Literacy Task Force History ~Literacy Task Force History ~Why It Came To BeWhy It Came To Be

SED Quality Assurance Review (2003-04) High level of segregation (ELA blocks) Overrepresentation of classified minority students Secondary level issues (Perception: “The level at

which your child reads when he/she enters the high school will be the reading level upon graduation.”)

Allington report and new research on best practices in literacy development

Literacy Task Force Literacy Task Force Committee Members ~Committee Members ~

Elaine Bell, Spec. Ed., Miller Maura Czerepinski, ESL,

Highview Ginny DeFeo, 3-6 Instructional

Facilitator Carole Dugan, Reg. Ed., Middle JoAnn Fastiggi, Spec. Ed., Middle Alissa Frendel, Speech, Highview Gail Hinchcliffe, English

Chairperson 7-12 Michael Kronberg, Reading,

Middle

Donna Lennane, Administration Jayne Levin, K-2 Instructional

Facilitator Fran Rizzo, Spec. Ed., Miller Carol Ryan, English & ESL, HS Merri Schneider, Spec. Ed.

Administration/CPSE Roberta Teiken, Reading, Miller Kathy Triana, Spec. Ed.,

Highview

Mindful of Nanuet’s Mission ~Mindful of Nanuet’s Mission ~ It is the mission of the Nanuet school district,

in partnership with our families and community, to ensure a child-sensitive,

challenging environment in which children understand and accept their responsibilities

for lifelong learning and productive citizenship in a diverse, global society.

Promoting Nanuet’s Beliefs ~Promoting Nanuet’s Beliefs ~

We believe… An educational program should assess

students in real world tasks to meet world class standards.

It takes a whole village to raise a child. We must respect and accommodate

individual differences through appropriate experiences and assessments.

Our Charge ~Our Charge ~ To foster the delivery of research-based,

data-driven support services

To inform and plan with other leadership

committees (e.g. K-12 ELA committee,

scheduling committees, and administration)

To work toward a more systemic district

literacy program

Initial Action Plan ~Initial Action Plan ~ Support services survey (winter ’04) Superintendent conference day K-12

(2/04) support services meeting/analysis: Best practices are utilized, but not

systemically. It is difficult to assess longitudinal

progress. Pressure to compensate in content

areas often overshadows direct skill development.

Action Plan ~Action Plan ~ Recruited task force participants (special

education, speech, ESL, regular education and remedial ELA)

Applied for a $40,000 grant from SED to fund R & D and materials (July ’04 – June ’05)

Continued research and discussions on program recommendations

Integrate newly legislated Response to Intervention Model and Reauthorized IDEA (September ’05 – June ’06)

Draft recommendations to administrative team for implementation to begin in September ‘06

Current Best Practice ResearchCurrent Best Practice Researchfor Literacy Development ~for Literacy Development ~

There exists a potent relationship between volume of reading and reading achievement (e. g. NYS - 25 books per year).

Research has documented the need for students to have instructional texts that they can read accurately, fluently, and with good comprehension if we hope to foster academic achievement.

Research, Continued ~Research, Continued ~ Independent-level reading: Texts at this level of

difficulty are appropriate for the reading children do with no assistance and little, if any, instruction from adults (80% of what students read should be at this level).

Instructional-level reading: This is used with material for which a teacher provides instruction on the content and supporting reading strategies.

Frustration-level reading: This level should be avoided because of the negative impact such experiences have on learning, attitude, and behavior.

Research, Continued ~Research, Continued ~

Easy access to a wide range of books of appropriate complexity has tremendous impact on achievement. Allington recommends hundreds of titles

for classroom use, equally split between below grade level and on or near grade level materials.

The books should be equally divided between narratives and informational text.

Research, Continued ~Research, Continued ~

The National Reading Panel recommends the following five elements for a balanced literacy program:

Phonemic awareness explicitly taught Explicit, systematic phonics instruction Fluency practice Vocabulary development Reading comprehension strategies

Response to Intervention Model ~Response to Intervention Model ~New Mandate under NCLB & IDEANew Mandate under NCLB & IDEA

Assessment News:Assessment News:Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early

Literacy Skills (DIBELS)Literacy Skills (DIBELS) Efficient and economical Standardized Replicable Relevant to instruction Technically reliable and valid Sensitive to growth and change over time

and effects of intervention

DIBELS Assesses the DIBELS Assesses the Big Ideas of Literacy ~Big Ideas of Literacy ~

DIBELS Assesses the BIG IDEAS . . .DIBELS Assesses the BIG IDEAS . . .

