Q3: How do we get there? Cohort A

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
PAYS FOR: Literacy Coach, Power Hour Aides, LTM's, Literacy Trainings, Kindergarten Teacher Training, Materials.
Advertisements

Using Core, Supplemental, and Intervention Reading Programs to Meet the Needs of All Learners Carrie Thomas Beck, Ph.D. Oregon Reading First Center COSA.
1 Achieving a Healthy Grade- Level System in Beginning Reading Content developed by Carrie Thomas Beck.
Oregon Reading First IBR V - Cohort B Introduction to Lesson Progress Reports (LPRs)
1 Data-Based Leadership Cohort B March 2, 2006 (C) 2006 by the Oregon Reading First Center Center on Teaching and Learning.
Oregon Reading First Leadership Session October 20, 2005 (Cohort B) October 21, 2005 (Cohort A) Erb Memorial Union University of Oregon Eugene, Oregon.
Instruction GoalsAssessment For Each Student For All Students Institute on Beginning Reading Day 4: Instruction: Time, Scheduling & Grouping / Reading.
Action Planning Spring 2008 Statewide Coaches’ Meeting Oregon Reading First.
1 Cohort B Q2: How are we doing?. 2 Reviewing Outcomes  What percent of students are reaching benchmark goals in each grade level?  What percent of.
1 Reading First Internal Evaluation Leadership Tuesday 2/3/03 Scott K. Baker Barbara Gunn Pacific Institutes for Research University of Oregon Portland,
1 Oregon Reading First Institute on Beginning Reading: Evaluating and Planning Spring, 2006 Cohort B.
Oregon Reading First: Statewide Mentor Coach Meeting February 18, 2005 © 2005 by the Oregon Reading First Center Center on Teaching and Learning.
Oregon Reading First (2009)1 Oregon Reading First Webinar Data-based Action Planning Winter 2009.
1. 2 Dimensions of A Healthy System Districts Schools Grades Classrooms Groups.
1 Cohort B Institute on Beginning Reading III February 1 and 2, 2006 Achieving Healthy Grade-Level Systems in Beginning Reading.
1 Oregon K-12 Literacy Framework and K-3 Statewide Outreach.
Oregon Reading First (2010)1 Oregon Reading First Regional Coaches’ Meeting May 13, 2010.
Oregon Reading First (2009)1 Oregon Reading First Regional Coaches’ Meeting May 2009.
Oregon Reading First (2008)1 Oregon Reading First Conference Call Data-based Action Planning Winter 2008.
1 Q3: How do we get there? Cohort B 2 GOALS AND ASSESSMENT INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAMS INSTRUCTIONAL TIME DIFFERENTIATED INSTRUCTION ADMINISTRATION/ ORGANIZATION.
1 Oregon Reading First Institute on Beginning Reading VII: Evaluating and Planning Institute on Beginning Reading VII: Evaluating and Planning.
Oregon Reading First (2010)1 Winter 2010 Data Based Planning for Instructional Focus Groups.
1 Oregon Reading First: Cohort B Leadership Session Portland, Oregon May 27, 2009.
Instruction Goals Assessment For Each Student For All Students Institute on Beginning Reading II Planning Core/Benchmark, Strategic, & Intensive Interventions.
1 Project-wide Reading Results: Interpreting Student Performance Data and Designing Instructional Interventions Oregon Reading First February, 2004 Institute.
1 Q2: How are we doing? Cohort A (C) 2006 by the Oregon Reading First Center Center on Teaching and Learning.
Oregon Reading First (2007)1 Oregon Reading First Coaches’ Meeting Spring 2007 IBR Preparation April 25 and 26th, 2007.
Designing and Implementing An Effective Schoolwide Program
Providing Leadership in Reading First Schools: Essential Elements Dr. Joseph K. Torgesen Florida Center for Reading Research Miami Reading First Principals,
From Data to Dialogue: Facilitating meaningful change with reading data Ginny Axon misd.net) Terri Metcalf
