Local District B Reading First Principals’ Presentation April 2, 2003.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Response to Instruction ________________________________ Response To Intervention New Opportunities for Students and Reading Professionals.
Advertisements

Administrators Meeting April 21, Key Areas of Grant-Based Monitoring Schools to be Served Instructional Assessments Instructional Strategies and.
1 R-2 Report: Read and write at the end of third grade Work session on Strategies to meet Results Targets A presentation to the Board of Education by Brad.
A Guide to Implementation
1 Welcome to the Title I Annual Meeting for Parents
PAYS FOR: Literacy Coach, Power Hour Aides, LTM's, Literacy Trainings, Kindergarten Teacher Training, Materials.
Central Union High School District Board of Trustees Meeting April 16, 2013.
Delta Sierra Middle School Napa/Solano County Office of Education School Assistance and Intervention Team Monitoring Report #8 – July 2008 Mary Camezon,
1 Executive Summary Title I Delivery Model Title I Personnel Changes for English Language Arts Instructional Coaches Intervention Teachers.
Building & Using an Effective Leadership Team Kathi Cooper Aida Molina Bette Harrison Sandy Lam.
Campus Staffing Changes Positions to be deleted from CNA/CIP  Title I, Title II, SCE  Academic Deans (211)  Administrative Assistants.
1 Program Improvement Update Foundations for writing the LEA Addendum.
RTI … What do the regs say?. What is “it?” Response To Intervention is a systematic process for providing preventive, supplementary, and interventional.
Implementation of the North Carolina Read to Achieve Program May 7, 2013.
Implementing RTI Using Title I, Title III, and CEIS Funds Key Issues for Decision-makers.
1 Visions of Community 2011 March 12, 2011 The Massachusetts Tiered System of Support Madeline Levine - Shawn Connelly.
MARY BETH GEORGE, USD 305 PBIS DISTRICT COORDINATOR USD #305 PBIS Evaluation.
INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP FOR DIVERSE LEARNERS Susan Brody Hasazi Katharine S. Furney National Institute of Leadership, Disability, and Students Placed.
San Juan High School Intermediate Intervention/Under-performing School Program By Mike Peebles, Teacher Partial fulfillment of ED251 Instructors: Duane.
Common Core Implementation Plan Whittier City School District Board of Education Meeting April 7, 2014.
Designing and Implementing An Effective Schoolwide Program
1 Supporting Striving Readers & Writers: A Systemic Approach United States Department of Education Public Input Meeting - November 19, 2010 Dorothy S.
Welcome to the Annual Meeting for Parents in a Title I Building.
ARRA Title I: The chance of a lifetime to address our most vexing challenges Reform and Restore: Implementing the ARRA Michigan Institute for Educational.
Why/Purpose Instructional Support Services Program Review The purpose of the review is to create a well-articulated, high quality, financially sustainable.
Oregon Reading First Orientation Holiday Inn Portland Airport November 12, 2002 Oregon Department of Education.
RESPONSE TO INSTRUCTION AND INTERVENTION (RtII) Adapted from School District of Philadelphia Rtii Materials.
Evaluating a Literacy Curriculum for Adolescents: Results from Three Sites of the First Year of Striving Readers Eastern Evaluation Research Society Conference.
FewSomeAll. Multi-Tiered System of Supports A Comprehensive Framework for Implementing the California Common Core State Standards Professional Learning.
Maryland’s Journey— Focus Schools Where We’ve Been, Where We Are, and Where We’re Going Presented by: Maria E. Lamb, Director Nola Cromer, Specialist Program.
Dr. John D. Barge, State School Superintendent “Making Education Work for All Georgians” Title IIA Guidance Teacher and Leader Keys Effectiveness.
Federal Programs Fall Conference Title I and the ACIP Logan Searcy and Beth Joseph.
Implementation of the North Carolina Read to Achieve Program CCSA March 25, 2013.
Instructional Leadership and Reading First Component 3-Part B Sara Ticer, Principal, Prairie Mountain School District Support for Instructional Leadership.
Overview of Title I Part A Farwell ISD. The Intent of Title I Part A The intent is to help all children to have the opportunity to obtain a high quality.
The Improving Teacher Quality State Grants Program California Postsecondary Education Commission California Mathematics & Science Partnership 2011 Spring.
Overview of Title I Part A Prepared by: Title I Staff - Office of Superintendent of Instruction OSPI Dr. Bill Wadlington, Superintendent/Principal and.
District Program Improvement Update Title I Schools Board of Education Study Session August 18, 2009.
Literacy Framework: What Does It Look Like at Shawnee Heights? Tamara Konrade ESSDACK Educational Services and Staff Development Association of Central.
Using Adequate Resources to Double Student Performance Sarah Archibald Allan Odden CPRE Invitational Conference February 21, 2007.
The Michigan Statewide System of Support for Title I Schools.
Federal Support for World-Class Schools Gwinnett County Public Schools 4/18/13.
Readiness for AdvancED District Accreditation Tuscaloosa County School System.
Archived Information The information in this presentation is archived for historical and research purposes only.
Data Report July Collect and analyze RtI data Determine effectiveness of RtI in South Dakota in Guide.
What is Title I and How Can I be Involved? Annual Parent Meeting Pierce Elementary
Presented By WVDE Title I Staff June 10, Fiscal Issues Maintain an updated inventory list, including the following information: description of.
Academic Program Survey Kern County Superintendent of Schools Office RSDSS Region 8.
Response To Intervention “Collaborative Data Driven Instruction at Lewis & Clark Elementary” Owen Stockdill.
TOM TORLAKSON State Superintendent of Public Instruction CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Tom Torlakson, State Superintendent of Public Instruction Title.
Multi-year Academic Acceleration Plan (MAAP) and Community Plan for Accountability in Schools (ComPAS) Oakland Unified School District January 31, 2007.
1 Welcome to the Title I Annual Meeting for Parents Highland Renaissance Academy.
State Systemic Improvement Plan (SSIP) Office of Special Education January 20, 2016.
“ Let us not be content to wait and see what will happen, but give us the determination to make the right things happen”- Horace Mann 2014 MCAS Overview.
The Georgia Department of Juvenile Justice Board of Education Presentation May 26, 2011.
Teaming/Data/Interventions RtI Infrastructure: Teaming RtI Partnership Coaches meeting January 6, 2011 Terry Schuster, RtI Partnership Lead Coach.
MASTERING READING INSTRUCTION A PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECT FOR FIRST GRADE PROFESSIONALS.
Office of School Turnaround Center for Accountability and Improvement, Ohio Department of Education 25 South Front Street, Columbus, Ohio
Interboro School District Keystones to Opportunity Grant Four Year Overview School Years.
Statewide System of Support For High Priority Schools Office of School Improvement.
MASSACHUSETTS TIERED SYSTEM OF SUPPORT Melrose Public Schools July 9, 2013.
English Learner Subgroup Self-Assessment (ELSSA) and the Title III Year 4 Plan Montague Charter Academy for the Arts and Sciences Prepared and Presented.
SIOP Implementation in Manatee County A Title I and Title III Partnership Presented by: Debra Estes, ESOL Coordinator.
Title III of the No Child Left Behind Act
System Goals Academic Excellence Educational Equity Social and Emotional Learning Improving and Expanding Facilities.
Verification Guidelines for Children with Disabilities
Worlds Best Workforce Annual Report
Studio School Title I Annual Meeting Title I Program Overview for Schoolwide Program (SWP) Schools Federal and State Education Programs Branch.
Response to Intervention in Illinois
August 25, 2016 Dr. ScharbreniaLockhart Principal
Presentation transcript:

Local District B Reading First Principals’ Presentation April 2, 2003

Introduction California’s Reading First plan invited LEA’s to apply for funding to improve reading instruction in California’s highest need K-3 classrooms. The plan requires schools to:  Use scientifically researched and standards based instructional materials  Train teachers to use these material  Train administrators about reading instruction so they are able to support teachers  Gear classroom assessments to the instructional materials

Introduction LAUSD is in the beginning stages of implementing many of the reforms outlined in California’s Reading First plan focusing on the following components to improve student achievement:  Literacy Coaches  Content Experts  Use of Assessment results to guide instruction  Professional development (Governor’s Reading Institutes and Passport)

Introduction (cont.)  LAUSD’s continued success over the next few years relies upon strengthening the improvement model currently in place and on using Reading First funds to accelerate efforts at the schools that need targeted assistance most, augmenting services to a level that results in accelerated improvement in student achievement at the District’s lowest performing and most needy schools  Additional technical assistance needed

Selection of Eligible Schools Federal Criteria: Eligible school must:  Be in an eligible LEA  Have 40% or more of second and third grade students scoring “below basic” and “far below basic” on the California Standards Test  Be a Program Improvement school or have 50% or more of student counted for Title I / Part A funding

Selection of Eligible Schools Local District Selection was based on:  Commitment of faculty to attend advanced training aligned to the adopted materials  Commitment to participation in eighty hours of follow-up practicum  Evidence of existing coach capacity to support Reading First program components  Evidence of a collaborative, self-reflective environment

Summary Characteristics of Selected Schools  Range of percent of students in 3 rd grade scoring “below basic” and “far below basic” on the English/Language Arts portion of the California Standards Test:  Median percentage of students in 3 rd grade scoring “below basic” and “far below basic” on the English/Language Arts portion of the California Standards Test: 53  Range of percent of minority students at selected schools:  Median percent of minority students at selected schools: 100

Summary Characteristics of Selected Schools  Range of percent of English learners at selected schools:  Median percent of English learners at selected schools: 63  Number of schools identified as Title I School- wide/Targeted Assistance: 145  Number of schools identified as “Program Improvement” schools: 45

