literacy leadership -...

30
Literacy Leadership: District Level and Building Level Support of CLC Suzanne Robinson Executive Director, Strategic Learning Center Associate Professor, University of Kansas Ann Southworth Assistant Superintendent, Chief Academic Officer Ann Ferriter Striving Readers Implementation Officer Springfield Public School District, Springfield, MA

Upload: ngokien

Post on 20-Aug-2018

216 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

Literacy Leadership:District Level and Building LevelSupport of CLC

Suzanne RobinsonExecutive Director, Strategic Learning Center

Associate Professor, University of Kansas

Ann SouthworthAssistant Superintendent, Chief Academic Officer

Ann FerriterStriving Readers Implementation Officer

Springfield Public School District, Springfield, MA

CLC Framework

• Researchers at KU – CRL developed a framework called theContent Literacy Continuum (CLC; Lenz & Ehren, 1999).

• This structure provides a vehicle for

(a) considering the factors that influence the success ofsecondary literacy efforts.

(b) leveraging the talents of secondary school faculty.

(c) organizing instruction to increase in intensity as the deficitsthat certain subgroups of students demonstrate become evident.

A Continuum of Literacy Instruction

Level 1: Enhanced content instruction (strategic teaching to ensure

mastery of critical content for all regardless of literacy levels)

Level 2: Embedded strategy instruction (routinely weave learning

strategies within and across courses as part of large-group instruction)

Level 3: Intensive strategy instruction (ensure mastery of specific

strategies via research-based instruction in small groups and in tutoring)

Level 4: Intensive basic skill instruction (mastery of entry-level

literacy skills below the 4th grade level)

Level 5: Therapeutic intervention (mastery of language underpinnings

related to curriculum content, learning strategies, and entry level skills)

Level 1: Enhanced content instruction

Level 2: Embedded strategy instruction

Level 3: Intensive strategy instruction

Level 4: Intensive basic-skill instruction

Level 5: Therapeutic intervention

Strategic Intervention

Intensive Intervention

A Continuum of Literacy Instruction

Challenges of a secondary schoolliteracy initiative

1. Close the gap for struggling readers asquickly as possible - change the trajectoryof reading skills acquisition.

2. Raise the bar for all - address how to attainhigh achievement outcomes for all studentsregardless of incoming literacy levels.

3. Acknowledge and address resistance tochange.

Challenge #1Challenge #1((““Close the GapClose the Gap””))

61% 61% of struggling adolescentreaders in urban settings scoredat significantly lower levels onword level and readingcomprehension skills.

Challenge #2 Challenge #2 ((““Raise the BarRaise the Bar””))

Standardized tests for adolescents

• Require students to be proficient in…– Complex thinking (inference, summarization)

– Vocabulary

– Background knowledge

• Increase in– Length

– Question number and complexity

Challenge #3 Challenge #3 (Resistance to Change)(Resistance to Change)

1) Staff express suspicion of new initiatives.

2) Staff are asked to abandon personal resources/materials.

3) Some teachers find sharing instructional practices and materials threatening.

4) Teachers feel they have too much to cover already. 5) Teachers experience uncertainty about their role in CLC.

Attempt, Attack, Abandon Cycle

AttackAbandon

Attempt

What administrators need to knowabout CLC implementation

• During stages of CLC implementation,actions taken around

– Vision

– Responses to challenges

– Leadership and collaborative problem-solving

– Support for professional growth

– Structures for professional development andcoaching

– Support for planning and collaboration

– Allocation of resources

What administrators need to knowabout CLC implementation

• During stages of CLC implementation,actions taken around

– Curriculum planning

– Support for professional development

– Support for CLC

– Support for continuum of literacy instruction

– Building commitment

– Accountability

– Use of data

– Promote responsibility

District level challenges

• Align district initiatives: find out how initiativesconnect to one another to create a supportsystem.

• Respect individual school characteristics,school improvement goals as appropriate.

• Manage inevitable “tensions” that arise duringsystems change.

• Identify resources to support literacy initiative.

• Collect and use data for decision-making.

Building level challenges

• Align literacy initiative with building initiatives.

• Align building initiatives and district initiatives.

• Coordinate resources to support initiativesthrough school governance structure.

• Coordinate and support implementation ofliteracy interventions.

• Coordinate and sustain implementation ofliteracy interventions.

• Collect and use data for decision-making.

District level strategies

• Curriculum alignment around adoptions andsupport programs

• Integration of literacy interventions into curriculumdissemination systems (e.g., websites, electroniccurriculum resource banks, pacing guides, etc.)

