1

Running Head: READER’S THEATER VS IPAD GAMES: IMPROVING FLUENCY

The Effectiveness of Reader’s Theater vs. Educational IPad Games in Improving Reading
Fluency of Elementary Grade Students
Miranda Siler
Franciscan University of Steubenville
 2
READER’S THEATER VS IPAD GAMES: IMPROVING FLUENCY
Introduction
Fluency may be the most important skill for an emerging reader to acquire because

fluency unlocks the door to comprehension. Fluent readers do not focus on decoding words and

are better able to focus fully on comprehending a text. Fluency is composed of five measurable

skills: accuracy, expression and volume, phrasing, smoothness, and pace. There are varied

methods in fostering the development of these skills in students today. One approach is the use of

technology. Technology has become a major part of our culture. It has been said that the use of

technology in the classroom is no longer a luxury but a necessity for teaching students in

elementary schools today (Reutzel & Cooter, 2012). This seems to suggest that older strategies

may no longer be effective. Reader’s Theater is one such strategy pulled into question. Reader’s

Theater engages students in the reading of a text as well as performing that text as a play or skit.

Students read the text in the form of a script, practice their lines, and perform for an audience.

This strategy has been shown to develop expression, accuracy, and pace which are skills essential

to developing fluency. With the growing prevalence of technology, Reader’s Theater may no

longer be as engaging for students as compared to a more technological approach. This study

seeks to find the answer to this question.

Purpose
The use of technology in the classroom is growing in popularity. Many schools have

scheduled times to complete programs on computers, laptops, and other electronic devices. One

such device that has become more popular in the classroom is the iPad. IPads can be used for a

multitude of purposes such as research, presentations, and virtual field trips. Another popular use

for the iPad is educational games. These games are used to help build certain skills such as

reading fluency. With the prominence of technology in today’s classrooms, will a tried and true
 3
READER’S THEATER VS IPAD GAMES: IMPROVING FLUENCY
method such as classic Reader’s Theater or a modern method such as using educational iPad

games be more effective in improving reading fluency for elementary age students?

A study will be conducted that seeks to answer this question. The duration of the study

will last for two weeks. The first week will focus on using an iPad game to build fluency. It will

begin by administering a pre-test to assess students’ reading fluency, measured in correct words

per minute (CWPM). Students will then engage in the chosen fluency game throughout the week.

Finally, a post-test will be administered to measure any improvements. The second week, a pre-

test will again be administered to reestablish a baseline. Students will then engage in Reader’s

Theater throughout the week at the end of which another post-test will be administered. Results

of both methods will be compared to see which was more efficient in increasing the reading

fluency of the tested students.

It is hypothesized that Reader’s Theater will be more effective than the iPad game in

increasing the fluency of readers. This hypothesis is based on the idea that students will be more

actively involved in the Reader’s Theater strategy than the iPad game. This study hopes to show

that actively engaged students are likely to put in more effort and as a result build the skills

necessary to become fluent readers.

Review of Literature
As the use of technology increases in the classroom the effectiveness of this modern

method must be considered. An article by Shobana Musti-Rao, Ya-yu Lo, and Erin Plati (2014),

investigates this issue through testing the effects of using iPad applications for instruction in

reading. The purpose of this study was specifically, to observe the effects of instruction

administered through the use of an iPad app on sight word fluency and oral reading fluency. This

experiment was carried out with the participation of six first grade students who were identified

as being at risk for reading failure. The authors conducted two different studies. The first study
 4
READER’S THEATER VS IPAD GAMES: IMPROVING FLUENCY
consisted of three students participating in teacher-directed iPad instruction while the second

study consisted of three different students participating in self-mediated iPad instruction. The app

Sight Words: Kids Learn App was used in both studies. Sight word reading fluency was measured

in correct words per minute (CWPM). Students were tested before beginning iPad instruction to

etablish a baseline. The students’ maintained their regular routine during this part of the study.

