1. Module 1: Unit 3, Session 2 MODULE 1: MODULE 1: ADOLESCENT READING, WRITING, AND THINKING Adolescent Literacy – Professional Development Unit 3, Session 2

2. Module 1: Unit 3, Session 2 ADOLESCENT LITERACY: THE CRISIS AND THE SOLUTIONS 1.3.2

3. Module 1: Unit 3, Session 2 The State of Reading, Writ Large  Its importance is heavily emphasized in policy  Considerable attention from the federal government to the details of practice  Lots of funding, relatively speaking  Focus on assessments/accountability  The scores that count are not improving  Demands for improved literacy outputs are rising 3

4. Module 1: Unit 3, Session 2 What’s the Crisis?  Academic achievement depends on better literacy skills  But the data are alarming:  International comparisons of 15 year olds’ literacy: PISA (A. Schleicher)  NAEP scores  Dropout rates  Postsecondary remediation 4

5. Module 1: Unit 3, Session 2 NAEP 12 th Grade Reading Assessment Results  37% of students scored at Basic level & 23% at Below Basic level for reading  Fewer than half of twelfth graders perform at or above the level expected by NAEP standards Source: National Center for Education Statistics, U.S. Department of Education, NAEP 1998 Report Cards, 1999 5

6. Module 1: Unit 3, Session 2 Drop-Out Rates  Nearly half of African-American and Latino students fail to graduate from high school in 5 years (Greene & Forster, 2003; Orfield, Losen, Wald, & Swanson, 2004)  High school drop-out rates among 16 to 24 year- olds in 2000:  10.9% overall  13.1% among African-Americans  27.8% among Hispanics  44.2% among immigrants born outside the U.S.  15.9% among second (or greater) generation immigrants Source: U.S. Department of Commerce, U.S. Census Bureau, Current Population Survey, October 2000 6

7. Module 1: Unit 3, Session 2 Post-Secondary Remediation  Only 30% of high school students graduate as proficient readers who are college-ready (Greene & Forster, 2003).  35 - 40% of high school graduates do not have the sophisticated reading and writing skills that employers seek (Achieve, Inc., 2005; Kaestle et al., 2001; National Commission on Writing, 2004).  Half of all high school graduates or GED recipients exhibit the lowest levels of literacy (Kaestle et al., 2001). 7

8. Module 1: Unit 3, Session 2 Two Adolescent Literacy Challenges  Dealing with struggling readers  Wide array of skills present in the post- primary classroom  Some students need intensive re-teaching  Some need serious remediation  All strugglers need help to make up for missed learning opportunities  Teaching normally-developing readers new skills:  New vocabulary and academic language  Content-specific literacy skills  New purposes for reading 8

9. Module 1: Unit 3, Session 2 The Price of Success: Reading Excellence and Reading First  Inoculation has become the default model —focusing efforts exclusively on the early grades  “Research-based practice” can mean we are like the drunk looking under the streetlamp for his keys  E.g., we interpret adolescent literacy problems as primary reading problems, postponed  E.g., we implement phonological awareness interventions rather than struggling to teach comprehension 9

10. Module 1: Unit 3, Session 2 What Can We Learn from Reading Excellence? 10

11. Module 1: Unit 3, Session 2 PRD Starting Points  Prevention, not instruction  primary, secondary, and tertiary  structural as much as instructional  implies assessment to guide decisions  Emergent literacy, not readiness  Research consensus about skilled reading 11

12. Module 1: Unit 3, Session 2 PRD Recommendations  Instruction to promote:  Language and metalinguistic skills  Understanding the functions of written language  Both grasping and mastering the alphabetic system  Motivation and positive affect around literacy 12

13. Module 1: Unit 3, Session 2 The Accomplishments of Reading Excellence: Agreement that…  Excellent early reading instruction is part of a solid foundation for ongoing achievement.  Investing time in effective teaching and not wasting time on ineffective teaching are key.  Literacy instruction should be coordinated across the preprimary, primary, and later grades.  We can identify and correct weaknesses in early literacy programs. 13

14. Module 1: Unit 3, Session 2 Reading First  Focus on instruction, not prevention  Mandated use of assessments for accountability  Presumption regarding central role of teacher/school expectations in influencing student achievement  Perverse incentives regarding high standards  Important but tricky disaggregation strategy  Attention to AYP rather than growth 14

15. Module 1: Unit 3, Session 2 National Reading Panel Report Recommendations about Instruction  Phonological awareness (15- 18 hrs)  Systematic phonics instruction  Fluency  Vocabulary  Comprehension strategies 15

16. Module 1: Unit 3, Session 2 What’s Missing?  For post-primary grades:  Other kinds of comprehension instruction  Classroom discussion  Content-area-specific literacy skills  Writing  Motivation and interest  Establishing a purpose for reading 16

17. Module 1: Unit 3, Session 2 Reading Comprehension  The goals of primary reading instruction are really high school academic achievement.  There is too little focus on comprehension during primary reading instruction  And too little reading instruction of any kind after grade 3 17

