Engagement as Intervention

Improving English I STAAR Scores Through Guided Literacy Practice

Authors

  • Ashleigh Bridges Texas A&M University - Texarkana

Keywords:

guided practice, engaged learning, STAAR , secondary, literacy , reading comprehension, writing, tutorials , English Language Arts education

Abstract

High schools may rely on tutorial periods to support students who have previously failed the English I State of Texas Assessments of Academic Readiness (STAAR) exam. However, these tutorials often rely on lecture, passive practice, or isolated worksheet completion, which are approaches that rarely promote active literacy engagement. This quantitative, quasi‑experimental pretest–posttest study examines the impact of implementing guided practice and engaged learning routines in a high school English I tutorial course serving STAAR retesters. Using classroom observations, behavior documentation, attendance patterns, and pre-post assessment data, the study analyzes how instructional shifts relate to performance on the December STAAR retest. Findings suggest that tutorials grounded in modeling, scaffolded practice, opportunities to respond, and collaborative literacy tasks are associated with higher engagement, fewer disruptive behaviors, and stronger assessment performance. Implications for English Language Arts teachers and literacy leaders are discussed, particularly in the design of tutorials that prioritize interaction and meaningful reading and writing practice.

                Keywords: state assessment; literacy; guided practice; tutorials; English Language Arts

References

Adamson, R. M., & Lewis, T. J. (2017). A comparison of three opportunity-to-respond

strategies on the academic engaged time among high school students who present challenging behavior. Behavioral Disorders, 42(2), 41–51. doi.org/10.1177/0198742916688644

Bajak, A. (2017, December 10). Lectures aren’t just boring, they’re ineffective, too, study finds.

Science. https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2014/05/lectures-arent-just-boring-theyre-ineffective-too-study-finds

Cooper, K. S. (2014). Eliciting engagement in the high school classroom: a mixed-methods

examination of teaching practices: A mixed-methods examination of teaching practices. American Educational Research Journal, 51(2), 363-402. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831213507973

Creswell, J. W., & Guetterman, T. C. (2019). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and

evaluating quantitative and qualitative research (6th ed.). Pearson.

Dean, K. L., & Wright, S. L. (2016). Embedding engaged learning in high enrollment

lecture-based classes. Academy of Management Proceedings, 2016(1), 10058. https://doi.org/10.5465/ambpp.2016.10058abstract

Center for Engaged Learning. (2019). Engaged Learning Resources - Center for Engaged Learning. https://www.centerforengagedlearning.org/engaged-learning

Fisher, D., & Frey, N. (2014). Better learning through structured teaching: A framework for the

gradual release of responsibility (2nd ed.). ASCD.

Guthrie, J. T., & Wigfield, A. (2000). Engagement and motivation in reading. In M. L. Kamil et

al. (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (Vol. 3, pp. 403–422). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

McDonald, D. M. (1998). The effectiveness of engaged learning for the low-socioeconomic

African American secondary student (Publication No. 9841593) [Doctoral dissertation, University of South Alabama]. ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global.

McDonald, M. L. (1997). Teaching microcomputer software applications (electronic

spreadsheets): Guided practice vs. independent practice (Publication No. 9841173)[Doctoral dissertation, University of Missouri]. ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global.

Moore, D. (2016). Engaged learning in the academy: Challenges and possibilities. Palgrave

Macmillan.

Pearson, P. D., & Gallagher, M. C. (1983). The instruction of reading comprehension.

Contemporary Educational Psychology, 8(3), 317–344. https://doi.org/10.1016/0361-476X(83)90019-X

Rosenshine, B. (2012). Principles of instruction: Research-based strategies that all teachers

should know. American Educator, 36(1), 12–19.

Shernoff, D. J., Kelly, S., Tonks, S. M., Anderson, B., Cavanagh, R. F., Sinha, S., & Abdi, B.

(2016). Student engagement as a function of environmental complexity in high school classrooms. Learning and Instruction, 43, 52-60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2015.12.003

Texas Education Agency. (2019). STAAR English I assessment blueprint. https://tea.texas.gov

Vaughn, S., & Fletcher, J. M. (2012). Response to intervention with secondary students with

reading difficulties. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 45, 241-253.

https://doi.org/10.1177/0022219412442157

Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes.

Harvard University Press.

Wang, M. T., & Hofkens, T. L. (2020). Beyond classroom academics: A school-wide and

multi-contextual perspective on student engagement in school. Adolescent Research Review, 5(4), 419-433. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40894-019-00115-z

Waymouth, H. (2019). Transforming teaching and learning: A review of No more telling as

teaching: Less lecture, more engaged learning. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 62(3), 352-354. https://doi.org/10.1002/jaal.896

Weimer, C. (2007). engaged learning through the use of brain -based teaching: A case study

of eight middle school classrooms (Publication No. 3272172) [Doctoral dissertation, North Illinois University]. ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global.

Downloads

Published

2026-03-03