the guam department of education (gdoe) is a single public ... · pdf filestudents by one...

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

BUDGET INFORMATION

NON-CONSTRUCTION PROGRAMS

OMB Control Number: 1894-0008

Expiration Date: 04/30/2014

Name of Institution/Organization

Guam Department of Education

Applicants requesting funding for only one year should complete the column under

"Project Year 1." Applicants requesting funding for multi-year grants should complete all

applicable columns. Please read all instructions before completing form.

SECTION A - BUDGET SUMMARY

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION FUNDS

Budget Categories Project Year 1

(a)

Project Year 2

(b)

Project Year 3

(c)

Project Year 4

(d)

Project Year 5

(e)

Total

(f)

1. Personnel 49,897.00 49,897.00

2. Fringe Benefits 18,576.01 18,576.01

3. Travel

4. Equipment 42,800.00 42,800.00

5. Supplies 118,992.50 118,992.50

6. Contractual 81,000.00 81,000.00

7. Construction

8. Other

9. Total Direct Costs (lines 1-8) 311,265.51 311,265.51

10. Indirect Costs* 1,701.49 1,701.49

11. Training Stipends

12. Total Costs (lines 9-11) $312,967.00 $312,967.00

*Indirect Cost Information (To Be Completed by Your Business Office):

If you are requesting reimbursement for indirect costs on line 10, please answer the following questions:

(1) Do you have an Indirect Cost Rate Agreement approved by the Federal government? _X___Yes ____ No

(2) If yes, please provide the following information:

Period Covered by the Indirect Cost Rate Agreement: From: _10/01/2008__ To: _09/30/2009__ (mm/dd/yyyy)

Approving Federal agency: ____ ED ____ Other (please specify): __________________________ The Indirect Cost Rate is __3.4____%

(3) For Restricted Rate Programs (check one) -- Are you using a restricted indirect cost rate that:

___ Is included in your approved Indirect Cost Rate Agreement? or ___ Complies with 34 CFR 76.564(c)(2)? The Restricted Indirect Cost Rate is _________%

ED 524

Part I. PROJECT ABSTRACT

The Guam Department of Education‘s (GDOE) Project "Na'fang gai Tiningo"

(indigenous Chamorro word meaning "To give knowledge, to enlighten, to learn") will focus on

the following three (3) goals:

1. To improve reading comprehension skills of all participating elementary and secondary

students by one grade level annually by providing them with additional interventions

and support through the district‘s current language literacy programs, the Home

Literacy Program, and Literacy Labs, paying particular attention to historically

underachieving student groups such as the socioeconomically disadvantaged, English

Language learners, and students with disabilities. GDOE will increase the cohort

graduation rate by at least 2% annually; and will reduce the proportion of students who

drop-out by at least 1% annually.

2. To provide a system of effective instruction and learning through comprehensive

professional development opportunities and training to; a) teachers in differentiated

instruction and best practices at all levels with an emphasis on students‘ instructional

needs and levels of language proficiency; b) Administrators to ensure that they have the

skills and knowledge necessary to support, monitor, and assess stated activities.

3. To provide support to ensure a seamless transition from one level of schooling to

another, the district will identify and assess the literacy skills of students transitioning

from one level of schooling to the next, specifically, students transitioning from Pre-K

to Kindergarten; Elementary (5th grade) to Middle (6th grade); Middle (8th grade) to

High School (9th grade) and 12th

grade students as they prepare to transition into post-

secondary education and/or careers. Historically underachieving students such as

socioeconomically disadvantaged backgrounds, English Language learners, and

students with disabilities will be monitored closely.

The immediate outcomes include the following: Increased reading, writing, and

comprehension skills for all students so to prepare all children for academic success; To prepare

secondary students with the tools necessary to succeed in college, careers, and in life; Increase

graduation rates; Decrease drop-out rates; To enhance and assess growth of teachers and students

appropriately throughout the process, To insure that methodologies, strategies and resources are

appropriate and meet the District‘s goals; to develop an instructional cohort program within

scheduled timelines, to collect appropriate data and information from various sources, and to

evaluate the programs regularly by having reliable tools and instruments. To use assessment

data and results to make informed decisions regarding the effectiveness of current literacy

program approaches and professional development strategies, and to identify and assess success

or challenges of transitioning students to ensure students are prepared for the next level of

schooling.

The GDOE employs a large number of professionals with varied educational

backgrounds and experience. This includes over 2,000 teachers and administrators in 41 schools.

Guam Department of Education - Project Na'fang gai Tiningo Striving Readers Comprehensive Literacy Grant - April 2011

of 66

The GDOE serves a student body with more than thirty-one thousand (31,000) students.

The need for professional development projects is necessary as turn-over rates for all content

area teachers are significantly high. Additionally, the limited pool of certified administrators and

teachers, low SAT10 scores, non-attainment of required academic skill levels and knowledge by

students, and high dropout rates are a few of the indicators driving the need for the GDOE‘s

proposed goals.

