Core Assessment 5:

School Reading Program Report

Part 3- Revise/Design a School Reading Program
Elaine Vazquez
Saint Xavier University
 After extensive review of our school profile and our literacy practices in the 2010-2011

school year we are ready to move forward with the planning of the 2011-2012 School Reading

Program. This plan has been based off of the 2010-2011 template. Some aspects of the original

plan have been retained, some have been deleted, and some have been added. For the purpose of

this paper the new plan is presented in three sections: 1) Goals, 2) Solutions, and 3) Detailed

Action Plan. After each section there will be a brief discussion of what was added, what was

removed, and any important logistics, or materials. Finally I will discuss projected effects on

student learning and program evaluation for the coming year.

Goals
Goal 1: 90%-100% of students scoring at 6.1 or above on the TABE test will make one full
grade-level gain.
Goal 2: 90%-100% of students scoring 6.0 and below on the TABE test will make a gain of
two full grade levels.

Discussion

In our official school improvement plan, these two goals are currently written as one

single goal. In the coming weeks I will be talking more with my administrator about expanding

our goals. I think it would be important to include goals in the areas of professional developmen

and family and community literacy as well. Perhaps these goals may not be present on the

“official” plan, but they could serve as guiding lights for our work in these areas.

I believe in these goals. There are, however, some unspoken hitches to them. “Students”

here means “stable” students: students who are here for a half a year or more without huge gaps

in attendance. From what I understand, students with IEPs are also excluded from this goal.

Solutions
 Students scoring below 6.1:
Students with TABE scores below 6.1 will be considered “Tier 3” students in our RTI
framework. In addition to all Tier 1 interventions, these students will receive the following
services:

1) (a) Additional testing using NWEA’s Measurement of Academic Progress (MAP) program.
These results will be used to determine the student’s basic areas of strength and weakness in
fluency, vocabulary, and various aspects of general reading comprehension, as well as to check
for progress in these areas at regular intervals. Assessment information will be used to design
the Learner Assessment Plan
(b) One-on-one Qualitative Reading Inventory assessment for students testing at a 4.0 or below
on the TABE.
2) A Learner Achievement Plan will be written that includes the following:
a) All assessment data available including:
i. TABE scores
ii. MAP results
iii. Any additional qualitative data (esp. in the case of students reading 4.0 or
below)
iv. Student reading/writing interest survey.
b) Background of home, community, school, and classroom
c) Analysis of assessment
d) Match or mismatch with present instructional context
e) Recommendations/Action plan
i) Personal goals
ii) Family goals
iii) Classroom goals
iv) Intervention goals
f) Observations and insights

3) Placement in Reading 101 class for intensive training in the skills of a good reader while
also learning to think and read deeply and critically.
4) A projected calendar of one-on-one intervention services if called for in the Intervention
goals section of the LAP.
5) Availability of after-school programming that puts high-interest, low-level texts in the hands
of students and/or that cultivates interest or skills in reading and writing.

Discussion
At the beginning of this discussion I’d like to first make clear that at our school we have

made the choice to slightly alter the traditional three tier RtI framework. Upon examination of
the data, I have found that at any one time we have between fifty and sixty (30%- 35%) students

out of 175 scoring at 6.0 or below. These students need and deserve intensive intervention,

which was lacking last year. The great majority of our students are in the 6.0-8.9 range-- I would

estimate about 60%. In my personal opinion I believe they are regular students of regular

intelligence who have been involved in a system that has failed them on many fronts. These

students need classrooms where literacy is as much of a focus as the content that is being

delivered. They are our “Tier 2” students. Our final group of students is brilliant, but these

students lack practice with their intelligence and talents. I would estimate that at any one time

we have 15-20 (about 10%) of these outstanding studens. They are reading at or near the 12th

grade level, but their actual skills in writing and the depth and breadth of their vocabulary may

be lacking. Unfortunately, they are in a classroom that is geared primarily towards that middle

group with a framework in place to catch and carry these students and those that struggle below

them, and they have no real source of enrichment for the potential that lies within. These

