Launching the Tight 10 in Middle and High Schools

Written by Kate V. Crist and Dr. Ali Wilson 

This week we are thrilled to launch a pilot implementation project with schools in the Pacific Northwest! Our focus? Bringing fluency routines to older students through a research-based approach we call the Tight 10. Designed for use across core content areas, the Tight 10 is a structured, 10 minute routine aimed at improving oral reading fluency as a means to deepen comprehension of complex texts. Oral reading fluency is how students sound when reading grade-level text aloud, demonstrating speed  (reading at an appropriate pace), accuracy (recognizing words automatically), and prosody (reading with proper expression). But more than that - it also gives us important information about what they do when they read silently, which is how adolescents spend the majority of their time reading. This is one reason attending to fluency is so important in the upper grades - it’s the highest leverage way secondary teachers can support students to develop strong reading skills.  Before we dig into the ‘what’ and the ‘how’ of the Tight 10, let’s keep talking about why fluency is so important for older graders. 

Reading Fluency is a Literacy Accelerator

Reading fluency is often overlooked in middle and high school, despite being a key factor in reading comprehension. As Liben & Liben (2022) explain: 

"Fluency is the most visceral element of reading instruction. Students can hear and feel it when they’re improving. So can their teachers and families. This provides an element of intrinsic motivation to undertake fluency work." 

Yet research shows that nearly 80% of adolescents struggle with fluency, and explicit fluency instruction is rare in secondary classrooms. If more of us working in middle and high schools used fluency routines, they would become a powerful accelerator for adolescent reading skills.  Using fluency routines regularly helps to:

• Support comprehension of increasingly complex texts in the secondary grades

• Accelerate and extend literacy development for diverse learners

• Build student confidence in reading ability and help reinforce a student’s positive literacy identity

• Support secondary teachers to build foundational reading skills in a manageable and sustainable way without intensive training or knowledge

With clear routines, fluency work can evolve to include advanced skills like morphology, syntax, and decoding complex multisyllabic words.  

A Research-Based Protocol: Tight 10

The Tight 10 is a practical, research-based protocol that requires just 10 minutes,  three times a week. It empowers teachers to integrate fluency practice without requiring extensive training and help students build fluency, boosting their overall reading outcomes.

The design of the fluency work in the Tight 10 is based on current research, including: 

• Use High-Quality Texts Across Topics: Choosing grade level texts with that demonstrate different levels of complexity Include multiple genres to build fluency, knowledge, and stamina

• Provide Strong Fluency Models: Use teacher read-alouds or fluent peer models to demonstrate fluency. Highlight elements like prosody and syntax, allowing students to process and discuss what they observe

• Offer Purposeful Practice Opportunities and Provide Opportunities for Feedback: Center practice around  meaningful comprehension activities, like summarizing or answering questions. Listen and provide actionable feedback to support students’ prosody and accuracy

• Connect Fluency to Meaning-Making: Ensure fluency exercises support comprehension by including vocabulary and sentence/passage analysis.

Leveraging this research, we have designed a fluency protocol that centers grade-level, content-area texts, evidence-based fluency routines, and text-dependent vocabulary and comprehension tasks. Ideally, the Tight 10 can be used by content area teachers across a single school so that students are getting the benefit of 30+ minutes of fluency practice in a single day (a good dosage for older students). 

A lesson plan for a week of using the Tight 10 in an ELA class reading Shakespeare’s Macbeth would look like the following:

A Tight 10 lesson plan using Shakespeare's MacBeth

Structure of the Pilot Implementation Project

To enable successful adoption, we’ve structured the Tight 10 rollout into 4-6 week cycles, gradually introducing fluency routines and layering in comprehension, vocabulary, and multisyllabic word reading tasks. Here’s a look at the implementation process:

Cycle A	Introduce Fluency Routines
Cycle B	Fluency + Comprehension Tasks
Cycle C	Fluency + Vocabulary and Morphology
Cycle D	Fluency + Syllabication

Teachers will receive professional learning, classroom resources, and strategic support throughout the process. We will also ask teachers to gather evidence of implementation such as student work, recordings of students reading, and reflective notes on the implementation process. This evidence will be utilized to refine and enhance the Tight 10 based on real-world implementation. By the end of the 2024/2025 school year, we’ll have a fully developed framework ready for broader use. Please stay tuned for updates! 

Want to Start a Fluency Routine Tomorrow?

If you want more on reading fluency for middle and high school students or you want to start implementing a reading fluency routine right now, check out the blog post, You Want Me to Add Fluency? 

Research Referenced to Inform this Article

Casey, L. B., & Wright, L. H. (2022). Examining reading fluency and comprehension in middle school students with reading difficulties: Evidence from a cross-sectional study. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 40(3), 255-269. https://doi.org/10.1177/07342829211057809

Denton, C. A., Wexler, J., Vaughn, S., & Bryan, D. (2008). Intervention provided to linguistically diverse middle school students with severe reading difficulties. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 23(2), 79–89. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ790878.

Heistad, D. (2008). The effects of Read Naturally on fluency and reading comprehension: A supplemental service intervention (four-school study) [Unpublished manuscript]. https://www.readnaturally.com/userfiles/ckfiles/files/heistad-study_4schools.pdf.

Kim, J. S., Hemphill, L., Troyer, M., Thomson, J. M., Jones, S. M., LaRusso, M. D., & Donovan, S. (2017). Engaging struggling adolescent readers to improve reading skills. Reading Research Quarterly, 52(3), 357–382. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1146095.

Liben & Liben, 2022. Improving Foundation Reading for Older Readers: A Problem of Practice.

Manset-Williamson, G., & Nelson, J. M. (2005). Balanced, strategic reading instruction for upper elementary and middle school students with reading disabilities: A comparative study of two approaches. Learning Disability Quarterly, 28(1), 59–74. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ710417.

Reed, D. K., Aloe, A. M., Reeger, A. J., & Folsom, J. S. (2019). Defining summer gain among elementary students with or at-risk for reading disabilities. Exceptional Children, 85(4), 413–431. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1219248.

Sprague, K., Zaller, C., Kite, A., & Hussar, K. (2012). Springfield-Chicopee School Districts Striving Readers (SR) program. Final report years 1–5: Evaluation of implementation and impact. The Education Alliance at Brown University. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED600926.

Toste, J. R., Capin, P., Williams, K. J., Cho, E., & Vaughn, S. (2019). Replication of an experimental study investigating the efficacy of a multisyllabic word reading intervention with and without motivational beliefs training for struggling readers. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 52(1), 45–58. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1199704.

Vaughn, S., Solís, M., Miciak, J., Taylor, W. P., & Fletcher, J. M. (2016). Effects from a randomized control trial comparing researcher and school-implemented treatments with fourth graders with significant reading difficulties. Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, 9(sup1), 23– 44. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1115339.

Wanzek, J., Petscher, Y., Al Otaiba, S., Rivas, B. K., Jones, F. G., Kent, S. C., Schatschneider, C., & Mehta, P. (2017). Effects of a yearlong supplemental reading intervention for students with reading difficulties in fourth grade. Journal of Educational Psychology, 109(8), 1103–1119. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1160638.

Zimmermann, L. M., Reed, D. K., & Aloe, A. M. (2021). A meta-analysis of non-repetitive reading fluency interventions for students with reading difficulties. Remedial and Special Education, 42(2), 78– 93. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1287974.