NASB/NASANASB/NASAState Education ConferenceState Education Conference

Omaha, NebraskaOmaha, NebraskaNovemeber 19Novemeber 19thth , 2009 , 2009

Increased Achievement: A Reality for All Students When Professional Increased Achievement: A Reality for All Students When Professional Development is FocusedDevelopment is Focused

Gering Public SchoolsGering Public Schools

Gering, NebraskaGering, Nebraska

“The mission of Gering Public Schools is to develop the academic, personal, and social skills of all “The mission of Gering Public Schools is to develop the academic, personal, and social skills of all students and to prepare them to be productive, responsible global citizens of the 21students and to prepare them to be productive, responsible global citizens of the 21 stst century.” century.”

Gering Public SchoolsGering Public SchoolsGering, NebraskaGering, Nebraska

Bev Hague, Geil Reading CoachBev Hague, Geil Reading Coach

Mary Kay Haun, Geil PrincipalMary Kay Haun, Geil Principal

Don Hague, SuperintendentDon Hague, Superintendent

Andrea Boden, RTI Project Manager/UNLAndrea Boden, RTI Project Manager/UNL

District DemographicsDistrict Demographics

Four Elementary Buildings (K-Four Elementary Buildings (K-6)6)

1100 K-6 students1100 K-6 students 43 % Free and Reduced Lunch 43 % Free and Reduced Lunch

30 % Ethnic Minority30 % Ethnic Minority 13 % Mobility13 % Mobility

1.5 % ELL1.5 % ELL 10 % Special Education 10 % Special Education

Gering Student Performance DataGering Student Performance DataPrior to Implementing the Reading programPrior to Implementing the Reading program

Only 36 % of Third graders were meeting Only 36 % of Third graders were meeting Benchmark on DIBELS (Universal Benchmark on DIBELS (Universal Screener for RTI) in Spring of 2004 .Screener for RTI) in Spring of 2004 .

There were huge achievement gaps There were huge achievement gaps between our various demographic groups between our various demographic groups in some cases these gaps were as large in some cases these gaps were as large as 44%.as 44%.

What did Professional Development consist What did Professional Development consist of in Gering prior to 2004-2005of in Gering prior to 2004-2005

Staff attended a large variety of Staff attended a large variety of professional development activities based professional development activities based on brochures, trends, ESU offered on brochures, trends, ESU offered activities, tradition-i.e. Title I –International activities, tradition-i.e. Title I –International Reading Association conference in Denver Reading Association conference in Denver (IRA) and Kearney, etc. (IRA) and Kearney, etc.

Following the P.D. activity there was little if Following the P.D. activity there was little if any accountability to implement any accountability to implement information learned at these activitiesinformation learned at these activities

THEN WHAT ?THEN WHAT ?

Reading First and Direct Instruction Reading First and Direct Instruction Programs were used to Improve Programs were used to Improve

Reading AchievementReading Achievement

Reading First-Federal Grant used to fund the Reading First-Federal Grant used to fund the program. RF provided focused professional program. RF provided focused professional development and guidelines for utilizing development and guidelines for utilizing Scientifically Based Reading Research in Scientifically Based Reading Research in classrooms.classrooms.

Direct Instruction-Scientifically Research Direct Instruction-Scientifically Research Based Program that was implemented to Based Program that was implemented to address our district’s deficits in Reading at address our district’s deficits in Reading at the K-6 level.the K-6 level.

When ?When ?

K-6 Implementation TimelineK-6 Implementation Timeline

2004-2005 Grades K-32004-2005 Grades K-32005-2006 Grade 42005-2006 Grade 4

2006-2007 Grades 5-6 2006-2007 Grades 5-6 2007-2008 Sustain Grades K-62007-2008 Sustain Grades K-62008-2009 Sustain Grades K-62008-2009 Sustain Grades K-62009-2010 Sustain Grades K-62009-2010 Sustain Grades K-6

What changes have taken What changes have taken place during our five year place during our five year

journey of reform ?journey of reform ?

