The First 100 High-Frequency Words List: Building Fluency in Delayed Readers
-
1
National University of Ireland Galway, School of Psychology, Ireland
-
2
Emirates College for Advanced Education, United Arab Emirates
Introduction
Fluent readers can decode text smoothly and without hesitation (Binder, 1996; Hartnedy, Mozzoni & Fahoum, 2005). Frequency-building procedures, also known as fluency-building, involve timed “drills” where students repeatedly practice particular skills and receive feedback on their performance with the aim of building fast and accurate responding (Kubina, Yurich, Durica & Healy, 2016; Greene, McTiernan & Holloway, 2018).
Kubina and Yurich (2012) reported that the established beneficial outcomes of increasing fluency in academic skills included: (i) maintenance, whereby fluent performance is maintained over time, even after a period of no practice; (ii) endurance, where the skill can be performed at a high rate for prolonged periods of time; and (iii) stability, where the performance rate can be maintained even in the presence of distraction.
Method
The current study used a fluency-building approach to sight word acquisition for four children aged 6-7 years who were in receipt of additional support for reading. The target sight words were the first 100 high-frequency words, reported to comprise approximately half of all written words in the English language (Fry & Kress, 2006). The 100 words were divided into three stimulus sets with each word included twice, to comprise sets of 66, 66 and 68 flash cards. These word sets were targeted systematically in a multiple probe design across stimulus sets.
Following baseline probes for all word sets, the first set was targeted for frequency-building. Participants read the first flash card aloud and the experimenter pointed to a correct or incorrect pile, where the student placed the card and moved to the next one in the deck. Students were encouraged at the outset to read as many words as they could for one minute. When the timer sounded, participants counted the number of cards in each pile, wrote the scores on a data sheet and engaged in learning opportunities by practicing the words that they read incorrectly.
Participants completed a minimum of three timings per session and a maximum of five. The extra timings were completed if requested by the participant (typically when they were close to reaching the aim). Sessions were run on weekdays during school hours.
When the aim of 60 words per minute was reached on the first set, additional baseline probes were conducted on the second and third sets and then fluency-building was implemented for the second set. In this way, experimental control was demonstrated as untargeted sets remained at baseline level while targeted sets increased towards the aim.
Results
All four participants reached the aim of 60 words per minute on each word set within a three-week intervention period. Participants 1, 2, 3 and 4 completed the intervention in 8, 13, 10 and 11 intervention sessions respectively. They were able to maintain the rate per minute during a 5-minute timing (endurance). They also responded at a similar rate in the presence of distraction, when another student simultaneously read a contrasting word list (stability) and the rate per minute was maintained at 4-week follow-up (maintenance).
Conclusion
Fluency-building using the first 100 high frequency word list resulted in large gains for all participants. Furthermore, the fluency outcomes of maintenance, endurance and stability were observed. This represents an efficient and effective intervention for young readers who require extra support. Instruction took approximately 5-10 minutes each day and students were highly motivated to beat their previous day’s score; thus it was embedded into their daily routine easily. While phonics-based instruction remains an essential component in the teaching of reading (Torgerson, Brooks, Gascoine & Higgins, 2018), building fluency in high frequency words is likely to be a useful addition for overall reading development in all learners. Future research into fluency-building with phonics is warranted along with investigations into how best to combine phonics and the high frequency word list in fluency-based instruction.
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank Sarah Rehman and Nadia Ali for their assistance in collecting data for this study
References
Binder, C. (1996). Behavioral fluency: Evolution of a new paradigm. The Behavior Analyst, 19,163–167.
Fry, E. & Kress, J. E. (2006). The reading teacher’s book of lists, 5th Edition. San Francisco:
Jossey.
Greene, I., Mc Tiernan, A., & Holloway, J. (2018). Cross-Age Peer Tutoring and Fluency-
Based Instruction to Achieve Fluency with Mathematics Computation Skills: A
Randomized Controlled Trial. Journal of Behavioral Education, 1-27.Hartnedy, S. L., Mozzoni, M. P., & Fahoum, Y. (2005). The effect of fluency training on
math and reading skills in neuropsychiatric diagnosis children: A multiple baseline
design. Behavioral Interventions, 20(1), 27–36.
Kubina, R. M., & Yurich, K. K. L. (2012). The precision teaching book. Lemont, PA: Greatness Achieved Publishing Company.
Kubina, R. M.,, Yurich, K. K., Durica, K. C., & Healy, N. M. (2016). Developing behavioral
fluency with movement cycles using SAFMEDS. Journal of Behavioral Education,
25(1), 120–141.
Torgerson, C., Brooks, G., Gascoine, L., & Higgins, S. (2018). Phonics: reading policy and the evidence of effectiveness from a systematic ‘tertiary’review. Research Papers in Education, 1-31.
Keywords:
fluency,
Sight words,
reading,
Maintenance,
Endurance
Conference:
3rd International Conference on Educational Neuroscience, Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates, 11 Mar - 12 Mar, 2018.
Presentation Type:
Poster Presentation
Topic:
Educational Neuroscience
Citation:
Murray
CM and
Kelly
MP
(2018). The First 100 High-Frequency Words List: Building Fluency in Delayed Readers.
Conference Abstract:
3rd International Conference on Educational Neuroscience.
doi: 10.3389/conf.fnhum.2018.225.00027
Copyright:
The abstracts in this collection have not been subject to any Frontiers peer review or checks, and are not endorsed by Frontiers.
They are made available through the Frontiers publishing platform as a service to conference organizers and presenters.
The copyright in the individual abstracts is owned by the author of each abstract or his/her employer unless otherwise stated.
Each abstract, as well as the collection of abstracts, are published under a Creative Commons CC-BY 4.0 (attribution) licence (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) and may thus be reproduced, translated, adapted and be the subject of derivative works provided the authors and Frontiers are attributed.
For Frontiers’ terms and conditions please see https://www.frontiersin.org/legal/terms-and-conditions.
Received:
26 Feb 2018;
Published Online:
14 Dec 2018.
*
Correspondence:
Dr. Clodagh M Murray, National University of Ireland Galway, School of Psychology, Galway, Ireland, clodagh.murray@nuigalway.ie