Big Idea of Literacy . . . Phonemic Awareness

Alphabetic Principle Accuracy and Fluency

with Connected Text Comprehension

Vocabulary – Oral Lang. Indicator of Risk

DIBELS Measure . . . Initial Sound Fluency Phoneme Segmentation Nonsense Word Fluency Oral Reading Fluency

Oral Reading and Retell Fluency

Word Use Fluency Letter Naming Fluency

DIBELS “Scientifically-based” DIBELS “Scientifically-based” Benchmark GoalsBenchmark Goals

((Assessed Minimally 3 Times Per Year)Assessed Minimally 3 Times Per Year)

Initial Sound Fluency: 25 sounds per minute by Winter K

Phoneme Segmentation Fluency: 35 sounds per minute by Spring K

Nonsense Word Fluency: 50 sounds & 15 nonsense words per minute by Winter Grade 1

Oral Reading Fluency: 40 words correct per minute by Spring Grade 1, 90 words correct per minute by Spring Grade 2, 110 words correct per minute by Spring Grade 3

K-2 Literacy Framework (Levels I & II) ~K-2 Literacy Framework (Levels I & II) ~

Balanced Literacy: a conceptual framework for differentiating literacy instruction

Independent Reading/ Conferences

Guided Reading/Small Group Work

Independent Writing/ Conferences

Guided Writing/Small Group Work

Target: print awareness, phonemic awareness,

decoding, fluency, comprehension, motivation,

listening and speaking

Target: print awareness, phonemic awareness,

decoding, fluency, comprehension, motivation,

listening and speaking

Target: print awareness, spelling, composition,

motivation, listening and speaking

Target: print awareness, spelling, composition,

motivation, listening and speaking

Sharing/Debriefing – whole group

Read Aloud (≈ 15 minutes, daily)

Teacher reads to whole group

Target: vocabulary, fluency, comprehension, motivation, listening

Reader’s Workshop (≈ 45 minutes, daily)Minilesson or Shared Writing– whole group

Target: print awareness, composition, listening

Target: listening, speaking, comprehension, student accountability

Minilesson or Shared Reading – whole groupTarget: print awareness, phonemic awareness, decoding,

comprehension, listening

Sharing/Debriefing – whole group

Language/Word Study (≈ 20 minutes, daily)

Shared Reading – whole group (or intervention groups)

Target: print awareness, phonemic awareness, decoding, vocabulary, spelling, grammar

Writer’s Workshop (≈ 45 minutes, 4-5 days/week)

Sta

rts

End

sC

ontin

ues

Target: listening, speaking, comprehension, student accountability

Draft of K-2 Literacy Instruction ~ Draft of K-2 Literacy Instruction ~ (Response to Intervention Model)(Response to Intervention Model)

Current Core Program Literacy Task Force InvestigationsLevel 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4

K-2 Programmatic Remedial/Small GroupIndividualized Intervention IEP Intensive

ComprehensionVisualizing and Verbalizing (Vanilla Vocab or leveled text); Elements of Reading

Vocabulary/ Activating Schema

Visualizing and Verbalizing (Vanilla Vocab or leveled text); Elements of Reading; ELLIS

Fluency Literacy Place Fundations (1-3); Great LeapsPhonemic Awareness/ Phonetic Awareness

Literacy Place; CAI—Waterford (K)

Fundations (1-3) 10 -30 min; CAI—Waterford (1); Earobics

Fundations (K-3) 10 -30 min; Glass Analysis; Reading Clinic (1-2); Earobics

Reader's Workshop:Guided Reading, Read Aloud, Shared Reading, Individual Reading, Individual Conference/ Running Records; Literacy Place; Visualizing and Verbalizing (method); Making Meaning;

Visualizing and Verbalizing (Vanilla Vocab or leveled text); Elements of Reading;

Visualizing and Verbalizing (Vanilla Vocab or leveled text); Elements of Reading; ELLIS

Fundations (K-3); Great Leaps

Sampler of Current Investigations ~ (Levels II, III, and IV)

Considering existing research-based methods:• Great Leaps

• McRel Reading in the Content Areas Workshops

• Preventing Academic Failure (Orton-Gillingham)

• Read 180

• Spector Phonics

• Visualizing and Verbalizing (Lindamood-Bell)

Exploring new intervention/assessment methods:• Dynamic Indicators of Basic Literacy Skills (DIBELS)

• Fundations (Wilson primary grades)

• Language!

• Tucker Signing Strategies

• Wilson Reading System

K-12 Implementation K-12 Implementation ConsiderationsConsiderations

Consistent longitudinal assessmentsLevel I, II, III & IV programs & interventionsSchedulesTechnologySpaceStaff developmentParent educationBudget

Literacy Task Force TimelineLiteracy Task Force Timeline

’04 -’05: research and experimentation ’05 -’06: continued research and

experimentation with RTI focus, drafting pre-budget recommendations (e. g. Read 180 moving to Middle School), and staff development

’06 -’07: K-6 assessment (DIBELS) implementation, piloting RTI programs, and evaluation of outcomes, continued planning and recommendations