Cohort 5 Elementary School Data Review and Action Planning: Schoolwide Reading Spring
Spring, Cohort 4 Middle/Jr. High School Data Review and Action Planning: Schoolwide Reading.
Using a Comprehensive Assessment Plan to Meet All Students’ Instructional Needs Leadership Conference 2005 Orlando, Florida Pat Howard and Randee Winterbottom.
Interpreting DIBELS reports LaVerne Snowden Terri Metcalf
BY Karen Liu, Ph. D. Indiana State University August 18,
Oregon Reading First Orientation Holiday Inn Portland Airport November 12, 2002 Oregon Department of Education.
Systems Review: Schoolwide Reading Support Cohort 5: Elementary Schools Winter, 2009.
Creating, Monitoring and Evaluating a Master Schedule That supports student learning.
B-ELL Leadership Session May 26, 2009 Jorge Preciado University of Oregon © 2009 by the Oregon Reading First Center Center on Teaching and Learning.
School-wide Data Team Meeting Winter NSIF Extended Cohort February 10, 2012.
Cohort 5 Middle/Jr. High School Data Review and Action Planning: Schoolwide Reading Spring,
Effective Behavioral & Instructional Support Systems Overview and Guiding Principles Adapted from, Carol Sadler, Ph.D. – EBISS Coordinator Extraordinaire.
1 The Oregon Reading First Model: A Blueprint for Success Scott K. Baker Eugene Research Institute/ University of Oregon Orientation Session Portland,
CSI Maps Randee Winterbottom & Tricia Curran Assessment Programs Florida Center for Reading Research.
Cohort 4 Elementary School Data Review and Action Planning: Schoolwide Reading Spring
Data Analysis MiBLSi Project September 2005 Based on material by Ed Kameenui Deb Simmons Roland Good Ruth Kaminski Rob Horner George Sugai.
Detroit Public Schools Data Review and Action Planning: Schoolwide Reading Spring
EOY DIBELS Benchmark Data for Intervention Programs Oregon Reading First Schools June, 2009 © 2009 by the Oregon Reading First Center Center on Teaching.
Data Report July Collect and analyze RtI data Determine effectiveness of RtI in South Dakota in Guide.
Fidelity of Implementation A tool designed to provide descriptions of facets of a coherent whole school literacy initiative. A tool designed to provide.
Oregon Reading First Leadership Session October 20, 2005 (Cohort B) October 21, 2005 (Cohort A) Erb Memorial Union University of Oregon Eugene, Oregon.
1 Oregon Reading First Institute on Beginning Reading: Evaluating and Planning Spring, 2006 Cohort A (C) 2006 by the Oregon Reading First Center Center.
Teaming/Data/Interventions RtI Infrastructure: Teaming RtI Partnership Coaches meeting January 6, 2011 Terry Schuster, RtI Partnership Lead Coach.
Cohort B Observation Cycle for © 2007 by the Oregon Reading First Center Center on Teaching and Learning.
White Pages Team Grey Pages Facilitator Team & Facilitator Guide for School-wide Reading Leadership Team Meetings Elementary.
RTI/MTSS Self-Assessment. RTI Session Objectives -An increase in the understanding of the necessary components of RTI/MTSS -An awareness that each school.
SAM (Self-Assessment of MTSS Implementation) ADMINISTRATION TRAINING
End of Year Report and Renewal Process
Benchmarks of Quality (BOQ) Training
Data-Based Leadership
Measuring Project Performance: Tips and Tools to Showcase Your Results
DESE Educator Evaluation System for Superintendents
Systems Problem Solving
Reading Goals and Reading Growth A Proposal for Cohort A
Overview: Understanding and Building a Schoolwide Assessment Plan
Oregon Reading First Leadership Session
Reading Goals and Reading Growth A Proposal for Cohort A
2018 OSEP Project Directors’ Conference
WESTEST 2 SCHOOL REPORTS
WESTEST 2 SCHOOL REPORTS
Presentation transcript:

Q3: How do we get there? Cohort A © 2006 by the Oregon Reading First Center Center on Teaching and Learning

DIFFERENTIATED INSTRUCTION PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT All Critical Elements Must Be In Place ASSESSMENT GOALS AND INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAMS INSTRUCTIONAL TIME DIFFERENTIATED INSTRUCTION ADMINISTRATION/ ORGANIZATION PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT

Linking Q2: How are we doing? with Q3: How do we get there? What is the overall effectiveness of our grade-level instructional support plan (CSI Map)? How are we doing with our benchmark students? What do the data tell us? How is the combination of current programs/strategies working for our strategic and intensive students? So what do we do next year?

Activity # 1: What is the overall effectiveness of our grade-level instructional support plan (CSI Map)? Materials Needed: • Table 2 from “How Are We Doing?” section • grade-level CSI Maps • highlighter pens (green, yellow, pink) Step 1: In grade-level teams, revisit the Summary of Effectiveness data from Table 2 of the “How Are We Doing?” section. In particular, examine the total percentage of students who made adequate progress toward the spring benchmark goal in your grade level.

How effective was the grade-level winter to spring instructional support plan (CSI Map)? Table 2 Evaluating Winter to Spring 2006 Grade Level Instructional Support Plans: Percent of Students Making Adequate Progress Towards DIBIELS Benchmark Goals Grade/ Benchmark Goal Measures Total percent of students in K that made Adequate Progress Include actual numbers of students, e.g., 90/100 or 90% Percent of Intensive Students that made Adequate Progress Include actual numbers of students e.g., 1/5 or 20% Percent of Strategic students that made Adequate Progress Include actual numbers of students, e.g., 25/50 or 50% Percent of Benchmark students that made Adequate Progress e.g.95/100 Winter to Spring 2005 2006 Percent Change (+ or -) K - PSF 70% 87% +17 60% 86% +26 50% 79% +29 90% 93% +3

Yellow middle quartiles in the state of Oregon What is the overall effectiveness of your grade-level instructional support plan (CSI Map)? Step 2: Using the criteria below to determine the appropriate color, draw a box around the perimeter of your CSI Map to indicate the overall effectiveness of the grade level system. Green top quartile in the state of Oregon Yellow middle quartiles in the state of Oregon Pink bottom quartile in the state of Oregon

Yellow middle quartiles (57% - 86% made adequate progress) What is the overall effectiveness of your grade-level instructional support plan (CSI Map)? K-1 Kindergarten: Green top quartile (87% or more made adequate progress) Yellow middle quartiles (57% - 86% made adequate progress) Pink bottom quartile (56% or less made adequate progress) Grade 1: Green top quartile (72% or more made adequate progress) Yellow middle quartiles (48% - 71% made adequate progress) Pink bottom quartile (47% or less made adequate progress)

What is the overall effectiveness of your grade-level instructional support plan (CSI Map)? 2-3 Green top quartile (61% or more made adequate progress) Yellow middle quartiles (39% - 60% made adequate progress) Pink bottom quartile (38% or less made adequate progress) Grade 3: Green top quartile (60% or more made adequate progress) Yellow middle quartiles (42% - 59% made adequate progress) Pink bottom quartile (41% or less made adequate progress)

What is the overall effectiveness of your grade-level instructional support plan (CSI Map)? Green Box = Sustain or minimal modifications needed to your overall grade-level CSI Map Yellow Box = Moderate to substantial modifications needed to your overall grade-level CSI Map Pink Box = Substantial modifications needed to your overall grade-level CSI Map

Complete Activity 1 using your data and grade-level CSI Map. What is the overall effectiveness of your grade-level instructional support plan (CSI Map)? Your Turn! Complete Activity 1 using your data and grade-level CSI Map.

Activity # 2: How effective were the grade-level winter to spring instructional support plans for benchmark, strategic, and intensive students? Materials Needed: • Table 2 from “How Are We Doing?” section • grade-level CSI Maps • highlighter pens (green, yellow, pink) Step 1: Revisit the Summary of Effectiveness data from Table 2 of the “How Are We Doing?” section. What percentage of benchmark, strategic, and intensive students made adequate progress toward the spring benchmark goal?