Although the GDOE‘s District Action Plan (DAP) continues to provide the necessary

assistance to improve, develop and sustain many GDOE programs, high levels of achievement in

the core academic subjects of literature are still areas of needed growth. The DAP will continue

to support students in meeting the challenges of standards and curriculum development.

The road to success for Reading and Language Arts teachers and parents alike are riddled

with many obstacles. Some of these are attributed to external forces, specifically a shortage of

monetary funding for textbooks and instructional resources, certified teachers or teachers without

strong content knowledge, and inadequate central office support.

Linda Darling-Hammond states, ―At effective schools, students are expected to meet

similar academic expectations and learn similar habits of mind in each class they take, and the

school community as a whole has a solid sense of what students should know and be able to do

by the time they graduate. Joint curricular planning also enables the curriculum to ―add up‖ – to

build ideas from one course to another and from one year to the next. This also enables more

powerful learning than can be achieved with a fragmented, disconnected course of study that

leaves students with gaps, holes, and misunderstandings as they try to put the pieces together by

themselves.‖ (2002)

In the same token, this grant will help in continuing to bridge the gap between student

learning, teacher quality training, and pedagogy, and using data to drive decisions within the

district. Thus, allowing the school community as a whole to envision a school district with high

quality academic achievement standards and expectations, and aggressive goals and objectives

that meet the needs of all Guam public school students for decades to come.


of 66

Part II. PROJECT NARRATIVE

A. Project Need

Guam History and Facts

Guam is an unincorporated territory governed through the Organic Act of Guam, which

the United States (U.S.) Congress passed in 1950 as its governing instrument and as federal law.

After the passage of the Organic Act of Guam, people living on Guam at the time (including

indigenous Chamorros living abroad) were automatically given United States citizenship. Those

who came afterward and continue to immigrate to Guam (foreigners from other countries) are

required to earn their residency status through rigorous U.S. Immigration and Naturalization

processes and procedures. Guamanian and Indigenous Chamorro Americans living on Guam

have a non-voting representative in the US Congress. However, Guamanian Americans are

unable to vote for president and do not pay federal income taxes as residents of Guam.

Guam is located in the Western Pacific between Hawaii and Asia, and is the westernmost

territory of the United States. Although 212 square miles in size, Guam is nonetheless

considered to be the trade and communications hub of the Western Pacific. Guam is seven hours

travel time by plane to Hawaii and approximately three hours southeast to Japan.

Since the first Compact of Free Association (CFA) between the US and the Federated

States of Micronesia (FSM) in 1986, Guam has welcomed a significant number of citizens from

the Freely Associated States (FAS), specifically from the Micronesian islands of Chuuk,

Pohnpei, Yap, Kosrae, and the Marshalls.

The CFA has had a tremendous impact on Guam‘s educational, social, and economic

conditions in terms of the expenditure of government resources and assistance. The high influx

of FSM citizens to Guam has posed financial challenges throughout the Government of Guam,


of 66

particularly on public education. This is readily seen in the rapid and steady growth of identified

English as a Second Language (ESL) students, of which FSM English Language Learners

(ELLs) make up 96%. Many FSM citizens continue to benefit from higher standards of living,

education and training, and have contributed greatly to the needed workforce on Guam.

The total population of Guam as stated in the U.S. Census Report taken in 2000 is

approximately 154,000 people, from various multi-ethnic, multi-lingual, and multi-cultural

communities. Guam‘s demographic community is comprised of 37% indigenous Chamorro,

26% Filipino, 7% representing the Freely Associated States (Federated States of Micronesia,

Republic of Palau, and the Republic of Marshall Islands), 6% representing nearby Asian

countries, 10% other ethnic backgrounds and 14% representing two or more ethnic groups. In

addition, the 2000 U.S. Census reports that 15% of Guam‘s population speaks a primary

language other than English, and that 64% speak primarily English and another language at

home.

Guam’s Educational System

The Guam Department of Education (GDOE) is a single public school district in its

region serving as the State Education Agency (SEA) and Local Education Agency (LEA).

GDOE is responsible for the education of approximately 31,000 students from Early

Intervention, Special Education Preschool, Gifted and Talented preschool, and Head Start

through the 12th

grade in 27 elementary schools, 8 middle schools, 5 high schools, and 1

secondary alternative program. GDOE is the largest school district in the Western Pacific and

has, in many respects, served as a model for other school districts within the region despite its

remote location. The following Tables reflect the populations for the GDOE as well as special

program populations, including Preschool (Early intervention, Special Education Preschool, and


of 66

Gifted and Talented preschool, Head Start), English as a Second Language, and Special

Education programs for SY 2007-2008, SY 2008-2009 and SY 2009-2010.

