Model Demonstration Projects California State University, Northridge Michigan Department of Education University of Texas, Austin/University of Maryland Model Demonstration Projects Improving Literacy Instruction for Adolescents with Disabilities Presented at the OSEP Project Director’s Conference July, 2018

Agenda Purpose of model demonstration projects Introduction to project sites Effective classroom practices and intensive interventions for adolescents Outcomes This work is supported by the Office of Special Education Programs, U.S. Department of Education, through Model Demonstration Grants awarded to California State University, Northridge, the Michigan Department of Education, and The University of Texas at Austin/University of Maryland. Opinions expressed are those of the authors and do not represent views of the U.S. Dept. of Education.

1.0 Purpose of Model Demonstration Projects

Purpose of Model Demonstration Projects To establish and operate model demonstration projects designed to improve adolescent literacy for students with disabilities in middle and high school who score below grade level in reading

Model Demonstration Priorities Improving adolescent literacy Skills needed to locate, read, understand, interpret, evaluate, and use written information across multiple content areas Improving classroom practices to address the needs of struggling students Improving access to interventions Providing professional learning and coaching for teachers to successfully use effective classroom practices and interventions Replicating implementation and effects across multiple sites

2.0 Introductions to Project Sites

Three Projects Awarded LA Intervention Project California State University, Northridge Three high schools in a large urban district in Southern California Promoting Adolescent Reading Success (PARS) Michigan Department of Education Three middle schools in three different districts Adolescent Literacy Model for Students with Disabilities University of Texas at Austin/University of Maryland Four middle schools in an urban Mid-Atlantic district

3.0 Effective Classroom Practices and Intensive Intervention

Effective Classroom Practices Explicit vocabulary instruction Comprehension strategy instruction Opportunities for extended discussion of text Student motivation and engagement Intensive intervention Kamil, M. L., Borman, G. D., Dole, J., Kral, C. C., Salinger, T., & Torgesen, J. (2008). Improving adolescent literacy: Effective classroom and intervention practices. A Practice Guide. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education.

Intensive Intervention Word study Fluency Vocabulary Comprehension Motivation Boardman, A. G., Roberts, G., Vaughn, S., Wexler, J., Murray, C. S., & Kosanovich, M. (2008). Effective instruction for adolescent struggling readers: A practice brief. Portsmouth, NH: RMC Research Corporation, Center on Instruction.

4.0 Professional Development and Coaching

Professional Learning and Coaching: Summary of Key Features Distributed over time (e.g., cohorts) Workshops used to increase teacher knowledge School-based Interactive Teacher practice time Teacher preparation time Multi-tiered system of support coaching used to increase implementation

5.0 Summary of Outcomes

Outcomes Michigan Department of Education (MIBLSI): 60% of the students receiving special education services that have been in the intervention scope and sequence for at least 2 years met their reading progress monitoring goals.  Teachers who achieved fidelity are sustaining the use of the content area reading strategies beyond 2.5 years of coaching supports Intervention fidelity, intervention intensification, coupled with the use of content area reading strategies has led to more students with disabilities meeting their end of year progress monitoring strategies University of Texas at Austin / University of Maryland: 91% of middle school teachers rated the school wide literacy model as highly useful and relevant. Teachers at two middle schools received 6,675 minutes of coaching support. Implementation frequency and quality increased across the school year. 83% of teachers reported sustaining PACT Plus practices during the year following intensive support from researchers

Outcomes (cont.) California State University, Northridge: In years one and two of the program,  87% of the students in the intervention program showed a statistically significant increase on at least one of the following reading assessments: GORT-5, TOWRE, TOSREC.   100% of the program educators attended at least six program PD workshops, and 100% of them reported that the sessions were relevant and useful to their practice. 100% of content area teachers were observed implementing the essential elements of comprehension strategy instruction and/or vocabulary instruction. The time spent reading in the classroom ranged from 20 to 60 minutes in a 90- minute period.  Overall average student engagement in the intervention classes was rated as 3.7, medium on a scale from 1 (low) to 5 (high) engagement.     

Contact Information LA Intervention Project www.lainterventionproject.com spedreading@csun.edu Promoting Adolescent Reading Success (PARS): Michigan’s Integrated Behavior and Learning Support Initiative (MIBLSI) Kim St. Martin, Ph.D. kstmartin@miblsimtss.org University of Texas Project www.meadowscenter.org/projects/detail/pact-plus