Journal of Behavioral Education, Vol. 7, No. 2, 1997, pp.

219-233

The Effects of Reading Racetracks on the

Sight Word Acquisition and Fluency of
Elementary Students
Lisa Rinaldi, M.Ed.,1 Dana Sells, M.Ed.,2 and T. F. McLaughlin, Ph.D.3,4

The effectiveness of using the reading racetrack drill and practice intervention
on the sight word acquisition and fluency of 15 elementary students was
examined in two separate experiments. A multiple baseline design across
participants was used. The participants were 15 third and fourth-grade students
attending a public (n = 10) or parochial (n = 5) elementary school. Participants
included children receiving special education services in a resource room, services
for learning difficulties, and those in a general classroom setting. Reading
racetracks IS a novel approach which employ error correction, timing, and
drill and practice procedures. This strategy also utilized drill and practice probe
sheets that resemble an automotive racetrack. The results indicated that during
the reading racetrack intervention all of the participants more than doubled
their correct rate in oral reading. There was also a marked decrease in the number
of errors made by each of the participants in this study. The implications of
employing reading racetrack procedures for practitioners are outlined.
KEY WORDS: reading racetrack; drill and practice; sight word acquisition; special education.

Regardless of the philosophical orientation, educators seem to agree that

literacy is one of the most important skills a student can apply to functional
living in our society (Slavin, 1996; Weaver, 1990). Research in reading indi-
cates that children who read well have a very high probability of achieving
1
Special Education Teacher, Spokane School District #81, Spokane, Washington.
2
Graduate Student, Department of Special Education, Gonzaga University, Spokane,
Washington.
3
Professor and Chair, Department of Special Education, Gonzaga University, Spokane,
Washington.
4
Correspondence should be directed to T. F. McLaughlin, Department of Special Education,
School of Education, Gonzaga University, Spokane, WA 99258-0001 or e-mail
tmclaughlin@soe.gonzaga.edu.

219
1053-0819/97/0600-0219$12.50/0 c 1997 Human Sciences Press, Inc.
220 Rinaldi, Sells, and McLaughlin

success in school (Slavin, 1989, 1991, 1996; Slavin, Madden, Dolan, Wasik,
Ross, & Smith, 1994). If these reading skills are not acquired and mastered,
children have an increased chance of later dropping out of school as well as
being incapable of performing successfully in today's society (Hansen & Ea-
ton, 1978; Howard, McLaughlin, & Vacha, 1996; McLaughlin & Vacha, 1992a,
1992b; Slavin et al., 1994; \fccha & McLaughlin, 1992,1993). Unfortunately, there
is a great deal of disagreement regarding how to increase the likelihood that
all students will leave our current educational system able to read fluently.
Many school districts have adopted a somewhat laissez faire approach
to teaching reading. Often, the approach they follow is labeled as whole
language (Weaver, 1990). With this approach, students are said to acquire
literacy naturally, in much the same way as they acquire oral language
(Altwerger, Edelsky & Flores, 1987; Goodman, 1986,1989). While some
students learn to read in this manner, an increasing number of students
appear to require a more structured and systematic approach to attain this
skill. Finally, recent scholarship and analysis has called into question the
efficacy of employing some of the whole language strategies with students
who are at risk for school difficulties (Liberman & Liberman, 1990). How-
ever, many schools continue to employ instructional methods that lack va-
lidity (Engelmann, Haddox, & Bruner, 1983).
While public schools usually have access to additional programs such
as special education, learning assistance services, or tutoring program to
help children who are at risk of having difficulties in reading, many paro-
chial schools do not qualify for the funding necessary to implement such
programs (Maddaus, 1991). Consequently, children attending parochial
schools depend upon their classroom teachers to develop and implement
supplemental reading programs that will assist them in this vital area of
instruction. Without such programs some students have had to seek assis-
tance elsewhere. This takes valuable time away from their education be-
cause of time spent traveling between locations (Morra, 1993). Although
some parochial schools do qualify for and utilize additional reading pro-
grams, these schools are rare and are inaccessible to most students receiv-
ing a private education (Lipkin, 1989).
According to the current research literature, there are several effective
and efficient teaching strategies to improve reading fluency. These include
skill based programs such as Direct Instruction (Carnine, Silbert, &
Kameenui, 1990), procedures that allow students to actively practice skills
(Lindsley, 1991), drill and practice (Barbetta, Heron, & Heward, 1993; Bar-
betta, Heward, & Bradley, 1993; Shapiro, 1996), classwide peer tutoring
(Greenwood, Delquadri, & Hall, 1989; Greenwood et al., 1987; Greenwood
et al., 1984; Greenwood, Hart, Walker, & Risley, 1994). The following
methods incorporated in our study contain a novel extension of several of
Reading Racetracks 221