students have been designated as “Tier 1.” Our RtI intervention “pyramid” is actually a diamond

with special services designated for those at the extreme ends of ability.
 With this said, I’d like to focus now on the structure planned for students in Tier 3. For

the most part, the plan for Tier 3 students was completely scrapped and re-envisioned for the

upcoming year. MAP testing was not a part of our RtI structure this year. I have included it for

the upcoming year because it is a responsive software assessment tool that adapts to a student’s

reading abilities as they take the exam and subsequently provides detailed data on the reader’s

strengths and weaknesses. It cuts down the amount of time the Reading Specialist would spend

performing QRIs considerably and opens the door for more of a direct “zooming in” on

intervention.

Last year’s Reading Achievement Plan (RAP) became the Learner Assessment Plan

(LAP), which will be modeled off of the Learner Assessment Plan example provided in Voght

and Shearer’s text, Reading Specialists and Literacy Coahes in the Real World (2011, p. 95-98).
It provides space for a description of home and community setting, classroom context, an

analysis of assessment, discussion of match and mismatch with present instructional context, and

recommendations for action which are communicated with all relevant stakeholders. There is

also a section for later observations and insights as the recommendations are implemented.

Last year we decided not to create a class in which all “struggling readers” would be

place for fear of creating something akin to tracking. For the upcoming year we have included a

one-period Reading 101 class for our most struggling readers as it is clear that these students

cannot make two, three, and four-year gains in their reading comprehension level without a great

deal of individual attention and skill development. The idea is that this is a class students would

move up and out of once they have made enough recovery. This class will be taught by the

Reading Specialist to ensure that a qualified reading teacher is delivering instruction.

Finally, we have retained the after school programs from last year and added a few new

ones. These programs will be overseen by the Reading Specialist but most likely facilitated by

other school personnel.

Students scoring between 6.1-10.9:

Students in this category are considered “Tier 2” students. These students will receive their
intervention services within the regular education classroom. All classroom teachers will be
considered both content area teachers and literacy teachers and will be expected to implement a
curriculum of literacy learning in their classrooms.

1) Students testing at this level who make no progress or who regress at mid-year TABE
testing will be referred for Tier 1 services.
2) Students will receive instruction from classroom teachers prepared with the following
Professional Development:
a) Teachers receive several crash-course “Literacy at PACHS” mini-courses in shared writing
practices, 6+1 writing traits, PACHS 10 literacy strategies, teaching comprehension in the
content area, and vocabulary instruction in the month of August, before instruction begins.
b) Teachers will be members of at least one ongoing literacy study group that will report their
findings to the rest of the instructional team and integrate their findings into their own work.
c) Teachers will work one-on-one with the Literacy Coach to target individual goals and
weaknesses through observations, co-teaching, and the review of research and data-driven
instruction.
d) Teachers will be responsible for one year-long Action Research project they may submit for
showcasing at conferences or for publication in content-area or literacy based journals.

Discussion:
The biggest change that has been made to the plan for this year is the full enumeration of

all of the many levels of Professional Development and coaching that will prepare teachers to to

teach students who need instruction in reading strategies and assistance comprehending

instructional-level content-area materials. Most notably, we have added study groups,

beginning-of-the-year crash-course literacy preparation courses, and an action research project to

encourage our teachers to develop new, data-driven insights in to what kind of instruction works

for the student population we serve. These services are all almost exclusively the responsibility

of the Reading Specialist, and they will take up the majority of their release time.

I have planned for the ordering of a text that will partner with each of the beginning-of-

the-year professional developments so that teachers are equipped with a library of resources they

are familiar with for the whole year. In 2010-2011 I had to make a huge number of photocopies

that were supposed to be placed into teachers’ individual binders, but there’s no way to know if

that actually happened or not. I have also ordered a text to help guide teachers’ Action Research

projects, and I have provided a budget for teachers to subscribe to content-area journals. I am

not sure of the logistics of each of the Action Research projects yet, but I think one important

part of it will be making sure that the details and expectations are laid out at the beginning of the

year.

