mastro- target students. Skilled readers can provide rich
pieri, Leinart, & Scruggs, 1999). Each reading oral reading models of appropriate reading rates
is timed, and then the level of fluency is charted, and phrasal organization. Peers can be effective
often by the students. A criterion (e.g., 100 words in providing the preview of the material before
per minute) or a specific number of repetitions the student reads independently (Gut, Bishop-
(e.g., 3–5 times) is generally specified. Goforth, & Farmer, 2004).

180 I NTERVENTION IN S CHOOL AND C LINIC VOL . 41, N O. 3, J ANUARY 2006 ( PP. 180–183)
 Use repeated reading, modeling with can foster oral reading fluency (O’Connor, Bell,
4 an audiotape/CD. Providing an audiotape/ Harty, 2002). Work with texts that are well
CD preview of the text to be read by the stu- within the reader’s independent instructional
dent improves reading fluency (Daly & Mar- range (i.e., minimum 90%–95% success rate).
tens, 1994). The student listens to the model,
Use predictable or patterned text.
then reads the passage independently. This ac-
tivity allows for an appropriate previewing ex-
11 Rhythmic, repetitive language structures in
children’s literature and nursery rhymes can aid
perience with limited personnel. For students
fluency (Douville, 2001).
who need more support, tape-assisted readings
can be completed. Here, students read aloud Use a word drill. Words missed during an
simultaneously or as an echo with an audio- 12 initial reading can be placed on flashcards and
taped model. practiced in isolation. The direct instruction on
challenging words can affect reading fluency
Use prepractice preview. This method of by improving student’s word recognition effi-
5 previewing allows the student to read (aloud or ciency. The student reads the passage, again,
silently) the assigned selection to themselves after the drill.
before the lesson. This pre-exposure allows the
student to become aware of text vocabulary, Use a phrase drill. Similar to word drills,
context, and features. 13 the phrase drill provides the opportunity to
practice error words in contextual phrases.
Use paired reading. This read-along pro- Hence, words are drilled using phrases in
6 cedure is exemplified when the teacher, or an- which they occur in the text. Students practice
other fluent reader, and the student read the text chunking or grouping thought units instead of
together (Nes, 2003). Read-along approaches focusing on single word-by-word reading.
would involve the learner spending more allo-
cated time actively engaged in oral reading Use a letter-naming drill. Letter–name
than a traditional round-robin procedure. 14 knowledge facilitates letter–sound knowledge
(Treiman, Tincoff, Rodriguez, Mouzaki, &
Use choral reading. This is another read- Francis, 1998). Students must visually discrimi-
7 along procedure in which several children nate the letter before they can develop ortho-
orally read the same passage in unison. graphic knowledge and the ability to decode
words. Students can practice rapidly naming
Use shared reading. The teacher introduces
8 the student to the text and reads it to them.
letters that are randomly presented, increasing
the rate correct.
Then the student reads the text to the teacher.
This is followed by the student reading the text
over successive trials to others (e.g., peer, par-
ents, etc.). In essence, the student shares the
reading with many listeners.

Use praise/attention. The implication is

9 that instructional attention to the aspects of
fluency enhances students’ awareness of fluency
production. Reading fluency improves when
students are cued to read faster. Rewards and
praise, contingent on increased fluency, can
have a functional effect on student performance
(Chafouleas, Dobson, & Martens, 2004).

Use appropriate-level text. Matching the

10 difficulty of the reading passage (e.g., length
and vocabulary) with the ability of the student,
while selecting engaging and appropriate texts,

VOL . 41, N O. 3, J ANUARY 2006 181

 Use corrective feedback. Teachers can Use a computer. Computers can be used
15 help students with accuracy by providing feed- 19 effectively to provide practice on reading flu-
back and guidance. This is exemplified by ency. Some software includes game-like activi-
teachers providing the correct words when stu- ties that promote reading speed by providing
dents’ read words incorrectly during oral read- feedback on work-attack skills and reading
ing. This can reduce the number of errors and, comprehension (Mastropieri & Scruggs, 2002).
in turn, increase reading fluency (Carnine, Sil- Additionally, computers can limit the number
bert, Kame’enui, & Tarver, 2004). of words (i.e., the amount of text presented) to
aid fluency.
Use models of fluent reading. By listen-
16 ing to good models of fluent reading, students Use a parent/school reading program.
learn how a reader’s voice can help written text 20 Encourage parents to increase the amount of
make sense. Teachers and other skilled readers time spent reading with their children at home.
should read aloud daily to students. By reading Schools can provide easily accessible materials,
effortlessly and with expression, the teacher is suggestions, and reinforcement to enhance read-
modeling for the students how a fluent reader ing curricula and provide additional opportuni-
sounds during reading. ties for practice (Kelly-Vance & Schreck, 2002).

