Comprehensive Literacy Improvement Plan

A systemwide strategy to leverage opportunities--experience and expertise--to accelerate literacy

learning across Shelby County Schools

February 10, 2015

How will we reach our 80/90/100% goals and ensure all students are career and college ready?

CLIP BACKGROUND

Why do we need it?

SCS Students Making Progress in Literacy Learning

32.4 32.0 33.6

49.1 49.4

56.0

42.8 41.3

48.6

19.9 22.8 21.9

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

2012 2013 2014

Pe

rce

nt

Pro

fici

en

t*

Grades 3-8

English I

English II

English III

*Includes Alternative

SCS Students not On-track for College and Career Readiness—Across all grades

Reading/Language Arts Subgroup Proficiency Rates 2014

Significant Gaps in Literacy/LA Learning Exist Across SCS Student Groups

Reading/LA Proficiency in Grades 3-8, Improving but Not Fast Enough

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

80.0

90.0

100.0

2014 2017 2020 2023 2026 2029 2032 2035 2038 2041 2044 2047 2050

Pe

rce

nt

Pro

fici

en

t

Year

The District’s grades 3-8 RLA proficiency rate increased by 1.6 percentage points from 2013 to 2014. At that growth rate it would take until 2050 to reach 90% proficiency.

33.6%

91.2%

SCS Students not On-track for College and Career Readiness—Across all grades

Average US HS Graduate: 910-1210L

CCR/CCSS Expectation: 1300L

Average SCS High Schooler

What does it mean for each of us to support student literacy learning toward CCR standards? • “The goal for readers of all ages is to be able to understand

and learn from what they read and to express such knowledge clearly through speaking and writing about text.”

• “The standards focus intently on students reading closely to

draw evidence from the text and are emphatic about students reading texts of adequate range and complexity.”

(Publishers’ Criteria for the Common Core State Standards in English Language Arts and Literacy, Grades 3-12, CCSSO )

“Read like a detective and write like an investigative reporter” – David Coleman, CCSS author

CLIP OVERVIEW

What is it? How is it different?

CLIP Guiding Principles • We are student centered. We believe all children can

learn to high standards and our work should be focused on ensuring each child achieves to these goals.

• We believe the classroom is the most important place in the district. To be successful, teachers need:

– Clear expectations for performance and regular, quality feedback

– High-quality instructional materials and resources (e.g., for planning and assessing)

– Meaningful, timely and accurate data to assess student needs and modify instruction

– On-going, job-embedded professional development

• We acknowledge that literacy is a continuum.

CLIP Guiding Principles, cont’d

• We believe literacy teaching and learning is a shared responsibility

• We have a responsibility to ensure that professional development, support, and accountability are aligned to our goals and vision for literacy teaching and learning (as defined in the CLIP) and effective teacher and leadership practice more broadly (e.g., TLE and TEM)

• We must continuously monitor progress, reflect, make improvements, and ensure accountability, as appropriate

• We believe leadership matters—at all levels

Comprehensive Literacy Improvement Plan (CLIP)

• Builds on our strengths; not another change of course, but clearer commitment to “what works”

Unlike earlier efforts:

• Acknowledges complexity of literacy learning – Reading, writing, speaking, listening

– Developmental

– Different across contexts, genres, content, etc.

– Simultaneous need to build basic skills and promote high-levels of CCR rigor

• Clarifies expectations across all levels— – Locating work within RTI2 framework, and setting

expectations at each of core (Tier 1), supplemental (Tier 2) and Tier 3 levels

– Specifying expectations by grade-level, content, and role

– Emphasizing areas of greatest need, e.g., reading foundations

Response to Intervention (RtI2)

Tier I: Research Based,

Core Programs,

Universal Screening

Grade-level instruction aligned to

grade-level (CCSS) standards,

curriculum maps and pacing guides,

district-adopted instructional materials

(e.g., HMH-Journeys for K-5 and

resources)

33.4%

22.7%

43.9%

80-90%

Standard RtI2 Tier 3:

Individualized

Strategies

(e.g., replacement

curriculum)

1-5%

5-15%

Tier 2: Effective,

Strategic

Supplemental,

Interventions and

Progress

Monitoring (e.g., I-

Station for K-8

Reading)

SCS RtI2

Foundational Skills

The Report of the National Reading Panel (2000) identified five key components needed to prevent reading failure:

• Phonemic Awareness

• Phonics

• Fluency

• Vocabulary

• Text Comprehension

At MS and HS, part of Tier 1, Core Instruction

At MS and HS, may require Tier 2, Supplemental Instruction

At ES, Tier 1, Core Instruction at various grade levels

SCS students particularly under-prepared in the basic, foundational skills across grades

42.1% 42.1% 40.6% 40.8% 39.4% 43.7%

47.8% 56.7%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th 6th 7th 8th

Pe

rce

nta

ges

Percentage of Students who Scored in Tier 1 on Spelling Portion of Istation

SCS students struggle in writing, across grades and domains (TCAP Writing)

Comprehensive Literacy Improvement Plan

Includes:

• Common vision for literacy teaching and learning—what do we mean by “literacy” and what does effective instruction look like – Instructional time/blocks and designs by grade-level bands – Lesson planning template – Informal classroom “Look-Fors” aligned to TEM and targeted

instructional design

• Curricular and instructional tools and supports – Aligned instructional materials (e.g., core texts, Tier 2

interventions) – CCR-aligned curriculum maps and pacing guides – Sample lesson plans – High-leverage strategies and best practice resources

