1. Strategy Training and Refresher Day V.Garrett-Meade
Moorefield STARS
Strategy Training and Refresher Day
V.Garrett-Meade

2. Agenda Period 4 Welcome and agenda
Review of the 2014 program and direction
2014 Program and support for teachers not participants in the Mentoring/Team teaching phase of the program.
Complete survey via link.
Lunch
Period 5
Strategy 1 – Previewing
Strategy 2 – Predicting
Strategy 3 – Making Connections & activity
Strategy 4 – Types of Questions and Questioning & activity
Short break – Please remind me!
Period 6
Strategy 5 – Monitoring
Strategy 6 – Clicks and Clunks
Strategy 7 – Visualising
Strategy 8 – Summarising

3. 2013 Overview & Future Directions for 2014
Improving Literacy and Numeracy National Partnership
2013 Overview & Future Directions for 2014

4. STARS
Strategies To Achieve Reading Skills

6. Professional Learning
Overview
Professional Learning
2 periods per fortnight
1 – 2 strategies per session
1 embedded strategy
Feedback, sharing within faculty groups and across faculty groups.
1 team teaching lesson per fortnight – either a modelled, guided or practice lesson. Collaboratively planned. The students were explicitly taught & had time to practice the strategy in 2-3 lessons per cycle.

7. The lesson model Modelled Guided Practice
Explicit instruction, whole class activity using the strategy. Maximum teacher support.
Guided
Review of strategy, pair or small group activity using the strategy. Level of teacher support varies depending the needs of the students.
Practice
Review of the strategy, individual practice activity. Minimal teacher support for the majority of students.

8. Embedded Teaching Strategies
At the beginning of every lesson students were explicitly taught the standard & student friendly definition of 5 key words in the text.
Opened our eyes sometimes to the words students did and did not know the general meaning of. Gave an opportunity for real life examples to be used in different contexts.
Pre teaching vocabulary
Allowing students the time to process both the question and the answer. Slowing down the pace of questions. Increasing the depth of answers and allowing all students a chance to contribute.
Students such as Natalia (8R), Leah Thompson (7B ) and Letitia Dolan ( 8Y ) were offering answers when the pace and expectation of question/answer time was slower.
Thinking Time
Using the THINK – PAIR – SHARE model. Time to think, respond to a partner. An opportunity to practice their answer, to either extend or formulate a response after listening to their peer and sharing their response with the class.
In the beginning of the program Amy & SiSi would sit and say very little, if at all, during peer answering time however as the program continued we observed the girls required less prompting each time to share and talk.
Peer Answering

9. Embedded Teaching Strategies
Gives students warning they are required to give an answer. Reduces anxiety.
We used this with different purposes for Natalia (8R) as compared to Sarah Fakih and Arabella Scott (7B) however the underlying reduction of anxiety and verbal expectation of a contribution was the same for all.
Pre Questioning
Students were paired up in the latter part of the program. Stronger readers with those who have a slower pace for fluency. Text readability was important.
We saw high levels of engagement each time we did this in various lessons and subjects.
Fluency reading
Small groups, reviewing previous strategies, teaching upcoming strategy.
We did this towards the end of the program for a few students.
Pre Teaching

10. The girls were reminded of the importance of Comprehension…..
Understanding the fine print in the instruction manual might have helped this 13 year old….although she did have a guest spot on Ellen….

11. The Data
The girls were assessed in both Reading Comprehension and Reading Fluency at the beginning of the program.

12. The Comprehension Measure
The assessment required the girls to read an age appropriate text and then answer 20 multiple choice comprehension questions.
There were a mix of questions;
Literal questions have responses that are directly stated in the text. Also known as ‘Here’ questions.
Inferential questions have responses that are indirectly stated, induced, or require other information. Also known as ‘Hidden’ questions.
Evaluative questions require the reader to formulate a response based on their opinion. Also known as ‘Head’ questions.

