Orientation to Oregon Reading First November 30, 2004 Jantzen Beach, Portland Doubletree Columbia River

2 Content Development Content developed by: Edward J. Kame’enui & Trish Travers Oregon Reading First Center Staff University of Oregon Prepared by: Edward J. Kame’enui, Trish Travers, and Katie Tate University of Oregon

3 Acknowledgments  Edward J. Kame’enui, Ph.D, University of Oregon  Carrie Thomas Beck, Ph.D., University of Oregon  Scott Baker, Ph.D., University of Oregon  Hank Fien, Ph.D., University of Oregon  Rachell Katz, Ph.D., University of Oregon  Marianne Oakes, M.S., University of Oregon  Trish Travers, Ed.S., University of Oregon  Jennifer Walt, M.S., University of Oregon  Oregon Department of Education

5

6 All children will read at grade level or above by the end of grade 3.

7  Reading First  Early Reading First  Scientifically based reading research (SBRR)  Valid & reliable assessments for  Screening  Diagnosis  Instruction  Evaluation  $900 million for FY2002  50 states, DC, Puerto Rico, American Samoa, Guam, N. Mariana Islands, Virgin Islands, Bureau of Indian Affairs Significant New Reading Support

8 “To provide assistance to State educational agencies and local educational agencies in establishing reading programs for students in kindergarten through grade 3 that are based on scientifically based reading research to ensure that every student can read at grade level or above not later than the end of grade 3.” NCLB, 2001, Part B, Sec Purpose of Reading First

9 (2) “To provide assistance to State educational agencies and local educational agencies in preparing teachers, including special education teachers, through professional development and other support, so the teachers can identify specific reading barriers facing their students and so the teachers have the tools to effectively help their students learn to read.” Purpose of Reading First NCLB, 2001, Part B, Sec

10 Districts & Schools Reading First Targets Most  Districts and schools with highest percentages or numbers of K- 3 students reading below grade level  Districts and schools with large numbers of poor children  States have latitude to determine eligibility, but must strategically decide how funds will be awarded, ex:  Allocation to each LEA is entitled based on Title I share  Number of eligible schools within LEA  Of “sufficient size and scope to enable LEA to improve reading instruction…”

11 Basic Premises of Reading First  All but a very small number of children can be taught to be successful readers  Prevention of reading problems is far more cost effective and efficient than remediation  Reading failure can be prevented by relying on extensive scientifically based reading research

12 DNA of Reading First  Reading by end of Grade 3  Science and Scientifically Based Reading Research  Accountability and Results  Five Essential Components  Minimum framework for reading

13 Overview of Oregon Reading First Regional Coordinators & Regional Coordinating Teams Oregon Reading First Districts and Schools Oregon Reading First Center Reading Leadership Team Oregon Department of Education

14

15

16

17 Student Performance and Implementation Questions and Data Sources

18 What Reading First Means to Oregon Schools  K-3 reading instruction following scientifically- based reading research (SBRR)  Ongoing assessments to monitor student reading progress and outcomes  Ongoing professional development targeting knowledge of SBRR, classroom expertise, and building long-term capacity

19 Oregon Reading First Application Process  Timeline  Intent to Apply Packet  Letter of Intent  Selected School Form ( Form A)  Non-selected School Form (Form B)  Grant Writing Workshop Registration (District Team) (Form C)  Grant Writing Workshop Registration (School Team) (Form D)

20 RF School Readiness Tool  One School Readiness tool is provided in each district packet.  School Readiness tool must be filled out by each of the staff members listed on page 64 of ORF Grant.  Each district is responsible for distributing and collecting the School Readiness Tool from each eligible school.  Using the School Readiness Tool, each district is responsible for selecting those schools ready to participate in the Reading First grant. ( Form A)  Using the School Readiness Tool, each district is responsible for determining which schools are not ready to participate in the Reading First grant. (Form B)

21 Required Elements of ORRF 1.Measurable student reading goals at each grade (K-3). 2.Benchmark assessment 3 times a year to identify at- risk students and monitor progress. 3.Differentiated instruction to increase progress of at-risk students. 4.Use of a core reading program evaluated and selected based on principles of SBRR.