• School/leader supports – Explicit, common expectations/best practices – Sample schedules

Comprehensive Literacy Improvement Plan To include:

• Improved RTI2 supports – High-quality Tier 2 and 3 interventions

– Streamlined (less labor-intensive) RTI2 tracking

• Aligned assessment vision, instruments, and related resources – Universal screener, diagnostics, formative/benchmarks,

summative

– Improved data reports and dashboards

• Aligned, high-quality professional development – Tiered support that ensures 1) access for all teachers, 2)

differentiated supports, 3) varied approaches, 4) comprehensive approach, and 5) on-going progress monitoring and continuous improvement

• Continuous progress monitoring

CLIP EVIDENCE-BASED BEST PRACTICES

What do we need to do?

PreK-3 Block and Instructional Design

• Required time frame

– 50 minutes Reading PreK

– 90 minutes Reading K-3

– 30 minutes Writing K-3

• Grouping structures aligned to purpose

• Gradual release of responsibility: “I do, we do, they do, you do”

• Students actively involved

Reading ELA/Writing

Core (Grade-Level Instruction for All Students)

Whole Group

Explicit instruction on

reading skills and strategies;

collaborative reading of text

Modeled and shared writing;

modeling writing skills

Small Group

Homogeneous and

heterogeneous groupings;

practice and apply skills

Independent and group writing; practice and apply skills

Whole Group Closure and assessment

Closure, assessment,

sharing of student work

4-5 Block and Instructional Design

• Required time frame – 90 minutes

Reading

– 30 minutes Writing

• Grouping structures aligned to purpose

• Gradual release of responsibility: “I do, we do, they do, you do”

• Students actively involved

Reading ELA/Writing

Core (Grade-Level Instruction for All Students)

Whole Group

Explicit instruction on skills and strategies; collaborative reading

of text

Explicit instruction on skills and

strategies; sharing exemplars

Small Group

Homogeneous and heterogeneous

groupings; practice and apply skills

Engagement in the writing process;

practice and apply skills

Whole Group Closure and assessment

Closure, assessment,

sharing of student work

Middle Grades Block and Instructional Design

• Whole Group - 25 minutes

• Flexible Grouping – 20 minutes

– Teacher – led Small Group Instruction

– Flexible groups/centers for Independent Practice

• Whole Group – 5 minutes

Reading/ELA/Writing

Core (Grade-Level Instruction for All Students)

Whole Group

I do – teacher models We do - guided practice Teach/model grade level standards, concepts, skills

Small Group

Teacher led •We do (guided practice) •Teach/model, coach students with similar needs

Flexible groups/centers •They do/You do - independent practice •differentiated content, process, products

Whole Group

Closure •Wrap Up what you’ve learned.

High School Instructional Design

• Lessons span multiple days

• Gradual release of responsibility across days

• Reading and writing inextricably linked

Reading Writing ELA

Core (Grade-Level Instruction for All Students)

Complex Texts Writing About Texts

Taught in the Context of Writing

Whole Group Teach/model grade level standards, concepts, skills I do – teacher models We do - guided practice

Teach/model grade level standards, concepts, skills I do – teacher models We do - guided practice

Teach/model grade level standards, concepts, skills I do – teacher models We do - guided practice

Small Group Teacher Led Flexible groups

Teacher Led Flexible groups

Teacher Led Flexible groups

Whole Group Closure - Summarize what you have learned

Closure - Summarize what you have learned

Closure - Summarize what you have learned

Supplemental (Tier 2) Support for Targeted Students

The Gradual Release of Responsibility (to introduce or reinforce a new skill)

Teacher Responsibility

Student Responsibility

I do it.

We do it.

They do it (together).

You do it (independent of the teacher).

Guided

Collaborative

Independent

Beyond Appearances

It’s not about how students are arranged; it’s about the work in which they are engaged.

Is instruction-- -Purposeful -Rigorous (TNReady aligned) -Differentiated to meet student needs -Consistent with evidence-based practice -Aligned to TEM standards

CLIP IMPLEMENTATION AND SUPPORTS

When does the work begin? What does it include?

DRAFT CLIP Development and Roll-Out

Philosophy Nov-Jan 2015 -Literacy Needs Assessment, Research, and Planning -DRAFT CLIP -CLIP Teacher Advisory (1/15/15)

Vision Jan-Feb 2015 -D2025 and Draft CLIP Roll-out: Central Office Staff (1/16/15) Principals and APs (1/26-28/15) PLC Coaches Board of Education (2/10/15) Teachers (2/16/15)

Strategy Feb- Aug 2015 -DRAFT CLIP Instructional Design (including “the why”) -Early “Look-Fors” and shared expectations -Aligned PD, instructional tools (e.g., curriculum maps, pacing guides, assessments) and materials (e.g., Tier 2 intervention) -Aligned planning tools (e.g., sample schedules)

Skills

Resources

Monitoring Aug- Ongoing -Clear, consistent, common expectations (and support) -High quality, meaningful student assessment, accessible reporting

Evaluation, Rewards and Sanctions

TBD -TBD