these procedures. They employ the "model, lead, test, and retest" found
in the Direct Instruction procedures, the precision teaching techniques of
timed readings, fluency building, probe sheets, and student self-charting of
performance, and finally the use of drill and practice procedures (Barbetta
et al, 1993, 1993b; Shapiro, 1996). Finally, they conform to the Direct In-
struction principle of not introducing words which are auditorily and visu-
ally similar in the same lesson.
The purpose of our study was to determine the effectiveness of using
the "reading racetrack" practice procedure and precision teaching techniques
to increase the fluency of reading isolated Dolch Sight Words by elementary
school students in both the public and private education sectors. To assess
the ability to generalize the reading racetrack procedures, data were gathered
across children with different characteristics and demographics.

Experiment 1

METHOD

Participants and Setting

Ten students participated in the study. Seven had been diagnosed by

a multidisciplinary team as disabled and received special education services
in a resource room (see Table 1). The participants' disability designations
included learning disabilities, mild mental retardation, and health impaired
(including Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) and Juvenile
Rheumatoid Arthritis). Several participants also displayed mild to severe
behavior problems as well as other social/emotional difficulties. According
to the school psychologist and the special education teacher, two of the
participants also displayed many of the physical characteristics and behavior
patterns of children affected by Fetal Alcohol Syndrome (FAS) or Fetal
Alcohol Effects (FAE).
The three remaining participants had been referred to multidiscipli-
nary teams for assessment to determine program eligibility; but did not
qualify for special education services. These students continued to have dif-
ficulties in their regular classroom settings particularly in the areas of read-
ing and written language. The three participants were eligible to receive
services from the Learning Assistance Program (LAP) which is a special
program offered by the school district for students having difficulties in the
classroom in the area of reading. According to LAP statistics, participants
1, 2, and 3 were all reading in the lowest 10th percentile of children who
222 Rinaldi, Sells, and Mclaughlin

Table 1. Characteristics of Participants

Disability
Designation or Other Teacher
Participant/Gender Age Remedial Services Observations

P-l Female 10.8 No Disability/Normal Difficulties in all

Intelligence— LAP subjects particularly
Services, lowest 10% reading and written
in reading. Truancy is language.
excessive and Organizational skills
unexplainable are minimal and
assignments are often
incomplete
P-2 Male 9.6 No Disability/Normal Area of difficulty in
Intelligence— LAP classroom is reading,
services, lowest 10% in motivation, and does
reading not finish assignments
P-3 Male 10.3 No Disability, low- Little success with
average intelligence— classroom
LAP Services, lowest assignments, difficulty
10% in reading reading and spelling
P-4 Male 9.1 Learning Disabled, Difficulty staying on
Difficulty staying on task, inability to
behavior problems, finish assignments,
reading goals on IEP reading at grade 1.2
level
P-5 Male 11.5 Learning Disabled, Reading and
behavior problems, comprehension at
reading goals on IEP grade 2 level, lacks
motivation and
regularly removed
from classroom for
inappropriate
behavior
P-6 Male 9.3 Health Reading and
Impaired/ADHD, comprehension at
severe behavior grade 1.5 level,
problems, reading excessive
goals on IEP inappropriate
behavior occurs
regularly
P-7 Male 8.10 Learning Disabled, Recent sexual abuse
social/emotional has caused added
problems difficulties in
reading goals on IEP classroom, difficulties
in attending and
seems confused
regularly, teacher and
school psychologist
observed many
characteristics of FAS
Reading Racetracks 223

-]fable 1. Continued
Disability
Designation or Other Teacher
Participant/Gender Age Remedial Services Observations

P-8 Female 9.5 Health Frequent

Impaired/Juvenile hospital ization,
Rheumatoid Arthritis difficulty with reading
fluency, and finishing
assignments