IPad instruction consisted of students learning words from two different word lists and weekly

testing to assess developments in fluency. The students were also tested three weeks after the

iPad instruction came to an end to identify if fluency was maintained. The first study, teacher-

directed iPad instruction, resulted in an increase in the level of sight word fluency for each

student. The results of the maintenance tests indicated that two of the students maintained more

words from one list than the other. The third student scored higher on the maintenance test than

on the weekly assessments given during the study. The results of the second study also indicated

increases in sight word fluency. The mean increase ranged from 14.8 CWPM to 34 CWPM. The

results of the maintenance assessment indicated that two of the three students maintained the

sight words they had learned on both lists. The third student, however, scored higher than

previously on one list while maintaining what was learned on the other.

The authors clearly outline and organize important information throughout this article.

The article was insightful and included applicable information. However, the authors did not

make good use of graphs and tables. While the information of the article itself was clearly

defined the labels of graphs and charts were not. It was difficult to determine the results based on

the data provided in the graphs. The effect of technology, specifically iPad instruction, on

reading fluency was also discussed. The authors mentioned a helpful process of testing the

targeted strategy through testing before to establish a baseline and testing after. It was also
 5
READER’S THEATER VS IPAD GAMES: IMPROVING FLUENCY
helpful to the researcher to note the method of measurement, correct words per minute, and

calculation, finding the mean increase, that the authors used. Further research should be

conducted to measure the effectiveness of other iPad applications.

Authors Morgan, McLaughlin, Webe, and Bolich (2016), analyze the effectiveness of the

program Read Naturally. This program utilizes the repeated reading strategy. The purpose of this

study was to determine the effectiveness of the Read Naturally program in improving reading

fluency. Two third grade students, who were identified as struggling readers, participated in the

study. The authors used Read Naturally every day for thirty minutes over the course of eight

weeks. The program uses three methods to ensure words per minute (WPM) improvement which

include modeling, repeated reading, and progress monitoring. The design of the experiment was

a single-subject reversal design. To establish a baseline the authors calculated the WPM of each

student for a cold read which is the reading of an unfamiliar passage without any previous

practice. The author graphed the number of words per minute for four sessions for baseline 1 and

only one session for baseline 2. The authors also measured and recorded WPM for hot reads

which is when students read a story that is familiar. The authors found an increase in words per

minute from cold reads to hot reads. For participant one, the baseline average of words per

minute was 31.8 with a range of 24-36 WPM. This range increased after using the Read

Naturally program to a range of 15-42 WPM with an average of 29.8 words. Participant two

started with a baseline average of 18.3 WPM with a range of 14-25 words. This participant’s

average increased, after the implementation of Read Naturally, to an average of 22.4 WPM with

a range of 15-42 words.

The author’s specification of the methods used by the Read Naturally program was

beneficial and helpful to the reader in understanding the purpose of the study. Also, by providing
 6
READER’S THEATER VS IPAD GAMES: IMPROVING FLUENCY
background information about reading fluency, the author clarifies concepts for the reader that

makes the study easier to understand. There were no graphs or charts, however, to show the data

that the researchers collected which made the results difficult to comprehend. Furthermore, the

layout of the procedure and the method by which data was collected was unclear. It was difficult

to understand how the authors determined their results. However, the analysis of the effects of an

electronic reading program helped to inform this researcher’s study. This study could be

improved by comparing the effectiveness of the Read Naturally program to traditional methods

of repeated reading using books. Such a comparison could determine whether an electronically

based strategy has a greater effect in improving fluency.

Another study analyzed the effectiveness of using Reader’s Theater in the classroom.

This article by Martinez, Roser, and Strecker (2002) examines some of the effects of Reader’s

Theater such as increasing fluency and motivation. The purpose of this study was to examine the

influences of Reader’s Theater on improving the fluency of second-grade students. Two classes

of second-graders, a total of 28 students, participated in the study. An experimental design

methodology was used. Reader’s Theater was implemented over a period of time and students

were tested to see if reading fluency improved. Data was gathered through observation and

assessments. Many students began at different reading levels so the researchers provided three

different levels of books to meet the students’ needs. Each Monday the students’ classroom

teacher read aloud three new stories. The rest of the week was spent engaging in Reader’s

