2. Oregon Reading First Cohort B Statewide Coaches’ Training Session February 27, 2007 Carrie Thomas Beck, Ph.D. University of Oregon

3. The Coaching Cycle Identify Groups to Observe: 5-Minute Observations Review of Written Data Conduct Observations Provide Feedback / Identify and Apply Remedies Follow Up

4. LPR System A method of tracking lesson progress. A way to organize information on student performance/program mastery. A system for monitoring group progress toward important literacy benchmarks.

5. Tracking Lesson Progress MonthWeek ofPacing GoalLesson Completion September4thLesson 2 11thLesson 6 18thLesson 10 25thRM Plus, Level II, L15Lesson 14 October2ndLesson 18 9thLesson 22 16thLesson 26 23rdLesson 30 30thRM Plus, Level II, L40 November6th 13th 20th 27thRM Plus, Level II, L60 December4th 11thRM Plus, Level II, L70 January1st 8th 15th 22nd 29thRM Plus, Level II, L95 Lesson 34 The group is off pace!

6. Program Mastery

7. DIBELS Progress Monitoring

8. Transition to a Paper and Pencil Version of the LPR System

9. Components of the Paper and Pencil LPR System: Group Organizer Teacher LPR Test Summaries DIBELS Progress Monitoring Data

10. Group Organizer

13. Teacher LPR (one page per group)

14. Teacher LPR (one page per teacher)

17. Group Organizer/Teacher LPR Partner 1 tell Partner 2 what type of group organizer and teacher LPR you are using at your school. Switch. Large group share out on group organizers and teacher LPRs.

18. Test Summaries

20. Partner 2 tell Partner 1 how you organize in- program test summary data at your school. Switch. Large group share out on in-program test summaries.

21. DIBELS Progress Monitoring

22. √ Clip booklets by instructional group. √ Flag booklet if student is three data points below aim line.

23. DIBELS Progress Monitoring Josh Mary Sarah Aiden Nathan

24. DIBELS Progress Monitoring

25. Partner 1 tell Partner 2 how you organize DIBELS progress monitoring data for instructional groups at your school. Switch. Large group share out on organizing DIBELS progress monitoring data for instructional groups.

26. Using LPR Data to Target Groups for Instruction: “We Do”

28. Is Lesson Progress Adequate? Does the data reveal potential problems with use of time? (Slow progress may indicate that teacher is (a) not following the schedule, (b) not teaching the program as specified, or (c) struggling with presentation skills or behavior management issues.) Is enough time scheduled? Are some lessons being repeated too many times? Will projections be met if current rate of lesson progress is continued? If projections will not be met, do justifiable reasons exist for not meeting them? Do the projections need to be changed? (NIFDI Coaching Manual: Level I, 1999)

29. Is Instruction Differentiated? Are the group sizes appropriate? Are programs matched to student performance level? Are all of the groups on the same lesson? (Is teacher treating all groups the same?) Are high, medium, and low groups completing lessons at optimum rates? Does the data indicate the need for acceleration for some students? (NIFDI Coaching Manual: Level I, 1999)

30. Are students at a high level of mastery as measured by in-program tests? Did teacher indicate the number of students who passed the in-program test(s)? Did teacher miss an opportunity to give an in-program test? Did teacher remediate and retest students who failed the test on the first try? Consider group performance: How many students overall passed the in-program test? Consider individual student performance: Who are the students who failed one test, two consecutive tests? Which tests? Are the same students failing from time to time? Does data indicate a possible need for change in placement? Is lesson gain being achieved at the expense of mastery? (NIFDI Coaching Manual: Level I, 1999)

31. What additional information or concerns has the teacher communicated? Did the teacher list types of items missed on in-program tests? Did the teacher include information on remediation and retesting? Did the teacher indicate a concern about an individual student? (NIFDI Coaching Manual: Level I, 1999)

32. Are students making progress as measured by DIBELS probes? Are strategic and intensive students progress monitored regularly? Are students being monitored on the appropriate measures? Are there individual students who are not making progress comparable to the group? Is the group overall showing progress on the DIBELS measures? Do the supplemental and intervention programs appear to be addressing skill deficits in students?

33. Grove Elementary: “I Do”

35. On same lessons as Apples, yet lower students. These students passing on 2ND TRY. Tanner passed on 2nd try for 3 tests in a row!

37. As a GLT, determine which groups coach will observe.

39. “We Do.” Work in groups of four (two sets of partners) to skim, highlight, and flag the sample set of LPRs from a grade level. Note flagged groups on GLT Summary Form. Include a problem description. Identify a plan for each flagged group and who will follow up. As a group, determine which group(s) the coach will need to observe.

40. “We Do:” Large Group Share Out Note flagged groups on GLT Summary Form. Include a problem description. Identify a plan for each flagged group and who will follow up. As a group, determine which group(s) the coach will need to observe. Do we agree?