Site Personnel Roles and Responsibilities  Principals and assistant principals who are well versed in the requirements and components of the reading program will provide instructional leadership through increased program knowledge and through the use of data analysis to plan for improved instruction  Highly trained Literacy Coaches and Content Experts will provide direct, daily support to teachers and support administrator professional development

State Standards Adopted Instructional Materials Professional Development Assessments

Professional Development Plan For Teachers and Administrators  Five-day institutes (40 hours) for teachers - provided through the state approved provider with 80 hours of on-site follow-up and up to 40 additional (optional hours) - Leveled professional development: New; Advanced; Mastery; Mastery II  Five-day institute for administrators (AB75 Module I) and monthly evening sessions (40 additional hours)  All professional development tied to full implementation of the State adopted reading / language arts program, Open Court  Focus on using assessment data to guide teaching and learning

Administrator Professional Development  Analyzing assessment results  Planning for effective professional development  Facilitating effective grade level meetings  Supervising instruction to support high-level implementation of the reading program  Creating coherence at the school site through a focused school vision

Assessment Driven Instruction  Use of assessment each six weeks to monitor instruction and guide professional development  Use of SOAR system - including technology support to facilitate teacher access to assessment data and speed collection and reporting process  Additional diagnostic assessment available as needed  Assessment driven intervention for students - with in- class intervention as the primary preventative measure for struggling students

Assessment Driven Professional Development Assessment results will be used to guide all aspects of ongoing professional development and to plan for, and implement appropriate interventions for individual students and groups of students

Technical Assistance from Local District  Placement of Literacy Coaches at school sites  Obtain grant funding for Content Experts (one for every coaches)  Intensive, ongoing professional development aligned to the adopted materials

Technical Assistance from School  Regular, facilitated grade-level meetings  Intensive, ongoing professional development aligned to the adopted materials  Content Focused Coaching

Current Barriers  The mobility of students results in inconsistency of instruction received  Teachers exhibit lack of fidelity to the state approved research-based reading program  Teachers do not remain in one grade level long enough to master the reading program  Teachers do not use time effectively, and omit important program components

Current Barriers (cont.)  The 163-day calendar and split-grade classes reduce instructional effectiveness  Teachers do not differentiate instruction sufficiently for students with reading difficulties  Parents need additional training to fully support the reading program  There is little coherence between the reading program and after-school tutorial programs

Strategies to Address Barriers  Focused professional development for teachers and administrators  Consistent, district-wide full implementation of State adopted reading / language arts materials  Specific strategies to address the needs of ELs and SELs  Focused intervention  Leveled classroom libraries  Improved implementation of the Waterford Early Reading Program  Effective use of diagnostic assessments

Coordination With Library Programs  District funded library aides work with teachers to identify resources and materials aligned with Open Court themes  Leveled classroom libraries to support Open Court themes  Site / Local District / Central Office efforts to support enhanced coordination with public libraries

Evaluation Plan Internal evaluation - contracted with LAUSD’s Program Evaluation and Research Branch or outside provider Data SourceWhen Collected Unit Assessments (Grades 1-5)Every 6 weeks Mid-year and End-of-year Assessments (K) Fall Semester, Spring Semester CAT-6 / California Standards TestSpring Semester California English Language Development Test (CELDT)Fall Semester

Data Collection Assessment Measure Kinder- garten Grade 1Grade 2Grade 3 Mid-year, End-of- year Unit Assessments CAT 6 California Standards Test CELDT Absences Referrals for Special Ed.

Leveraging of Funding Sources

Implementation Challenges Impacting Funding Request  Size square miles  Size - number of schools  Large proportion of economically disadvantaged students  High percentage of English learners  Large number of non-credentialed teachers  Diverse community needs

Budget Expenditures Aligned to Needs  Classroom libraries – central purchase – shipped to schools  Content Experts – approximately 1 Expert for each 7 schools  Technology Support – direct teacher access to enter SOAR data  Waterford support materials – central purchase for K-1 classes  Teacher professional development – Reading Implementation Center (Governor’s Reading Institute) – Beginning / Advanced / Mastery / Mastery II levels  Substitute release time for professional development – 1 substitute day per school  Teachscape on-line professional development for teachers  Administrator professional development

Budget Expenditures - Use of Funds Federal law allows Reading First funds to be expended on reading assessments, scientifically based reading programs, instructional materials, professional development, evaluation strategies, reporting, and access to reading materials. California’s approved plan focuses these uses on supporting and fully implementing the State adopted reading program. The reason California’s plan was written and approved with this focus is that the Reading First program holds states accountable for ensuring that any expenditures of Reading First money by an LEA are spent on scientifically research based materials and activities. Since California’s adopted reading programs are scientifically researched, and LEA assurances require full implementation, expenses for State oversight are minimal. From: Reading First Subgrant Application

Reading First - A final thought… “One can never consent to creep when one feels an impulse to soar.” -Helen Keller