This study addressed the literacy needs of at-risk students, who entered first grade with less print related knowledge compared to their peers. This research project investigated the effects of combining two well-known instructional approaches: Shared Book Experience and the Language Experience Approach on at-risk students' literacy development. The seven at-risk students were chosen for this study based on informal assessments that placed them below their peers in literacy concepts. Quantitative measures were taken at six-week intervals to determine the effect of the intervention. These measures included students' knowledge of five print-related concepts: alphabetic knowledge, phonemic awareness, concept of word in print, word recognition, and oral text level reading. In addition, qualitative data was collected at six-week intervals to examine the types of instruction and interactions that occurred and how this influenced students' literacy development. This formative experiment was conducted for eighteen weeks and was implemented by the classroom teacher, who was also the researcher.

The results of this study demonstrate that a classroom teacher can substantially increase at-risk students' knowledge of written language using the combined SBE and LEA weekly routine. Importantly, this intervention resulted in placing seven students, who entered first grade with markedly less print related knowledge than their peers, at or above grade level status by the end of first grade. This is supported by the quantitative results, which indicated significant improvement in all measures of reading.

Going beyond quantitative results, the qualitative results provided a rich understanding of the types of instruction and discourse that occurred. Four major assertions emerged: (1) this intervention helped forge the connection between oral and written language; (2) the weekly routine provided a responsive instructional environment that allowed for continuous modification in order to address changes in students' literacy development; (3) the oral language, developed through this intervention, played a major role in developing students' knowledge of written language; and (4) the length, amount, and consistency of time in this intervention was necessary for students to develop and internalize foundational skills and strategies. This study has implications for classroom instruction, future research in classroom discourse, and professional development for teachers.