Richland Library Literacy 2030 Richland County December 2014 Library Literacy 2030 Richland County ... pronged approach and provides pre-survey ... programs for grade level literacy/reading

1

Richland Library

Literacy 2030 Richland County

December 2014

Leigh Kale D’Amico, EdD

Kassie Mae Miller, MPH

Glenn Prince, MDiv

2

3

Table of Contents

Table of Contents ...................................................................................................................... 3

Overview ................................................................................................................................... 4

Process ..................................................................................................................................... 5

Step 1: Identify Needs ............................................................................................................... 7

Pre-Survey Results................................................................................................................ 7

Attendance ............................................................................................................................ 8

Session 1 Summary .............................................................................................................. 8

Step 2: Define Goals ................................................................................................................. 9

Pre-Survey Results................................................................................................................ 9

Attendance .......................................................................................................................... 10

Session 2 Summary ............................................................................................................ 10

Step 3: Identify Evidence-Based Practices .............................................................................. 15

Pre-Survey Results.............................................................................................................. 15

Attendance .......................................................................................................................... 15

Session 3 Summary ............................................................................................................ 16

Step 4: Develop Outcomes ..................................................................................................... 17

Pre-Survey Results.............................................................................................................. 17

Attendance .......................................................................................................................... 18

Session 4 Summary ............................................................................................................ 19

Participant Reactions to Process ............................................................................................ 20

Conclusions ............................................................................................................................ 21

Recommendations .................................................................................................................. 22

Appendix A. Needs and Barriers/Conceptual Frameworks ...................................................... 23

Appendix B. Developing Outcomes ......................................................................................... 32

Appendix C. Literacy 2030 Participating Organizations ........................................................... 34

4

Overview

Literacy 2030 was initiated by a group of library and literacy service providers to improve

community collaboration and South Carolina’s efforts to address literacy. This initial group was

known as A Community of Readers. In 2010, Central Carolina Community Foundation

provided A Community of Readers with funding and the name was changed to Literacy 2030 to

reflect the goal of achieving 100% literacy in eleven counties in the Midlands by 2030. Literacy

2030 continued to grow with more community partners, focusing on alignment of services,

advocating for literacy, and building capacity during the first year.

By August 2011, almost 60 coalition members began building a Regional Literacy Plan for the

Midlands focusing on 1) early childhood/family literacy and 2) workforce readiness. In addition

to the Regional Literacy Plan, Literacy 2030 also created several key reports to inform the

community on the current state of literacy, including a needs and services assessment, as well

as a funding analysis. Coalition members also conducted an analysis on the economic impact

of low literacy in the community and disseminated this information widely throughout the

Midlands to engage businesses and community leaders.

In 2012, the Central Carolina Community Foundation furthered their support for the initiative by

investing $1 million into Midlands literacy work over the course of three years. While

continuing to support and advocate for Literacy 2030, the Community Foundation delegated

leadership of the initiative to the South Carolina State Library. Richland Library also provides

support in maintaining and growing the initiative, as well as and serving as model for other

county library systems.

To build on previous work and develop capacity for partnerships around this effort, Literacy

2030 Richland County established a process to move the initiative forward. This process

included quarterly meetings throughout the 2014 calendar year. The State Library plans to use

the work completed through Literacy 2030 Richland County to inform a statewide framework,

using the local public libraries as conveners and resources for future work.

5

Process

The Office of Program Evaluation (OPE) at the University of South Carolina collaborated with

Richland Library to provide support and facilitation for the quarterly meetings, as well as to

document the process. To encourage a systems-based approach, OPE and Richland Library

identified a process to engage participants at the community level and ensure pertinence to

their individual literacy work.

Each quarter, OPE staff developed and disseminated a pre-survey to gauge participants’

understanding of the topic(s) covered at upcoming meeting, as well as thoughts and strategies

based on their perceptions and experience in the field. The findings from these surveys were

used to guide the facilitation of the meetings, as well as prepare for the meetings’ content.