P-9 Female 9.0 Health Difficulties with all

Impaired/ADHD, Mild classroom subjects,
(MR) reading goals on tactile sensitivity,
IEP teacher and school
psycholoist observed
many characteristics
of FAS

P-10 Female 10.5 Learning Disabled, Difficulties in all

reading goals on IEP subjects particularly
Reading, bone marrow
donor for brother with
Leukemia causes
frequent absences.
Student is highly
motivated

were served by this program. See Table 1 for additional information on

participants 1-10.
This study took place in the resource room of an elementary school
in a low-socioeconomic area in a large urban city in the Pacific Northwest.
The first author worked with each participant one-on-one, while the other
participants worked in pairs practicing their racetracks. The primary
teacher in the resource room had five years of teaching experience and
had an instructional aide and a volunteer researcher who implemented the
study. The researcher worked with each child for approximately five min-
utes daily at various times between 11:30 a.m. and 2:00 p.m. The school's
LAP instructor was also in the classroom at various times to assist with
data collection and to perform reliability checks.

Materials

A variety of materials were used: lists of Dolch Sight Word sets 1-4
were used, a stop watch, scratch paper, red and blue ink pens, and a data
224 Rinaldi, Sells, and McLaughlin

collection sheet devised for the experiment. The reading racetracks were
drill sheets designed to resemble an automotive racetrack.
The words read on the racetracks were taken from the lists of Dolch
Sight Words sets 1-4 that were commonly used in the school district. The
words taken from this list were carefully selected to avoid having any two
words on a particular racetrack that were either auditorily or visually similar.
There were two different types of racetracks, each containing 28 cells.
The first type of racetrack consisted of seven target words that were re-
peated in random order. The random order was an attempt to avoid the
occurrence of patterns which may have interfered with the participants
learning the words and instead focusing on and learning the pattern in
which the words appeared. Every fifth racetrack was a review racetrack
containing the accumulation of the 28 different words that were introduced
in the four previous racetracks.

Dependent Variables and Measurement Procedures

Two dependent measures were taken. The first was the number of
words read correctly from the reading racetrack during a 1-min timing while
the second was the frequency of errors during the same 1-min timed read-
ing. An error was defined as a word being read incorrectly, an omission
or addition of a word, or any words that were read out of order. An error
was not counted if the participant made a self-correction before going on
to the next word.

Experimental Design and Procedures

A multiple baseline design across participants was employed to evalu-

ate the effects of the reading racetrack procedure. A description of the
various conditions follows.

Baseline

The baseline consisted of having the participants read the lists of

Dolch Sight Words orally as they normally appeared. No instruction was
provided during this phase. The researcher recorded whether or not the
participants read each word correctly with the only addition to their regular
program was the use of timing. The participants were given the lists of
words and were told to read them as quickly and as accurately as they
could. The participants were aware that they were being timed, and they
Reading Racetracks 225

began reading when a researcher cued them to start. At the end of one
minute the researcher said, "Stop," praised them for their hard work and
cooperation, and then recorded the data. Baseline consisted of three 1-min
timings for participant 1, and an additional consecutive timing for partici-
pants 2 through 10. Participants were tested once per day.

Reading Racetracks

The procedures used during this phase were somewhat similar to those
during the baseline condition; however, the reading racetracks were used
in place of the Dolch Sight Word lists. At the beginning of each intervention
session, the participants were given the particular racetrack that he or she
was working on. The participant was then instructed to inform the re-
searcher when he or she was ready to begin. This was followed by the re-
searcher giving the cue, "On your mark, get set, go!" The researcher would
then keep track of the number of words read by placing a mark each time
the participant completed a full circle around the track. At the end of the
1-min timing, the researcher would say, "Stop!" The participant and the
researcher would then mark the word that was just read. Upon completion
of each 1-min timing, the participant would count the number of words
that he or she read and self-record the data. The first author would tally
the number of errors, give this number along with specific feedback to the
participant, who would then record these data below the number correct.
These data were then collected and documented by the researcher on the
data collection sheet.
At this point, the researcher would use the "model, lead, test and re-
test" Direct Instruction procedure to teach or review the words that were
missed by the participant. This procedure consisted of first modeling the
correct pronunciation of the word, then saying the word with the partici-
pant, the participant would then read the word independently, and finally,
the participant would be asked to reread the word correctly several more
times. This procedure took approximately one minute. The participants re-
mained on a given racetrack until they had reached the criterion of 90
words read correctly per minute with zero errors, or until they had com-
pleted five sessions on a particular racetrack.

