“kid writing program evaluation” psdc conference 2006 mifflin county school district in...

““Kid Writing Program Kid Writing Program Evaluation” Evaluation”

PSDC Conference PSDC Conference 20062006

““Kid Writing Program Kid Writing Program Evaluation” Evaluation”

PSDC Conference PSDC Conference 20062006

Mifflin County School DistrictMifflin County School DistrictIn collaboration with the In collaboration with the

Tuscarora Intermediate Unit 11Tuscarora Intermediate Unit 11

Project Inception• Requested by Mifflin County District

Office Administration • Specifically, Mr. Runk and Dr.

Czerniakowski expressed interest in the development of an IU Program Evaluation Model during the summer administrative retreat, 2004.

Program Background• In late August, Dr. Czerniakowski met

with Dr.Tracy Hinish from the TIU office to develop the timeline for implementation. At that time, Highland Park Elementary, because of its size and diversity, was identified as the school for the study. It was determined that “Kid Writing” should be the topic of discussion.

Planning Meeting• On October 20, 2004, an initial

planning meeting of the core team members was held at Highland Park Elementary.

• Goals for the project were determined.

• Questions for exploration were listed.

Core Team Members• Dr. John Czerniakowski• Dr. Joe Maginnis• Dr. Linda Mohler• Robert Shinskie• Deb Coble• Amber Elsesser• Sharon Grassmyer• Dottie Peiffer• Rita Weber• Beth White• Tracy Hinish

Additional Members during 05-06

• Kristin Fisher, first grade teacher who replaced Sharon Grassmyer

• Dr. Ken Albaugh, consultant for TIU 11

Questions for Exploration

• How has Kid Writing affected older students?

Questions for Exploration

• What gradespecific guidelines/benchmarks could

serve as expectations?

Questions for Exploration

• How should writing prompts for PSSA preparation be incorporated with Kid Writing?

Questions for Exploration

• What role do literacy coaches play in Kid Writing?

Questions for Exploration

• How should we report progress for Kid Writing?

Questions for Exploration

• What reading benefits do students gain as a result of Kid Writing?

Questions for Exploration

• How are other districts using Kid Writing?

Questions for Exploration

• What are reasonable daily time expectations for Kid Writing?

Questions for Exploration

• How has students’ writing skills and reading abilities improved as a result of Kid Writing?

Data Collected• Longitudinal PSSA data• Imagination Station• DIBELS

Data Collected• Teacher perceptions as per team

interview on March 22, 2005• Student artifacts/portfolios

Title I Reading/Literacy Coaches

• In December 2005, Title I Reading/Literacy Coaches were invited to participate.– Cynthia Smith– Jennifer Knode

Perceptions Data Summary

• Reading impact– Many kindergarten children are

reading by the end of K and most identify words.

– Enjoy writing and reading– K – Guided Reading Level D– More connectedness between

reading, writing, speaking, listening

Reading Impact– Easier transfers of author’s purpose

to writing (using all caps for loud speaking)

– Confidence with writing– Clear applications to notes, letters,

cards, notes to each other– Smoother grade level transition from

kindergarten to second grade

Perceptions Data Summary

• Challenges– Helpers/parents volunteers are necessary

for kindergarten classes. It would be helpful in other grades as well.

– It is beneficial for the literacy coaches to be involved. This helps a lot.

– Children with speech difficulties have trouble hearing initial sounds.

– Children who have not had exposure to print or writing implements have extreme difficulty.

Perceptions Data Summary

• Curriculum Challenges:– All grade level curriculum is more

rigorous as a result of Kid Writing.– There are more opportunities for

extended activities at all grade levels due to higher level of sophistication.

Additional Challenges– Children who move into the district

and have had no Kid Writing experience have difficulty.

– Getting students to write to a more sophisticated level of detail presents challenges.

– First year of implementation presented uncertainties for the teachers.

Perceptions Data Summary

– Second Grade – more rigor in spelling.

– “Maintenance” issues for first grade are already covered.

Perceptions Data Summary

• Grading Issues:– Portfolios– Rubrics– Developmental Checklists

General Classroom Observations

• Helpers beneficial in all grade levels• Literacy coaches beneficial in all grades• Complete student engagement• One to one teacher/student contact• Peer tutors• Routines established• Learning centers/stations and other activities

are required for classroom management issues once students finish assignments

Classroom Observations

• Student enthusiasm• Text rich environment• Positive interactions• Vocabulary development• Peer models• Use of resources for writing• Problem solving – “What do you do when you

get to a word you don’t know how to spell?

Classroom Observations

• Handwriting integrated• Co-teaching with Title I

Reading/Literacy Coaches• Get to every child, every day• Portfolios allow to see growth• Better parent communication• Applications of decoding skills• Individuality

Portfolio Observations• Teacher/adult editing• Interest surveys completed with parents• Word lists• Student writing• Evidence of the use of conventions as

students progressed through the grade levels

• Expanded vocabulary

Portfolio Observations• Combination of fiction and non-

fiction writings• Evidence of mapping and Venn

Diagrams

2005-06 School Year• Developed guidelines and benchmarks for Kid

Writing at Kindergarten, first, and second grade– Benchmarks for beginning, middle, and end of

school year by grade level. Includes skills and expectations for average achievement.

– Guidelines include classroom management tips and student writing samples for K, 1st, and 2nd grades

• Comparison of third grade PSSA data with control group and experimental group

2005-06 School Year continued

Networking of TIU member districts who are using Kid Writing

• Continued Professional Development– District visits– Writer’s workshop

PSSA Reading Data Collection Tool

PSSA Performance - Reading

Test Group BB B P A CommentsGr 3 (03-04) 29 33 24 14 Without Kid Writing/Without Imagination StationGr 3 (04-05) 23 17 38 22 With Kid Writing/Limited Imagination StationGr 3 (05-06) 14 15 45 26 With Kid Writing/With Imagination Station

PSSA Reading Data Collection Tool

Longitudinal 3rd Grade PSSA Reading

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

BB B P A

Performance Levels

Per

cen

tag

e o

f S

tud

ents

Gr 3 (03-04)

Gr 3 (04-05)

Gr 3 (05-06)

PSSA Reading Data Collection Tool

AYP Performance Reading

38

60

71

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Gr 3 (03-04) Gr 3 (04-05) Gr 3 (05-06)

AYP Performance

PSSA MathData Collection Tool

PSSA Performance - MathTest Group BB B P A CommentsGr 3 (03-04) 24 31 30 14 Without Kid Writing/Without Imagination StationGr 3 (04-05) 7 24 40 29 With Kid Writing/Limited Imagination StationGr 3 (05-06) 6 11 37 46 With Kid Writing/With Imagination Station

PSSA MathData Collection Tool

Longitudinal 3rd Grade PSSA Math

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

BB B P A

Performance Levels

Per

cen

tag

e o

f S

tud

ents

Gr 3 (03-04)

Gr 3 (04-05)

Gr 3 (05-06)

PSSA Math Data Collection Tool

AYP Performance Math

44

69

83

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

Gr 3 (03-04) Gr 3 (04-05) Gr 3 (05-06)

AYP Performance

Questions?• Comments

Contact Information• Dr. John Czneriakowski, Assistant Superintendent,

Mifflin County SD• jjc31@mcsdk12.org

• Dr. Tracy Hinish, Assistant Executive Director, Tuscarora Intermediate Unit 11

• thinish@tiu11.org

• Dr. Joe Maginnis, Principal,Highland Park Elementary, Mifflin County SD

• jpm45@mcsdk12.org