In collaboration with Richland Library, OPE employed the following four-step process to guide

the process and focus the Literacy 2030 sessions.

Step 1: Identify Needs

1. Identify literacy

needs and barriers

to meeting needs

2. Categorize needs

by areas of literacy

3. Prioritize needs within each area

Step 2: Define Goals

1. Define goal for

each literacy area

2. Develop

frameworks to

understand and

guide progress

Step 3: Evidence-Based Practices

1. Identify sources

and review

evidence for literacy

strategies

2. Consider

evidence and

evaluation results

when selecting or

implementing

literacy programs

Step 4: Develop Outcomes

1. Develop

community-based

outcomes aligned

with goals

2. Specify target

populations and

indicators to

measure outcomes

6

Representatives from approximately 45 organizations attended some or all of the sessions. A

list of participating agencies is provided in Appendix C. This report documents the four-

pronged approach and provides pre-survey results, attendance, and a session summary

related to each session. After the final session, a post-survey was administered to participants

to gain feedback about the process and inform next steps. Finally, recommendations for

continued work toward Literacy 2030 goals and outcomes are presented to build on the

foundation that has been established.

7


Identifying needs is often the initial step in developing a community plan to improve outcomes

for citizens. To better understand perceived community needs, activities in Session 1 involved

systematically identifying literacy-related conditions and needs in the Richland County area.

Richland Library staff members were the primary facilitators of Session 1 to build on the

capacity and trust that had been developed through previous Literacy 2030 efforts.

Pre-Survey Results

Prior to the first Literacy 2030 meeting, OPE staff developed a survey to assess participants’

perceived needs related to improving literacy. Approximately 20 people responded to the

survey representing various organizations and institutions in Richland County, from community

agencies, school districts, religious organizations, and businesses. Most of the respondents

indicated that they work with constituents throughout Richland County (70%) versus specific

locations or neighborhoods. The majority serve school-age children, including elementary

students (70%), middle grade students (70%), and high school students (55%). Almost half of

the respondents also indicated that they work with adults (45%). Responses do not add to

100% because many respondents reported working with multiple populations.

Participants indicated working with a variety of literacy programs, most frequently noting

programs for grade level literacy/reading (65%), workforce literacy (35%), and family literacy

(35%). A smaller proportion of respondents indicated that they work with programs supporting

financial literacy, high school/GED literacy, school readiness/pre-literacy, and health literacy.

Respondents listed common barriers faced by their clients in accessing and completing literacy

programs. Awareness and access emerged as the primary barriers. Respondents most

frequently commented that the populations they work with are not aware of the programs they

offer and that disseminating information is a challenge. Issues related to access include

transportation, child care, finances, and cultural barriers. Respondents also listed the top

barriers they face in meeting the needs of their target populations, involving funding, reaching

their target population, and recruiting and training volunteers and staff.

Furthermore, respondents shared that networking with colleagues (50%) and building a

community to address literacy needs (32%) were the most beneficial aspects of attending

8

Literacy 2030 sessions. For meetings, respondents most frequently made recommendations to

allow more time for networking (43%) and additional discussion about literacy needs (48%).

Attendance

Approximately 32 people attended Session 1. The participants represented a wide range of

organizations including South Carolina Afterschool Alliance, South Carolina Department of

Education, St. Lawrence Place, Turning Pages, Tutor Eau Claire, and United Way of the

Midlands.

Session 1 Summary

To orient participants, Session 1 began with a short history of Literacy 2030, including how and

why it was formed, previous efforts, and future plans. Introductions were made between

participants, including many of the original recipients of Literacy 2030 grants from Central

Carolina Community Foundation, and time was allowed for networking.

After a lunch break, participants worked in small groups to identify the literacy needs of

Richland County and the barriers for achieving literacy by 2030. Each group brainstormed

needs and barriers for all areas of literacy. Then, they worked together to create categories of

literacy and prioritize the needs and barriers within each area. A follow-up survey was

disseminated asking participants to rank the literacy areas identified in Session 1. The most

highly rated literacy need areas include: 1) School Readiness, 2) Grade-level Literacy, and

3) Family Literacy. Based on the work in Session 1 and the survey feedback, these three

areas were selected to guide the remainder of Literacy 2030 work.