Table 1

(Source: Guam Department of Education Research, Planning, and Evaluation Division)

Table 2

(Source: Guam English as a Second Language Program)

0

2000

4000

6000

8000

10000

12000

14000

Elementary Middle High Alternative School

13851

6845

9633

341

13633

6884

9671

361

13851

6845

9633

341

GDOE Student Enrollment

SY08-09 SY09-10 SY10-11

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

Elementary Middle High

6363

3270

4186

5702

2912

4000

5745

2675 2606

English as a Second Language (ESL) Enrollment

SY08-09 SY10-11 SY09-10


of 66

Table 3

(Source: Guam Special Education Division)

Table 4

(Source: Guam Head Start Division and the Special Education Division)

There are approximately 13,800 students in K-5th

(44.5%), 16,660 students in grades 6th

through 12th

(53.7%), and 500 students in the Head Start program (1.7%). The eligibility

criterion for Head Start enrollment includes age and incomer (below poverty guidelines) and

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Elementary Middle High

SY08-09

723

SY08-09

511

SY08-09

955

SY09-10

696

SY09-10

464

SY09-10

754

SY10-11

827

SY10-11

487

SY10-11

648

Special Education (SpEd) Enrollment

201 182 165 167 160 171

126 126 126

500 500 534

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

SY08-09 SY09-10 SY10-11

Pre-School Population

Ages 3-5 GEIS Pre-School GATE Head Start


of 66

additional selective factors such as a history of family violence and child abuse, substance abuse

and homelessness. As of February 1, 2011, there are 75 children ages 3 – 5 with a certified

disability, of which currently 54 children (85%) are attending Head Start. Currently, 43 of the

above 75 children are age eligible for next year‘s Head Start Program.

The Western Association of Schools and Colleges (WASC) granted accreditation status

to all five of Guam‘s public high schools, and many of the middle and elementary public schools.

In spite of their progressive accreditation standing, GDOE remains challenged by low student

achievement scores, high dropout rates, low graduation rates, and ineffective recruiting,

development, and retention of high quality teachers and school administrators. These challenges,

however, do not appear to be unique on Guam and exist throughout the continental United

States. Nonetheless, given Guam‘s remote geographic location and limited funding sources,

reaching national standards expected for all Americans has been more difficult and challenging

for Guam students, teachers, and parents.

In March 2008, the Guam Education Policy Board (GEPB) adopted the District Action

Plan (DAP) to improve student achievement in Reading, Language Arts, and Mathematics. The

DAP addresses specific target areas of development including Standards and Assessments and

Personnel Quality and Accountability. The goal of increasing student achievement as articulated

in the DAP is monitored and adjusted annually by GDOE. The GEPB works closely with GDOE

administrators to evaluate a number of school performance indicators. The performance

indicators are reported annually in the Superintendent‘s State of Education Report, in the District

Report Card, and the Individual School Report Card for each of GDOE‘ public schools.


of 66

State Assessment Data

Of the performance indicators specifically required by Public Law 26-26, approximately

70% consist of student achievement performance indicators in Reading, Language Arts, and

Mathematics. Student achievement is measured by the district‘s state-wide assessment tool, the

Stanford Achievement Test 10th

Edition (SAT10). Student scores are reported as SAT10

performance levels (Below Basic, Basic, Proficient, and Advanced), SAT10 percentile scores,

and SAT10 mean scaled scores. This test is given annually in the spring to grades 1st through 12

th

and assesses students‘ achievement in a wide range of content knowledge in the areas of

Language Arts, Reading, Math, Science, Social Science and Spelling. Student scores are then

compared to a nationally sampled group of students called a ―norm group‖ that is representative

of the country and who took the test at the same time of the year.

The SAT10 provides the District with diverse scores for different interpretive purposes.

However, the primary score that is used by the Department is the Students‘ Performance Level

which classifies a student as scoring in the Below Basic (Level 1), Basic (Level 2), Proficient

(Level 3) or Advanced (Level 4) categories. Our goals are to increase the number, as denoted by

a percentage, of students who score in the Proficient (3) and Advanced (4) categories. These

categories indicate a solid mastery of the content material and indicate that the student is

prepared for the next grade.

Over the last three years at the three main levels of schooling, elementary, middle and

high, our district has only had a small number of students perform at the Proficient and

Advanced levels of the SAT10. Though the data show some increases in the number of students

achieving at these categories at different times, the percentage of students remains low in the

areas of Reading, Language Arts and Math. The following tables reflects the percentage of


of 66

students in each grade, that scored in Below Basic (1), Basic (2)Proficient (3) and Advanced (4)

categories for SY 2007-2008, SY 2008-2009 and SY 2009-2010 in the areas of Reading and

Language Arts.