Use classwide peer tutoring. Peer tutor- Persons interested in submitting material for 20 Ways
17 ing can provide additional practice for readers. To . . . should contact Robin H. Lock, College of Educa-
A reciprocal tutoring system allows for half the tion, Box 41071, Texas Tech University, Lubbock, TX
class to be reading at a particular time, while 76409-1701.
the other half is engaged in monitoring and
feedback. Mentor/tutors support a less fluent
reader by providing scaffolding.
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Richard G. Welsch, PhD, is an assistant professor in special
Use readers’ theatre. This activity has education at the University of Toledo. His scholarly interests
18 students rehearse a poem, joke, story, script, or focus on strategies for including children with mild disabilities
speech until they can read it with fluency and in the general education curriculum and oral reading fluency.
expression (Keehn, 2003; Worthy & Prater, Address: Richard G. Welsch, The University of Toledo, 2801
W. Bancroft Street, MS#954, Toledo, OH 43606-3390.
2002). Readers’ theatre provides an authentic
reason to engage in repeated readings while
providing a model of fluent reading. REFERENCES
Carnine, D. W., Silbert, J., Kame’enui, E. J., & Tarver, S. A. (2004).
Direct instruction reading (4th ed.). Columbus, OH: Prentice Hall.
Chafouleas, S. M., Dobson, R. L., & Martens, B. K. (2004). Fluent
reading as the improvement of stimulus control: Additive effects of
performance-based interventions to repeated reading on students’
reading and error rates. Journal of Behavioral Education, 13, 67–81.
Daly, E. J., & Martens, B. K. (1994). A comparison of three interven-
tions for increasing oral reading performance: Application of the
instructional hierarchy. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 27, 459–
469.
Douville, P. (2001). Using songs and chants as a source of predictable
text. Preventing School Failure, 45, 187–188.
Gut, D. M., Bishop-Goforth, J., & Farmer, T. W. (2004). The school
engagement project: Academic engagement enhancement. Prevent-
ing School Failure, 48, 4–9.
Keehn, S. (2003). The effect of instruction and practice through read-
ers’ theatre on young readers’ oral reading fluency. Reading Research
and Instruction, 42, 40–61.
Kelly-Vance, L., & Schreck, D. (2002). The impact of a collaborative
family/school reading programme on student reading rate. Journal
of Research in Reading, 25, 43–53.
Mastropieri, M. A., Leinart, A., & Scruggs, T. E. (1999). Strategies to
increase reading fluency. Intervention in School and Clinic, 34, 278–283.

182 I NTERVENTION IN S CHOOL AND C LINIC

Mastropieri, M. A., & Scruggs, T. E. (2002). Effective instruction for spe- Using brief functional analysis to select interventions for oral read-
cial education (3rd ed.). Austin, TX: PRO-ED. ing. Journal of Behavioral Education, 8, 203–218.
National Reading Panel. (2000). Teaching children to read (NIH Daly, E. J., III, Martens, B. K., Kilmer, A., & Massie, D. R. (1996). The
Publication No. 00-4769). Washington DC: National Institute of effects of instructional match and content overlap on generalized
Health. reading performance. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 29, 507–
Nes, S. L. (2003). Using paired reading to enhance the fluency skills of 518.
less-skilled readers. Reading Improvement, 40, 179–192. Dowhower, S. L. (1987). Effects of repeated reading on second-grade
O’Connor, R. E., Bell, K. M., & Harty, K. R. (2002). Teaching reading transitional readers’ fluency and comprehension. Reading Research
to poor readers in the intermediate grades: A comparison of text dif- Quarterly, 22, 389–406.
ficulty. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94, 474–485. Eldredge, J. L., Reutzel, D. R., & Hollingsworth, P. M. (1996).
O’Donnell, P., McLaughlin, T. F., & Weber, K. P. (2003). Improving Comparing the effectiveness of two oral reading practices: Round-
correct and error rate and reading comprehension using key words robin reading and the shared book experience. Journal of Literacy
and previewing: A case report with a language minority student. Research, 28, 201–225.
Education & Treatment of Children, 26, 237–254. Greenwood, C. R., Tapia, Y., Abbott, M., & Walton, C. A. (2003).
Taylor, R. L. (2000). Assessment of exceptional students: Educational and Building-based case study of evidence-based literacy practices: Im-
psychological procedures (5th ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon. plementation, reading behavior, and growth in reading fluency, K–
Treiman, R., Tincoff, R., Rodriguez, K., Mouzaki, A., & Francis, D. J. 4. The Journal of Special Education, 37, 95–110.
(1998). The foundations of literacy: Learning the sounds of letters. Kamps, D. M., Barbetta, P. M., Leonard, B. R., & Delquadri, J. (1994).
Child Development, 69, 1524–1540. Classwide peer tutoring: An integration strategy to improve reading
Worthy, J., & Prater, K. (2002). “I thought about it all night”: Readers skills and promote peer interactions among students with autism
theatre for reading fluency and motivation. The Reading Teacher, 56, and general education peers. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 27,
294–297. 49–61.
Levy, B. A., Abello, B., & Lysynchuk, L. (1997). Transfer from word
training to reading in context: Gains in reading fluency and com-
SELECTED RESEARCH prehension. Learning Disability Quarterly, 20, 173–188.
IN ORAL READING FLUENCY Noell, G. H., Gansle, K. A., Witt, J. C., Whitmarsh, E. L., Freeland, J.
T., LaFleur, L. H., et al. (1998). Effects on contingent reward and
Chard, D. J., Vaughn, S., & Tyler, B. J. (2002). A synthesis of research instruction on oral reading performance at differing levels of pas-
on effective interventions for building reading fluency with elemen- sage difficulty. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 31, 659–663.
tary students with learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disa- Steventon, C. E., & Fredrick, L. D. (2003). The effects of repeated
bilities, 35, 386–406. readings on student performance in the corrective reading program.
Daly, E. J., III, Martens, B. K., Dool, E. J., & Hintze, J. M. (1998). Journal of Direct Instruction, 3, 17–27.

VOL . 41, N O. 3, J ANUARY 2006 183