Facilitating factors and barriers to address literacy in three areas of need were

identified based on consensus from surveys and discussion during Session 1.

These three need areas were related to:

1) School Readiness

2) Grade-level Literacy

3) Family Literacy

9


After the community’s literacy needs were identified, priorities and goals were defined to allow

stakeholders to articulate joint responsibility toward a common framework. Stakeholders use

priorities and goals to determine programs, contexts, and situations that facilitate or inhibit

progress toward these goals. An effective format for this work is developing conceptual

frameworks that provide maps to display relationships among factors contributing to progress

toward goals.

Pre-Survey Results

Based on the needs, barriers, and priorities identified during Session 1, survey respondents

were asked to rank their top three priorities in each area of literacy. Appendix A provides a list

of the needs, barriers, and priorities developed during Session 1. The top priorities within each

area that emerged from the survey results were used to focus the development of conceptual

frameworks in Session 2. The top priorities identified by the survey are listed below.

School Readiness

1) Engaging parents in literacy issues/initiatives

2) A need to better prepare children for K-5 education

3) Improving parenting skills and support

Grade-Level Reading


2) Addressing low-level reading skill gaps

3) Preventing the “summer slide”

Family Literacy


2) Understanding how adult literacy impacts child literacy

3) Creating a print-rich environment in the home, Improving parenting skills and support,

and Preventing the “summer slide” (three-way tie)

10

In addition, respondents were asked to share their definitions of literacy. Participants provided

varying responses that were summarized into the following definition that was used as a

guiding goal across all three areas of literacy:

“Being able to read, write, communicate, and utilize what you have learned to

successfully function as a member of one's family, workplace and community,

and achieve personal goals.”

Attendance

Approximately 34 participants participated in the second meeting, with representatives from

organizations such as the Episcopal Diocese of Upper SC, Boys and Girls Club of the

Midlands, SC Arts Commission, and local school districts (Richland 1, Richland 2, and

Richland/Lexington 5).

Session 2 Summary

The focus of the second meeting was to use the identified priorities and guiding literacy

definition to develop communal definitions and goals for the three literacy areas. The presenter

shared the results from the survey and then asked participants to break into groups in the three

literacy areas to work on developing common definitions for each area.

The following definitions were developed:

School Readiness: A child has cognitive and language skills to be ready to

learn.

Grade-level Literacy: Being able to read (reading defined as the ability to

apply basic skills of phonological processing, decoding, and fluency in order to

comprehend), write, communicate, and utilize what they have learned in order

to succeed at grade level.

Family Literacy: All members of a family are equipped to navigate through the

systems of the community, resulting in increased family stability and

sustainability.

11

After lunch, the presenter introduced the use of conceptual frameworks. Conceptual

frameworks will be used by Literacy 2030 to guide the collaborative partners to address priority

areas in each literacy category. The participants broke into the three literacy groups again and

began developing drafts of their conceptual frameworks. The definition they created in the

morning was used as an end goal and the top three priority areas helped to guide the

contributing factors. By the end of the meeting, each group developed a draft using poster

board and sticky notes. The evaluators translated the paper conceptual frameworks into digital

versions, using previous experience and literature reviews to assist the revision process.

The conceptual frameworks developed through the participant work in Session 2 and revisions

by the evaluators are presented below. Full versions of the conceptual frameworks are shared

in Appendix A.

12

13

The following images show the progression of the conceptual framework process from the

initial development stage to the final product. In this example, participants used sticky notes to

identify needs and influential factors for Family Literacy during Session 2. The evaluators then

used their draft to develop a final version of the conceptual framework in a digital format.

14


Participants developed the following common definitions to guide future Literacy

2030 work in each priority area:

School Readiness: A child has cognitive and language skills to be ready to learn.

