Balanced Literacy Framework

Revised Program Evaluation Report

July 21, 2010

"When teachers understand and internalize the workshop approach to instruction model, teaching and learning become more effective, efficient

and enjoyable. Teachers increase the time they allot to shared and independent reading and spend a little less time on guided reading. They

begin to base instruction on what kids need rather than on the components of a literacy program.

Routman, Reading Essentials, 2003

Stephen P. Barrett, Ed.D. Curriculum Coordinator

2

Table of Contents

Introduction............................................................................................................................................................. 3 GM Balanced Literacy Model....................................................................................................................... 4 Basal Approach vs. Balanced Approach................................................................................................ 5 Statistical Data.................................................................................................................................................... 6 Summary and Recommendations............................................................................................,,............... 9 Attachments.......................................................................................................................................................... 10 A. Balanced Literacy Model......................................................................................................... 11 B. Statistical Data Charts............................................................................................................. 12 C. Feedback Surveys....................................................................................................................... 19

3

Balanced Literacy Framework

A Program Evaluation Report

Introduction

The General McLane School District is committed to high levels of proficiency for all

students. In that quest for excellence, we continue to examine our district policies, our

building level initiatives, and our classroom practices in an effort to bring the very best of

teaching and learning to the entire General McLane community. We are dedicated to

every facet of a comprehensive approach to literacy learning in our district. The purpose

of this approach is to create life-long learners who are good readers, with the ability to

question and think critically in their reading and writing experiences. Our practice and

approach is driven by our own experiences and collective wisdom coupled with the works

of such experts in the field as Gay Su Pinnell, Irene Fountas, Lucy Calkins, Linda Dorn,

Stephanie Harvey, Anne Goudvis, Richard Allington, and many others.

4

Interest

Attitude

Motivation

Engagement

Balanced Literacy Approach A balanced reading approach is research-based, assessment-based, comprehensive, integrated and dynamic, in that it empowers teachers and specialists to respond to the individual assessed literacy needs of children as they relate to their appropriate instructional and developmental levels of decoding, vocabulary, reading comprehension, motivation, and sociocultural acquisition, with the purpose of learning to read for meaning, understanding, and joy.

International Reading Association

General McLane Balanced Literacy Model

As we consider our collective experiences in the school environment, we as a school community understand children come to the classroom with a wide range of skills and experiences. A “balanced approach” to literacy consists of a number of elements that provide many opportunities for reading and writing across the curriculum within each classroom. Research-based instruction is direct and moves along a continuum from demonstration and “thinking aloud” to guided practice, and ultimately to independent problem solving. Instruction emphasizes comprehension combined with phonemic awareness and phonics, fluency instruction, vocabulary development, and writing for a variety of purposes. Our instructional practice is grounded in the scaffolding theory conceptualized by Pearson and Gallagher (1983) and is characterized by degrees of language and teacher support. The degree of teacher assistance depends on two factors: (1) the goal of the task and (2) the student’s ability to carry out the task. Guided by this practice, we understand that all learners will proceed through this process at their own pace and at their appropriate level. Through this model, our professional responsibility is to use assessment and observation of students engaged in the learning process to guide our interactions with them. Comprehensive Reading Components To be considered effective, a comprehensive reading program needs the following components. These components are embedded into the General McLane philosophy. 1. The five pillars of reading instruction – phonemic awareness, phonics, fluency, vocabulary,

and comprehension. (National Reading Panel) 2. Optimal learning model -- gradual release of responsibility. 3. Differentiated instruction -- all students being instructed at their level. 4. The classroom teacher having the knowledge of the reading process. 5. Foster a love of reading. "It should be the teacher's aim to give every child a love of reading, a hunger for it that will stay with him through all the years of his life. If a child has that he will acquire the mechanical part without difficulty." (Mayne 1915, 40) A Complete Reader

Please refer to Attachment A for a graphic depiction of the Balance Literacy Model adopted by the General McLane School District.

Phonetics

Fluency Comprehension

Semantics

Syntax

5

What is changed from basal instruction to the balanced literacy approach?

! Our individual student assessments and teacher observations drive our instruction.

! The amount of time students do authentic reading and writing in school is increased.

! Lessons teach deep thinking and reading strategies.

! Students respond to their reading with authentic text talk and written response.

! Teachers do more modeling and demonstrating.

! Small-group instruction during reading and writing workshop meets student needs.

! Teachers conduct conversational conferences with individual students during

reading and writing workshop.

! Students are exposed to all genre and the strategies needed to read different genre.

! Teachers are building their lessons by what they observe the students need to

grow as readers and writers.

! Students learn how to work as a community.

! Students are accountable for their learning and can reflect on what they do well and what they need to work on to grow as a reader and writer.

! Teachers know more about their students reading and writing than ever!

Basal Approach vs. Balanced Approach

6

Statistical Data for Literacy (K-6) General McLane School District has focused on test data for the purpose of review and refinement to its instructional programs. Specifically, the district focuses on the following assessment data for literacy:

I. DIBELS – Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills (Administered three times per year, K-2)

II. DRA – Developmental Reading Assessment (Administered two to three times per year, K-6)

III. PSSA – Pennsylvania System of School Assessment

(Administered once per year, 3-8 and 11)

IV. Running Record – "A method of assessing a student's reading by systematically evaluating a student's oral reading and identifying error patterns."

(Administered on an on-going basis)

The results of the PSSA Assessment reveal the following outcomes:

PERCENTAGE OF STUDENTS PROFICIENT AND ABOVE EDINBORO MCKEAN

Grade 3 (2007) 84% 84% Grade 3 (2008) 71% 84% Grade 3 (2009) 79% 70%

Grade 4 (2007) 84% 71% Grade 4 (2008) 84% 82% Grade 4 (2009) 71% 75%

NOTE: These scores represent a unique and separate class each year of testing.