Role of LeadershipRole of Leadership

CurriculumCurriculum

Professional DevelopmentProfessional DevelopmentUse of Assessment DataUse of Assessment Data

Focused Professional Focused Professional DevelopmentDevelopment

MAJOR CHANGES: MAJOR CHANGES:

1)Professional development decisions are based on student data.1)Professional development decisions are based on student data.

2) Professional development training sessions are selected and 2) Professional development training sessions are selected and planned by leadership team, based on what teachers and planned by leadership team, based on what teachers and paraprofessionals need to implement the program with fidelity.paraprofessionals need to implement the program with fidelity.

3) The continuum for professional development support is 3) The continuum for professional development support is prescriptive and provided on both a group and individual basis prescriptive and provided on both a group and individual basis depending on the need. depending on the need.

What did these changes look What did these changes look like in our district?like in our district?

Our district selected a Scientifically Research Based program.Our district selected a Scientifically Research Based program.Increased funding: We spent more money on professional Increased funding: We spent more money on professional development than on materials.development than on materials.Increased Accountability Increased Accountability Increased Support for Professional Development at the building Increased Support for Professional Development at the building levellevelUtilized outside consultants: We provided high quality and on-Utilized outside consultants: We provided high quality and on-going professional development during the first 4 years of the going professional development during the first 4 years of the implementation (National Institute For Direct Instruction) implementation (National Institute For Direct Instruction) Screened all other P.D. opportunities for staff : We avoided Screened all other P.D. opportunities for staff : We avoided general P.D. sessions to limit confusion for our staff and help general P.D. sessions to limit confusion for our staff and help them maintain the focus necessary to implement our program them maintain the focus necessary to implement our program with fidelity.with fidelity.

What did these changes look What did these changes look like in our district? Continued:like in our district? Continued:

Evaluated the effectiveness of the Professional Development: Evaluated the effectiveness of the Professional Development: We utilized frequent observations and student data to evaluate We utilized frequent observations and student data to evaluate the effectiveness of the training we provide.the effectiveness of the training we provide.Developed capacity to sustain high quality on-going Developed capacity to sustain high quality on-going professional development within our district: We have 15 professional development within our district: We have 15 teachers and one paraprofessional that have successfully teachers and one paraprofessional that have successfully completed the week long trainer of trainers course in either completed the week long trainer of trainers course in either Eugene, OR or Lincoln, NE.Eugene, OR or Lincoln, NE.Collaborated with ESU 13 P.D. Staff to schedule trainers for Collaborated with ESU 13 P.D. Staff to schedule trainers for next year that will help support the sustainability of our next year that will help support the sustainability of our implementation.implementation.Provided our paraprofessionals the same level of training as Provided our paraprofessionals the same level of training as our teachers as they now play a critical role in our our teachers as they now play a critical role in our implementation.implementation.

What did these changes look What did these changes look like in our district? Continued:like in our district? Continued:

Principals serve in much more of an instructional leader role i.e. Principals serve in much more of an instructional leader role i.e. observations, teacher placement, data analysis, evaluator of observations, teacher placement, data analysis, evaluator of research, scheduling, building-wide rules to support academics research, scheduling, building-wide rules to support academics etc. (Principals will share some examples of role change)etc. (Principals will share some examples of role change)

District capacity and activities to sustain implementation: i.e. District capacity and activities to sustain implementation: i.e. weekly leadership meetings, weekly data review meetings, etc.weekly leadership meetings, weekly data review meetings, etc.

Possible Barriers To a Focused Possible Barriers To a Focused Professional Development PlanProfessional Development Plan