Table 5


Table 6


41

80 82 81

89

48

81 86 83

90

44

87 89 83

92

59

20 18 19 11

52

19 14 17

10

56

13 11 17

8 0

20

40

60

80

100

Grades: 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th

Reading Levels 1st to 5th

Level 1/2, SY 07-08 Levels 1/2, SY 08-09 Level 1/2, SY 09-10

Level 3/4, SY 07-08 Level 3/4, SY 08-09 Level 3/4, SY 09-10%

91 97

89 84 87

92 97

90 86 87

73

93 89 89 90

9 3

11 16 13

8 3

10 14 13

27

7 11 11 10

0

20

40

60

80

100

Grades: 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th

Language Levels: 1st to 5th

Level 1/2, SY 07-08 Level 1/2, SY 08-09 Level 1/2, SY 09-10



of 66

Table 5 reflects the Reading levels for the elementary grades, within the last three years,

over half of our students in the 1st grade perform at the proficient and advanced levels in Reading

with a high of 59% during SY 2007-2008 but experience a sharp drop to as low as 13% in the

second grade during SY 2009-2010. The percentage of students remain low throughout the

elementary years with the highest percentage being 20% in the second grade in SY 2007-2008

and the lowest being 8% in the fifth grade during SY 2009-2010.

Table 6 reflects the Language Arts levels in the elementary grades; numbers start off low

during first grade with the exception of SY 2009-2010 where 27% of our students met the

standard (proficient and advanced). All other years, all of the other elementary grades remained

low with the highest percentage peaking at 16% and the lowest percentage being 3% in the

second grade during SY 2007-2008 and SY 2008-2009.

Table 7


89

88

83

91

93

90

87

87

87

84

91

91

93

86

87

86

82

85

89

88

88

11 12 17

9 7 10 13 13 13 16

9 9 7 14 13 14 18

15 11 12 12

0

20

40

60

80

100

Grades: 6th 7th 8th 9th 10th 11th 12th

Reading Levels: 6th to 12th



%


of 66

Table 8


Table 7 reflects the data for the middle grades in both Reading and Language Arts, the

percentage of students meeting the standards of proficient and advanced remain in range of 11%

to 18% in all grades for the last three years. This indicates that only a small percentage of our

students are consistently prepared for the next grade as measured by the SAT10.

Table 8 reflects the data for the high schools; the percentages of students decrease further

for both reading and language arts with the range for all grades being consistently high at15%

and a low of 3%. In the 12th

grade, though there is an obvious increase in the percentage of

students who meet the standard with jumps to double digits in all three years, in many

discussions, this increase has been attributed to the sharp decrease in the student population at

the 11th

and 12th

grades as well as in the percentage of students who take the test. On Guam, the

legal age to drop out is 16.

It is important to note that multiple factors contribute to low student achievement. The

data further supports the need for effective instructional literacy approaches and strategies, and

89

88

87

95

97

96

84

87

88

86

95

95

96

93

89

85

85

92

96

91

90

11 12 13 5 3 4 16 13 12 14 5 5 4 7 11 15 15 8 4 9 10 0

20

40

60

80

100

Grades: 6th 7th 8th 9th 10th 11th 12th

Language Levels: 6th to 12th




of 66

valid and reliable classroom assessment instruments that teachers can use throughout the school

year. There is also a great need to providing professional development for collecting and using

data to improve learning.

Literacy Program Specific Assessment Data

Direct Instruction: Reading and Language Benchmarks

The Direct Instruction (DI) program reports student progress through the student

benchmark report which identifies the percentage of students who reach or achieve a certain

standard through the course of the year. Table 9 below shows the benchmark information for all

students in the DI program for the first and fourth quarters of SY 2008-2009 and SY 2009-2010

for both Reading and Language Arts for 11 participating schools. Though in every grade level

between the first and fourth quarters there are notable gains in the percentage of students

reaching benchmark.

Table 9


With Language Arts, though we start off in Kindergarten with a high percentage of

students at program benchmarks, we see a sharp decline in those numbers during first, then

Kinder 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th Total

SY08-09 Reading 1st Qt. 19% 34% 33% 33% 33% 33% 31%

SY08-09 Reading 4th Qt. 29% 27% 25% 25% 33% 34% 29%

SY09-10 Reading 1st Qt. 34% 29% 26% 29% 38% 48% 34%

SY09-10 Reading 4th Qt. 47% 39% 43% 37% 46% 50% 44%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

Per

cen

tag

e

Direct Instruction


of 66

second and then finally with third, fourth and fifth grades having no students reaching

benchmarks. This shows that we have serious problems with being able to keep students

progressing at the required pace to maintain the benchmark status that was achieved in their early

years.

Success for All: Reading and Language Assessment

For SY 2009-2010, the Success for All Program focused its data collection efforts on

student reading levels and tracked the percentage of students who were reading at or above grade

level for each quarter. Table 10 below denotes the percentage of student reading at or above

grade level for each quarter by grade. As you will see, in a comparison between students‘ initial

performance on their reading assessment and their performance during their 4th

quarter each

grade level showed a substantial increase in the percentage of students reading at grade level.