Posttest

On the final day of the experiment the researcher retested the children
on the Dolch Sight Word lists that were used during the baseline phase.
226 Rinaldi, Sells, and McLaughlin

Reliability

Interobserver reliability checks were taken during a minimum of 30%

of the timed intervention sessions (range 11-17 reliability checks). The re-
searcher and another observer would independently tally the number of
words read correctly and the number of errors made during the 1-min tim-
ing. Many of the reliability sessions were also recorded on audio tape and
were later scored for reliability. The percentage of interobserver agreement
was calculated by dividing the smaller number by the larger number and
multiplying by 100. The overall percentage of total interobserver agreement
was 99.9% (range 99.8 to 100%) for corrects and 92.6% (range 78.8 to
100%) for errors. Reliability as to the implementation of the independent
variables was taken by audio taping 30% of the sessions. Total reliability
for fidelity of the independent variables was 100%.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The number of words read correctly per minute and the number of
errors per minute during baseline and reading racetrack sessions are shown
in Fig. 1. During baseline, the mean number of words read correctly by
the participants during baseline was 27.9 (range 9 to 57). and the mean
number of errors was 5.9 (range 0 to 19).
With the implementation of the reading racetracks there was an im-
mediate increase in the number of words read correctly by each of the
participants. The mean number of words read correctly during the read-
ing racetrack intervention phases was 83.9 (range 33 to 146) and the num-
ber of errors made during the reading racetrack phases was .66 (range
0 to 14). During posttest, the mean number of words read correctly was
62.4 (range 41 to 87), and the mean number of errors was 1.9 (range 0
to 6).
The reading racetrack procedure was not only effective in terms of a
marked increase in the number of words read in a 1-min period, but also
in the elimination of nearly all errors. We felt that the increase in correct
reading, which more than doubled the highest score during baseline for all
of the participants, was meaningful for the participants.
The purpose of Experiment 2 was to replicate the outcomes of Ex-
periment 1 with children enrolled in a parochial school setting. In this way
an attempt to examine the generality of the findings with another popula-
tion could be examined. Due to time constraints, we did not have the par-
ticipants self-chart their performance as we did in Experiment 1.
Reading Racetracks 227

Fig. 1. Correct reading and errors for participants 1-10.

228 Rinaldi, Sells, and Mclaughlin

Fig. Ib.
Reading Racetracks 229

Experiment 2

METHOD

Participants and Setting

The study took place in the third-grade classroom of a parochial ele-

mentary school in an upper socio-economic area in a large urban city in
the Pacific Northwest. The classroom was staffed by one teacher who had
six years teaching experience. The students were five third-grade students
in a class of 23 students. Each of the five students was determined by the
classroom teacher to be having difficulty in reading. The students, two
boys and three girls ranged in age from 8 to 10 years. Student 1, who had
a moderate speech impairment was the only student with a known dis-
ability. The researcher worked individually with the students within their
classroom setting. Each day, with the exception of Thursday, immediately
following their lunch hour at 12:50 p.m., the students were given a period
of time to complete work or spend time on free-choice reading. The stu-
dents were seated at a desk in the room and worked on their reading for
approximately 5 minutes. This study was conducted four days per week
for 15 weeks. There were six occasions where the students completed 2
sessions per day.

Procedure

Experiment 1 procedures were replicated, with the exception that the

students did not undertake self-recording of their data. Another difference
between Experiment 1 and 2 was the manner in which the students were
allowed to progress through the various reading racetracks. If the child read
greater than 90 words per minute from a specific reading racetrack, the
experimenter allowed the student to read the next review racetrack rather
than requiring the child to read each successive racetrack up to the review
racetrack. This was done to allow the students to progress through the vari-
ous racetracks as soon as possible.

Reliability

Interobserver reliability checks were taken during 27% of the sessions.