Ineffective programs: Not finding a scientifically research based Ineffective programs: Not finding a scientifically research based program that is going to guarantee results if implemented with program that is going to guarantee results if implemented with fidelity (Need to have a strong program)fidelity (Need to have a strong program)Difficulty finding highly qualified trainers that can provide initial and Difficulty finding highly qualified trainers that can provide initial and ongoing professional developmentongoing professional developmentUnwillingness to combine resources to support one program that Unwillingness to combine resources to support one program that focuses on improving student achievement focuses on improving student achievement Availability of so many competing professional development Availability of so many competing professional development trends that move through education and result in distractions to trends that move through education and result in distractions to teachersteachersMaintaining commitment to improving student achievement –Maintaining commitment to improving student achievement –Leadership that understands that this has to trump everything else Leadership that understands that this has to trump everything else Stakeholders being misinformed (staff, BOE, parents, community Stakeholders being misinformed (staff, BOE, parents, community members)members)Difficulty maintaining focus and enthusiasm needed to continue to Difficulty maintaining focus and enthusiasm needed to continue to implement your program with fidelity (Continuous training)implement your program with fidelity (Continuous training)

Three Components that are Three Components that are imperative to making this program imperative to making this program

work!work!

Principals that are prepared to be Principals that are prepared to be Instructional LeadersInstructional Leaders

Full-time Reading Coach in each buildingFull-time Reading Coach in each building

High quality and on-going professional High quality and on-going professional development (NIFDI).development (NIFDI).

Why does the Direct Instruction Why does the Direct Instruction program work?program work?

Teachers use scripted lessons to provide Teachers use scripted lessons to provide direct and explicit instructiondirect and explicit instruction

Students are homogeneously grouped Students are homogeneously grouped according to their instructional levelaccording to their instructional level

Students are taught to masteryStudents are taught to mastery

Only 10% of the information presented Only 10% of the information presented each day is new information each day is new information

Students are highly engagedStudents are highly engaged

Why does the Direct Instruction Why does the Direct Instruction program work?program work?

Frequent assessments are embedded into Frequent assessments are embedded into the program to check for learning and the program to check for learning and monitor student progressmonitor student progressGreat deal of skill practice and application Great deal of skill practice and application of those skills is built into the programof those skills is built into the programTeachers are very skilled at reinforcing Teachers are very skilled at reinforcing desired behaviors with specific praisedesired behaviors with specific praiseSpecific error correction procedures are Specific error correction procedures are built into the programbuilt into the program

What is our data telling us after 4 plus What is our data telling us after 4 plus years of implementation?years of implementation?

We are significantly reducing the percent of students reading We are significantly reducing the percent of students reading below grade level.below grade level.Students are improving their Fluency, Vocabulary, and Students are improving their Fluency, Vocabulary, and Comprehension skills.Comprehension skills.Gaps are closing between the performance of demographic Gaps are closing between the performance of demographic groups.groups.The longer students are in the program the greater the The longer students are in the program the greater the improvement in achievement.improvement in achievement.Students are improving their writing skills.Students are improving their writing skills.The program is very effective as an early intervention The program is very effective as an early intervention program (5 % below the state average for Special Education) program (5 % below the state average for Special Education) Lowest among the 25 largest districts in the state.Lowest among the 25 largest districts in the state.

Increasing Achievement for All Increasing Achievement for All StudentsStudents

K-6 DIBELSK-6 DIBELSImpact of Reading First/DI afterImpact of Reading First/DI after4 and 5 years of Implementation4 and 5 years of Implementation

DIBELS Spring of 2004 vs. Spring of 2008 /Spring 2009DIBELS Spring of 2004 vs. Spring of 2008 /Spring 2009 (District-Lincoln, Geil, Northfield) (District-Lincoln, Geil, Northfield)

Based on an average class size of 150 Gering has moved 231 students out of anBased on an average class size of 150 Gering has moved 231 students out of anat risk category for reading failure in the future in just 4 years and 266 students in just at risk category for reading failure in the future in just 4 years and 266 students in just

5 years!!5 years!!