The biggest gains were in the first grade which began the year with 42% of their students and

ended with 62%. The second biggest gain was in third grade which started at 28% of their

students reading at grade level and ending with 46%.

Table 10


Initial 1st Quarter 2nd Quarter 3rd Quarter 4th Quarter

1st Grade 42% 58% 56% 57% 62%

2nd Grade 35% 57% 48% 58% 44%

3rd Grade 28% 44% 38% 55% 46%

4th Grade 35% 45% 43% 49% 47%

5th Grade 45% 56% 53% 65% 58%

Total Overall 36% 52% 47% 57% 51%

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%

Per

cen

tag

e

Success for All


of 66

Student Behavior Data

GDOE is also mandated to report dropout rates annually. GDOE‘s dropout rate fluctuated

over the last three years; the table below reflects the trend. In SY 2007-2008, the dropout rates

was reported at 7%, a decrease to 6.1% in SY 2008-2009, and slight increase of 6.4%in SY

2009-2010. However, in comparison to the national average, specifically with districts of the

same population, dropout rates range from a low of 2.3% to a high of 10.9%, Guam‘s dropout

rate is significantly high.

Table 11


Table 12


7.0% 6.1% 6.4%

0.0%

10.0%

Percentage %

Annual Drop Out Rates

SY 07-08

SY 08-09

SY 09-10

64.8% 67.6% 76.7%

0.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

70.0%

80.0%

Percentage %

Cohort Graduation Rates

SY 07-08

SY 08-09

SY 09-10


of 66

Over the past three years, the graduation rate has increased from 64.8% in SY 2007-2008

to 76.7% in SY 2009-2010. However, the cohort graduation rate is significantly affected by the

dropout rate. The table below reflects the trend; in SY 2007-2008, the dropout rate was 72%, in

SY 2008-2009, it was recorded at 68%, and 61% in SY 2009-2010. Results support the need to

focus on increasing instructional support and improving instructional strategies in the secondary

grades to further decrease dropout rates and increase graduation rates.

B. Literacy Programs

The Guam Department of Education (GDOE) is currently implementing two

scientifically-based research literacy programs, in the elementary schools; 10 elementary schools

that will be utilizing the Success for All (SFA), and 11 will be utilizing the Direct Instruction

(DI) programs. The historically low student performance as indicated by SAT10 scores and low

graduation rates have prompted GDOE to implement these alternate literacy programs for the

next five years beginning in SY 2009-2010 and ending in SY 2013-2014.

The rationale behind the district‘s decision to provide schools, teachers, students, and

parents with literacy program options is in response to a public outcry that certain programs

work best within specific communities and around certain teaching styles and philosophies,

shifting away from the idea of ―one size fits all‖ and that blanket curriculums are best; and as a

result of persistent failure of students meeting high standards for learning when compared to the

national average. As a result of the diverse cultural and educational characteristics within

Guam‘s public school, it is imperative that the three literacy program‘s methods and strategies

for student learning, teaching, and school management are founded on scientifically-based

research and effective practices, but have been replicated successfully in schools with diverse

characteristics.


of 66

The DI program is presently in its 8th

year of implementation, and the SFA program is in

its 2nd

year of implementation across 10 participating schools. In an effort to address literacy

challenges in the secondary grades, increase student achievement, raise graduation rates, and

decrease dropout rates, a scientifically-based research literacy program, Johns Hopkins Talent

Development, will be piloted in 1 middle school and 1 high school in SY 2011-2012.

The intention behind the implementation of these scientifically research –based models

was to help schools to integrate programs while allowing flexibility and enhancing accountability

for student learning, and provides both a framework to enable schools to change their

organization and practices so all students can achieve high standards. Its unique aspect was the

expectation that schools would collaborate with expert partners to implement whole-school

reform models that had a strong research base and a successful replication record.

The DI, SFA, and JHTD literacy programs are highly structured, data driven,

scientifically validated programs shown to work through rigorous scientific experimentation.

Student performance is tracked, monitored, and assessed regularly to identify students falling

behind or need extra-help. The JHTD program also tracks student behaviors and provides the

schools with the tools needed to adequately address behavioral challenges.

The literacy programs will help to close the achievement gap between the lowest-

achieving students and their grade level classmates before that gap becomes too great to bridge

through a carefully designed and structured teaching and learning activities. Research shows that

phonemic awareness is the most powerful predictor of success in beginning reading, and for

most children, a necessary prerequisite for learning to read. In fact, children who do not develop

phonemic awareness do not go on to learn how to read. A balanced approach combining

language and literature-rich activities develops proficiency in reading. These programs turn


of 66

frustrated, struggling children into confident readers who feel successful early in their school

lives.