Grade-Level Literacy: Being able to read (reading defined as the ability to apply

basic skills of phonological processing, decoding, and fluency in order to

comprehend), write, communicate, and utilize what they have learned in order to

succeed at grade level.

Family Literacy: All members of a family are equipped to navigate through the

systems of the community, resulting in increased family stability and

sustainability.

These definitions were then used as an end goal in the development of conceptual

frameworks for each area (Appendix A).

15

Step 3: Identify Evidence-Based Practices

Identifying and incorporating evidence-based or evidence-informed practices are important in

striving to meet programmatic, community-level, or state-level goals. Evidence-based

practices indicate whether minimal, moderate, or strong levels of evidence are related to the

practice’s efficacy in accomplishing certain goals. Evidence-informed practices are based on

the research literature, but often do not have empirical evidence to support their impact on

certain goals. Information on the effectiveness of programs or practices can be found through

initiatives such as the What Works Clearinghouse or reviewing research literature.

While evidence-based practices, when available, are important for stakeholders to consider,

collecting evidence at the program and community levels is critical for stakeholders to inform

progress toward their project’s goals. Many programs or strategies may work to make

progress toward a goal; the critical questions relate to “what works best” (Hattie, 2009).

Pre-Survey Results

All of the survey respondents reported some level of familiarity with evidence-based practices,

with most saying they are very familiar (77%). They also noted that the use of evidence-based

practices in their literacy programs is very important (79%); however, only half of the

respondents (53%) use evidence-based practices in most of their programs and one-third use

them sometimes (33%).

The majority of respondents shared that they are able to identify evidence-based practices in

specific areas related to literacy sometimes (60%) or often (33%). Most frequently,

respondents find evidence-based practices on the internet, from research articles, from the

school district or state, or a variety of organizations in their fields. Respondents listed

time (80%), knowledge of sources (73%), and access to sources (40%) as the most common

barriers in identifying more evidence-based practices related to literacy.

Attendance

Approximately 17 people attended Session 3. Examples of the range of organizations that

participants represented include: St. Lawrence Place, United Way of the Midlands, SC State

Library Foundation, and Goodwill Industries of the Upstate/Midlands.

16

Session 3 Summary

At the third meeting, the presenter reviewed the importance of conceptual frameworks and their

use in guiding collaborative efforts. Then the presenter shared the conceptual frameworks for

each of the three literacy areas developed during the previous meeting. Participants separated

into three groups to review the conceptual frameworks and definitions for each literacy area

and provide detailed feedback to edit the frameworks.

After the group activity, the presenter led a discussion on the use of evidence-based practices

in literacy programs, including information about where to find evidence-based practices and

considerations for their use. Staff from Richland Library concluded the meeting with a

discussion about managing data within organizations. Information was shared between the

participants about what types of data are collected, how they are utilized, and the best methods

for sharing data with other Literacy 2030 participants.

Step 3: Identify Evidence-Based Practices

Several sources were identified to review the quality and evidence of literacy

programs and practices. These sources include: 1) What Works Clearinghouse,

2) Google Scholar, 3) Promising Practices Network, 4) Centers of Excellency,

5) literacy foundations, 6) meta-analyses, and 7) other peer-reviewed sources.

Important considerations when using evidence to determine the effectiveness of

literacy-based programs relate to the quality of the source, context of the program,

goals of the program, cost of implementation, and size of the program impact.

17


Based on the literacy needs and goals related to each priority area identified in earlier

sessions, outcomes were developed to focus on community-level performance. Outcomes

indicate expected achievements as a result of community focus and programming related to

specific needs and goals. Outcomes are best used to learn about and continuously improve

programs. When developing outcomes, consideration should be made to ensure outcomes are

specific, measurable, attainable, relevant, and time specific.

