Evaluation of the Content Literacy Continuum: Report on Program Impacts, Program Fidelity, and Contrast

The ups and downs of reading across content areas: The association between instruction and fluctuations in reading motivation.

“…We addressed teacher-directed activities with three binary variables indicating a teacher’s use of whole group, textbooks, and active monitoring of student work with worksheets. All of these practices included in the present study were those that demonstrated reliability estimates above .70 in previous studies (Corrin et al, 2012). Notably, none of these practices were considered mutually exclusive in our analysis.…”

“…To address our second research question, examining factors that might explain daily fluctuations in reading motivations (i.e., the DRMM as the outcome of interest), we captured instructional practices in the classroom and student characteristics. To address student-centered and teacher-directed practices associated with certain text types and features of the classroom social context we used the Activating Knowledge, Constructing Knowledge, and Extending Knowledge (ACE) observation protocol, which uniquely attends to content and literacy instructional practices (Corrin et al, 2012). To address motivation-rich instruction we included in this observation protocol supplementary items of commonly captured indicators in the motivation literature, with items on autonomy, competence, and relatedness.…”

“…The ACE is a tool to assess the dual use of quality literacy practices and content instruction in a given classroom, and was developed as part of an experimental study of quality literacy instruction by content-area teachers (Corrin et al, 2012; Lenz, Ehren, & Deshler, 2005). The instructional practices in the ACE protocol are composed of practices identified in the reading literature as high-quality practices for content and literacy instruction and includes student groupings (e.g., whole group, small group), and text choices (textbooks, trade books).…”