22 Required Elements of ORRF 1.Use of supplemental and intervention programs evaluated and selected based on principles of SBRR. 2.Ongoing professional development (PD) to ensure high quality implementation of all RF objectives. 3.Minimum of 90 minutes of reading instruction per day. 4.Frequent progress monitoring of students (e.g., once a month or once every two weeks) toward benchmark goals.

23 Required Elements of ORRF 1.High quality coaching support for RF purposes only. 2.District and school-building leadership committed to the implementation of RF. 3.Attendance at all RF meetings, institutes, and PD sessions. 4.Coordination of RF requirements and elements with existing reading elements and commitments.

24 Oregon Reading First: 7 Major Elements 3. Reading Programs 4. Differentiated Instruction 1. Goals 2. Assessment 5. Coaching 6. Professional Development 7. Leadership

25 Element #1: Goals of Beginning Reading A Set of Strategic, Research-Based, and Measurable Goals and Working Understanding of Big Ideas to Guide Instruction and Learning

26 #1: What are our goals? What are the most important goals and objectives for our K-3 students to accomplish in the fall and by the end of the year in each of the five essential components of RF? One Data Source: Simmons & Kame’enui K-3 Curriculum Maps

27 D. Simmons & E Kame’enui 2003

28 Element #2: Assessment of Student Learning  Requirement of Reading First--”Approved” reading measures only, aligned with State and District assessments  District and schoolwide assessment system established and maintained to enter and report findings  Student performance monitored frequently for each child at risk of reading difficulty  Data used to make timely instructional adjustments at monthly grade level team meetings  Commonly understood and used by all teachers A Valid and Reliable Assessment System To Actively Monitor Progress in the Early Grades

29 Assessing Oregon Reading First Students Assessment Purposes  Screen all students to determine who is at grade level, and who needs additional or substantial instructional support  Diagnose students’ instructional needs  Monitor progress of students over time  Evaluate outcomes at key points in time

30 Assessing Essential Components in Reading Effective, comprehensive, reading instruction includes instruction in each of the essential components:. Phonological Awareness Fluency Phonics Vocabulary Reading Comprehension

31 Who will collect the assessment data?  District and school assessment teams trained to collect benchmark data as well as screening, diagnostic, and progress monitoring data  Grade level teams, coaches, teachers work together to collect progress monitoring data  The Oregon Reading First Center will collect some student outcome data  District and school assessment teams trained to conduct reliability checks Assessing Oregon Reading First Students

32 Student reading performance monitored systematically  Assess five essential components of beginning reading at different grade levels at different points in time  Assess all students a minimum of three times per year  Determine if students are “at grade level” (i.e., Benchmark) and likely to benefit from the core reading program Assessing Oregon Reading First Students

33 Student reading performance monitored systematically  Determine if students are “below grade level” and require additional instructional support (i.e., Strategic) using supplemental programs  Determine if students are “significantly below grade level” and require substantial instructional support (i.e., Intensive) using intervention programs  Determine effectiveness of core, supplemental, and intervention programs Assessing Oregon Reading First Students

34  Assess students who require “additional” instruction (i.e., Strategic) once a month  Assess students who require “substantial” instruction (i.e., Intensive) every two weeks  Make timely instructional adjustments as necessary and appropriate Assessing Oregon Reading First Students Student reading performance monitored systematically

35 Examples of Student Assessments: Screening AreaExamples Phonemic Awareness DIBELS: Initial Sound Fluency, Phonemic Segmentation Fluency PhonicsDIBELS: Nonsense Word Fluency FluencyDIBELS: Oral Reading Fluency VocabularyWoodcock-Johnson Test of Achievement- III: Picture Vocabulary Reading Comprehension Woodcock Reading Mastery Test-Revised: Passage Comprehension

36 Examples of Student Assessments: Progress Monitoring AreaExamples Phonemic Awareness DIBELS: Initial Sound Fluency, Phonemic Segmentation Fluency PhonicsDIBELS: Nonsense Word Fluency FluencyDIBELS: Oral Reading Fluency VocabularyWoodcock-Johnson Test of Achievement- III: Picture Vocabulary Reading Comprehension Texas Primary Reading Inventory: Reading Comprehension

