1. Team Solutions Professional Development WASIP Cluster PLC Year 1 and 2 teachers Debbie Martin; Primary Literacy Facilitator 10th May 2011

2. Purpose To bring teachers together to network, share, understand and continue to inquire into the effectiveness of their literacy practices – developing powerful Professional Learning Communities (PLCs). To build new knowledge about what our students need to understand and do to increase their ability in reading through the identification of effective literacy practices.

3. Teaching as Inquiry What do you remember from Claire Sinnema’s workshop?

4. Opportunity to practice Groups of three teachers (Teachers you from another school) Use the evidence you have brought with you (e.g. Running record, Observation Survey, writing book, modeling book) for one target student to practice the inquiry process Use the Inquiry Speaking frame to share in your groups (5 minutes per teacher) Share with your group something you have tried or changed as a future action from the Teacher Only Day presentations Group sharing - effective practices

5. Inquiry speaking frame Focus Inquiry My target student demographics are as follows… Current achievement (best fit) Level - Standard - The evidence shows the student is able to… Their next steps for learning include … I decided to focus on…..because My learning intention was… The success criteria were… Teaching Inquiry The strategy I wanted my students to learn in this lesson was… I used the following deliberate acts of teaching… Learning Inquiry I noticed… As a result of this I am thinking about… Something that worked well was…Why? Something I need to change is… Why?

6. Things to think about Do I expect to notice shifts in every lesson? What am I going to need to do to support the students who are not shifting? In what ways has the professional reading changed my practice? What did “student voice” tell me

7. Running Records What can they tell us?

8. Purpose To model a process that uses running records to inform teaching and learning. We will do this using 3 levels of analysis.

9. Prior knowledge activation What do we already know about running records?

10. Emergent texts 1.No minimum requirement to move students from emergent to red and beyond 2.Making rules about how long you stay on emergent only hinders progress 3.Emergent texts are about early reading concepts 4.There is very little problem solving at emergent texts 5.We read to make meaning and build knowledge as we go 6.We have to consider what we want learners to learn from emergent texts and what are the opportunities /challenges in these texts

11. Emergent texts Learners do not have to look at emergent levels and the longer they are on emergent the longer they persist with unhelpful ways of working. Red Texts At red we need to show the learner how to look, where to look, what to look for-all enclosed in making meaning. Reading is a meaning making problem solving activity.

12. Professional reading “Getting it Together” by Ian Morrison

13. Level 1 analysis Child 1Child 2 Running words56 Errors44 Self-corrections22 Accuracy94% Self correction rate 1:3 Analyse the number of errors, self corrections and accuracy. What is a desirable ratio for self corrections?

14. Level 2 Analysis Errors M Errors S Errors V SC M SC S SC V Child 1543012 Child 2220002 Total each cueing system - MSV (ELP Pages 28-30, An Observation Survey-Marie Clay, P.69) Are they (MSV) being used in an integrated way?

15. Level 3 analysis Attending and Searching: Word level? Analogy use? Illustrations? Predicting: Attempts? Guessing? Using MSV knowledge? Cross-Checking/Confirming/Self-Correcting: Notices mismatches? Reruns? Reads on? Multiple attempts? Using MSV knowledge? Analyse for processing strategies What reading behaviours are these children using/not using?

16. What can/can’t these children do? Child 1Child 2 Can do - Can’t do - Can do - Can’t do -

17. What can/can’t these children do? Child 1Child 2 Can do - re-runs when a mismatch occurs, re-reads after being told a word, Nearly always predicts when unsure Can’t do - Endings Can do -use pictures and first letter sounds sometimes to self correct Can’t do - doesn’t re-read when T tells the correct word, doesn’t predict/attempt when unsure - just appeals

18. Analyse for comprehension Can they retell all the key information? Is the retell coherent? Are they able to retell in sequence? When using Benchmarks or Probe Variation in ability to answer different types of questions? Use of comprehension strategies? e.g. Visualisation? Prediction/re-prediction? Summarisation? Identifying main idea? Connecting to prior knowledge? Inference?

19. Analyse for fluency Finger pointing? Voice pointing? Phrasing? Expression? Using punctuation?

20. Next steps/Future action Back in your schools; Use the three levels of analysis on one target student’s running record Identify what the child can do/can’t do Prepare your next Inquiry speaking frame to share at the Week 7 PLC Identify your challenge of practice from the reading

21. Professional Reading for Week 7 PLC To find or to fix:Effective teacher response to error in early literacy learning by Pauline Smith “Early - reading teachers typically focus on fixing student errors, rather than helping students notice them.”

22. Reflection time What is one new thing I learnt today? What are my next steps? Be prepared to share these at your next team meeting.

23. “Every child is ready to learn more than he or she already knows…Teachers must find out what children already know and take them from where they are to somewhere else.” Dame Marie Clay