13. 7B Pre Program Comprehension
Top Easiest
Item
Type
Students Correct
Percentage 1
Literal
18 of 20
90% 2 8
16 of 20
80% 12
Inferential 5
15 of 20
75% 20
Evaluative 19
13 of 20
65% 4 11
12 of 19
63% 9
12 of 20
60%
5/7 literal questions
4/7 inferential questions
1/6 evaluative questions.
Top 3 hardest question types were
1 x inferential
2 x evaluative

14. 7B Post Program Comprehension
Top Easiest
Item
Type
Students Correct
Percentage 1
Literal
18 of 20
90% 2 8
16 of 20
80% 12
Inferential 5
15 of 20
75% 20
Evaluative 19
13 of 20
65% 4 11
12 of 19
63% 9
12 of 20
60%
5/7 literal questions
4/7 inferential questions
1/6 evaluative questions.
Top 3 hardest question types were
2 x inferential
1 x evaluative

15. Year 8 Pre Program Comprehension
Top Easiest
Item
Type
Students Correct
Percentage 6
Inferential
22 of 23
96% 14
Literal 1
21 of 22
95% 16
Evaluative
21 of 23
91% 11
19 of 23
83% 5
18 of 22
82% 7
18 of 23
78% 3
15 of 22
68% 20
15 of 23
65% 8
5/7 literal questions
2/7 inferential questions
3/6 evaluative questions.
Top 3 hardest question types were
2 x inferential questions
1 x literal question

16. Year 8 Post Program Comprehension
Top Easiest
Item
Type
Students Correct
Percentage 5
Literal
24 of 26
92% 1
23 of 26
88% 2
22 of 26
85% 14 10
Evaluative
21 of 26
81% 6
Inferential
20 of 26
77% 11 17
16 of 26
62% 16
15 of 26
58% 20
6/7 literal questions
1/7 inferential questions
3/6 evaluative questions.
Top 3 hardest question types were
2 x inferential
1 x evaluative

17. The Fluency Measure
The assessment required the girls to read an age appropriate text for one minute out loud to either myself of Gilda.
In the Assessment to Programming Document the current reading fluency rates are;
Year 3 : correct words per minute 0-3 errors
Year correct words per minute 0-3 errors
By Year 7 – 8 it’s expected they would be reading a minimum of 150+cwpm with 0-3 errors on an instructional text.

18. Year 7 pre program fluency
Slowest pace
93cwpm
Average student read 129cwpm.
ideal
average

19. Year 7 post program fluency
Slowest pace
11cwpm. Different student than pre assessment
Average student read 149cwpm.
Growth of 15.5%
ideal
average

20. Year 8 pre program fluency
Slowest pace
68cwpm
Average student read 142cwpm.
ideal
average

21. Year 8 post program fluency
Slowest pace 100cwpm. Same student.
Average student read 156cwpm.
Growth of 9.8%
ideal
average

22. Year 7 Literacy Continuum

23. Year 8 Literacy Continuum
Year 8 Total Sample - 22 students
Reading Comprehension
Reading Fluency
Well below expectation
Assess 1 %
Assess 2
Below expectation 10
45.50% 4
18% 5
22.70%
At expectation 9
40.90% 11
50%
Above expectation 2 9% 6
27% 7
33.80%
Well above expectation 1
4.50%

24. Year 8 Literacy Continuum

25. 2014 and beyond… Questions to ponder….solutions to find….
Year 7 - How can we best support them with comprehension and the explicit teaching and practice of the STARS comprehension strategies?
Year 8 & 9 – How can we best support these students who have already been taught the strategies. How can we encourage maintenance of these skills? What do we do for new students?
2013 staff who were not part of STARS this year & new to the school staff next year. How can we develop their knowledge and understanding of comprehension and the strategies? Professional Learning/Development and in planning and classroom delivery?
*Support Classes – Do we need to modify these strategies for the students in our Support Classes? How can we implement them with the students? ( Special Ed. & Learning Support )

26. Not a Mentor? Mentee? What about me?

27. LaST Support in Terms 3-4
In each Faculty you have teachers who are familiar with the strategies from their participation in the 2013 program and some will have Mentors. Don’t be shy about asking them for assistance embedding these strategies into your current teaching program each fortnight.
I have time scheduled every Thursday and Friday Week B for team teaching and consultation with you. I’ll give you this timetable when it has been confirmed.
Use the site for resources and lesson plans. More will be uploaded during the course of the program.

28. Survey

29. Check your email for the link