37

38

39

40 Examples of Student Assessments: Outcomes AreaExamples Phonemic Awareness DIBELS: Phonemic Segmentation Fluency PhonicsDIBELS: Nonsense Word Fluency, SAT- 10: Word Study Skills FluencyDIBELS: Oral Reading Fluency VocabularySAT-10: Reading Vocabulary & Listening Comprehension Reading Comprehension SAT-10: Reading Comprehension, WRMT- R: Passage Comprehension

41 Element #3: Scientifically Based Reading Research Programs  A comprehensive (core) instructional program of validated efficacy adopted and implemented school wide  Programs must teach the five essential components  Use of approved research-based supplemental and intervention programs  Programs must be implemented with high fidelity  All children (Special Education, Title, ELL) included Adoption and Implementation of Research-Based Reading Programs that Support the Full Range of Learners

42 Types of Reading Programs Vaughn et al, CORE, Core Reading Program (Benchmark) Supplemental Reading Program (Strategic) Intervention Reading Program (Intensive) 80% 15% 5% Classifying Reading Programs

43 Core Reading Program  A core program is the “base” reading program designed to provide instruction on the essential areas of reading for the majority of students schoolwide.  In general, the core program should enable 80% or more of students to attain schoolwide reading goals. Simmons, Kame'enui, Harn, & Coyne © A Core Instructional Program of Validated Efficacy Adopted and Implemented School-wide.

44 Benchmark Level of Instructional Support Level of Support INSTRUCTIONAL PLACEMENTASSESSMENT PLAN BenchmarkSBRR Core Reading Program  Progress Monitoring: Three times per year- All students  In-Program Assessments  Screening & Outcome Assessment Addressing the needs of most students...

45 Core Reading Programs We may need to supplement or modify, but we must do it judiciously. Simmons, Kame’enui, Harn & Coyne One Size Does NOT Fit All. Period!

46 Core Reading Programs Simmons, Kame’enui, Harn & Coyne However, “one size” may work effectively for most.

47 Supplemental Reading Programs  Support and extend the critical elements of a core reading program.  Provide additional instruction in one or two areas (i.e., fill the gaps for phonological awareness, fluency).  Provide more instruction or practice in particular area(s) of need.  May include large group, small group, one-on-one instruction.  Provide more teacher scaffolding.  Provide more explicit and systematic instruction. Simmons, Kame’enui, Harn & Coyne

48 Strategic Level of Instructional Support Level of Support INSTRUCTIONAL PLACEMENTASSESSMENT PLAN StrategicCore Reading Program Plus Supplement  Progress Monitoring: Monthly  In-Program Assessments  Screening & Outcome Assessment Addressing the needs of some students...

49 Intervention Reading Programs  Designed for children who demonstrate reading difficulty and are performing below grade level (< 20th percentile).  Provide more explicit, systematic instruction to accelerate learning to a high criterion level of performance.  Focus on more than one area (e.g., phonics, fluency, and comprehension).  Teacher instruction to meet the needs of students who are struggling in their classrooms.  Typically delivered in small group settings. Simmons, Kame’enui, Harn & Coyne

50 Intensive Level of Instructional Support Level of Support INSTRUCTIONAL PLACEMENTASSESSMENT PLAN IntensivePart Core Reading Program Plus Intervention or Supplant Core with Intervention Program  Progress Monitoring: Every 2 weeks  In-Program Assessments  Screening & Outcome Assessment Addressing the needs of each student...

51 90-Minute Block  CORE  CORE + SUPPLEMENT  CORE + INTERVENTION  INTERVENTION  INTERVENTION + SUPPLEMENT

52 ORF Comprehensive Reading Programs Oregon Curriculum Review Panel  Purpose: To provide a critical analysis of beginning reading programs and materials that is objective, reliable, and based on the best research available about SBRR

53 The Process: What Oregon Reading First Center Has Done  Evaluated core, supplemental, and intervention reading programs to determine strengths and weaknesses in teaching the essential components of reading  Provided a menu of options from which schools/districts will select reading programs  Will assist in the program selection process to fit the needs of individual schools based on student performance data

