1. Shine Literacy Project Thank you for attending tonight’s first feedback meeting

2. Shine Literacy Project Thank you these agencies who have provided funding and support: Infinity Foundation Pub Charities Porirua Foundation Mana Community Grants TG McCarthy Trust Gilt Edge Publishing, MJA Publishing FRESCO

4. How the Project Started Percentage of Titahi Bay School students achieving at or above National Standards in 2012 *** Three years of integrated literacy instruction Years 1-3 ** Two years of integrated literacy instruction Years 2 & 3 * One year of integrated literacy instruction – Year 3 ReadingWriting Year 3***79%91% Year 4**85%89% Year 5*62%71% Year 649%60%

5. Achievement Profiles Reading Achievement Pattern A Pattern B Pattern C A – Increasing achievement gap (Matthew Effect) B – Decreasing achievement gap (compensatory model) C – Stable achievement gap

6. Shine Literacy Project Assessments Used

7. Vocabulary Knowledge British Picture Vocabulary Scale Measures receptive vocabulary

8. Assessments Used Knowledge of Letter Names Upper and lower case

9. Assessments Used Clay Word Reading Reading 15 high-frequency words

10. Assessments Used Phonological Awareness Skills Sutherland Phonological Awareness Test - SPAT Syllables, rhyming, blending, segmenting, deleting sounds

11. Assessments Used Knowledge of Letter Sounds U pper and lower case

12. Assessments Used Sound to Letter knowledge The ability to write every sound of English

13. Assessments Used Invented Spelling Writing 18 words (a total of 54 sounds)made up of most of the sounds of English

14. Shine Literacy Project Cohort Characteristics

15. Size The cohort size is 259 children. 112 (43.2%) are boys 147 (56.8%) are girls Trial group size: 138 71 Decile 9-10; 67 Decile 1-4 Comparison Group size: 121 69 Decile 10; 52 Decile 1-3

16. Cohort Characteristics Ethnicity 28 different ethnicities were recorded. These have been grouped into: Pakeha46.3% Maori21.2% Pasifika18.5% Asian11.6% European1.5% Other0.8%

17. Cohort Characteristics Decile Ranking 119.7% 215.1% 37.3% 43.9% 93.9% 1050.2%

18. Cohort Characteristics Deciles by Ethnicity Deciles 1 & 2Deciles 3 & 4 44.4% Pasifika41.4% Pakeha 36.7% Maori31% Maori 11.1% Pakeha13.8% Pasifika 6.7% Asian 10.3% Asian 1.1% Other3.4% Other

19. Cohort Characteristics Deciles by Ethnicity Deciles 9 & 10 70% Pakeha 9.3% Maori 2.9% Pasifika 15% Asian 2.9% European

20. Shine Literacy Project Results

21. British Picture Vocabulary Scale There was no significant difference between the results for Comparison and Trial cohorts. Comparison Group Mean:98.64 Trial Group Mean:99.75

22. Results There were significant differences comparing high and low decile groups in the Comparison and Trial cohorts: Comparison High Group Mean:103.96 Comparison Low Group Mean:91.58 Trial High Group Mean:106.23 Trial Low Group mean:92.26

23. Results Results are now grouped in the following way: 1. Items where there was no change between Time 1 and Time 2 - Letter name knowledge (upper and lower case letters) - Clay Word Reading

24. Results ComparisonTrial Significance Time 116.1214.70Sig (comp) Time 223.2721.36Sig (comp) Letter Names: Upper Case /26 ComparisonTrial Significance Time 116.1214.70Sig (comp) Time 223.2721.36Sig (comp)

25. Results ComparisonTrial Significance Time 115.1713.37Non Sig Time 223.8021.84Sig (comp) Letter Names: Lower Case /28 ComparisonTrial Significance Time 115.1713.37Non Sig Time 223.8021.84Sig (comp)

26. Results ComparisonTrial Significance Time 11.53.92Non sig Time 26.905.86Non sig Clay Word Reading /15 ComparisonTrial Significance Time 11.53.92Non sig Time 26.905.86Non sig

27. Results Results are now grouped in the following way: 2.Items where there was a change in results with significantly higher results in Time 1 ceasing to be significant in Time 2. Sound-letter knowledge Letter sound knowledge (upper and lower case) Invented Spelling