Theater. The students discussed the meaning and the content of the stories. The classroom

teachers provided the students with a mini lesson targeting a concept of fluency. Students then

received their scripts and throughout the week practiced reading all the parts. Parts were assigned

by the students to one another. Thursday consisted of rehearsing the assigned parts before the
 7
READER’S THEATER VS IPAD GAMES: IMPROVING FLUENCY
performance on Friday. The study lasted for ten weeks. The authors found that as a result of

Reader’s Theater the students made noticeable gains in their reading fluency. For example, one

student, before the project took place, averaged 74 words a minute but after the implementation

of Reader’s Theater this student was able to read 125 words per minute. Overall there was an

average rate of a 17-word increase. Reading levels also improved. Nine students gained two

grade levels and fourteen of the students gained one. Only five children showed no reading level

gain. The author also noticed an increase in motivation and excitement about reading. The author

explains how the students would invite their parents to performances and would choose to read

the original texts of their Reader’s Theater scripts during free time.

The author’s style aimed at grabbing the reader’s attention in this article. Academic terms

were clearly defined and assisted the reader’s understanding. Graphs and charts were distinctly

labeled and well explained. Useful information given about the effects of Reader’s Theater on

improving fluency helped inform the researcher. Considering this article is dated, the study could

be improved upon by replicating it in a classroom today. The question remains as to whether or

not Reader’s Theater will be as effective in a classroom with students who are accustomed to

using technology.

Though Reader’s Theater has shown its usefulness in helping develop fluency and oral

language, the strategy is antiquated. It stands to reason that many teachers still ask the question

“Yes, but will it work in my classroom?” Authors Mraz, Nichols, Caldwell, Beisley, Sargent, and

Rupley (2013) report on a teacher who asked herself this very question and conducted a study on

Reader’s Theater in her own classroom. The purpose of the study was to investigate whether or

not Reader’s Theater improved the fluency of struggling readers in her class. The participants

were nineteen third grade students age seven to nine. A pre-test and post-test were administered
 8
READER’S THEATER VS IPAD GAMES: IMPROVING FLUENCY
before and after the study. The study occurred in a weekly cycle. The first day consisted of

shared reading, the second day, echo reading, the third day, paired/partner reading, the fourth

day, choral/expressive reading, and the fifth day was the performance. This weekly cycle

repeated over the course of six weeks. At the end of the six-week period, results demonstrated

that students’ word recognition, measured in Words Correct Per Minute (WCPM), had improved.

Comparing pre-test and post-test results demonstrated an increase in students’ class average from

55 WCPM to 93 WCPM. Prosody, which was measured using the Multidimensional Fluency

Scale rubric, revealed a class increase from an average score of 5 to a score of 11. This was a

substantial gain considering that according to Rasinski, a score less than eight shows severe

weakness and is a cause for concern.

The organization of this article was unambiguous. It was coherent and easy to follow.

However, no graphs, charts, or sample rubrics were included in this article. Including these

would help to inform the reader’s interpretation of the results. The relevance of this study to the

study to be done, relates to its analysis of the impacts of Reader’s Theater on developing fluency.

Many researchers have investigated the effects of Reader’s Theater on improving fluency.

However, few studies have been done to analyze the effect Reader’s Theater may have on

comprehension. This could be the next step taken to improve upon the research of Reader’s

Theater.

Methodology
The methodology that was used in this study was of an experimental design. This was a

two-week long study which included five second-grade students that were classified as

struggling readers. These were students that the researcher frequently tutored in reading and felt

were a convenient sample for this study. The researcher tested the effectiveness of Reader’s

Theater the first week and the effectiveness of the iPad game Reading Fluency Builder the
 9
READER’S THEATER VS IPAD GAMES: IMPROVING FLUENCY
second week. To measure the increase in reading fluency, a 1-minute reading test was

administered before and after the targeted teaching strategy. The researcher found from previous

studies that this was the most frequent type of assessment used to measure fluency.

To conduct a 1-minute reading test the assessor chooses a grade level text of 200 to 300

words. A timer is set and the student is asked to read as much of the text as he/she can for one

minute. The assessor marks errors on their own copy of the text such as omitted words,

substitutions, or hesitations of more than three seconds. The total number of words read, subtract

the number of errors made, generates a score of correct words per minute ( Reutzel & Cooter,

2012). This number is the student’s reading rate and is how fluency was measured in this study.