Based off of my later analysis of teacher coaching, I would also like to make the effort

this year to schedule meetings with teachers ahead of time as regularly occurring appointments.
In 2010-2011 it was difficult to see teachers regularly and equally- some teachers were seen

more often than others, and appointments were sporadic and canceled regularly. It is my hope

that laying expectations out ahead of time will set up the understanding that literacy is and will

be an important, ongoing service that all teachers will include in their curriculum and reflect on

throughout the year.

Between the beginning of the year resources, the study groups, the ongoing one-on-one

coaching and the ongoing Professional Development, I feel confident that every student-- and

especially Tier 2 students-- will receive content-area literacy instruction of the highest quality.

Students scoring at 11.0 or above:

These students will be considered “Tier 1” students. These students require enrichment
opportunities to develop skills that may have been neglected in the CPS system. Students with
these scores will be automatically assigned to this tier, but students who score below 11.0 can
be “referred” to the services available to this tier upon referral by a teacher or staff member
based on exceptional talent.

1) Access to college level classes at Wright Community College,

2) After school PSAE study group
3) Access to advanced critical literacy and college preparatory class designed in-house.
4) Referral to “Individualized Enrichment Education Plan” (IEEP) that targets the individual
strengths of the student and connects them with enrichment learning opportunities.
5) Encouragement to join “Destination ImagiNation” and “Louder than a Bomb” team.

Discussion
The revision of this tier came from my own analysis of school data, my experiences with

students in my own classroom, and a discussion with my administrator. The vast majority of our

students require intervention to catch up to where they should be. There is, however, a group of

students we find at our school who are particularly brilliant, but who lack practice and

refinement of their talents. In urban schools where there is so much focus on intervention for

struggling readers, they are often left behind, quite bored, in their classes. Their skills continue

to be undeveloped. For these students we have created a Tier 1 plan. These students will have
access to additional services and programs to help them team their college-ready brains with

opportunities that will empower them with college-ready skills in reading, writing, and problem

solving.

Items retained from last year are PSAE test preparation and the opportunity to take

college-level coursework at Wright City College. We have also retained the critical literacy

class, but for the upcoming year, just as we have decided to do with the Reading 101 class, this

class will actually reflect a student population that is reading at the advanced level.

Most notably we have added the IEEP: The “Individual Enrichment Education Plan.” It

is unclear who will be responsible for the writing and follow-up of this plan. There are few

enough students at any one time that it would probably be possible for the Reading Specialist to

be in charge of this aspect of the literacy plan. It may be helpful, however, for collaboration to

take place between the dean of students, the senior transition specialist, and various instructors

within the school. The IEEP would be a plan identifying the young person’s areas of interest and

areas in need of development. There would be a timeline for implementation of enrichment

activities, and the young person would work together with the staff member to seek out extra

opportunities in the school and community, and to ensure that classroom instruction is engaging

and challenging.

Finally we have added a program called Destination ImagiNation. This program is one

that cultivates teamwork and creativity. It is a year-long competition in which participants train

for “spontaneous” problem solving sessions in which they are given a problem and a time limit

and scored on their group performance, as well as a “long term” problem that they work on and

present at final competition. As a young person in middle school and high school, I was a

member of one of these teams, and I am certain that it was one of the most important things I
have ever been a part of in terms of developing creativity, teamwork, spontanaiety and out-of-

the-box thinking.

All Students:
1) Writing and reading across the curriculum program will engage students in "owning" their
learning.
2) Entrance and Exit tickets in all classes.
3) Writing Process framework and 6+1 Writing Traits evaluation system used across the
curriculum to create a common language for talking about writing in detail.
4) All units in all courses involve a substantial written component.
5) Senior Portfolio writing experience for all seniors
6) All students will have access to interest-based magazines to increase interest in reading.
7) All students will have access to after-school programming putting interesting texts into their
hands that are at their independent reading level and expanding their home libraries.
8) All students will have access to expanding content-area-based, multi-leveled, high-interest
classroom mini-libraries.
9) All students’ parents will receive information about their student’s TABE scores, and what
resources they have at their disposal if they would like to be a part of improving those scores.
(Any parent may request an LAP)

