Board Study Session

UPDATE ON ENGLISH LANGUAGE ARTS (ELA) IMPROVEMENT PLAN

STEPHANIE SMYKA, COORDINATOR OF ELEMENTARY ENGLISH LANGUAGE ARTS

DIANE BONI, DIRECTOR OF ENGLISH LANGUAGE ARTS

DECEMBER 1, 2009

Board Study Session

Summary of ELA improvement plan goals

High quality implementation of new elementary assessment system

High quality implementation of early literacy interventions

Increase literacy content knowledge of special education teachers

Greater use of student-centered, assessment-driven literacy instructional practices

Fountas and Pinnell Benchmark Assessment

Oral Reading Accuracy

Fluency

Comprehension Within the text Beyond the text About the text

Comprehension - fiction

WITHIN the Text BEYOND the Text ABOUT the Text

Tell me what happened…

Tell me more… Tell me why… What was the

problem/solution? What happened first? Explain the meaning of

the title

How do you think _____ felt?

What kind of person do you think ____ was?

What can you infer…? Why…? How did ____ change in

the story? Why did ____ change?

Tell why you think ... Connections

Is this a good story? How did the writer show

you…? How did the writer help

you …? What lesson is the author

trying to teach? Evaluate How did you like the

way the story ended? What might you change?

Comprehension - nonfiction

WITHIN the Text BEYOND the Text ABOUT the Text

Explain what you learned Give examples/details Give facts – what facts did

you learn? Tell me in your own

words… Can you find it in the text What did you notice

about…?

So what does that tell us is probably true about _____?

Why are ____ so important to ____?

What is the most important information/idea?

Why is it the most important information?

What causes that? What led to _____? How did ____ happen? What might happen if

_____? What did you learn that was

new information to you?

Why do you think the writer included (photographs/drawings, charts, tables, etc.) in the book?

How did the author help you to…?

Why did the author write this book?

Do you think the author was right in what he/she said?

Is the author credible? Why/why not? How do you know?

What did the writer do to make this book interesting?

Evidence: Fountas and Pinnell Benchmark Assessment Results – Fall

2009

Grade Percent Meeting Benchmark Percent Not Meeting Benchmark

1 74% 26%

2 77% 23%

3 73% 27%

4 69% 31%

5 68% 32%

District Average 72% 28%

Evidence: Monitoring

Walkthroughs School administrative teams Collaborative school and district administrative teams:

To date, collaborative walkthroughs have been conducted at 12 of the 13 elementary schools

Professional Development Focus of elementary principal meetings two times per year Focus of required reading specialist meetings two times

per year Embedded into BLIC sessions throughout the year

Building Level Monitoring School principals monitor progress quarterly through

regular Student Accountability Meetings Teachers/administrators utilize resources to continually

assess student progress toward instructional level goals monthly and/or quarterly

Next Steps

Continue collaborative walkthroughs and reflective conversations

Continued monitoring at the school level through student accountability meetings

Continued monitoring at the school level through the mid-year administration (January-March)

Continue embedding differentiated professional development at the school level

Reading Recovery Current Status: Instructional Text Level

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 TOTAL %age

AL 1 1 1 1 4 75%

EV 1 2 2 3 2 6 16 81%

HR 1 1 2 3 3 2 12 83%

LR 1 2 5 4 8 20 60%

PB 1 2 1 4 75%

PH 1 1 2 4 75%

PL 2 3 2 1 8 75%

WR 1 2 1 4 25%

Total: 1 5 15 13 17 10 9 2 72 70.8%


Reading Recovery (RR) teacher monitoring Students’ literacy knowledge assessed with Marie Clay’s

Observation Survey at the commencement of the intervention

RR teachers take a Running Record on each student daily RR teachers update comprehensive assessment

information at 5 week intervals (Independence Checks) RR teachers monitor student progress longitudinally

Professional Development – Reading Recovery teachers RR Teachers-in-training take students Behind the Glass 3

times/year RR teachers-in-training receive a minimum of 3 building-

based coaching visits per year from RR teacher leader RR teachers-in-training attend class weekly on Tuesday

evenings

Evidence: Monitoring (continued)