54 K-3 Comprehensive Reading Programs

55 Rank Order by Type of Item (High Priority/Discretionary)

56 The Process: What You Must Do  Evaluate menu of program options to determine areas of strength and weakness according to the big ideas in beginning reading  Study and select programs that fit the needs of learners in your respective schools  Schedule and provide sufficient professional development to ensure high quality implementation

57 ORF Reading Reading Instruction Reliance on research-based instructional practices and strategies  Allocated time and engaged time  At least 90 minutes per day of uninterrupted beginning reading instruction  Instructional groups--Opportunities to Learn  Small group and whole class  Minimum of 30 minutes teacher directed instruction  Based on student performance and resources

58 Element #4: High Quality Differentiated Instruction  Instructional plans, strategies, and systems designed to respond to the needs of each and every child.  The management of alterable variables and programs designed to meet individual needs of struggling readers Instruction that is individualized, focused on clear goals, data driven and results based

59  Differentiated instruction requires:  individualized instruction for each and all to reach reading goals  varying the intensity, amount, explicitness and response requirements  teaching each child to high criterion levels of performance  reviewing previously taught material before introducing new material  monitoring student performance during and after instruction

60 How To Differentiate Instruction  Use data to identify students who need additional or substantial instruction  Use progress monitoring data to adjust instruction  When possible, select supplemental and intervention programs that complement one another and the core program  Manipulate “alterable variables” to intensify instruction

61 Alterable Elements  Program: Is the learner likely to benefit from the core? If not, what intervention-- specialized/ acceleration program--is available?  Time: A minimum of minutes of intensive intervention.  Grouping/Organization: Small group (e.g., 3-5 per group)

62 Instructional Adjustments Grouping: Reduce group size

63 Instructional Adjustments Program Efficacy: Preteach components of core program

64 Instructional Adjustments Coordination of Instruction: Meet frequently to examine progress

65 Three Levels of Instructional Support: Summary of CSI Map Guidelines  One instructional support map per grade level.  Each grade level map addresses benchmark, strategic and intensive student levels of support.  All teachers/specialists should work from the same map.  Data will direct changes as necessary.  Each map is a work in progress.  Use alterable variables to assist in increasing/decreasing intensity for varying levels of support.  Alter the fewest number of variables that impact reading progress.

Three Levels of Instructional Support: Summary of CSI Map

67 Three Levels of Instructional Support: Summary of CSI Map Kindergarten Example

68 “Double-Dosing” Instruction  Once placed in a strong core, supplemental, or intervention reading program, students most often need MORE NOT DIFFERENT.  Schedule your double dose keeping “MORE” in mind.  Some double-dose options include: Firming up the morning’s lesson Moving on to the next lesson

69 Element #5: High Quality Coaching  A Reading Coach in each school  A supportive, knowledgeable school leader  Knowledge of goals, programs, assessment, strategies, data organization/management/ interpretation  Collaborative support with school principal and teachers Informed, Knowledgeable, Committed

70 School-Based Mentor Coaches  Teachers with expertise in beginning reading instruction  Focus on effective program-specific implementation and support  Expertise with DIBELS and using data for decision making  Build school capacity to provide and sustain effective reading programs and practices

71 School-Based Mentor Coaches  Coaches must not have other responsibilities that take time from their instructional leadership roles  Coaches must schedule monthly collaboration meetings with grade-level teams to:  (a) review and analyze lesson progress reports (LPRs) and progress monitoring data  (b) plan instruction and grouping  (c) provide professional development  (d), and problem solve

72 Program Fidelity Checklist USDOE states:  The State Educational Agency must report Implementation Evidence to the U.S. Department Of Education “ demonstrating that it has met all program requirements related to the implementation and administration of the Reading First Program …”

73 Rationale for Observation Oregon’s Reading First Application states:  “The mentor coaches’ primary responsibility will be to support and guide classroom teachers in their effective implementation of high-quality instruction in beginning reading.”  Therefore...“ the school mentor coach will observe each teacher on a regular basis, providing support and feedback, and model instruction as needed or requested by the teacher.”

