Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
Introduction: The Leyendo Avanzamos Program (Reading We Advance) was a collaboration between the Salem/Keizer Coalition for Equality (SKCE) and Four Corners Elementary School staff. The program was designed as a 6week intervention program for Hispanic students with limited English proficiency who were significantly below grade level in reading. We targeted students, recommended by classroom teachers, who were at high risk of falling further behind academically and worked to reverse this downward trend by increasing their reading proficiency so they are aligned with their peers who are at grade level. The first program cohort started in September, targeting a group of 14 second grade students who were 1-2 years below grade level. We then targeted 19 first graders who were showing little progress in reading. After that, the program targeted the third cohort of 24 Kindergarten students who showed a significant gap in the basic reading elements such as letter recognition and being able to read an emergent reading level book. Our program is in Spanish. Research demonstrates building literacy skills in a childs first language is the most effective method to solidify learning and allows them to transfer skills into English as they progress academically. The end result is strong literacy skills in both languages. From September 2011 to May 2012 we worked closely with 79 K-2 students by providing weekly classes and home visits as needed. Each cohort of students attended the 6-week program (with the exception of Kindergarteners who attended a 9-week program). After that, families had the choice to continue the program by attending classes with the next cohort of families for another 6 weeks. As a reference, according to the EDL literacy assessments, it is important to clarify that each grade has several reading levels and measurements to gauge adequate progress. Kindergarten has four reading levels (A, 1, 2, 3), first grade has seven (4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, 16,), and second grade has four (18, 20, 24, 28). By the end of second grade students should be at reading level 28, first grade at level 16, and kindergarten at level 3. Our data is based on the sample of 57 students who showed an attendance of 60% or more. They are considered the active students. At the end of May, all K-2 students and their families had a closure event with certificates, dances, and cultural performances. The event was a big celebration of the hard work, dedication, and partnership among teachers, community organizers, parents, and students. Kindergarten data: At the end of the year, 58% of the 24 active students showed excellent standing by being at or above grade level and 42% at good standing by being one reading level below. Data showed that when only considering the active students, there were no students below our target range of within one level. Of the 24 active students, 100% of the students showed academic progress. First grade data: At the end of the year, 58% of the 19 active students showed excellent standing by being at or above grade level and 32% at good standing by being one reading level below. Data showed that considering just the active students, only 10% of the students were significantly below grade level in reading. This 10% was compromised of students who were already under an individualized educational program (IEP) or in the process of entering one. Of the 19 active students, 100% of the students showed academic progress. Second grade data: At the end of the year, 14% of the 14 active students showed excellent standing by being at or above grade level and 7% at good standing by being one reading level below. 100% of the students in the
1
second grade program were at intensive intervention status because their achievement gaps encompassed more than just reading levels and were actually a complete 1-2 academic year gap. Despite this huge gap we were able to get 21% of the students at or close to grade level (1 reading level below). The other 79% was made up of students who were already under an individualized educational program (IEP), in process of getting into one, or with a behavior personal plan, they were new comers, and so behind on reading levels. Of the 14 active students, 100% of them showed academic progress. Attendance: The attendance is rated according to the number of families who attended more than 60% of the classes (these are the active students) and the students who attended less than 60% (these are the inactive students). 72% of the 79 registered students attended classes regularly and were considered active (57 students). The other 28% (22 students), instead of attending classes, got regular home visits because of scheduling conflicts due to employment inflexibility. Other families dropped out the program because they went to Mexico for a long period of time or family issues. Facilitators from the Coalition catered their home visits to the families needs and availability.
Summary:
1.
Kindergarten, first, and second grade together, 77% of the 57 active students concluded the
program with good or excellent reading standing.
2. Kindergarten, first grade together, 95% of the 43 active students concluded the program with good or excellent reading standing. 3. Kindergarten grade alone, 100% of the 24 active students concluded the program with good or excellent reading standing. 4. First grade alone, 90% of the 19 active students concluded the program with good or excellent reading standing. 5. Second grade alone, 21% of the 14 active students concluded the program with good or excellent reading standing (due to starting 1-2 years below grade level).
Knows how to read: 15 = 55.6% 3. When your child started the course: What did you as a parent already know about supporting her/him in reading? 24 answered surveys a. I read to my child frequently: 12 = 50% b. I would help my child to homework: 8 = 33.3% c. I knew nothing: 4 = 16.7% 4. After taking the course: What new information have you learned as a parent to support your child in reading? 16 answered surveys (many responses included more than one of the following categories) a. Strategies to make reading more engaging (games, ask questions, flashcards): 11 =68.8% b. Read with expression: 3 = 18.75% 5. What did you like the most about the course? 27 answered surveys (many responses included more than one of the following categories) a. Support of the teachers: 15 = 55.6% b. It gives the parents the tools to be the teachers: 11 = 40.7% 6. What could be improved in the course? 16 answered surveys a. Motivate parents to attend session and participate more: 5 = 31.25% b. The course could be longer or sessions could be more frequent: 5 = 31.25%
A differentiated intervention for second graders is urgently needed: It was very clear that second graders need a different intervention other than the 6 weeks because, as it was stated before, their achievement gaps encompassed more than just reading levels and were actually a complete 1-2 academic year gap. This group was made up of students who were already under an individualized educational program (IEP), in process of getting into one. Some of them were just newcomers or with a personal behavior plan, and so behind on reading levels due to family mobility, lack of familys knowledge of how to support its child at home, or due to inconsistent instructional programs. It is very evident that this group of students and families need more than just a 6-weeks intervention. It is impossible to think that a 6-week program is going to make up all the reading skills that should take place in a 3-year period. As more time passes it is more difficult to catch up to get at grade level: We need to urge parents, teachers, principals and administrators to not wait until the reading gap is so big that it requires an intervention that needs a big investment of resources, time and strategies in order to bring the student at grade reading level. We need to work hard to get and keep kids on grade level in Kinder and first grades. A differentiated special education intervention plan is needed: Besides the regular and differentiated intervention needed for second graders, there is another differentiated intervention needed targeting directly special education students who need a different approach. Perhaps we can pilot an intervention program with the special education department in the district by joining resources, ideas, and strategies in order to better meet students needs.
Thinking Ahead: 1. Combine cohorts groups: Perhaps we could combine first and second grades to save resources, time and get a bigger number of participants. 2. Present the program at once to all groups: and give first materials to all the target groups at once. So, the groups who need to wait for their turn can start working right away without waiting and that can represent more gains in childrens reading abilities. It can also save us time and money. 3. Create a network of collaboration among parents by helping each other collaborate on how to work at home with their children. Groups of 2-3 parents can get together on their own schedule to share techniques, ideas and ways to work with their children. 4. Bring Volunteers to the program: Perhaps students older siblings to help instructors, parents, and students. 5. Modify the curriculum for Special Education students who are in IEP or with specific behavior needs. 6. Offer tutoring during school hours to those students whose parents lack involvement, are on IEPs, or are not making progress. 7. Create a differentiated intervention program for second graders; perhaps a 6-month program with frequent home visits and tutoring during school until the students and parent involvement is stabilized and can continue independently with a gradual release of responsibility.
29%
42%
Close to grade level (one level below) At grade level Above grade level
29%
10% 32%
Close to grade level (one level below) At grade level Below Grade Level (IEP's)
58%
Academic Standing
7% 14%
Close to grade level (1 level below) At Grade level Below grade level (IEP's or behavior problems)
79%
Academic Standing
14
12
10
23%
12%
35% 30%
28%
72%
Active Students: attended more than 60% Inactive Students: Attended less than 60%
10
11