Birth to Pre-School Programs

Early Intervention Program:

The Guam Part C (GEIS) and Part B (ECSE), we are required by the US Office of

Special Education Program to demonstrate improvements in the following developmental areas:

A. Positive social-emotional skill (including social relationships);

B. Acquisition and use of knowledge and skills (including early

language/communication and early literacy); and

C. Use of appropriate behaviors to meet their needs.

The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) is a law ensuring services to

children with disabilities throughout the nation. IDEA governs how states and public agencies

provide early intervention, special education and related services to more than 6.5 million

eligible infants, toddlers, children and youth with disabilities.

Infants and toddlers with disabilities (birth-2) and their families receive early intervention

services under IDEA Part C. Children and youth (ages 3-21) receive special education and

related services under IDEA Part B.

Under the Part C of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act of

2004, GDOE receives funds to make early intervention services available for infants and toddlers

with disabilities, birth through two, and their families. The purpose of Part C is to enhance the

development of infants and toddlers with disabilities to minimize their potential for development

delays, and to recognize the significant brain development that occurs during the child‘s first 3

years of life; To reduce the education cost by minimizing the need for special education and

related services after infants and toddlers with disabilities reach school age and maximize the

potential to live independently in society.


of 66

Other purposes of Part C is to enhance the capacity of families to meet the special needs

of their infants and toddlers with disabilities and to enhance the capacity of State and local

agencies and service providers to identify, evaluate and meet the needs of all children. The

Guam Early Intervention System supports the full inclusion of infants and toddlers with or at-risk

for development delays and their families.

Pre-School Gifted and Talented Education:

The literacy program we engulf is The Whole Literature Approach where stories that are

read are tied into the project or unit they are working on. Students have story time daily and

reading parties that allow the students to select story books and look and share with the other

students. The students also write their own stories by telling their instructors a story that the

instructor writes down as they tell it. Reading their stories back at them is always fun and often

becomes the center of attention. The only problem is getting enough books for our students.

They are eager to learn therefore we try to supply real life books such as animals and science.

Many of our students read already and this program helps them be able to expand their own

knowledge. Working on the computer is another way we promote literacy by allowing the

students to illustrate their stories in book form, and to research about subjects they are interested

in. Some preschool classes have created their own dictionaries for the classroom with words

they have learned throughout the year.

Head Start Programs:

The GDOE Head Start Program, the Special Education Preschool (Gifted and Talented

Pre-School) program, the military, and many private childcares utilize the scientifically evidence

based Creative Curriculum.

Head Start keeps current with training and implements new modules as they are updated.

To familiarize/ transition Head Start students with Kindergarten, the program includes time in a


of 66

kindergarten classroom following a kindergarten reading lesson. In addition, the Head Start

program provides information well as discusses the Kindergarten curriculum with Head Start

parents to ensure a smooth transition into the next level of schooling. More importantly, Head

Start‘s curriculum aligns with the District‘s Kindergarten content standards and Guam‘s Early

Learning guidelines to ensure students are prepared for Kindergarten.

Head Start works with parents in the home as well as in the classroom and encourages

parents to volunteer in the classrooms Parents participate in parent groups and the Head Start

policy council, and make decisions on our budget and policies with joint decision making with

the board. During parent conferences, parents are provided Head Start mandated training that

includes child abuse, safety, and other relative transition and literacy activity information. In the

reporting of children‘s progress, there are 4 levels of developmental progress. Forerunner

identifies children who are not yet at the initial level of typical preschool development but show

the beginning evidence of developing the skill. Step I approximates a beginning level of typical

preschool development. Steps II and III represent higher levels in acquiring these skills.

Table 14

(Source: Guam Head Start Program)

Guam Head Start Program

Creative Curriculum

Overall Progress

SY 2009-2010


of 66

The table above indicates that 21% of the students entered in the fall were in the

Forerunner stage of development, 64% at Step I, 14% at Step II, and 1% at Step III. However,

through the Creative Curriculum program these students exited the program at 3% for

Forerunner, 11% at Step I, 53% at Step II, and 33% at Step III. This indicates that the students

are able to exit the program with a significant increase in levels.

Elementary School – Kindergarten to 5th

Grade

Direct Instruction:

Implementation in the elementary schools consists of Reading for 90 minutes a day;

Language for 60 minutes a day; and Math for 60 minutes a day. The primary goal of DI is to

accelerate at-risk students' learning in the elementary grades and equip them to compete with

their more advantaged peers (Engelmann et al., 1988). Direct Instruction aims not only to

increase the amount of learning, but also its quality by systematically developing important

background knowledge and applying and linking it to new knowledge (Block, et al., 1995).