74 Focus of Observations  Mentor coaches will conduct the following observations:  5 minute observations  Program fidelity observations

75 Program Fidelity Checklist Features  Instructional Heading  Activity  Instructional Target (PA, PH, FL, V, C, Other)  Grouping (whole group, small group, Independent)  Time (actual time of activity, e.g. 8:15-8:25)  Level of Implementation (None, Partial, Partial+, Full)  Comments

Hank Fien, Carrie Thomas Beck, Nicole Sherman-Brewer Oregon Reading First Center Staff Oregon Reading First Fidelity of Implementation Observation System

78 Element #6: High Quality Professional Development  Professional Development (PD) requires a significant and serious investment at the school level (e.g., Substitute teachers may be required for all teachers attending PD sessions)  PD must be based on SBRR and aligned with Oregon Reading First goals  PD must support implementation of core, supplemental and intervention programs  PD must receive “prior approval” from ORFC and ODE  Principals and District leaders must attend PD sessions (e.g., IBRs, Leadership IBRs)

79 Continuum of PD Support Regional Expertise: University or Regional (Institutes, Beacon Schools, Coursework) Within School Expertise (Coaches & Study Teams) Local Expertise (District, Beacon Schools, or Program Specific) State or National Support (NRFTAC--WRRFTAC, CRRFTAC, ERRFTAC)

80 Professional Development (PD) and Support for Oregon Reading First Implementation  Institutes on Beginning Reading (IBRs)  School-Based mentor coaches  School-based Reading First teams and principal leadership  Regional Reading First coordinators  Leadership IBRs for principals & coaches Two-year professional development plan

81 Institutes on Beginning Reading (IBRs)  IBR I: A School-wide Model  IBR II: Enhancing the Core  IBR III: Differentiating Instruction through Supplemental and Intervention Programs  IBR IV: Evaluating and Planning  IBR V-VII: Regionally focused IBRs

82 Institutes on Beginning Reading (IBRs) Purpose: To develop knowledge and expertise related to Scientifically Based Reading Research IBR I - 4 days  Conducted the summer prior to new school year  Focuses on scientific principles of beginning reading; application of principles to grade-specific goals and programs  Provides support for the selection of core, supplemental, and intervention programs  Includes support for learning the DIBELS (Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills) assessment system

83 Institutes on Beginning Reading (IBRs) IBR II - 2 days  Held following fall data collection  Focus on analysis of student performance data  Plan instructional groups and differentiated instruction for students who require more instructional support

84 Institutes on Beginning Reading (IBRs): Year 2  Focus on quality of program implementation  Improve effectiveness of interventions, especially for struggling students  Improve efficiency and effectiveness using data for decision making  Focus on data-based leadership and data sources--student reading progress and outcomes

85 Oregon Reading First Regional Coordinators  Provide support in beginning reading and administration  Train mentor coaches  Help schools build capacity for continuous improvement  Extend Reading First activities to Pathfinder schools

86 Oregon Reading First Interconnected Websites Oregon Reading First  Oregon Reading First Center (U of O)  Big IDEAS in Beginning Reading  Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills (DIBELS) 

87 Element #7: High Quality Leadership  District and school leaders who provide a serious and “good faith” commitment to the tenets and requirements of ORF  District and school leaders who focus on student performance data and school systems and support Informed, Knowledgeable, Committed

88

89 Reading First Questions & Data Sources Fall #1: What are our goals? J. Silbert, K. Howe, & D. Howe 2004 What are the most important goals and objectives for our K-3 students to accomplish in the fall and by the end of the year in each of the five essential components of RF? One Data Source: Simmons & Kame’enui K-3 Curriculum Maps

90 D. Simmons & E Kame’enui 2003

Planning and Evaluation Tool (PET) 91

92

93

94 Reading First Questions & Data Sources Fall #2: How are we doing? For each grade and essential component, what percentage of students have bench- mark, strategic, and intensive needs? Data Source(s): DIBELS Grade List Reports a.