The researcher tutored students at a local elementary school three days a week: Monday,

Wednesday, and Friday. The first week of the experiment was to test the effectiveness of

Reader’s Theater in improving fluency. The researcher had originally planned to test the iPad

game Reading Fluency Builder the first week, but was confronted with complications. On Friday,

the researcher administered the 1-minute reading pre-test to each of the five students and

calculated their CWPM scores. The researcher was going to engage the students in the iPad game

Reading Fluency Builder on the following Monday. However, there were difficulties with

procuring an iPad from the elementary school and downloading the Reading Fluency Builder

app. Considering these complications, the researcher decided to implement Reader’s Theater the

first week while resolving these issues.

On the following Wednesday, the researcher engaged the students in Reader’s Theater.

The Researcher read “Where the Wild Things Are” aloud to the students at the beginning of the

session. The researcher then gave each student a script for the story. The script that was used for

the story “Where the Wild Things Are” was found online. Before the script was read, the
 10
READER’S THEATER VS IPAD GAMES: IMPROVING FLUENCY
researcher assigned a part to each of the five students. Then the researcher provided markers for

each student to highlight his/her assigned role. The students read through the script as their

assigned parts and the researcher read the part of the narrator. The students were then allowed to

switch parts and choose what part they wanted to read next. The script was read a total of four

times. The last time the students read the script the author encouraged them to act out their parts.

The post 1-minute reading test was administered on Friday. The same passage was read in both

the post-test and the pre-test. This was to accurately measure the students’ growth in correct

words per minute (CWPM).

The second week of the study the researcher tested the effectiveness of the iPad game

Reading Fluency Builder in improving fluency. The researcher was not at the elementary school

on Monday due to fall break at the University she attends. The 1-minute reading pre-test was

therefore given on Wednesday. A different passage was used for the Reading Fluency Builder

pre-test and post-test than the Reader’s Theater pre-test and post-test. This was due to the

possibility that students’ CWPM score would increase because of repeated reading instead of the

iPad fluency game. The researcher engaged students in the iPad game Reading Fluency Builder

on Friday. The game consisted of four levels. The students had to start a timer and read as much

of the given passage as they could before time ran out. Students hit the stop button once they

were finished reading, and the game generated a score based on how much of the passage was

read. The passages increased in difficulty as the levels increased. The 1-minute reading post-test

was administered the following Monday.

Findings

The researcher found that both Reader’s Theater and the iPad game Reading Fluency

Builder increased students’ reading rate. To determine which strategy was more effective in
 11
READER’S THEATER VS IPAD GAMES: IMPROVING FLUENCY
improving reading fluency, a score was calculated for each based on pre-test and post-test results.

To calculate the scores the researcher first determined the difference between pre-test reading

rate and post-test reading rate for each activity. The difference calculated shows the increase in

correct words per minute for each student after completing each activity. This is referred to in

Table 1 and Table 2 as “CWPM Increase”. Each student’s CWPM increase for Reader’s Theater

was significantly higher than their CWPM increase for the iPad game Reading Fluency Builder.

Except for student five, whose CWPM increase for Reader’s Theater was three points lower than

her CWPM increase for Reading Fluency Builder. This can be seen in Table 1 and Table 2 below.

Table 1 Reader’s Theater 1-Minute Fluency Test Results

Pre-test Post-Test CWPM

(CWPM) (CWPM) Increase
Student 1 75 87 12
Student 2 56 77 21
Student 3 38 52 14
Student 4 75 87 12
Student 5 101 110 9
*CWPM- Correct Words Per Minute

Table 2 Reading Fluency Builder 1-Minute Fluency Test Results

Pre-test Post-Test CWPM

(CWPM) (CWPM) Increase
Student 1 85 91 6
 12
READER’S THEATER VS IPAD GAMES: IMPROVING FLUENCY
Student 2 73 82 9
Student 3 55 57 2
Student 4 85 93 8
Student 5 85 96 11
*CWPM- Correct Words Per Minute

This may mean that though Reader’s Theater was more effective for the majority of the

students tested, it may not be most effective in improving the reading fluency of all students, as

in the case of student five for whom the Reading Fluency Builder game showed to be more

effective. This indicates the importance of differentiating one’s instruction. There is no one size

fits all method for teaching students. Every student is different and therefore should be provided

with different learning experiences to meet his/her needs.