Benchmark Students

How effective is the grade-level instructional support plan for benchmark students? Kindergarten Example Step 2: If your school is in the top quartile for benchmark students making adequate progress (97% or more benchmark students made adequate progress), highlight the benchmark section of your grade-level CSI Map in green. If your school is in the middle quartiles for benchmark students making adequate progress (76%-96% of benchmark students made adequate progress), highlight the benchmark section of your grade-level CSI Map in yellow. If your school is in the bottom quartile for benchmark students making adequate progress (75% or less of benchmark students made adequate progress), highlight the benchmark section of your grade-level CSI Map in pink.

Percent of Benchmark students that made Adequate Progress How effective were the grade-level winter to spring instructional support plans? Table 2 Evaluating Winter to Spring 2006 Grade Level Instructional Support Plans: Percent of Students Making Adequate Progress Towards DIBIELS Benchmark Goals Grade/ Benchmark Goal Measures Total percent of students in K that made Adequate Progress Include actual numbers of students, e.g., 90/100 or 90% Percent of Intensive Students that made Adequate Progress Include actual numbers of students e.g., 1/5 or 20% Percent of Strategic students that made Adequate Progress Include actual numbers of students, e.g., 25/50 or 50% Percent of Benchmark students that made Adequate Progress e.g.95/100 Winter to Spring 2005 2006 Percent Change (+ or -) K - PSF 70% 87% +17 60% 86% +26 50% 79% +29 90% 93% +3

How effective is the grade-level instructional support plan for benchmark students? First Grade Step 2: If your school is in the top quartile for benchmark students making adequate progress (100% of benchmark students made adequate progress), highlight the benchmark section of your grade-level CSI Map in green. If your school is in the middle quartiles for benchmark students making adequate progress (90%-99% of benchmark students made adequate progress), highlight the benchmark section of your grade-level CSI Map in yellow. If your school is in the bottom quartile for benchmark students making adequate progress (89% or less of benchmark students made adequate progress), highlight the benchmark section of your grade-level CSI Map in pink.

How effective is the grade-level instructional support plan for benchmark students? Second Grade Step 2: If your school is in the top quartile for benchmark students making adequate progress (91% or more benchmark students made adequate progress), highlight the benchmark section of your grade-level CSI Map in green. If your school is in the middle quartiles for benchmark students making adequate progress (78%-90% of benchmark students made adequate progress), highlight the benchmark section of your grade-level CSI Map in yellow. If your school is in the bottom quartile for benchmark students making adequate progress (77% or less of benchmark students made adequate progress), highlight the benchmark section of your grade-level CSI Map in pink.

How effective is the grade-level instructional support plan for benchmark students? Third Grade Step 2: If your school is in the top quartile for benchmark students making adequate progress (93% or more of benchmark students made adequate progress), highlight the benchmark section of your grade-level CSI Map in green. If your school is in the middle quartiles for benchmark students making adequate progress (80% - 92% of benchmark students made adequate progress), highlight the benchmark section of your grade-level CSI Map in yellow. If your school is in the bottom quartile for benchmark students making adequate progress (79% or less of benchmark students made adequate progress), highlight the benchmark section of your grade-level CSI Map in pink.

Strategic Students

How effective is your grade-level instructional support plan for strategic students? Kindergarten Example Step 3: If your school is in the top quartile for strategic students making adequate progress (76% or more of strategic students made adequate progress), highlight the strategic section of your grade-level CSI Map in green. If your school is in the middle quartiles for strategic students making adequate progress (34% - 75% of strategic students made adequate progress), highlight the strategic section of your grade-level CSI Map in yellow. If your school is in the bottom quartile for strategic students making adequate progress (33% or less of strategic students made adequate progress), highlight the strategic section of your grade-level CSI Map in pink.