95 Grade List Report - School A, Grade 2 Name Oral Reading Fluency Instructional Recommendation ScorePercentileStatus Travis54At RiskIntensive - Needs Substantial Intervention Brad64At RiskIntensive - Needs Substantial Intervention Lynn1213At RiskIntensive - Needs Substantial Intervention Brittany2217At RiskIntensive - Needs Substantial Intervention Jesus2421At RiskIntensive - Needs Substantial Intervention Kayla2725Some RiskStrategic - Additional Intervention Austin3029Some RiskStrategic - Additional Intervention Erin3133Some RiskStrategic - Additional Intervention Jimmy3738Some RiskStrategic - Additional Intervention Jose3742Some RiskStrategic - Additional Intervention Maria4046Some RiskStrategic - Additional Intervention LaTanya4250Some RiskStrategic - Additional Intervention Derek4454Low RiskBenchmark - At Grade Level Tiffany4858Low RiskBenchmark - At Grade Level Ben5063Low RiskBenchmark - At Grade Level Juan5367Low RiskBenchmark - At Grade Level Monica5671Low RiskBenchmark - At Grade Level Justin5775Low RiskBenchmark - At Grade Level J. Silbert, K. Howe, & D. Howe 2004 Dynamic Measurement Group © 2004 Benchmark - 50% Strategic - 29% Intensive - 21%

96 Reading First Questions & Data Sources Fall #2: How are we doing? Is there substantial increase in the number of students reaching targets in the fall from year to year? Data Source(s): DIBELS Cross-Year Box Plots b. J. Silbert, K. Howe, & D. Howe 2004

97 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Cross Year Box Plot Chart - School A Benchmark Time Correct Words Beginning Middle End J. Silbert, K. Howe, & D. Howe Dynamic Measurement Group © 2004

98 Reading First Questions & Data Sources Winter & Spring #2: How are we doing? For each grade and essential component, what percentage of students who started at benchmark remained at benchmark? What percentage of students moved from strategic and intensive to benchmark? What percentage of students moved from intensive to strategic? Data Source(s): DIBELS Summary of Effectiveness Report a. J. Silbert, K. Howe, & D. Howe 2004

Dynamic Measurement Group © 2004 Summary of Effectiveness Report - Grade 2, School A Effectiveness of Core CurriculumEffectiveness of Strategic Support ProgramEffectiveness of Intensive Support Program Students in Benchmark Range BeginningEndCheck if Reached Benchmark of 90 Students in Strategic Range BeginningEndCheck if Reached Benchmark of 90 Students in Intensive Range BeginningEndCheck if Reached Benchmark of 90 ORF Score Carlos X LaTanya X Jesus2490 X Jennifer X Maria 4092 X Brittany2297 X Pedro X Jose X Lynn1295 X Anna X Jimmy 3786Brad673 Tony X Erin 3197 X Travis546 Sonja X Austin X Justin X Kayla 2783 Monica X Juan X Ben 50118X Tiffany 4899X Derek 44108X Count: 12/12 Count 5/7 Count 3/5 Percent: 100% Percent: 71% Percent: 60% J. Silbert, K. Howe, & D. Howe 2004

100 State Reading First Questions & Data Sources Winter & Spring #2: How are we doing? Is there a substantial increase in the number of students reaching benchmark in the spring from year to year? Data Source(s): DIBELS Cross-Year Box Plots b. J. Silbert, K. Howe, & D. Howe 2004

101 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Cross Year Box Plot Chart - School A Benchmark Time Correct Words Beginning Middle End J. Silbert, K. Howe, & D. Howe Dynamic Measurement Group © 2004

102 An Oregon Reading First School: has a schoolwide beginning reading plan which includes an instructional map for Benchmark, Strategic, and Intensive students in each grade level. All K-3 teachers participate in this plan. uses an assessment system (e.g., DIBELS for screening, progress monitoring and evaluating reading outcomes). Teachers use data to group students and inform instruction. establish reading “instructional routines” and protocols that result in the prevention of reading difficulties in Kindergarten through Grade 3.

103 An Oregon Reading First School: has adopted a research-based core program for K-3 and is implementing that program faithfully with those students who require additional instructional support. has purchased and is implementing faithfully research based intervention programs to meet the needs of those students who do not benefit from the core instruction and require substantial reading support. has purchased and is implementing faithfully research based supplemental programs to fill the gaps in the core program and to provide additional instruction and practice in essential components for those students who need it.