The DI method teaches children increasingly complex skills and strategies by breaking

them down into small component skills that are taught one by one. The skill is taught so that

students fully understand it. Each skill is then practiced until it is completely mastered. In this

way, students learn to generalize and apply strategies that have been taught. The result for

students is not only the ability to apply their information, skills, and strategies in real-life

situations, but greater confidence in their own ability to learn. DI is highly focused, and provides

efficient lessons that will bring all children--even the lowest performing--to the level of

mastering essential skills.

Organization of instruction centers on (a) instructional grouping (using flexible skill

grouping as compared to "tracking"); (b) instructional time (increasing academic learning time—

the time students are engaged with high success rates); and (c) continuous assessment (providing


of 66

ongoing in-program assessments to inform instructional practice).

DI literacy program includes: Reading Mastery, Reading Mastery Plus; Writing includes

Basic Writing Skills, Expressive Writing, Reasoning and Writing, and Cursive Writing); Spelling

includes, Spelling Mastery; and Language includes Language for Learning, Language for

Thinking. In SY 2011-2012 the DI Spoken English (DISE) Program will be implemented within

the participating schools, this program will specifically target English Language learners with

limited English proficiency.

Guiding principles of DI include every child can learn if we teach him or her carefully

and all teachers can be successful when given effective programs and instructional delivery

techniques. Thus, ultimately it is the teacher who is responsible for student learning; students are

not blamed for their failure to learn (Marchand-Martella, N., et al., 2005).

The program structure and design requires close supervision of program implementation,

weekly testing and regrouping based on student progress by the DI School Site Reading

Coordinators, Peer Coaches. Regular analysis of individual student performance in the three

content areas of Reading, Math, and Language Arts, classroom observations, training, teacher

mentoring, and coaching needs are also elevated to ensure teacher and student mastery.

The alarming number of at-risk students (Level 1, Level 2, English Language Learners,

and Special Education students) within the schools requires close supervision of program

implementation. Results of weekly testing of students are used to determine if students are on-

track, are falling behind require regrouping and/or lesson modifications; this is necessary to

ensure that placement aligns with individual academic performance. The amount of program

intervention/instruction is dependent on the performance of the students. Regular analysis of

individual student performance in Reading and Language Arts, classroom observations, training,


of 66

teacher mentoring, and coaching needs are also elevated to ensure teacher and student mastery.

It also allows Coordinators to identify needs areas for teachers so to address each appropriately.

The evaluation model of the DI program utilizes specific assessments that will be used to

track and inform teachers of student progress in terms of their achievement. The percentage of

student who are on benchmark is tracked along with student Lesson Progress which monitors

that pace at which lessons are completed and Student Mastery, which monitors the percentage of

students who master the skills for each lesson.

The school leadership designs professional development opportunities that would help

teachers meet student needs. For example, teachers are taught to routinely use student assessment

data to identify students who may be in need of remedial help and decide on an appropriate

intervention or strategy that could be used to help that student better comprehend the material.

Success for All:

The Success for All (SFA) program parallels the instructional minutes as stated in the

GDOE Board Policy 346: 600 weekly minutes for Language/Reading component and 250

weekly minutes for Math. Students are homogenously grouped based on Reading levels while

the Math and Language components will be done in the homeroom classrooms.

The SFA program uses a homogeneous grouping structure based on quarterly assessment

data to place students based at reading level, rather than at grade level. Each quarter Reading

Roots students (reading at a first grade level) take the Roots assessment which allows teachers to

evaluate progress toward specific grade-level targets. Reading Wings students (reading at a

second grade level and above) take another form of assessment that provides Lexile and grade

level reading data. Many SFA schools use the Scholastic Reading Inventory (SRI). Teachers are

provided results from the quarterly assessment summary, which provides teachers with a picture

of each student‘s progress, so students can be appropriately grouped based on the Reading levels.


of 66

The SFA Writing program ensures student writing progress on specific measures through

the Writing Challenges built into each unit. Following a group of units centered on a type of

writing, students participate in a Writing Challenge where written timed response to a prompt as

practice for state assessments. Rubrics are provided to teachers and students, so all can prepare

for and review mastery of the Writing Challenge and target specific areas for improvement.

Additionally, each of these programs is based in the following instructional strategies,

thus creating consistency not only within the classroom but also across classrooms and

disciplines:

The effects of cooperative learning identify the following characteristics that students

will learn in cooperative settings:

Higher achievement

Increased retention of information

More positive heterogeneous relationships

Greater intrinsic motivation

Higher self-esteem

More on-task behavior

Improved attitudes toward teachers

Improved attitudes toward school

Because of the success of cooperative learning strategies on student motivation, engagement, and

achievement, every SFA curriculum depends upon student interaction to facilitate learning.

Through SFA‘s cooperative learning structures students work together to learn and are also

responsible for their teammates‘ learning.

The SFA Tutoring program is an integral part of the programs SFA overall

design. Teacher Assistants play a critical role in supporting program implementation in the

classroom. These tutors work to assist the teachers in the morning during the 90 minute reading

block often supervising small groups or assisting students who may need individual help. After

the reading block, the tutors work with approximately 7 to 8 students, on a one-to-one basis, who


of 66

are not reading on grade level and are in need of special assistance to catch up with their peers.