The overall percentage of interobserver agreement for total words read was
99.2% (range 79.4 to 100%). Reliability of the independent variable was
230 Rinaldi, Sells, and McLaughlin

taken by audio taping 27% of the sessions. Reliability for treatment fidelity
was 100%.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The number of words read correctly, and the number of errors during
baseline and reading racetrack sessions are shown in Fig. 2. The mean num-
ber of words read correctly during baseline was 41.1 (range 20 to 76) and
the mean number of errors made during baseline was 5.1 (range 0 to 10).
The mean number of words read correctly during the pretest portion of
Experiment 2 was 96.6 (range 57 to 119). The mean number of errors for
the pretest were 3.2 (range 1 to 6). With the implementation of the reading
racetracks, the overall mean number of words read correctly increased to
98.9 (range 52 to 156), and the mean number of errors decreased to 1.9
(range 0 to 17). The mean number of words read correctly in the posttest
was 109.4 (range 72 to 147) and the mean number of errors were 2.2 (range
0 to 5).

GENERAL DISCUSSION

These two experiments clearly demonstrate that the reading racetrack

procedure was effective with children with and without disabilities from
two settings. The improved reading fluency of the Dolch sight words ap-
peared to generalize to reading in context, with the five participants in
participants in Experiment 2. Likewise, all of the 10 participants in Experi-
ment 1 were able to generalize their rate and accuracy while reading the
Dolch Sight Word lists.
The reading racetracks procedure was practical, but did require the
use of one-to-one instruction. However, other effective programs to assist
children in the area of reading have employed one to one teaching (Slavin,
1996; Slavin et al., 1994). While implementing this program during the pre-
vious year (Rinaldi & McLaughlin, 1996), we discovered that the review
racetracks not only served as the cumulative review they were intended to,
but they also served as an efficient and effective initial assessment tool.
Following the baseline session, the researchers presented the participants
with the review racetracks. If a student was able to read the words on the
given review racetrack at the target rate, they would then move on to the
next review racetrack until reaching a point at which the student was unable
to read at an acceptable rate. Using this procedure, the researchers were
able to determine the appropriate placement for each participant.
Reading Racetracks 231

Fig. 2. Correct reading and errors for participants 11-15.

Another aspect of this program which made it very attractive and prac-
tical is the fact that after the initial session, subsequent daily sessions lasted
232 Rinaldi, Sells, and McLaughlin

only a maximum of five minutes for each participant. This, this program,
in conjunction with classwide peer tutoring, could offer individualized in-
struction for an entire classroom in less than 10 minutes of daily classroom
time. This could be especially valuable in grades 1 and 2 when students
are expected to learn and remember sight words that do not follow the
phonetic rules being taught.
Tb assist children at risk for difficulty in reading, active approaches
such as Direct Instruction, teaching code based reading, and active student
responding should be implemented. Reading racetracks are straightforward,
effective, and make use of several effective teaching methodologies.
The teachers involved were very impressed with the effects of the read-
ing racetrack program on the reading fluency of see-to-say words in isola-
tion with these students. The resource room teacher also planned to
implement this procedure with several other students who receive special
services in her classroom. It should be noted that all 15 of the participants
enjoyed the reading racetrack intervention and they were pleased with their
progress.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

This research was completed by the first two authors in partial fulfill-
ment of the Master of Education in Special Education from the Graduate
School at Gonzaga University, Spokane, WA. The authors gratefully ac-
knowledge Carol Hern for her development of the reading racetrack and
appreciate the assistance of Cheryl Anthony and Marquelle LaPorte in data
collection. A special note of thanks to Dr. Stephanie Peck for her assistance
with this paper. Copies of the materials can be obtained from the authors.

REFERENCES

Altwerger, B., Edelsky, C, & Flores, B. M. (1987). Whole language: What's new? The Reading
Teacher, 41, 144-154.
Barbetta, P. M., Heron, T. E., & Reward, W. L. (1993). Effects of active student response
during error correction on the acquisition, maintenance, and generalization of sight words
by students with developmental disabilities. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 26,
111-120.
Barbetta, P. M., Reward, W. L., & Bradley, D. M. (1993). Relative effects of whole-word
and phonetic-prompt error correction on the acquisition and maintenance of sight words
by students with developmental disabilities. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 26,
99-110.
Carnine, D., Silbert, J., & Kameenui, E. J. (1990). Direct instruction reading. Columbus, OH:
Merrill Publishing Co.
Reading Racetracks 233