• Coordination and financial support of professionaldevelopment and professional collaboration

• Resolution of potential union and other systemissues

Building level strategies

• Instructional leadership by principal

• Literacy coaches

• Literacy leadership teams

• Classroom observation strategies– Informal walk throughs

– Observation tools

– Integration with teacher evaluation process

Striving Readers

Criteria– Title 1 School District

– School-wide literacy intervention

– Targeted intervention for striving readers

– Randomized group research design

Eight Projects– Springfield/Chicopee, MA

– Portland, OR

– Danville, KY

– Chicago, IL

– Newark, NJ

– Ohio Dept of Youth Services, San Diego, CA

– Memphis, TN

Springfield-Chicopee Striving Readers

• KEY INFORMATION:• 5-year, $16.6 million grant:• Focused on improving the performance of struggling readers (2 or more years

below grade level down to 4th grade level) and school-wide teaching in supportof reading.

• Interventions:• Two targeted interventions for struggling population: Read 180 Enterprise

Edition and the Strategic Instruction Model (SIM) Xtreme Reading Program

• A whole school intervention: SIM Content Enhancement Routines for Teachers(CERT)

• There is one literacy coach per high school whose sole task is to support theuse of the whole school intervention.

• 5 participating high schools:• Springfield: HS of Science &Tech, HS of Commerce, Putnam Voc-Tech HS

• Chicopee: Chicopee HS and Chicopee Comprehensive HS

• Grant design requirements:• Strict randomized control trial evaluated by Brown University.

• Randomization is done for students, teachers and both interventions

Springfield-Chicopee Demographics

Total in SR 280Total in SR 630

White 69.9%White 16.8%

Hispanic 23.9%Hispanic 52.9%

Asian 1.3%Asian 2.1%

African Amer. 2.9%African Amer. 24.0%

Total HS 2625Total HS 6952

Total students: 7754Total students: 25233

CPSSPS

Springfield-Chicopee Selected Populations

15.1SPED23.2SPED

51.6Low-Income78.5Low-Income

4.5Limited English

Proficiency13Limited English

Proficiency

13.6First Language

Not English23.3First Language

Not English

%TITLE%TITLE

ChicopeeSpringfield

Springfield-Chicopee Indicators

72.153.8Graduation Rate

13.415.3Out-of-school

08.1In-School Suspensions

11.816.3Avg. Days Absent

92.9%89.9%Attendance Rate

6%10.9%Dropout Rate

ChicopeeSpringfield

Teacher Data

12.8 to 111.6 to 1Student/Teacher Ratio

94.480.7% Highly Qualified

5181,792Total in Core Subjects

9686.1% Licensed in Content

6032,215Total Teachers

ChicopeeSpringfield

MA Striving Readers ProjectDistrict Challenges

• Grant timeline and vendor contracts

• Challenges of random control model

• Fidelity of delivery, and adherence to programmodels and specifications

• Different schedules and classes acrossschools/districts

Vocational school schedule

• Buy-in/ownership of Content Enhancement

MA Striving Readers ProjectDistrict Strategies

• Engagement of Academic Directors

• Involvement of Instructional LeadershipSpecialists with Literacy Coaches

• Paid professional development

• Striving Readers newsletter

• Advisory and steering committees

• School committee presentations

• Communication with Congressmen

MA Striving Readers ProjectBuilding Level Challenges

• Changes in building leadership

• Student engagement in grant testing

and randomization

• CERT roll-out

• Intervention teacher turn-over

• Making striving readers’ success a

building priority

MA Striving Readers ProjectBuilding Level Strategies

• Literacy Leadership Teams

• Principal’s monthly meetings with CERTteachers

• Learning Walks in SIM/CERT classes

• Faculty meeting reports

• Parental communication

• Sharing of student testimonials

• Celebrations!

Successes

• Administrators have successfullyimplemented in all 5 schools

• Teachers have embraced the models

• Districts have delivered quality PD

• Districts’ leadership engaged and supportive

• Middle schools testing successfully

• CERT strategies adopted on the MS level

• Brown’s evaluation the gold standard

Conclusionthoughts on facilitating change

1. Urgency- the pull between the need to get “up to

speed” while addressing calendar constraints

2. Intervening at many levels of a school system

3. Getting “the right people on the bus”

4. Bumping up against limits of resources and time

5. Addressing unexpected obstacles

6. What are we not attending to that we need to

attend to? - The importance of vigilance!

Conclusion

Presentation and handouts available at:

http://www.kucrl.org/library/presentations.shtml

View more about CLC at:

http://www.preservice.kucrl.org/ (Look at DVD

Resources Instructional Support)

http://www.clc.kucrl.org

Questions

We invite your questions!

Thank you for your time and attention.