Pre-Survey Results

Most of the survey respondents (83%) indicated that they always or sometimes use outcomes

to measure progress toward goals, and that these outcomes are useful in measuring progress

toward goals. One respondent (17%) shared that s/he rarely uses outcomes and, thus, that

they are rarely useful in measuring progress. Respondents related barriers they face with

developing outcomes; they predominately had issues obtaining data to measure their

outcomes (75%), identifying what to measure (50%), and making their outcomes

measurable (50%).

Survey respondents also shared outcomes they currently use or have used in the past to

measure literacy. Examples of outcomes varied widely by the three focus areas. Participants

working in school readiness measure vocabulary, alphabet knowledge, and social skills, among

others. Grade-level literacy respondents frequently use standardized test scores or other pre-

and post-assessments. Family literacy outcomes include parent engagement in children’s

learning, time spent reading, and amount of learning materials in the home.

18

Attendance

Approximately 26 people participated in Session 4 representing organizations such as the

Greater Columbia Literacy Council, SCETV, Girl Scouts Mountains to Midlands, and the SC

Department of Education.

19

Session 4 Summary

Session 4 began with an overview of the process used to guide this year’s Literacy 2030 work,

walking participants through the steps from identifying needs and barriers, developing goals,

creating conceptual frameworks, and identifying best practices. The presenter then introduced

the final topic, developing outcomes to measure literacy programs, covering their importance

and common uses. Participants split into their focus areas to discuss outcomes they are

currently measuring, as well as outcomes they would like to measure. Participants

brainstormed outcomes related to the goals identified in the conceptual frameworks.

Finally, staff from the South Carolina State Library discussed their role as leader and organizer

of the overall Literacy 2030 collaboration. The State Library is in the process of developing a

comprehensive website for Literacy 2030 to detail the work done up to this point. Additionally,

they will be providing trainings in the future, as well as alerting agencies to potential funding

sources.


Measuring outcomes allows practitioners to gain timely, targeted feedback and

develop criteria for improvement. The following are examples of outcomes developed

in each literacy area:

School Readiness

Outcome: Increase in number of 4-year-old students enrolled in 4K

Indicator: Enrollment data from 4K programs

Grade-level Literacy

Outcome: 90% of 3rd and 8th graders are scoring at or above proficient of grade-level

literacy by 2020

Indicator: National and state standardized assessments (e.g. PASS, end-of-course

and end-of-grade assessments)

Family Literacy

Outcome: Increased number of screenings to identify learning differences

Indicator: Number of adults screened with literacy assessment, number of adults

showing improvement on literacy screenings

20

Participant Reactions to Process

To better understand participants’ attitudes and beliefs about the Literacy 2030 Richland

County process, a brief survey was administered after the final session. This survey included

12 items to gauge participants’ satisfaction with the sessions and preferences for future

sessions. Eleven Literacy 2030 participants responded to the survey.

The majority of respondents attended three or four of the 2014 sessions (73%). Of the

respondents who were unable to attend more frequently, most cited scheduling conflicts (73%)

as their primary reason for missing sessions. All of the participants rated the sessions they

attended as very good or excellent, noting networking with other literacy service providers, the

structure of the sessions, and discussion about literacy issues as the most beneficial aspects of

their participation in Literacy 2030 Richland County. Most of the respondents (73%) indicated

that they formed new partnerships and collaborations with others who attended the meetings.

Respondents shared several suggestions to improve future meetings, with most related to

tailoring the experience to the three focus areas of literacy. Suggestions included: sharing

case studies about successful organizations, dedicating meetings to each of the three literacy

areas, and providing more specific programmatic suggestions to improve literacy.

Furthermore, participants made suggestions for additional partners to include in the coming

year, including healthcare professionals, public school officials with decision-making power, as

well as representatives from Allen University, Benedict College, churches, and local

businesses.

All of the respondents indicated that they plan to participate in Literacy 2030 in the coming

year. The preferred timeframe for future meetings is between two and two and half hours

(73%), with a slight preference for Mondays or Tuesdays.