GRADE LEVEL PROGRESSION (READING) PERCENTAGE OF STUDENTS PROFICIENT AND ABOVE

Grade 3 (2006) 73% Grade 4 (2007) 77% Grade 5 (2008) 65% Grade 6 (2009) 74%

7

The DIBELS assessment is used as the universal screening for the Response to Intervention and Instruction for Struggling Learners (K-2). Results of this assessment indicate the following:

DIBELS % ACHIEVING BENCHMARK Edinboro Elementary McKean Elementary Grade

Level Fall Spring % Growth

Fall Spring % Growth

Grade K 54% 77% +23% 36% 58% +22% Grade 1 63% 73% +10% 58% 62% +4% Grade 2 70% 72% +2% 37% 70% +33% AVERAGE GROWTH % +17.6% AVERAGE GROWTH % +19.6%

The DRA assessment is designed as a diagnostic tool to determine individual reading deficiencies for the purpose of focus on instruction. Results of this assessment indicate the following:

DRA % AT OR ABOVE LEVEL Edinboro Elementary McKean Elementary

Grade Level October January %

Growth October January %

Growth 1 35% 51% +16% 48% 69% +21% 2 56% 81% +25% 47% 79% +32% 3 59% 62% +3% 64% 58% -6% 4 62% 64% +2% 60% 67% +7% AVERAGE GROWTH % +11.5% AVERAGE GROWTH % +13.25%

STRUGGLING READERS AVERAGE LEVEL OF IMPROVEMENT

Edinboro Elementary McKean Elementary Grade Level Fall Spring Levels of

Improvement Fall Spring Levels of

Improvement 1 1.98 12.66 + 6 Levels 2.07 10.65 +5.5 Levels 2 11.11 18.00 +4 Levels 11.11 24.00 + 6 Levels 3 16.18 25.81 +3.5 Levels 17.40 26.40 +3.5 Levels 4 25.00 36.00 +3.5 Levels 28.00 38.52 +3.5 Levels

STRUGGLING READERS PERCENTAGE OF IMPROVEMENT

Grade Level Edinboro Elementary McKean Elementary

Grade 1 83% improved 5+ levels 62% improved 5+ levels Grade 2 33% improved 5+ levels 89% improved 5+ levels Grade 3 60% improved 3+ levels 90% improved 3+ levels Grade 4 83% improved 3+ levels 69% improved 3+ levels

James W. Parker Middle School

Grade 5 35% improved 3+ levels Grade 6 25% improved 3+ levels

Please refer to Attachment B for the statistical data that support these findings.

8

The 2009-2010 school year also incorporated feedback from teachers, parents and students on their perceptions of the literacy initiative implemented into the General McLane elementary schools. Results of the surveys are as follows:

IMPROVEMENT IN QUALITY OF LITERACY INITIATIVE EDINBORO MCKEAN

Teachers 94% 100% Parents 95% 93%

DEGREE OF READING ENJOYMENT

EDINBORO MCKEAN

Teachers 100% 100% Parents 99% 93% Students 95% 98%

Please refer to Attachment C for the statistical data that support these findings.

9

Summary and Recommendations

Overall results of the statistical data and feedback assessment regarding the literacy

movement in the General McLane School District indicate success and effectiveness.

Student growth and development is continuing to improve, especially for our struggling

readers and writers. Students have demonstrated genuine interest in reading more.

Parents are seeing a stronger interest in students' reading at home and teachers see an

improvement in students' attitudes toward reading and increased volume of reading

independently.

The district's literacy momentum is contagious. In order to continue this momentum the

following recommendations are offered:

1. Continue the balanced literacy initiative throughout the 2010-2011 school year and

beyond. 2. Develop a professional education plan for grade level planning teams, as well as

special education teachers, grades K-6. 3. Develop a professional education plan on literacy leadership for General McLane

administrative teams. 4. Continue and refine the district's coaching model to provide the necessary support

needed for teachers to be effective. 5. Continue to support the Leveled Libraries (book rooms) in the elementary and

middle school buildings. 6. Begin to explore the transition from balanced literacy to the "Rigor and Relevance"

model at the secondary level. 7. Refine the literacy framework and present the curriculum component for board

adoption during the 2010-2011 school year. 8. Transition the Literacy Curriculum Framework to the district's web site.

10

ATTACHMENT A

BALANCED LITERACY MODEL

11

©Rigby, A Harcourt Education Imprint

12

ATTACHMENT B

STATISTICAL DATA CHARTS

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

ATTACHMENT C

FEEDBACK SURVEYS

PARENTS TEACHERS STUDENTS

20

Parent Feedback – Edinboro Elementary School

2

1

21

Edinboro Parent Survey (continued)

21- 30 minutes [16]

ed

d

M

21-30 minutes

1

22

Parent Feedback – McKean Elementary School

[10]

1

[12]

2

23

McKean Parent Survey (continued)

7]

Some

M

d

1

24

Teacher Feedback – Edinboro Elementary School

25

Edinboro Teacher Survey (continued)

Some

d

26

Teacher Feedback – McKean Elementary School

27

McKean Teacher Survey (continued)

ed

d

28

Student Feedback – Edinboro Elementary School

Don't like it very much [2] Really don't like it [0]

Rea

[2]

29

Edinboro Student Survey (continued)

Don't like it very much [0] Really don't like it [0]

Really like writing [29]

30

Student Feedback – McKean Elementary School

Don't like it very much [1] Really don't like it [0]

Really like reading [43]

[7]

31

McKean Student Survey (continued)

Don't like it very much [4] Really don't like it [0]

Really like writing [33]