28. Results In this category, the Trial group made statistically significant gains in progress for: Letter sound knowledge (upper and lower case) Invented Spelling SPAT

29. Results ComparisonTrialSignificance Time 116.1214.70Sig (comp) Time 223.2721.36Sig (comp) Sound to Letter /45 ComparisonTrial Significance Time 19.136.29Sig (comp) Time 225.6024.02Non Sig

30. Results ComparisonTrial Significance Time 111.457.50Sig (comp) Time 219.5818.48Non Sig Letter Sounds: Upper Case /26 ComparisonTrial Significance Time 111.457.50Sig (comp) Time 219.5818.48Non Sig

31. Results Comparison HighTrial HighSignificance Time 115.4210.99 Time 223.2721.23 Comparison LowTrial LowSignificance Time 16.173.39 Time 214.5815.38 Letter Sounds: Upper Case - by Decile Groups Comparison HighTrial HighSignificance Time 115.4210.99 Time 223.2721.23 Comparison LowTrial LowSignificance Time 16.173.39 Time 214.5815.38

32. Results Comparison HighTrial HighSignificance Time 115.4210.99 Time 223.2721.23 Comparison LowTrial LowSignificance Time 16.173.39 Time 214.5815.38 Letter Sounds: Lower Case /28 ComparisonTrial Significance Time 110.657.05Sig (comp) Time 220.2218.48Non Sig

33. Results Comparison HighTrial HighSignificance Time 115.0610.44 Time 224.0821.85 Comparison LowTrial LowSignificance Time 14.813.04 Time 215.0015.45 Letter Sounds: Lower Case –by Decile Group Comparison HighTrial HighSignificance Time 115.0610.44 Time 224.0821.85 Comparison LowTrial LowSignificance Time 14.813.04 Time 215.0015.45

34. Results ComparisonTrial Significance Time 17.283.54Sig Time 228.3328.49Non sig Invented Spelling /54 ComparisonTrial Significance Time 17.283.54Sig Time 228.3328.49Non sig

35. Results Comparison HighTrial HighSignificance Time 111.175.61Sig Time 234.5932.61Non sig Comparison LowTrial LowSignificance Time 12.161.18Non sig Time 219.8624.56Sig (Trial) Invented Spelling – by Decile Groups Comparison HighTrial HighSignificance Time 111.175.61Sig Time 234.5932.61Non sig Comparison LowTrial LowSignificance Time 12.161.18Non sig Time 219.8624.56Sig (Trial)

36. Results ComparisonTrialSignificance Time 112.7511.23Non Sig Time 221.6222.17Non sig SPAT: Sutherland Phonological Awareness Test ComparisonTrialSignificance Time 112.7511.23Non Sig Time 221.6222.17Non sig

37. Results Comparison HighTrial HighSignificance Time 116.6113.94Non Sig Time 226.8926.23Non Sig Comparison LowTrial LowSignificance Time 17.787.96Non sig Time 214.4917.31Borderline sig (Trial) SPAT: Sutherland Phonological Awareness Test - by Decile Groups Comparison HighTrial HighSignificance Time 116.6113.94Non Sig Time 226.8926.23Non Sig Comparison LowTrial LowSignificance Time 17.787.96Non sig Time 214.4917.31Borderline sig (Trial)

38. Shine Literacy Project Questions and Comments

39. Summary: Achievement Profiles Reading Achievement Pattern A Pattern B Pattern C A – Increasing achievement gap (Matthew Effect) B – Decreasing achievement gap (compensatory model) C – Stable achievement gap

40. Shine Literacy Project Ongoing Funding

41. Funding We have launched a Givealittle page to raise funds for the continuation of this project. Please let your school communities know about this via your newsletter. www.givealittle.co.nz/literacysuccess www.givealittle.co.nz/literacysuccess Thanks to Fraser Carson of FRESCO for setting this up for us.

42. Contact If you have any questions, comments or want to discuss the project further, please contact Joy: sus@ihug.co.nz 027 243 0827 sus@ihug.co.nz www.literacysuccess.org.nz

43. Shine Literacy Project Thank you for attending tonight’s presentation