21

Conclusions

The four-step process allowed participants to work together on a focused, systems-level

approach. At the beginning of the process, participants identified literacy focus areas based on

consensus related to needs. After literacy focus areas were developed, participants identified

overarching literacy goals within each area that were used to build frameworks. Frameworks

serve to demonstrate a map toward the goal, which includes understanding factors that

contribute to or inhibit progress toward goals. Evidence-based practices or strategies were

also highlighted to promote the use of best practices and an evaluative process in monitoring

progress toward the goals. Finally, community-level outcomes were developed to encourage

investment in the goals and metrics to understand progress.

While the four-step approach concentrated on community-level needs, goals, and outcomes, it

can also be used at the program level for planning, implementing, and evaluating strategies.

The process was designed to contribute toward systems-level, community-based work, as well

as allow participants to collaborate, gain resources, and better understand aspects to facilitate

success within their own organizations.

22

Recommendations

Literacy-related work encompasses a large realm of stakeholders, ranging from those working

with young children to encourage pre-literacy skills to those working with adults to build various

types of literacy skills such as financial literacy. Designing a process that encompasses the

broad nature of literacy work in combination with engaging stakeholders over a nine-month

process is challenging. This year’s process, beginning with identifying needs and ending with

developing community-level outcomes, was an important initial step in an on-going process to

develop relationships, encourage shared responsibility toward goals, and understand aspects

that contribute to community-level outcomes. The following recommendations are presented

based on work accomplished in Phase 1 to gain support for Phase 2 and move forward toward

further community-level buy-in and engagement.

Recommendations

Encourage active participation at each meeting from the same stakeholders

Hold individual meetings with each program or organization to understand their

perceived opportunities and challenges

Demonstrate the relevance of community-level strategies and outcomes on

each stakeholder’s individual program(s) or organization

Develop a shared plan and organizational commitments to achieve outcomes

Facilitate partnerships to accomplish goals and seek resources

23

Appendix A. Needs and Barriers/Conceptual Frameworks

Appendix A includes the list of needs, barriers, and priorities identified by participants in

Session 1 of the Literacy 2030 Richland County process. Sections I and II on the following

pages contain a list of brainstormed needs and barriers that participants then prioritized in

section III. Following Session 1, priorities from section III were listed in a survey for

participants to rank, resulting in the identification of three top priorities in each area that were

used to guide the development of the conceptual frameworks. The top priorities are below.

School Readiness


2) A need to better prepare children for K-5 education

3) Improving parenting skills and support

Grade-Level Reading


2) Addressing low-level reading skill gaps

3) Preventing the “summer slide”

Family Literacy


2) Understanding how adult literacy impacts child literacy

3) Creating a print-rich environment in the home, Improving parenting skills and support,

and Preventing the “summer slide” (three-way tie)

Conceptual frameworks were developed based on the top three priorities within each area

follow sections I, II, and III. These conceptual frameworks are provided after section III.

24

I. Literacy Needs Identified for Richland County

Better preparing/readying children for K-5 education (e.g., letter recognition,

books), especially in high-poverty areas

Preventing children from “falling further and further behind”

Preventing low-level readers from experiencing a negative “ripple effect” across

curricula / Addressing low-level reading skill gaps

Fostering positive experiences for parents at their children’s schools / Better

interactions between schools and parents

More books and reading materials in the home

Engaging parents in literacy issues/initiatives (i.e., parental involvement)

Engaging and reaching out to families who speak English as a second language

Addressing the “summer slide”

Recognizing the connection between adult literacy levels and child literacy levels

Meeting the child’s/family’s basic needs

Recruiting and retaining male volunteers

Public awareness/public campaigns about dyslexia

Early intervention for students with special needs

Addressing and preventing undiagnosed learning difficulties in early years

Family intervention to address adult literacy gaps

Including faith-based initiatives/organizations in the process

Increasing programs for Workplace Literacy

Cultural awareness

Increase in/connection to financial literacy (e.g., for unbanked citizens)

Higher rate of secondary school completion

Improved parenting skills and support

Access to affordable, quality childcare

Economic equity

Earlier, more consistent diagnoses of learning difficulties

Qualified, trained, and supported teachers across curricula

Additional home support for school-aged children and their single parents

25

II. Barriers to Achieving Literacy Identified

Lack of knowledge about literacy and literacy-related services

Lack of transportation / difficulty finding transportation

Lack of time (e.g., due to parents having multiple jobs, etc.)