Student increases in CWPM were averaged to determine a mean increase for each

activity. The mean increase in CWPM for Reader’s Theater was (13.6) which was higher than the

mean increase of the iPad game Reading Fluency Builder with a score of (7.2). These results can

be seen in Figure 1 below.

 13
READER’S THEATER VS IPAD GAMES: IMPROVING FLUENCY
Figure 1

Effectiveness in improving Reading Fluency

16

14 13.6

12

10 Mean increase of Correct

Words Per Minute (CWPM)
8 7.2

0
Reader's Theater Reading Fluency Builder Game

Based on these results Reader’s Theater was more effective in improving reading fluency

than the Reading Fluency Builder game. This may be due to the fact that Reading Fluency

Builder only measured speed. It did not seem to recognize when students mispronounced words
 14
READER’S THEATER VS IPAD GAMES: IMPROVING FLUENCY
or skipped sentences. During Reader’s Theater, however, the researcher was able to help students

with difficult words and bring to their attention when they skipped a line. This helped students to

improve their accuracy. Reading the script multiple times also helped students to improve speed

because the more they read, the more familiar they became with the story. In comparison, when

playing Reading Fluency Builder, students moved from one level to another with the passage

changing each time.

Recommendations
 15
READER’S THEATER VS IPAD GAMES: IMPROVING FLUENCY
Research indicated that both Reader’s Theater and using an iPad game for instruction

were effective ways of improving students’ reading fluency. This study determined that Reader’s

Theater was more effective in improving fluency than the iPad game Reading Fluency Builder

for this sample of second-grade students. Further research should be done to determine the

effectiveness of other uses for the iPad in building reading fluency. Other uses may include,

using the iPad to view flashcards of vocabulary words, creating a virtual story, or listening to a

passage through a recording. It is possible that other uses of the iPad may be more effective than

the classic Reader’s Theater strategy in building fluency. Also, this study only compared the

effectiveness of each of these activities in improving the rate in which students read and their

accuracy. There are three other components of developing fluency: expression and volume,

phrasing, and smoothness. Further research could be done to determine the possibility that the

capabilities of an iPad may be more effective than Reader’s Theater in building these three

fluency skills.
 16
READER’S THEATER VS IPAD GAMES: IMPROVING FLUENCY
Though this study suggests the effectiveness of Reader’s Theater over Reading Fluency

Builder there were limitations to this study that should be taken into consideration. The first

limitation was the short duration. Only two weeks were allotted for the study which only allowed

one week for testing each activity. The requirements of the researcher’s tutoring job in which she

had to incorporate the study, provided other limitations. The researcher was present at the

elementary school only three days a week: Monday, Wednesday, and Friday and in addition to

the study was required to carry out her regular duties. This affected the way the study was

conducted. The activity was only engaged in for one day out of the three during the week. This

was to allow the researcher to carry out her normal responsibilities on the other days. The 1-

minute reading pre-test and post-tests were not administered on the same day that the targeted

activity was carried out because the amount of time the tutor was scheduled to work with the

selected students was only thirty minutes. Administering the pre-test and post-test on the same

day would have taken ten minutes of time away from engaging students in the activity. Not being

assessed right before and after the activities, however, may provide another limitation. The time

between the pre-test and post-test students were engaged in activities in their regular classroom,

including reading activities. These classroom activities in which students participated during the

time between the pre-test and post-test, may have also aided in improving students’ reading

fluency and possibly skewed the results.

 17
READER’S THEATER VS IPAD GAMES: IMPROVING FLUENCY
To improve upon the findings of this study other researchers should carry out each

activity for a longer duration of time. Engaging the students in each activity for the period of a

month may provide very different results. Also engaging the students in the activity each day for

a longer amount of time may show to be more effective in producing definitive results.