How effective were grade level winter to spring instructional support plans (CSI Maps)? Table 2 Evaluating Winter to Spring 2006 Grade Level Instructional Support Plans: Percent of Students Making Adequate Progress Towards DIBIELS Benchmark Goals Grade/ Benchmark Goal Measures Total percent of students in K that made Adequate Progress Include actual numbers of students, e.g., 90/100 or 90% Percent of Intensive Students that made Adequate Progress Include actual numbers of students e.g., 1/5 or 20% Percent of Strategic students that made Adequate Progress Include actual numbers of students, e.g., 25/50 or 50% Percent of Benchmark students that made Adequate Progress e.g.95/100 Winter to Spring 2005 2006 Percent Change (+ or -) K - PSF 70% 87% +17 60% 86% +26 50% 79% +29 90% 93% +3

How effective is your grade-level instructional support plan for strategic students? First Grade Step 3: If your school is in the top quartile for strategic students making adequate progress (51% or more of strategic students made adequate progress), highlight the strategic section of your grade-level CSI Map in green. If your school is in the middle quartiles for strategic students making adequate progress (21% to 50% of strategic students made adequate progress), highlight the strategic section of your grade-level CSI Map in yellow. If your school is in the bottom quartile for strategic students making adequate progress (20% or less of strategic students made adequate progress), highlight the strategic section of your grade-level CSI Map in pink.

How effective is your grade-level instructional support plan for strategic students? Second Grade Step 3: If your school is in the top quartile for strategic students making adequate progress (27% or more strategic students made adequate progress), highlight the strategic section of your grade-level CSI Map in green. If your school is in the middle quartiles for strategic students making adequate progress (5% - 26% of strategic students made adequate progress), highlight the strategic section of your grade-level CSI Map in yellow. If your school is in the bottom quartile for strategic students making adequate progress (4% or less of strategic students made adequate progress), highlight the strategic section of your grade-level CSI Map in pink.

How effective is your grade-level instructional support plan for strategic students? Third Grade Step 3: If your school is in the top quartile for strategic students making adequate progress (29% or more of strategic students made adequate progress), highlight the strategic section of your grade-level CSI Map in green. If your school is in the middle quartiles for strategic students making adequate progress (9% to 28% strategic students made adequate progress), highlight the strategic section of your grade-level CSI Map in yellow. If your school is in the bottom quartile for strategic students making adequate progress (8% or less of strategic students made adequate progress), highlight the strategic section of your grade-level CSI Map in pink.

Intensive Students

How effective is your grade-level instructional support plan for intensive students? Kindergarten Example Step 4: If your school is in the top quartile for intensive students making adequate progress (89% or more of intensive students made adequate progress), highlight the intensive section of your grade-level CSI Map in green. If your school is in the middle quartiles for intensive students making adequate progress (52% - 88% of intensive students made adequate progress), highlight the intensive section of your grade-level CSI Map in yellow. If your school is in the bottom quartile for intensive students making adequate progress (51% or less of intensive students made adequate progress), highlight the intensive section of your grade-level CSI Map in pink.

How effective were the grade-level winter to spring instructional support plans (CSI Maps)? Table 2 Evaluating Winter to Spring 2006 Grade Level Instructional Support Plans: Percent of Students Making Adequate Progress Towards DIBIELS Benchmark Goals Grade/ Benchmark Goal Measures Total percent of students in K that made Adequate Progress Include actual numbers of students, e.g., 90/100 or 90% Percent of Intensive Students that made Adequate Progress Include actual numbers of students e.g., 1/5 or 20% Percent of Strategic students that made Adequate Progress Include actual numbers of students, e.g., 25/50 or 50% Percent of Benchmark students that made Adequate Progress e.g.95/100 Winter to Spring 2005 2006 Percent Change (+ or -) K - PSF 70% 87% +17 60% 86% +26 50% 79% +29 90% 93% +3

How effective is your grade-level instructional support plan for intensive students? First Grade Step 4: If your school is in the top quartile for intensive students making adequate progress (51% or more intensive students made adequate progress), highlight the intensive section of your grade-level CSI Map in green. If your school is in the middle quartiles for intensive students making adequate progress (21% - 50% of intensive students made adequate progress), highlight the intensive section of your grade-level CSI Map in yellow. If your school is in the bottom quartile for intensive students making adequate progress (20% or less of intensive students made adequate progress), highlight the intensive section of your grade-level CSI Map in pink.

