1 Achieving a Healthy Grade- Level System in Beginning Reading Content developed by Carrie Thomas Beck.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Reading Intervention “Today a reader, tomorrow a leader.” -Margaret Fuller-
Advertisements

Issue Analyses RtI Yvette Benton Brad Baietto Brad Scarbrough.
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 Reading First at Oak Grove Elementary School Medford School District 549C Julie York – District Person Julie Evans – Principal Barbara Low – Reading.
Oregon Reading First Cohort B Statewide Coaches’ Training Session February 27, 2007 Carrie Thomas Beck, Ph.D. University of Oregon.
Oregon Reading First IBR V - Cohort B Introduction to Lesson Progress Reports (LPRs)
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.
Oregon Reading First Cohort B Statewide Coaches’ Session September 14, 2006.
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.
Oregon Reading First Institute on Beginning Reading (IBR) Leadership Session for District Team Members, Principals, and Mentor Coaches August 25, 2004.
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.
Essential Elements in Implementing and Monitoring Quality RtI Procedures Rose Dymacek & Edward Daly Nebraska Department of Education University of Nebraska-
1 Cohort B Institute on Beginning Reading III February 1 and 2, 2006 Achieving Healthy Grade-Level Systems in Beginning Reading.
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.
Instruction Goals Assessment For Each Student For All Students Institute on Beginning Reading II Planning Core/Benchmark, Strategic, & Intensive Interventions.
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.
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
Grade-level Benchmark Data Meetings
The Puzzle of an Elementary Master Schedule Putting the Pieces Together!
Supporting K-12 Mathematics Intervention Presenter: Jameson Rienick, Mathematics Project Specialist
Planning Tier II Math Interventions Barbara Scierka, Ph.D. St. Croix River Education District
Grade-level Data Team Meetings.
Systems Review: Schoolwide Reading Support Cohort 5: Middle Schools Winter, 2009.
Systems Review: Schoolwide Reading Support Cohort 5: Elementary Schools Winter, 2009.
Creating, Monitoring and Evaluating a Master Schedule That supports student learning.
Teacher Evaluation and Professional Growth Program Module 4: Reflecting and Adjusting December 2013.
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,
Why must we do Data Teams? We know the implementation of DT benefit STUDENTS -helps teachers identify exceeding/proficient students and plan for targeted.
STUDENT GROWTH UPDATE LEARNING GOALS FOR TODAY - Teachers will be able to clearly delineate between the 4 levels of expectations on student.
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
RTI: Response to Intervention An Invitation to Begin… Rutgers Conference January 2015 Janet Higgins Reading Specialist East Amwell Township School Rutgers.
1 Lodi Unified School District High Priority Schools Grant (HPSGP) Review of Progress for Live Oak, Needham, and Washington Elementary Schools Mary Camezon,
EOY DIBELS Benchmark Data for Intervention Programs Oregon Reading First Schools June, 2009 © 2009 by the Oregon Reading First Center Center on Teaching.
Fidelity of Implementation A tool designed to provide descriptions of facets of a coherent whole school literacy initiative. A tool designed to provide.
Granite School District Multi-Tiered System of Support Part I: Moving Between Tier 1 Differentiation and Tier 2 Interventions and Extensions Teaching and.
Academic Program Survey Kern County Superintendent of Schools Office RSDSS Region 8.
Where Do You Stand? Using Data to Size Up Your School’s Progress Michael C. McKenna University of Virginia.
Oregon Reading First Leadership Session October 20, 2005 (Cohort B) October 21, 2005 (Cohort A) Erb Memorial Union University of Oregon Eugene, Oregon.
Zimmerly Response NMIA Audit. Faculty Response Teacher input on Master Schedule. Instructional Coaches Collaborative work. Design and implement common.
UNIVERSAL SCREENING AND PROGRESS MONITORING IN READING Secondary Level.
1 Linking DIBELS Data to Differentiated Instructional Support Plans 32 nd Annual COSA Seaside Conference June 23, 2006 Hank Fien, Ph.D. Center for Teaching.
1 Oregon Reading First Institute on Beginning Reading: Evaluating and Planning Spring, 2006 Cohort A (C) 2006 by the Oregon Reading First Center Center.
Schoolwide Reading: Day 3 Module 4.0 Evaluating the Schoolwide Reading Program Cohort 7 Winter
Cohort B Observation Cycle for © 2007 by the Oregon Reading First Center Center on Teaching and Learning.
October 17, What is the primary purpose(s) and responsibility of our committee?
 Effective monitoring of adult actions – teaching and leadership – strongly linked to gains in student achievement  “Implementation gap” between intention.
RTI/MTSS Self-Assessment. RTI Session Objectives -An increase in the understanding of the necessary components of RTI/MTSS -An awareness that each school.
Data Review Team Time Spring Purpose 0 This day is meant to provide school leadership teams with time to review the current status of their.
Supplemental Math Digital Tool: Dreambox
RTI- Response to Intervention
Data-Based Leadership
Issue Analyses RtI Yvette Benton Brad Baietto Brad Scarbrough.
Q3: How do we get there? Cohort A
Systems Problem Solving
Extending RTI to School-wide Behavior Support
Oregon Reading First Summary Outcomes at the End of Year 1: Students at Benchmark (On Track) (C) 2005 by the Oregon Reading First Center Center on Teaching.
Oregon Reading First Summary Outcomes at the End of Year 1: Students at Benchmark (On Track) © 2005 by the Oregon Reading First Center Center on Teaching.
Presentation transcript:

1 Achieving a Healthy Grade- Level System in Beginning Reading Content developed by Carrie Thomas Beck

2 Were grade-level instructional maps effective in supporting adequate progress for students with benchmark, strategic, and intensive needs? Achieving a Healthy System:

3 DIBELS Summary of Effectiveness Reports 4 Ways to Achieve Adequate Progress

4 1.Record the percentage of students who made adequate progress from Fall 2005 to Winter 2006 at your grade level: Instructional Recommendation in Fall 2005 Percent of Students Who Made Adequate Progress Benchmark Strategic Intensive

5 2.In grade level teams, identify the group of students (benchmark, strategic, intensive) making the least progress:

6 3. Using the Elements of a Healthy System Checklist, work in grade level teams to evaluate the health of your grade level system for that group of students.

Oregon Reading First -Schoolwide Beginning Reading Model Elements of a Healthy System Checklist School: Grade:Level of Support:

8 Seven Elements To Evaluate: I.Goals, Objectives, Priorities II.Assessment III.Instructional Programs and Materials IV.Instructional Time V.Differentiated Instruction, Grouping, Scheduling VI.Administration, Organization, Communication VII.Professional Development

9 To Complete the Checklist: ©Review the CSI Summary Map for your grade level. ©For each element, check off those items that are already in place. ©Leave items that are not being addressed in your grade level system blank.

CSI Summary Map

Oregon Reading First -Schoolwide Beginning Reading Model Elements of a Healthy System Checklist School: Roosevelt Grade: 1 Level of Support: Intensive * = Structural element

12 4. Highlight those items under each element that are not in place.

13

14 5. Discuss why highlighted items are not in place.

15 Roosevelt Example ©The first grade team hasn’t selected an intervention program for the lowest performing students. Intensive students are currently receiving instruction from the core program, using the preteaching and reteaching handbooks. ©Teachers are struggling to find activities that the intensive students can complete independently. © No pacing goals have been set. Students can’t access content of core program. Teachers are doing their best to include the students in the core, but students’ progress is poor and the gap between them and their average performing peers is growing larger.

16 6. Review highlighted items. Identify three high priority items to address in the upcoming weeks: Item 1: Item 2: Item 3:

17 How do we prioritize?

18 To Prioritize: ©Begin by addressing the structural items: Materials Time Grouping Staffing

19 To Prioritize (cont.): Look for “themes:” ©Are the highlighted items all related? ©Are there several highlighted areas under a particular element?

20 To Prioritize (cont.): ©Don’t put the cart before the horse! (Think about what must come first to support related elements.)

21 Identify High Priority Items: Roosevelt Example Roosevelt will first focus on structural elements: SE 1: Using appropriate reading programs and materials to teach the full range of students. (Along with this, the team will make sure that all necessary materials are available in each classroom and small group.) SE 2: Grouping students based on program recommendations.

22 Identify High Priority Items: Roosevelt Example (cont.) Roosevelt has identified all missing structural elements. Now, the team will identify items that are related to the missing structural elements: Ongoing, high quality training will need to be provided for the instructional programs/materials the team will select.

23 6. Review highlighted items. Identify three high priority items to address in the upcoming weeks: (Roosevelt Example) Item 1: Use appropriate reading programs and materials to teach the full range of students. Make sure all necessary materials will be available. Item 2: Group students based on program recommendations. Item 3: Provide ongoing, high quality training on the new reading programs/materials.

24 7. Collaborate with one or two grade level teams from other schools in the room. (a)Discuss current instructional maps (i.e., grade level systems) (b)Discuss progress of students. (c)Discuss high priority items for your grade level. (d)Share ideas for addressing the high priority areas.

25 8. Large Group Sharing: ©Return to your school’s table ©Share out to the large group a high priority area to address and the related proposed change to the team’s grade level system.

26 9. Draft a grade-level RAP to address the high priority items.

27 9. Draft a grade-level RAP to address the high priority items: Roosevelt Example: It’s easy to gain access to the placement tests even if program materials haven’t arrived yet.