Feelings of embarrassment about the lack of/level of literacy

Prior negative classroom experiences (for both children and their parents)

Continued cycles of poverty and illiteracy

Missing school/being out of school

Learning disabilities

Illnesses

Lack of funding to address adult literacy gaps

Reluctance to create/include faith-based collaborations

Lack of technology in poverty-ridden areas

Language barriers

Lack of parenting initiatives/education

Low parental expectations/goals (due to lack of parental exposure to literacy issues,

lack of opportunities for parents, lack of motivation/skills for parents, etc.)

Grade repetition/retention

Lack of year-round/after-school programs

High population of unbanked citizens

Lack of employment opportunities / Lack of knowledge about available jobs and job

training requirements

High number of high-school dropouts / Lack of high school diploma or G.E.D

Lack of home support for school-aged children and their single parents

Lack of access to quality, affordable, and available childcare

Lack of training and financial support for childcare workers

Additional teacher support and training

Lack of economic equity in the laws governing taxes

Lack of support for schools serving students with learning difficulties and

differences/Overwhelmed school systems

Lack of understanding about student needs

Unrealistic expectations of teachers and schools

26

III. Categorization and Prioritization of Identified Literacy Needs

A. Family Literacy Needs

1. First-priority needs

Engaging parents in literacy issues/initiatives (i.e. parental involvement)


Meeting families’ basic needs (e.g., food and shelter)

2. Second-priority needs

Meeting families’ basic needs

Understanding/showing how adult literacy impacts child literacy

Increase in/connection to financial literacy

Creating a print-rich environment in the home

Understanding of learning systems within families

3. Third-priority needs

Creating a literacy-rich/print-rich environment in homes with few or no books



More technology and infrastructure

4. Family Literacy needs listed, but unrated in terms of priority

Overcoming parents’ previous negative experiences

Connecting schools to homes

Engaging and reaching out to families who speak English as a second

language

Addressing and preventing the “summer slide”

Recruiting and retaining more volunteers, especially males

Improved school readiness

Increase in/connection to financial literacy

B. Early Childhood/School Readiness Needs



Systemic issues

Parenting skills and support (including family literacy)

Earlier interventions for students with special needs and students with

learning difficulties





Early intervention for special needs students

Quality, affordable childcare

27


Better preparing/readying children for K-5 education

Teacher training / Teacher preparation to address current trends

Early diagnosis of learning difficulties and differences


4. Early Childhood/School Readiness needs listed, but unrated in terms of priority


language



Tax structure

Quality, affordable childcare


Training and support for childcare providers

C. Workforce Literacy Needs


Technological literacy and access to technology (e.g., software skills)

Addressing low-level reading skill gaps in adults

Increasing programs to address adult literacy


Addressing the cycle of illiteracy and poverty



4. Workforce Literacy needs listed, but unrated in terms of priority


language



D. Grade-level Reading Needs


Preventing low-level readers from experiencing a negative “ripple effect”

across curricula / Addressing low-level reading skill gaps



Teacher training / Teacher preparation to address current trends




Training teachers


28

4. Grade-level Reading needs listed, but unrated in terms of priority


Preventing children from “falling further and further behind”



language



E. Statewide Public Awareness Needs


Awareness about the literacy rate in South Carolina


Faith-based initiatives

Awareness about dyslexia and other learning difficulties/differences

Cultural awareness


Cultural awareness

Awareness about dyslexia and other learning difficulties/differences

F. Educational System Support Needs


Qualified, trained, and supported teachers across curriculums



G. Systemic Infrastructure and Educational System Support Needs


Higher amount of tax revenue used to support public schools

Addressing the tax structure in South Carolina


Qualified, trained and supported teachers / Teacher training and preparation

to address current needs/trends



Technology and transportation infrastructure

29

30

31

32

Appendix B. Developing Outcomes

School Readiness

Population: 4-year-old children

Outcome: Increase in 4-year-old students enrolled in 4K in Richland County

Indicator: Enrollment data from 4K programs

Population: 4-year-old children

Outcome: 4K classrooms have the capacity to enroll all eligible children in Richland County