How effective is your grade-level instructional support plan for intensive students? Second Grade Step 4: If your school is in the top quartile for intensive students making adequate progress (18% or more intensive students made adequate progress), highlight the intensive section of your grade-level CSI Map in green. If your school is in the middle quartiles for intensive students making adequate progress (2% to 17% of intensive students made adequate progress), highlight the intensive section of your grade-level CSI Map in yellow. If your school is in the bottom quartile for intensive students making adequate progress (1% or less of intensive students made adequate progress), highlight the intensive section of your grade-level CSI Map in pink.

How effective is your grade-level instructional support plan for intensive students? Third Grade Step 4: If your school is in the top quartile for intensive students making adequate progress (34% or more of intensive students made adequate progress), highlight the intensive section of your grade-level CSI Map in green. If your school is in the middle quartiles for intensive students making adequate progress (14%-33% of intensive students made adequate progress), highlight the intensive section of your grade-level CSI Map in yellow. If your school is in the bottom quartile for intensive students making adequate progress (13% or less of intensive students made adequate progress), highlight the intensive section of your grade-level CSI Map in pink.

How effective are your grade-level instructional support plans for benchmark, strategic, and intensive students? Green Box = Sustain or minimal modifications needed to the identified level of support section on your grade-level of CSI Map Yellow Box = Moderate to substantial modifications needed to the identified level of support section on your grade-level CSI Map Pink Box = Substantial Modifications needed to the identified level of support section on your grade-level CSI Map

How effective are your grade-level instructional support plans for benchmark, strategic, and intensive students? Kindergarten Example Step 5: For each instructional recommendation, document student progress: For Example: Benchmark 38 established on PSF 3 emerging on PSF 0 deficit on PSF

Complete Activity 2 using your data and grade-level CSI Map. How effective are the grade level winter to spring instructional support plans? Your Turn! Complete Activity 2 using your data and grade-level CSI Map.

So what do we do next year?

Activity 3: Complete the PET Action Planning Tool

PET Action Planning Tool A tool designed to help schools achieve an effective schoolwide beginning reading model. The tool will assist school personnel in identifying relevant goals within the schoolwide model and pinpointing actions necessary to achieve those goals.

Planning and Evaluation Tool (PET) for Effective Schoolwide Reading Programs Goals, Objectives, Priorities Assessment Instructional Programs and Materials Instructional Time Differentiated Instruction, Grouping, Scheduling Administration, Organization, Communication Professional Development

Element I: Goals, Objectives, Priorities are clearly defined and quantifiable at each grade level are articulated across grade levels are prioritized and dedicated to the essential elements in reading guide instructional and curricular decisions are commonly understood and consistently used by teachers and administrators within and between grades to evaluate and communicate student learning and improve practice.

Goal Actions PET Element

PET Action Planning Tool School Action Plan (Goals, Objectives, Priorities)

PET Action Planning Tool

PET Action Planning Tool Complete elements II - VII Elements II and VII will be completed as a school team. Elements III, IV, and V will be completed in grade level teams*. Element VI will be completed by the principal and district team. Discuss goals listed under each element A school may check off a goal as being complete ONLY IF all actions to the right of the goal are already in place or have been completed. Goals that that are not currently completed (and the relevant actions) will become part of your school’s action plan for 2006-2007. * Grade level teams will complete these sections of the tool 3 times - once for intensive, strategic and benchmark instructional support plans.

PET Action Planning Tool

Element II: Assessment Please complete as a school team.

Elements III, IV, and V: Instruction Please complete in grade level teams. Element III: Instructional Programs and Materials Element IV: Instructional Time Element V: Differentiated Instruction, Grouping, Scheduling Complete these sections three times - once for benchmark, once for strategic, and once for intensive instructional support plans.

Elements III, IV, and V: Instruction Note that if an instructional support system (benchmark, strategic, or intensive) is quite effective (i.e., almost all students made adequate progress), then problem-solve at the individual student level. How can you intensify instruction for those few students who are not making adequate progress?

Element VI: Administration, Organization, Communication This section will primarily be completed by the principal and district team representative. Item #5 will be completed in grade level teams: 5. Concurrent instruction (e.g., Title, special education) is coordinated with and complimentary to general education reading instruction.