Trained RR teachers take students Behind the Glass 1 time/year

Trained RR teachers participate in monthly Continuing Contact sessions

RR teachers participate in district-wide Reading Recovery meetings bi-monthly

Professional Development – Classroom teachers First grade teachers participated in half-day professional

development sessions designed to create and maintain synergy between classroom and intervention instruction

RR teachers and first grade teachers consult regularly to discuss student progress and identify common instructional goals and strategies for the near future

Evidence: Monitoring (continued)

Building Level Monitoring School principals/teachers monitor progress at 5 week

intervals through updates related to 5 week Independence Checks

School principals/teachers monitor progress quarterly through regular Student Accountability Meetings

School principals and RR teachers monitor long-term progress of students once their intervention has been completed

School principals attend quarterly district-wide Reading Recovery meetings

Evidence of Impact: Reading Recovery Student

Work

K-Lab

• Early literacy intervention provided to Kindergarten students – Title 1 schools

• Provided by Reading Recovery teachers and a team of other intervention providers

Evidence:K-Lab Impact on Students (Parkland)

20 students total involved in K-lab (2008-2009)

5 students moved - either during or after K lab over the summer.

3 are current Reading Recovery (2009-2010)

1 student receives AIS-moderate. 11 students are currently meeting grade

level expectations and being monitored for continued progress.

Next Steps

Continue collaboration with classroom teachers to ensure alignment of instructional strategies

Analyze student data to determine factors which may impact discontinuation rates

Continue to implement K-Lab in Title 1 schools; consider how to implement effectively in non-Title schools

Continue longitudinal tracking of student data

Leveled Literacy Intervention

Short-term, targeted literacy intervention

Piloting during 2009-2010: Buckman Heights (special education classes only) Longridge (general education and special education)

Reading Recovery Lesson ComponentsReading Recovery

Lesson ComponentsLeveled Literacy Intervention

Lesson ComponentsLeveled Literacy Intervention

Lesson Components

Reading familiar books Reading yesterday’s new

book/assessment Letter/Word Work Writing Rereading and assembling

a cut-up sentence Reading a new book

• Odd-numbered lessons:– Rereading books– Phonics/Word Work– New Book (instructional

level)– Letter/Word Work

• Even-numbered lessons:– Rereading

books/assessment– Phonics/Word Work– Writing About Reading– New Book (easier level)– Letter/Word Work

Comparison of RR and LLI Lesson Structure

LLI in Action:New Book Introduction

Video Clip


Leveled Literacy Intervention (LLI) teacher monitoring Students’ literacy knowledge assessed with Fountas and Pinnell

Benchmark Assessment prior to commencement of the intervention

LLI teachers take a Running Record on each student every three days

LLI teachers update comprehensive assessment information at 5 week intervals (Independence Checks)

LLI teachers monitor student progress longitudinally Professional Development

LLI teacher representatives from BH and LR participated in a 5 day training spanning August through November

LLI teachers videotaped themselves teaching and shared with colleagues to evaluate/reflect on their teaching

LLI teachers will continue to reflect on LLI teaching through quarterly shadow visits to each other


Building Level Monitoring School principals/teachers monitor progress quarterly

through regular Student Accountability Meetings School principals and LLI teachers monitor long-term