Indicator: All students signed up for 4K are enrolled

Population: 4K students

Outcome: 4K students score higher on 5K readiness test than children in 5K who did not

attend 4K

Indicator: Scores from standardized 5K readiness assessment

Grade-level Literacy

Population: 3rd and 8th graders

Outcome: 90% of 3rd and 8th graders are scoring at or above proficient of grade-level literacy

by 2020

Indicator: National and state standardized assessments (e.g. PASS, end-of-course and end-

of-grade assessments)

Population: Special education and elementary reading teachers

Outcome: 100% of special education and elementary reading teachers are trained in research-

based reading instruction by 2018

Indicator: Statewide Read to Succeed data, teacher evaluation data

33

Population: Schools and community organizations

Outcome: Increase in strategic and targeted community partnerships that contribute to

measureable progress of student achievement

Indicator: (No indicators identified during session), Number of partnerships formed between

schools and organizations, number of children recruited for community services

through schools, student assessment data for students participating in programs

offered by partnering community organizations

Family Literacy

Population: Families with identified literacy gaps

Outcome: Achieving increased proficiency in literacy skills

Indicator: Number of books read in the home per week, parental attendance at school

meetings, number of successfully employed families

Population: Underserved adults with literacy needs that have primary or secondary influence

on school-age children

Outcome: Increased number of individuals accessing literacy services

Indicator: Number of adults accessing services



Outcome: Increased connectivity between literacy services

Indicator: Number of partnerships formed between serving organizations, literacy coalition

data



Outcome: Increased number of screenings to identify learning differences

Indicator: Number of adults screened with literacy assessment, number of adults showing

improvement on literacy screenings

34

Appendix C. Literacy 2030 Participating Organizations

Big Brothers Big Sisters of Greater

Columbia

Boys & Girls Club of the Midlands

Central Carolina Community Foundation

Christ Central Ministries

City Year

Columbia College

Communities in Schools of the Midlands

Discovery Program of South Carolina

Episcopal Diocese of Upper South Carolina

Ginetta V. Hamilton Literacy Foundation

Girl Scouts of SC - Mountains to Midlands

Goodwill Industries of Upstate/Midlands

Greater Columbia Literacy Council

Holladay House Publishing

Junior Achievement

Lexington/Richland 5 Adult Education

Midlands Education and Business Alliance

Midlands Reading Consortium

Moore School of Business, USC

Office of Program Evaluation, USC

Palmetto Health

Richland County First Steps

Richland Library

Richland School District 1 (Board of School

Commissioners, Adult Education,

Volunteering and Mentoring Programs)

Richland School District 2 (Adult Education)

Richland/Lexington School District 5

South Carolina Afterschool Alliance

South Carolina Arts Commission

South Carolina Baptist Convention

South Carolina Book Festival

South Carolina Center for Children's Books

and Literacy

South Carolina Department of Education

(Adult Education)

South Carolina ETV

South Carolina Future Minds

South Carolina Humanities Council

South Carolina State Library

St. Lawrence Place

The Humanities Council

Turning Pages Adult Literacy

Tutor Eau Claire

United Way of the Midlands

USC School of Library and Information

Science

Vital Connections of the Midlands

W.R. Rogers Adult, Continuing, and

Technology Education Center

YMCA

Documents

Richland Library Literacy 2030 Richland County December 2014 Library Literacy 2030 Richland County ... pronged approach and provides pre-survey ... programs for grade level literacy/reading