Researchers should also consider providing different assessments to test each activity for the

improvement of all five components of fluency rather than just one or two components.

Assessments should also be given in closer proximity to the strategy being tested. This will better

establish the accuracy of results.

Given the results of this study and the vast increase of the use of technology in the

classroom, the researcher suggests that while these new tools are very useful and helpful they

should not be relied upon completely. The researcher suggests that for the field of literacy a

variety of teaching strategies should be used to aid in building the skills necessary for students to

become fluent readers. Every student is unique which means there are many diverse needs in a

classroom of children. It is critical that each student’s needs are met so that they may become

flourishing readers.
 18
READER’S THEATER VS IPAD GAMES: IMPROVING FLUENCY

References
Beisley, R., Caldwell, S., Mraz, M., Nichols, W., Rupley, W., & Sargent, S. (2013). Improving

oral reading fluency through Reader’s Theater. Reading Horizons, 52.2, 163-180.

Martinez M., Roser N.L., & Strecker S. (2002). “I never thought I could be a star”: A Readers

Theatre ticket to fluency. The Reading Teacher, 52, 97-105.

McClanahan, B., Tate, S., & Williams, K. (2012). A breakthrough for Josh: How use of an iPad

facilitated reading improvement. TechTrends, 56 (3), 20-28.

Morgan, S.V., McLaughlin, T.F., Webe, K.P., & Bolich, B. (2016). Increasing reading fluency

using Read Naturally® with two third grade students with specific learning disabilities: A

replication of Erickson. Educational Research Quarterly, 40.1, 37-50.

 19
READER’S THEATER VS IPAD GAMES: IMPROVING FLUENCY
Musti-Rao S., Lo Y., & Plati E. (2014). Using an iPad app to improve sight word reading fluency

for at-risk first graders. Remedial and Special Education, 1-13.

Rasinski, T.V., & Griffith, L.W. (2004). A focus on fluency: How one teacher incorporated

fluency with her reading curriculum. The Reading Teacher, 58(2), 126-137.

Reutzel, D.R., & Cooter, R.B. (2012). Teaching children to read: The teacher Makes the

difference. Boston, MA: Pearson Education, Inc.

Websites Used to Obtain Materials

1-Minute Reading Tests:

Frauenhofer, (2016). Grade 2 oral reading.

Retrieved from

http://www.maryvaleufsd.org/webpages/kfrauenhofer/teacherresources.cfm?

subpage=10229

Reader’s Theater Script:

Young, C. (2016). Alphabetical listing of reader’s theater scripts with number of parts.
Retrieved from
http://www.thebestclass.org/rtscripts.html
 20
READER’S THEATER VS IPAD GAMES: IMPROVING FLUENCY
Appendix A- Reader’s Theater Script
Where the Wild Things Are
by Maurice Sendak
Characters (6): NARRATOR, CHILD 1, CHILD 2, CHILD 3, CHILD 4, MAX
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><
><><><><><>
NARRATOR: THE NIGHT MAX WORE HIS WOLF SUIT
CHILD 1: AND MADE MISCHIEF
CHILD 2: OF ONE KIND
CHILD 3: AND ANOTHER.
NARRATOR: HIS MOTHER CALLED HIM
CHILD 4: "WILD THING!"
NARRATOR: AND MAX SAID:
MAX: "I'LL EAT YOU UP!!"
CHILD 1: SO HE WAS SENT TO BED
CHILD 2: WITHOUT EATING ANYTHING.
NARRATOR: THAT VERY NIGHT IN MAX'S ROOM
MAX: A FOREST GREW, AND GREW, AND GREW UNTIL THE CEILING HUNG WITH
VINES
CHILD 3: AND THE WALLS BECAME THE WORLD ALL AROUND
CHILD 4: AND AN OCEAN TUMBLED BY
MAX: "WITH A PRIVATE BOAT!"
NARRATOR: FOR MAX. AND HE SAILED OFF THROUGH NIGHT AND DAY
CHILD 1: AND IN AND OUT OF WEEKS CHILD 2: AND ALMOST OVER A YEAR
MAX: TO WHERE THE WILD THINGS ARE!
NARRATOR: AND WHEN HE CAME TO THE PLACE WHERE THE WILD THINGS ARE
THEY
CHILD 3: ROARED THEIR TERRIBLE ROARS! (ALL ROAR)
 21
READER’S THEATER VS IPAD GAMES: IMPROVING FLUENCY
CHILD 4: AND GNASHED THEIR TERRIBLE TEETH! (ALL GNASH TEETH)
CHILD 1: AND ROLLED THEIR TERRIBLE EYES! (ALL ROLL EYES)
CHILD 2: AND SHOWED THEIR TERRIBLE CLAWS! (ALL SHOW CLAWS)
NARRATOR: TILL MAX SAID:
MAX: "BE STILL!"
CHILD 3: AND TAMED THEM
CHILD 4: WITH THE MAGIC TRICK
MAX: OF STARING INTO ALL THEIR YELLOW EYES
CHILD 1: WITHOUT BLINKING ONCE
NARRATOR: AND THEY WERE FRIGHTENED AND CALLED HIM
ALL: THE MOST WILD THING OF ALL!!
NARRATOR: AND MADE HIM KING OF ALL WILD THINGS.
MAX: "AND NOW, LET THE WILD RUMPUS START!! (PAUSE) NOW, STOP!"
CHILD 3: AND SENT THE WILD THINGS OFF TO BED
CHILD 4: WITHOUT THEIR SUPPER....AND MAX
CHILD 1: THE KING OF ALL WILD THINGS, SAID:
MAX: "I'M LONELY!"
NARRATOR: AND WANTED TO BE WHERE SOMEONE LOVED HIM BEST OF ALL
CHILD 2: THEN, ALL AROUND, FROM FAR AWAY, ACROSS THE WORLD
NARRATOR: HE SMELLED GOOD THINGS TO EAT!! SO HE SAID:
MAX: "I'LL GIVE UP BEING KING OF WHERE THE WILD THINGS ARE."
CHILD 3: BUT THE WILD THINGS CRIED
CHILD 4: OH, PLEASE DON'T GO
CHILD 1: WE'LL EAT YOU UP
CHILD 2: WE LOVE YOU SO
NARRATOR: AND MAX SAID:
MAX: "NO!"
 22
READER’S THEATER VS IPAD GAMES: IMPROVING FLUENCY
CHILD 1: THE WILD THINGS ROARED THEIR TERRIBLE ROARS (ALL ROAR)
CHILD 2: AND GNASHED THEIR TERRIBLE TEETH (ALL SHOW TEETH)
CHILD 3: AND ROLLED THEIR TERRIBLE EYES(ALL ROLL EYES)
CHILD 4: AND SHOWED THEIR TERRIBLE CLAWS (ALL SHOW CLAWS)
NARRATOR: BUT MAX STEPPED INTO HIS PRIVATE BOAT
CHILD 1: AND WAVED GOOD-BYE (MAX WAVES)
CHILD 2: AND SAILED BACK
CHILD 3: ALMOST OVER A YEAR AND IN AND OUT OF WEEKS AND THROUGH A
DAY
MAX: AND INTO THE NIGHT OF MY OWN ROOM
CHILD 4: WHERE HE FOUND HIS SUPPER WAITING FOR HIM
MAX: "AND IT WAS STILL HOT!"
 23
READER’S THEATER VS IPAD GAMES: IMPROVING FLUENCY
Appendix B- Reader’s Theater Pre-test/Post-Test Passage Student Copy
 24
READER’S THEATER VS IPAD GAMES: IMPROVING FLUENCY
Appendix C- Reader’s Theater Pre-test/Post-Test Passage Assessor Copy
 25
READER’S THEATER VS IPAD GAMES: IMPROVING FLUENCY
Appendix D- IPad Game: Reading Fluency Builder Pre-Test/Post-Test Student Copy
 26
READER’S THEATER VS IPAD GAMES: IMPROVING FLUENCY
Appendix E- IPad Game: Reading Fluency Builder Pre-test/Post-Test Assessor Copy