18. Module 1: Unit 3, Session 2 RAND Reading Group Study (RRGS) Goals  Create agenda for R&D programs focused on reading comprehension  Promote constructive debate about the agenda  Increase communications among members of reading research and practice communities  Submit agenda to U.S. Dept. of Education to support appropriations proposals 18

19. Module 1: Unit 3, Session 2 RRGS’s Definition of Reading Comprehension  The process of simultaneously extracting and constructing meaning through interaction and involvement with written language 19

20. Module 1: Unit 3, Session 2 A Heuristic for Thinking about Reading Comprehension 20

21. Module 1: Unit 3, Session 2 RRGS-Based Conclusions  Comprehension can be taught starting in preschool  And needs to be taught across all grades  Building oral language skills is a key component of reading comprehension instruction across the grades  Too much focus on print skills alone may decrease attention to comprehension precursors 21

22. Module 1: Unit 3, Session 2 Is a Focus on Comprehension by Itself Adequate to Solve the Problem? Not really, because…. 22

23. Module 1: Unit 3, Session 2 Adolescent Readers Have to Master…  Word reading accuracy  Word reading fluency  Making inferences from the text  Integrating new text-based knowledge with pre-existing knowledge  Understanding the language of the texts  Having the background knowledge presupposed by the texts  Motivation and interest in the text  Establishing a purpose for reading 23

24. Module 1: Unit 3, Session 2 Successful Practitioners with Adolescent Readers Have To…  Integrate reading instruction with content learning goals  Manage the distributed structures of middle/high schools  Find a place in the curriculum to focus on reading  English teachers tend to focus on literature, not reading  Other content-area teachers are rarely prepared, and sometimes unwilling, to teach reading  Design practice based on a relatively scanty research base 24

25. Module 1: Unit 3, Session 2 Reading Next Challenges  New reading tasks, even for children prepared very well at pre-K – Grade 3  Components of pre-K – Grade 3 instruction key for comprehension are still not being adequately implemented  Too many 4 th – 12 th graders are struggling 25

26. Module 1: Unit 3, Session 2 The Problem of Comprehension in the Content Areas Among Grade 4-12 students  Widespread  Inevitable if there is a mismatch between reader and text, reader and activity, text and activity  A problem that should become a focus of instruction 26

27. Module 1: Unit 3, Session 2 What Do We Know from Work on Early Literacy?  Solid research provides a basis for making progress  Assessment is a key step in organizing instruction  Consensus serves the field better than dissensus  Models of excellent instruction should be studied  Wisdom of practice has been undervalued 27

28. Module 1: Unit 3, Session 2 Steps to Helping All Students Read Better  Identify student literacy needs, at group and individual levels  Teach all students systematically  Teach all students reading for learning in every class  Give struggling students extra help designed to address their needs 28

29. Module 1: Unit 3, Session 2 http://www.all4ed.org/publications/ReadingNext/ReadingNext.pdf READING NEXT 29 READING NEXT A VISION FOR ACTION AND RESEARCH IN MIDDLE AND HIGH SCHOOL LITERACY A Report to Carnegie Corporation of New York

30. Module 1: Unit 3, Session 2 Fifteen Key Elements: Nine Instructional Improvements  Direct, explicit comprehension instruction  Effective instruction embedded in content  Motivation and self-directed learning  Text-based collaborative learning  Strategic tutoring  Diverse texts  Intensive writing  A technology component  Ongoing formative assessment of students 30

31. Module 1: Unit 3, Session 2 Fifteen Key Elements: Six Infrastructure Improvements  Extended time for literacy  Professional development  Ongoing summative assessment of students and programs  Teacher teams  Leadership  Comprehensive and coordinated literacy program 31

32. Module 1: Unit 3, Session 2 15 – 3 = 0  Indispensable elements are:  Professional development  Ongoing formative assessment of students  Ongoing summative assessment of students and programs 32

33. Module 1: Unit 3, Session 2 More Information  www.serpinstitute.org www.serpinstitute.org  www.carnegie.org/literacywww.carnegie.org/literacy  www.rand.org/achievementforallwww.rand.org/achievementforall  www.gse.harvard.edu/~snowwww.gse.harvard.edu/~snow 33

34. Module 1: Unit 3, Session 2 References Biancarosa, G., & Snow, C. E. (2004). Reading next - A vision for action and research in middle and high school literacy: A report from Carnegie Corporation of New York. Washington, DC: Alliance for Excellent Education. National Institute of Child Health and Human Development [NICHD]. (2000). Report of the National Reading Panel. Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction (No. NIH Publication No. 00- 4769). Washington, DC: U.S.: U.S. Government Printing Office. Perie, M., Moran, R., & Lutkus, A. (2005). NAEP 2004 trends in academic progress: Three decades of student performance in reading and mathematics. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics. RAND Reading Study Group. (2002). Reading for understanding: Toward an R&D program in reading comprehension. Santa Monica, CA: Rand. Snow, C., Burns, M. S., & Griffin, P. (1998). Preventing reading difficulties in young children. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. 34