Engelmann, S., Haddox, P., & Bruner, E. (1983). Teach your child to read in 100 easy lessons,
New York: Simon & Schuster.
Greenwood, C. A., Delquadri, J., & Hall, R. V. (1989). Longitudinal effects of classwide peer
tutoring. Journal of Educational Psychology, 81, 371-383.
Greenwood, C. A., Dinwiddie, G., Bailey, V., Carta, J. J., Dorsey, D., Kohler, F. W., Nelson,
C., Rotholz, D., & Schulte, D. (1987). Field replication of classwide peer tutoring. Journal
of Applied Behavior Analysis, 20, 151-160.
Greenwood, C. A., Dinwiddie, G., Terry, B., Wade, L., Stanley, S. O., Thibadeu, S., &
Delquadri, J. C. (1984). Teacher-versus peer-mediated instruction: An ecobehavioral
analysis of achievement outcomes. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 17, 521-538.
Greenwood, C. R., Hart, B., Walker, D., & Risley, T. R. (1994). The opportunity to respond
and academic performance revisited: A behavioral theory of developmental retardation
and its prevention. In R. Gardner III, D. M. Sainato, J. O. Cooper, T. E. Heron, W. L.
Heward, J. W. Eshelman, & T. A. Grass! (Eds.), Behavior analysis in education: Focus
on measurably superior instruction (pp. 213-223). Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.
Goodman, K. S. (1986). What's whole in whole language"? Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Goodman, K. S. (1989). Research and whole language. Elementary School Journal, 90, 207-221.
Hansen, C. L., & Eaton, M. (1978). Reading. In N. Haring, T. C. Lovitt, M. Eaton, & C. L.
Hansen, (Eds.), The fourth r: Research in the classroom (pp. 41-92). Columbus, OH:
Merrill.
Howard, V. F., McLaughlin, T. F., & Vacha, E. F. (1996). Educational capital: A proposed
model and its relationship to academic and social behavior of students at risk. Journal
of Behavioral Education, 6, 136-152.
Liberman, I. Y., & Liberman, A. M. (1990). Whole language vs. code emphasis: Underlying
assumptions and their implications for reading instruction. Annals of Dyslexia, 40, 51-76.
Lindsley, O. R. (1991). Precision teaching's unique legacy from B. F. Skinner. Journal of
Behavioral Education, 1, 253-266.
Lipkin, M. (1989). The school-search guide to private schools for students with learning
disabilities. Belmont, MA: School Search.
Maddaus, J. (1991). Should governments finance student attendance in private schools?: A
research opportunity. Orono ME: University of Maine.
McLaughlin, T. F., & Vacha, E. F. (1992a). School programs for at-risk children and youth:
A review. Education and Treatment of Children, 15, 112-120.
McLaughlin, T. F., & Vacha, E. F. (1992b). The at-risk student: A proposal for action. Journal
of Instructional Psychology, 19, 66-68.
Rinaldi, L., & McLaughlin, T. F. (1996). The effects of reading racetracks on the fluency of
see-to-say words in isolation by a student with learning disabilities. Journal of Precision
Teaching and Celeration, 13(2), 44-52.
Shapiro, E. S. (1996). Academic skill problems: Direct assessment and intervention. New York:
Guilford.
Slavin, R. E. (1989). Students at-risk for school failure: The problem and its dimensions. In
R. E. Slavin, N. L. Karweit, & N. A. Madden (Eds.), Effective programs for students at-risk
(pp. 3-19). Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Slavin, R. E. (1991). Chapter 1: A vision for the next century. Phi Delta Kappan, 72, 586-589.
Slavin, R. E. (1996). Education for all. Exton, PA: Swets & Zeitlinger Publishers.
Slavin, R. E., Madden, N. A., Dolan, L. J., Wasik, B. A., Ross, S. M., & Smith, L. J. (1994).
Whenever and where ever we choose: Replication of success for all. Phi Delta Kappan,
75, 639-647.
United States General Accounting Office. (1993). Compensatory education. Washington D.C:
Vacha, E. F., & McLaughlin, T. F. (1992). The social, structural, family, school, and personal
characteristics of at-risk students: Policy recommendations for school personnel. Journal
of Education, 174(3), 9-25.
Vacha, E. F., & McLaughlin, T. F. (1993). School failure and cultural capital: Families of
at-risk students. The Canadian School Executive, 13(6), 8-11.
Weaver, C. (1990). Understanding whole language. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.