progress of students once their intervention has been completed

Evidence: Impact on Students

Next Steps

Continue implementationContinue coaching visits to support

teachers with implementationContinue progress monitoring at 5 week

intervalsSchool principals/teachers monitor progress

quarterly through regular Student Accountability Meetings

Consider expanding the implementation of LLI

Literacy CoachingEvidence: Impact on Staff

Elementary Coaching Log

Co-Planning16%

Data Analysis15%

Debriefi ng6%

Getting to Know the Students

11%

Goal-Setting16%

Modeling16%

Professional Development

9%

Providing Feedback for Teachers

11%

Assessment0%

445 Hours Total

Literacy CoachingEvidence: Impact on Staff

Secondary Coaching Log

Co-Planning24%

Data Analysis29%Getting to Know the

Students5%

Goal-Setting18%

Modeling8%

Providing Feedback for Teachers

15%

Assessment0%

Professional Development0%

Debriefi ng1%

464 Hours Total

Evidence: Impact on StudentsBaseline Assessment Data--

Elementary

StudentGradeLevel

Fountas & Pinnell Benchmark Levels

Expected A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T

1 D 5 2 2

2 J 3 2 1 1 2 1

3 N 1 2 1 3 2 2 1

4 Q 1 2 1 2 3 2

5 T 1 4 1 1 4 4

Evidence: Impact on StudentsBaseline Assessment Data--Secondary

StudentGradeLevel

QRI Independent Comprehension Level--Expository Text

Pre-Primer Primer Grade 1 Grade 2 Grade 3 Grade 4 Grade 5 Grade 6

UpperMiddleSchool

HighSchool

6 5 3 3

7 1 2 1 4 1

8 1 1 1 5 1

9 1 1 1 1 2

10 1 2 1 1

11 1 1 1 2 1

Evidence: Impact on StudentsBaseline Assessment Data--Secondary

Student Grade Level

Developmental Spelling Analysis--Orthographic Stage

Emergent Letter Name Within WordSyllableJuncture

DerivationalConstancy

6 1 6 3

7 3 3 3

8 1 2 4

9 3

10 1 1

11 2

Evidence: Impact on StaffSample Elementary Literacy Coach

Log

Date Activity We worked on...Goals andObjectives What We Learned Next Steps

11/20 Co-planning

Implementing newInstructionalTechniques

Co-plan the nextComprehension toolkitlesson, Gather materials todifferentiateinstruction NA

teacher will present lesson and I willprovide feedback to her

11/20 Modeling Scaffolding

Have a readingconference withJames to discuss hisfluency progress,Take a RRR on hiscurrent independentreading text, Provide feedbackto him regardingareas of strength andimprovement

continue to modelreading conferences,goal-setting

debrief teacher regarding James'sprogress/goal-refining

Evidence: Impact on StaffSample Secondary Literacy Coach Log

Date Activity We worked on... Goals and Objectives What We Learned Next Steps

11/5 Modeling Scaffolding, Differentiating instruction for whole, small, and independent settings, Implementing new instructional techniques

Model "active reading strategy" lesson.

The three students in the group are very distractible, but the format of the lesson and scaffolding and chunking of the reading materials, increased their engagement. The cohort student in particular, appreciated the structure of the materials as, although the text was a copy of the grade level soc. studies text, and was fairly long, the scaffolding made it seem not so overwhelming to him. He appreciated being able to focus upon smaller sections of text, after being given a purpose for reading. He sometimes needs to refocus upon the question in order to accurately find text evidence.

Teacher will complete the lesson and will use the strategy as appropriate until we meet to debrief on 11/12.

11/13 Providing Feedback for Teacher

Developing Word Study and Language Practices

Observe cohort student in small content support group.

I noticed that the student, who has awkward phrasing during oral reading, as well as omitting many words, exhibits similar patterns in his writing. His spacing between written words is ineffective and he leaves some words out of sentences.

Share these observations with the teacher at our meeting scheduled for later today, and co-plan interventions.

Evidence: Impact on StaffSample Elementary Progress Monitoring Plan

Evidence: Impact on StaffSample Secondary Progress Monitoring

Plan

Evidence: Administrative Monitoring

Walkthroughs School administrative teams and/or District

Administration To date, 16 initial walkthroughs involving Stephanie,

Renee, Diane, Carol, and Deb Informal feedback provided to schools

Principal meetings Regular agenda item at monthly meetings with

Assistant Superintendent of Elementary or SecondaryMonthly secondary coach/principal meetingsMonthly special education coordinator meetingsRegular agenda item at Special Education Feeder Pattern

MeetingsBiweekly District meetings with coachesCo-observations of coaches

Next Steps

Continued progress monitoring at 5-week intervals

Continuing special education coaching logsContinuing professional development for coachesConsolidation of walkthrough dataSurvey of teachers working with coachesDisaggregation of student performance data on

CFAs and NYS assessments based on special education, teacher participation in coaching, professional development, etc.

Documents

Board Study Session