8592

98

57

7884

51

7075

36

6972

44

71 77

62

7674

45

7677

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

K 1 2 3 4 5 6

Spring 2004

Spring 2008

Spring 2009

Per

cen

t at

Ben

chm

ark

(K=

NW

F/1

st-6

th=

OR

F)

GRADE

44thth GRADE Writing Assessment GRADE Writing AssessmentComparison of Nebraska 4Comparison of Nebraska 4thth grade student performance and grade student performance and Gering 4Gering 4thth grade student performance on 4 grade student performance on 4thth grade Statewide grade Statewide

Writing AssessmentWriting Assessment(% of students assessed: 2005=100%, 2006=99%, 2007=99%, 2008 =99%)(% of students assessed: 2005=100%, 2006=99%, 2007=99%, 2008 =99%)

57

8385

82

9286

95 91

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

2005 2006 2007 2008

Gering

Nebraska

Before Reading First(D.I. Reading Program)

After Reading First(D.I. Reading Program)Students had received 3 yrs. of RF instruction

Per

cent

of

stud

ents

sco

ring

prof

icie

nt

After Reading First(D.I. Reading Program)

Students had received 2 yrs. of RF instruction

After Reading First (D.I. Reading Program) Students had received 4 yrs. Of RF program

Gering Public SchoolsGering Public SchoolsDIBELS ORFDIBELS ORF

33rdrd Grade Grade

9

2824

21

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

150+

Spring 2004

Spring 2007

Spring 2008

Spring 2009

Correct Words Per Minute

Num

ber

of S

tude

nts

Gering Public SchoolsGering Public SchoolsDIBELS ORFDIBELS ORF

11stst Grade Grade

30

53

68 70

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

75+

Spring 2004

Spring 2007

Spring 2008

Spring 2009

Correct Words Per Minute

Num

ber

of S

tude

nts

Terra Nova Science and Social Studies Pre and Post RF Terra Nova Science and Social Studies Pre and Post RF Implementation Scores for 3Implementation Scores for 3rdrd and 4 and 4thth grade ( Five years of grade ( Five years of

data analyzed)data analyzed)

616.4 618.3

624

631.6

640.3

643.9642.2

646.5

600605610615620625630635640645650

3rdScience

3rd SocialStudies

4thScience

4th SocialStudies

PreRFPostRF

Media

n S

cale

d S

core

Terra Nova Reading Median Scale ScoreTerra Nova Reading Median Scale ScoreComparison of Scale Scores for students who received the Language Comparison of Scale Scores for students who received the Language Arts Direct Instruction program for 3 years vs. students who received Arts Direct Instruction program for 3 years vs. students who received

Gering’s Traditional Language Arts ProgramGering’s Traditional Language Arts ProgramClass of 2014 in 5Class of 2014 in 5thth grade vs. Class of 2008, 2009, 2010 in 7 grade vs. Class of 2008, 2009, 2010 in 7thth grade grade

666.5

662.4

660.7660.5

657

658

659

660

661

662

663

664

665

666

667

5th Grade 7th Grade

Class of 2014 (N=152)

Class of 2008 (N=140)

Class of 2009 (N=149)

Class of 2010 (N=143)

Med

ian

Sca

le S

core

Closing and Narrowing Closing and Narrowing Achievement GapsAchievement Gaps

Class of 2014Class of 2014Pre-Direct Instruction Program vs. Post Pre-Direct Instruction Program vs. Post

Direct InstructionDirect InstructionDIBELS DATA (ORF)DIBELS DATA (ORF)

36

59

68

77

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

2004 2008

HispanicWhite

-23 % GAPPre DI

-9% GAPPost 4 yrs. Of DI Instruction

Per

cent

Pro

ficie

nt

Gering Fourth GradeGering Fourth GradePre-Direct Instruction Program vs. Post Pre-Direct Instruction Program vs. Post

Direct Instruction ProgramDirect Instruction Program DIBELS DATA (ORF) DIBELS DATA (ORF)

33

52

6974

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

2004 2008

HispanicWhite

-19 % GAPPre DI

-5% GAPPost 4 yrs. Of DI Instruction

Per

cent

of

Stu

dent

s at

Ben

chm

ark

11stst - 5 - 5thth DIBELS ORF DIBELS ORFFree and Reduced Lunch StudentsFree and Reduced Lunch Students

Impact of Reading First/DI afterImpact of Reading First/DI after4/5 years of Implementation4/5 years of Implementation