Element VII: Professional Development Please complete as a school team. Item #1 will require each member of the team to complete a Teacher Needs Survey 1. Teachers and instructional staff have thorough understanding and working knowledge of grade-level instructional/reading priorities and effective practices.

Highlight any goal that has incomplete actions. PET-R Action Planning Tool: What actions are necessary to achieve our schoolwide beginning reading goals? For each element, go back and highlight those actions that are not completed. Highlight any goal that has incomplete actions. Coach: Highlight Elements II and VII Grade-Level Teams: Highlight Elements III, IV, and V (and item #5 from Element VI) Principal/District Team: Highlight Element VI

PET-R Action Planning Tool

PET-R Action Planning Tool: Prioritizing Grade-Level Actions Now that you’ve highlighted actions that have not been completed, it’s time to prioritize.

PET-R Action Planning Tool: Prioritizing Grade-Level Actions In grade-level teams: Review the data to determine the area(s) of greatest need (benchmark, strategic, intensive support) in your grade. Review highlighted actions for those area(s) from the PAPT - Elements III, IV, and V. Select the few actions that are most critical for improving instructional support for those particular area(s) (benchmark, strategic, intensive). Consider whether there are actions from the 05-06 School Action Plan that were not met that would be important to include. Record selected high priority actions on grade-level action plan breakout forms.

Grade-Level Action Plan Breakout Form Grade Level Instructional Support (Total) Data: Percent AP: Quartile: Benchmark Instructional Support Data: Key Proposed Action(s) Percent AP: • Quartile: • Strategic Instructional Support Data: Key Proposed Action(s) Percent AP: • Quartile: • Intensive Instructional Support Data: Key Proposed Action(s)

Activity 4: Revisit 2005-2006 CSI Maps • What changes need to be made? Materials Needed: grade-level action plan breakout forms (just completed) 2005-2006 Winter-Spring CSI Maps Post-It Notes Revisit the high priority grade-level actions identified in Activity #3. Examine your 05-06 CSI Winter-Spring grade level instructional support plans for your benchmark, strategic and intensive students. Using Post-It notes, add notes to your CSI map reflecting desired actions/changes based on the prioritized actions.

Select stronger intensive program - RM?

Activity 5: Grade-Level Share Out. • How are we doing Activity 5: Grade-Level Share Out • How are we doing? How do we get there? Materials Needed: completed grade-level action plan breakout forms 2005-2006 winter-spring CSI Maps chart paper and markers Work in your grade-level team to prepare a brief share-out of your grade-level data and proposed high priority actions for next year. Share data summary and key proposed actions from instructional support areas (i.e., benchmark, strategic and intensive) with the entire school team. Building principals facilitate the large group share-outs.

Next Steps Each grade-level team should turn in one copy of the completed PET-R Action Planning Tool - Elements III, IV, and V (for benchmark, strategic, and intensive) with highlighted actions/goals to the coach. Also include #5 from Element VI. Include a copy of the action plan breakout form. Principal/District Team Representative will turn in a copy of Element VI to the coach. Coach will save Elements II and VI which were completed by the school team. Coach will collect Teacher Needs Surveys and summarize results.

Next Steps Early Reading Team will take the completed sections of the PET-R Action Planning Tool from the IBR and combine into a draft of a School Action Plan for 2006-2007. Early Reading Team will draft an 06-07 RF budget that is linked to the School Action Plan using the budget worksheets provided by ODE/ORFC. Drafts of the School Action Plan and budget will be turned into the Regional Coordinators on June 30, 2006 along with “How Are We Doing? Reports from principal and district. Principals and District Team Members should plan to share out their reports some time in the month of June. ODE/ORFC will send a complete school report, including DIBELS and SAT-10 data to RF schools in July. Leadership Team (district, principal, coach) will adjust School Action Plan/Budget as necessary based on the report. Leadership Team (district, principal, coach) will submit a final draft of School Action Plan/Budget to ODE/ORFC at the end of August. CSI Maps for fall-winter 06-07 will be due in September, 2006.

06-07 School Action Plan

06-07 School Action Plan