Discussion
Solutions one through four were present as written in the 2010-2011 Literacy Plan, and

numbers five through eight were present in action this year but were not made explicit in the

previous plan. Number nine is an addition for the plan for next year that is designed to target the

weakness suggested in Part I of this core assessment-- that school-home connections were

lacking, especially in the area of literacy. The logistics for one through eight are already present

and active in the school, with the exception of making sure that each of the components was

actually present in classrooms, and making sure that there was adequate training to implement

the writing process and 6+1 traits in every classroom. This year there is a structure in place to

make sure that these things are not just planned, but that they actually happen.

Number nine will be the responsibility of the Reading Specialist. Every time TABE

testing takes place, parents should be informed of their student’s results and what kind of
programs our school has in place to address their student’s strengths and weaknesses. One thing

I gathered from the family literacy surveys that I received on report card pickup day this year

was that there was no shortage of parents interested in helping and becoming involved at the

school, but they were simply not aware of their student’s progress or how they might be able to

get involved. Reaching out to parents and families next year will be one of the most important

goals we have. Logistically I’d like to see a letter of update go out every quarter or so, keeping

parents in the loop. Of course parents of students with LAPs will be actively involved with and

aware of their students performance and progress.

Projected Effects on Student Learning

The new plan for 2011-2012 directly addresses gaps in the plan from last year. In 2010-

2011 student intervention work was planned but it became clear as the year began that it was not

realistic to provide individualized services for both teachers and students while also keeping up

after-school programs and planning and delivering PDs. In the upcoming year I expect effects to

be much stronger than they were this year because we will be reaching our Tier 3 students with

an array of intensive, highly individualized services. Services for our Tier 2 students will be

improved as teachers build upon their literacy learning from the 2010-2011 school year, receive

more resources, engage in study groups and discussions, and craft their own action research,

constantly reflecting on their own practices. Finally, we will have resources for our “Tier 1”

students available that we have never had before. Students who need intervention will get

intervention, families will be more involved, and students with special talents will have a greater

opportunity to cultivate them.

Program Evaluation
 At the end of next year, I would suggest a full review very similar to the Core

Assessment 5. I addition to this, I would suggest an extensive teacher feedback survey, as well

as a student feedback survey. I would like to consider journal publication of our school’s two-

year progress at the end of next year. Everything we do will be recorded via google docs, google

sites, or google forms, so information will be readily available for review. It is most important to

me to get feedback from all stakeholders. That means parents, teachers, administration, and

Social Emotional Learning staff. Even community members should be involved. As we move

into the upcoming year, evaluation of the program is something I’d like to discuss with all of the

many stakeholders. As I am the one who has largely created the program, I think it would be

most powerful to have those outside of my perspective give feedback for change so we can

create a dialogue between the Reading Specialist and the community they serve.

I look forward to the upcoming year! In the event that I will be granted my full release

time, we have a powerful program that is based off of research, that has been redesigned based

on the successes and challenges of the prior program, and that is comprehensive and realistic in

its scope.

Detailed Action Plan

I am including what I have written of the detailed action plan so far. There are many more line

items to be added, but this is a strong start. I will be reviewing this with my staff and

administrator in the weeks to come. I am thankful for the opportunity to review it and revamp it

in such depth!
Work Plan Timeline Persons Responsible Professional Monitoring Activities Allocated
Actions Implementat for Implementation Development Amount
Related to ion Dates Needed/
Literacy
Target

Identify June ‘11 Principal None Supervision and

Literacy Evaluation
Coordinator

Identify June ‘11 Principal None Supervision and

English Evaluation
Instructor

Building a Ongoing Principal/Instructiona Cross-curriculum Ongoing $3,500

culture of l team Literacy
reading in the
school

Beginning of July- Juanita Garcia None Already part of N/A

the year September administrative
TABE testing correspondin functioning
g with rolling
admission

MAP testing 1) August 1 - Literacy Coordinator Training included in LAPs $4,000 for
of all September 30 package. testing
identified Tier initial testing materials
3 students. 2) 2nd testing and
round: 2nd training
week of
November
3) 3rd testing
round: 1st
week back
from winter
break
4) 4th testing
round: 2nd
week in
March
 5) Final
Round: Last
week of May.