DIBELS Spring of 2004 vs. Spring of 2008/2009 DIBELS Spring of 2004 vs. Spring of 2008/2009 (District-Lincoln, Geil, Northfield) (District-Lincoln, Geil, Northfield)

46

68 72

30

63

55

36

62 64

31

57

73

49

6865

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

1 2 3 4 5

Spring 2004

Spring 2008

Spring 2009

Per

cen

t o

f F

/R S

tud

ents

at

Ben

chm

ark

(1st-5

th=

OR

F)

GRADE

44thth GRADE State Writing Test GRADE State Writing TestComparison of Nebraska Hispanic student Comparison of Nebraska Hispanic student performance and Gering Hispanic student performance and Gering Hispanic student

performance on 4performance on 4thth grade Statewide Writing grade Statewide Writing AssessmentAssessment

39

7476

73

93

80

9388

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

2005 2006 2007 2008

Gering-Hispanic

Nebraska-Hispanic

Before Reading First(D.I. Reading Program)

After Reading First(D.I. Reading Program)Students had received 3 yrs. of RF instruction

Per

cent

of

stud

ents

sco

ring

prof

icie

nt

After Reading First(D.I. Reading Program)

Students had received 2 yrs. of RF instruction

After Reading First (D.I. Reading Program) Students had received 4 yrs. Of RF instruction

Closing the Achievement Gap in Gering Between Closing the Achievement Gap in Gering Between Hispanic and All Students on the State-Wide Hispanic and All Students on the State-Wide

Writing AssessmentWriting Assessment

83

39

9193

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

2005 2008

All StateHispanic Gering

-44% GAP +2% GAP

Per

cent

Pro

ficie

nt

Gering Second GradeGering Second GradePre-Direct Instruction Program vs. Post Pre-Direct Instruction Program vs. Post

Direct Instruction ProgramDirect Instruction ProgramDIBELS DATA (ORF)DIBELS DATA (ORF)

36

5967

71

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

2004 2008

HispanicWhite

-23 % GAPPre DI

-4% GAPPost 4 yrs. Of DI Instruction

Per

cent

Pro

ficie

nt

Terra Nova ReadingTerra Nova Reading Percent of students scoring above the 50 Percent of students scoring above the 50thth percentile percentile

Hispanic Students vs. White StudentsHispanic Students vs. White Students

Sixth GradeSixth Grade

22

62

53

70

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

2004 2008

HispanicWhite

Per

cent

of

Stu

dent

s sc

orin

g ab

ove

the

50th P

erce

ntile

40% GAPPre-DI program

17% GAPPost DI program

Kindergarten Phoneme Segmentation Fluency on the Kindergarten Phoneme Segmentation Fluency on the DIBELSDIBELSPre DI/Reading First scores vs. Post DI Reading First Pre DI/Reading First scores vs. Post DI Reading First Scores for our Hispanic and White student groupsScores for our Hispanic and White student groups

50

70 72 73

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Pre-DI/RF Post DI/RF

HispanicWhite

Per

cen

t of

stu

den

ts a

t b

ench

mar

k

Example of the closure of Achievement Gap between demographic Example of the closure of Achievement Gap between demographic groups on DIBELS (ORF) in 2groups on DIBELS (ORF) in 2ndnd grade grade23% gap has narrowed to a 4% gap23% gap has narrowed to a 4% gap

36

59

6771

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

2004 2008

Hispanic

White

Reducing the Number of Student in Reducing the Number of Student in Special EducationSpecial Education

Example of Geil ElementaryExample of Geil ElementaryChange in Special Education NumbersChange in Special Education NumbersComparing 2000-2001 t0 2008-2009Comparing 2000-2001 t0 2008-2009

These numbers do not represent students identified for speech services These numbers do not represent students identified for speech services only.only.

5

18

12

31

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

2000-20012008-2009

Num

ber

of S

tude

nts

Sped. Resource Sped. SLD

Example of Geil ElementaryExample of Geil ElementaryChange in Special Education PopulationChange in Special Education Population

Comparing 2000-2001 t0 2008-2009Comparing 2000-2001 t0 2008-2009

1.4

5.6

3.4

9.7

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

2000-20012008-2009

Per

cent

of S

tude

nts

Sped. Resource Sped. SLD

These percentages do not represent students identified for speech services only.

