1. The LAL Materials Review Recommendation for Adoption Building the Foundation Language Arts Literacy Bridgewater-Raritan Regional School District

2. Language Arts K-4  Recommendations from the evaluation  Improve use of assessments to inform instruction  Develop a scope and sequence  Streamline units of study and add focus  Provide training in Writing Workshop  Provide training in Comprehensive Literacy  Enhance word study  Establish core novels  Set benchmarks  Assistant Superintendent’s recommendations  Endeavor to hire early elementary teachers who are certified as reading specialists or trained in reading recovery.  Rotate the trained reading recovery teachers back into 1st grade classes every few years in keeping with the philosophy of Reading Recovery.  Superintendent’s recommendations  Investigate published K-6 LAL programs that utilize direct and explicit teaching strategies along with sequentially presented, skills-based methodology  Investigate tech-based classroom formative assessment systems such as Learnia, Acuity, and Northwest Evaluation Alliance, designed to give teachers frequent instructional feedback in order to target weak areas for rapid remediation and to move students forward at an appropriate pace

3. Recommendations were based on:  Concerns of the Teachers  Need for a word study program  Need for a better means to determine guided reading levels  Need for a writing program  Need for clear expectations or procedures  Concerns of the Parents  Student Achievement Data

4. Recommendations were based on:  Concerns of the Parents  Lack of explicit instruction in phonemic awareness, phonics, vocabulary, fluency and comprehension  Lack of constructive feedback on writing  Lack of attention to spelling, grammar, and the mechanics of writing  Lack of clear grade level benchmarks  Inconsistent implementation of the curriculum among teachers and schools  Student Achievement Data

5. Recommendations were based on:  Student Achievement Data  Benchmark Score: 73%  General Education Scores 3: 94.4% at or above state standard, 4.9% advanced 4: 93.% at or above state standard, 6.2% advanced 5: 81.6% at or above state standard, 10% advanced  Special Education Scores 3: 67.7% at or above state standard, 2.1% advanced 4: 69.7% at or above state standard, 0% advanced 5: 30% at or above state standard, 1.1% advanced

6. Status of the Recommendations  Began in 2008-2009  Improve use of assessments to inform instruction DRA 2 District Writing Prompts  Provide training in Writing Workshop Pull out training  Provide training in Comprehensive Literacy Pull out training  Enhance word study Words Their Way

7. Status of the Recommendations  Beginning in 2009-2010  Develop a scope and sequence  Establish benchmarks  Streamline units of study and add focus  Establish core experiences  Add focused and explicit instruction on grammar, usage, mechanics and spelling

8. Status of Recommendations  Pilot use of a published reading and writing program  Pearson’s: Good Habits Great Readers  Developmental Studies: Making Meaning and Being a Writer  Rigby: Literacy by Design

9. ~What we Learned~  A published reading and writing program will provide the foundation that our comprehensive literacy program needs and  Develop a scope and sequence  Establish benchmarks  Streamline units of study and add focus  Establish core experiences  Add focused and explicit instruction on grammar, usage, mechanics and spelling  Provide training on Writing Workshop  Provide training in Comprehensive Literacy

10. The Materials Review Process DateEvent March 3K-8 Committee Meeting- included teachers from all grade levels (general education and special education, Janice, Jennifer, Diane and Kevin) March 20Review of Materials – included input from high school teachers May 1-June 4Pilot teachers met with publishers and then piloted materials from the 3 top ranked publishers in K-4 classrooms June 9K-8 Committee Meeting with presentations from pilot teachers and publishers

11. The Rubric Question# of Points Possible Does the program reflect a balanced literacy/comprehensive literacy approach? 9 In the information presented based on current, relevant research? 9 Does the program support reading and writing workshop? Does the program support the writing process? 7 Are reading strategies explicitly taught as a way to develop comprehension? 7 Does the program reflect the recommendations of the National Reading Panel? (phonemic awareness, phonics, fluency, vocabulary and comprehension) 6 Is there a clear ‘road map’ for teachers to get an overall picture of the program (scope and sequence)? 5

12. The Rubric continued Question# of Points Possible Does it complement and supplement our current curriculum?5 Is instruction consistently explicit and systematic?5 Are there diverse, multicultural and authentic texts that match our student population? 4 Is there a coherent, logical instructional design?4 Is there ongoing formative assessment of students?4 Are there suggestions to differentiate instruction to meet the needs of all learners? 4 Is there support for writing across genres?4 Does the program provide additional materials and suggestions for instruction to support struggling learners? ELL? Advanced learners? 4

13. The Rubric continued Question# of Points Possible How well does it appear to align with grade levels above and below? 3 Is inquiry embedded in the program?3 Are there specific instructions for scaffolding?3 Does the program provide or accommodate word study?3 Are there resources available to help the teacher understand the rationale for the instructional approach and strategies utilized in the program? (articles, explanations, references) 3 Are the materials available online for students and parents?2 Does it provide useful assessment tools?2 Are goals and objectives clearly stated?2 Does the program address media literacies?2

14. AND THE WINNER IS…. Good Habits Great Readers

15. By the numbers: Points earned  Good Habits, Great Readers: 91  Literacy by Design: 88  Making Meaning and Being a Writer: 73

16. Good Habits Great Readers  Reading Instruction  Includes explicit instruction for all students through shared reading (Lessons on phonemic awareness, concepts of print, phonics, word study, vocabulary, fluency, non-fiction text, literary devices and writer’s craft)  Guided reading lessons that provide direct instruction in reading skills and strategies (Scaffolds instruction to move students from teacher directed to guided instruction, gathers informal assessment information)  Literacy Centers and Independent Work

17. Good Habits Great Readers  Writing Instruction  Direct and explicit instruction for all students through shared writing (lessons address six traits of writing, the writing process, a variety of genres, and writing strategies)  Small group direct instruction with mini-lessons that focus on grammar, mechanics, usage, and spelling  Independent writing that gives students opportunities to apply what they learn and extend or reinforce aspects of the writing taught in whole class or small group lessons.

18. The 7 Good Habits of Great Readers  Great readers see themselves as readers  Great readers make sense of text  Great readers use what they know  Great readers understand how stories work  Great readers read to learn  Great readers monitor and organize ideas and information  Great readers think critically about books

19. Best Practice Strategies Included  Choral reading  High frequency words  Blending  Partner talk  Tier-two words  Think-pair-share  Using sticky notes  Repeated readings  Using reading journals  Using think-alouds  Connecting to writing  Focused objectives  Teacher tips  Modeling in action  Informal assessments  Interventions for struggling readers and ELLs  Center activities  Vocabulary builders  DRA 2 connections  5 day planners  Guided reading database

20. What the pilot teachers said:  A great anchor that would put everyone on the same page  Well planned for the teacher  Connection to Words Their Way and DRA is invaluable  Connected to science curriculum  Integrated books were differentiated, helpful and meaningful  Meaningful center activities  Appropriate pacing for teachers and students that included a scope and sequence  Teacher friendly! Everything was tied together

21. What it will cost and how we will fund it  $494,851.00 plus shipping ($9,000)  $295,000 in budget for new adoption  $76,480 not needed for other LAL items in budget  $8,700 not needed for Marine Biology  $39,000 not needed for Biology (E books instead)  $75,000 from IDEA (15% of program)  $5,600 in budget for Holocaust materials paid for with Title IV funds instead  $4,071.00 from Title I and Title III instructional supplies FY09-10