Instructional One full week Literacy Literacy across the Occasional Not more
Team in August Coordinator curriculum to revisiting in literacy than $500
"Writing discuss each step in and instructional team for
Process" the writing process. meetings, one-on-one purchase
Training coaching of
materials
and
binding

Instructional Three full Literacy 6+1 Traits of Occasional $400 for

Team 6+1 days in Coordinator Writing: The revisiting in literacy posters
"Writing August. Complete Guide, and instructional team and
Traits" Grades 3 and Up meetings, one-on-one materials
Training coaching of
teachers’
choice.

Teaching Three full Reading and review Occasional $788.28

Reading days in of: When Kids Cant revisiting in literacy
Across the August. Read: What and instructional team
Curriculum Teachers Can Do: A meetings, one-on-one
training guide for teachers 6- coaching
12 by Kylene Beers.
($25.69) Materials
for implementation:
50 Content Area
Strategies for
Adolescent Literacy
($40.00)

Action Portion of Literacy coordinator, A Short Guide to Occasional revisiting in $488.76

Research one day in individual teachers Action Research, literacy and
preparation August, 3rd ed., Andrew P. instructional team
and ongoing one- Johnson. ($40.73) meetings, one-on-one
implementatio on-one coaching
n sessions

Vocabulary One day in Literacy coordinator, What Research Has Occasional revisiting in $292.68
 teaching August, individual teachers to Say About literacy and
training ongoing Vocabulary instructional team
study groups. Instruction ($24.39) meetings, one-on-one
coaching

Teacher Teacher Literacy coordinator, Subscriptions to Literacy coach keeps $400

Literacy selected, individual teachers. various academic track of study group
Study Groups year-long journals, purchasing online shared notes,
of additional groups report back at
materials. chosen times.

Biweekly Biweekly, Literacy coordinator, Provided by All notes and agendas $0

Instructional year long individual teachers. Literacy are posted on shared
Team Coordinator. website.
Responsive
Professional
Developments

Literacy Ongoing $0
coach
classroom
observations

Literacy Ongoing $0
coach co-
teaching

Staff PD: Teaching Writing $0

Technology using Blogs, Wikis,
in the and other Digital
Classroom Tools by Richar
Beach, Chris Anson,
and Lee-Ann
Kastman Breuch.
(Already purchased)

Critical Discussion time Copy of

Literacy/Peda with all staff to Pedagogy
gogy of the translate PACHS of the
Oppressed standards into Oppressed
Collaborative academic goals. for
Training/ everyone
 Planning $20 each,
$260?

Louder than a $1,000

Bomb Group
Teacher/Facilitator

Magazine Literacy coordinator, Literacy $300

subscriptions fiscal. Coordinator
of ALL kinds Beginning of
(cars, fashion, the year
black/latino,
hip-hop)
Students
LOVE
reading mags!

Removing Year- Chaperones, $500

student long, once literacy coordinators.
library card per month Facilitator/chaperone
fees /literacy coach

Traveling $15 per

Book student
Treasure Hunt per trip,
Book 20
Scholarships students
per trip,
one trip
per month
$2700

Traveling Two
Book chaperone
Treasure Hunt s, $200
Chaperone per half-
Stipend year $800

Transportatio One bus

n to and from costs
library/bookst $225.
ore regularly Twice per
 month=
$4,000 for
a year.
(Unless
you want
to do bus
cards?)
$4,000

Expansion of Beginning of Classroom teachers, Delivered in August One-on-one coaching to $300 per
multi-level the year field literacy coordinator sessions check for use of classroom
content-area, trip libraries/books (12)=
high-interest $3600
classroom
libraries