Example of Gering District Three Elementary BuildingsExample of Gering District Three Elementary BuildingsChange in Special Education PopulationChange in Special Education Population

Comparing 2001-2002 t0 2008-2009Comparing 2001-2002 t0 2008-2009

11

26

62

75

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

2001-20022008-2009

Num

ber

of S

tude

nts

Sped. Resource Sped. SLD

These numbers and percentages do not represent students identified for speech services only N=1,010

Example of Gering District Three Elementary BuildingsExample of Gering District Three Elementary BuildingsChange in Special Education PopulationChange in Special Education Population

Comparing 2001-2002 t0 2008-2009Comparing 2001-2002 t0 2008-2009

1.1

2.7

6

7.7

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

2001-20022008-2009

Per

cent

of S

tude

nts

Sped. Resource Sped. SLD

These numbers and percentages do not represent students identified for speech services only N=1,025 for 08-09/N= 962 for 01-02

GPS Classes That Received D.I. Reading*These students received the comprehensive Language Arts Direct Instruction

Program (Reading Mastery, Reasoning & Writing, and Spelling Mastery).** These students received only the Reading Mastery or Corrective Reading

portion of the DI Language Arts Program and it was used with approximately 80%-90% of the students at our Junior High School as part a comprehensive

School Reform Grant.

Class of 2008 None

Class of 2009 1 year as 9th** graders

Class of 2010 1 year as 8th** graders

Class of 2011 2 years as 7th** and 8th**

Class of 2012 2 years as 7th** and 8th**

Class of 2013 2 years as 6th* and 7th**

Class of 2014 4 years as 3rd-6th *

Class of 2015 5 years 2nd - 6th*

Class of 2016 6 years 1st - 6th*

Class of 2017 7 years as K - 6th *

Class of 2018 7 years as K - 6th *

Challenges Gering has faced with the implementation of Challenges Gering has faced with the implementation of a Scientifically Research Based program in an effort to a Scientifically Research Based program in an effort to

improve Reading Achievementimprove Reading Achievement

Keeping all stakeholders informed of the progress Keeping all stakeholders informed of the progress we have made towards the goal of Reading we have made towards the goal of Reading First /RTI(To improve Student Achievement)First /RTI(To improve Student Achievement)Some teacher resistance to accountability Some teacher resistance to accountability Keeping staff focused on student needs Keeping staff focused on student needs Dispelling rumors regarding the program that get Dispelling rumors regarding the program that get started in the communitystarted in the communityScreening professional development opportunities Screening professional development opportunities for staff for staff Desire of some staff wanting to go back to pre-Desire of some staff wanting to go back to pre-Reading First practicesReading First practices

What will it take for Gering Public Schools to sustain the implementation successfully?

Leadership focused on results for students

Continued district support

Continued focused professional development

Continued training for new staff members

Continued evaluation of program with data

What are the top ten reasons you would implement What are the top ten reasons you would implement a program with this much accountability?a program with this much accountability?

1.1. StudentsStudents2.2. StudentsStudents3.3. StudentsStudents4.4. StudentsStudents5.5. StudentsStudents6.6. StudentsStudents7.7. StudentsStudents8.8. StudentsStudents9.9. StudentsStudents10.10. StudentsStudents

QuestionsQuestions

Contact Information for PresentersContact Information for PresentersAndrea Boden Andrea Boden aboden2@unl.eduBev Hague bhague@geringschools.netBev Hague bhague@geringschools.netMary Kay Haun Mary Kay Haun mkhaun@geringschools.netDon Hague Don Hague dhague@geringschools.netdhague@geringschools.net

If you would like an electronic version of this presentation please If you would like an electronic version of this presentation please e-mail us.e-mail us.To view the Gering Video “Closing the Achievement Gap” go to To view the Gering Video “Closing the Achievement Gap” go to the National Institute For Direct Instruction websitethe National Institute For Direct Instruction website