Tutors are trained and work with the Site Facilitators to develop a tutoring plan for each student

under their care. Tutoring is done on a one-to-one basis throughout the day for approximately 20

minutes for each student. Student progress is monitored and interventions may be indentified and

incorporated into the tutoring sessions if necessary.

As a result of the high accountability expectations for schools, teachers, and program

personnel, the current intricate support structure is essential to ensure that teachers are teaching

the program effectively and efficiently, and more importantly, ensure expected levels of students

achievement is realized. Quarterly analysis of individual student performance in Reading and

Language Arts, classroom observations, teacher training are also elevated to ensure teachers and

students succeed.

The SFA program encourages parent engagement through the Read and Respond

Program (RRP) where parents will focus attention on helping children with their schoolwork and

encouraging reading at home.

Secondary School – 6th

to 12th

Grade

Johns Hopkins Talent Development:

Recognizing the critical need to support literacy interventions in the upper grades, in

SY2011-2012, 1 middle school and 1 high school will pilot the Johns Hopkins Talent

Development (JHTD) program. The JHTD program was specifically designed to target

instructional and behavioral support in the secondary grades. Providing scientifically research-

based literacy program in the secondary grades will help to foster reading, writing, speaking, and

critical thinking skills of secondary students, and will promote the district‘s goal to effectively

prepare students for success in college, careers, and life.


of 66

The Talent Development Model has a proven track record of increasing student

achievement through teacher learning. For example, the National Staff Council, in their

forthcoming Consumer Guide, identifies Talent Development‘s Student Team Literature

Program as one of just seven staff development efforts in the area of language arts that has

demonstrably improved Teacher effectiveness and student achievement in the middle grades.

Through the implementation of the JHTD, participating schools will improve student

learning and instruction through an integrated set of standards-based instructional materials,

effective instructional practices, assessments, and performance standards along with focused and

sustained staff development and in-classroom implementation support for each subject area.

These changes will provide all students with a strong opportunity to learn.

The professional development offered in each of the major subject areas combined with

follow-up curriculum coaching and implementation support makes it possible for teachers to

become skilled in instructional approaches that focus on teaching for understanding, peer

assisted learning, explicit mechanisms for providing students with essential background

knowledge, developing meta-cognitive strategies, and strategies and materials which engage

students in an active way with questions that provoke higher order thinking skills. The TD

models provide the curriculum, professional development, coaching, implementation support,

capacity building, and structural and organizational reforms needed to spread excellence in

teaching to every class in every major subject at every grade level.

The Talent Development Middle Grades

The Talent Development Middle Grades core Reading/English/Language Arts (TD-

RELA) curriculum includes Student Team Literature, Talent Development Writing, plus an


of 66

extra-help program called Computer-and Team-Assisted Reading Acceleration that provides

additional instruction and reading opportunities for struggling students.

The TD-RELA program represents a coherent research- and standards-based approach to

developing the literacy of older students. The program teaches effective reading strategies and

operations, extends reading comprehension skills, develops fluency in reading and writing,

systematically adds important words to students/ working vocabulary, and builds basic language

skills and higher-order thinking, literary analysis, and writing skills. One distinction of this

approach is its integrated nature. Skills are not taught in isolation. All objectives in

Reading/English/Language Arts are taught through reading, studying, discussing, and responding

to high-quality, high-interest books.

The TD-RELA program includes a wide variety of curricular materials that support

teachers‘ use of effective instructional practices, engaging and varied learning activities and

assessments, and students‘ use of effective peer assistance processes.

Students who need extra help in Reading attend a ten-week accelerated learning class (in

addition to their regular reading classes) that uses cooperative groups and computers (literacy

labs) to provide intensive learning experiences. Students needing extra help to meet high

standards have responded enthusiastically to these ―extra dose‖ classes even though the students

miss an elective class for ten weeks in order to participate. These extra-dose classes provide

students with the opportunity to master the material.

The Talent Development High School

The curriculum and other components of the Talent Development High School (TD-High

School) program selected include:

Ninth Grade Success Academy

Career Academies for the Upper Grades


of 66

Common Core Curriculum

These components are implemented into the program at later dates after the program has

been stabilized and implemented with fidelity. These too are proven reform program activities

that have been shown to increase student achievement and create positive school climates.

Because ninth graders undergo difficult transition from middle school to high school,

schools need to ease the transition to high school. A strong Ninth Grade Success Academy

would provide this transition, preparing students academically and socially for the rigors of high

school and college. The Ninth Grade Success Academy is a self-contained school-within-a-

school organized around interdisciplinary teams designed to provide incoming ninth graders with

a smooth transition into high school. Courses ninth graders will be exposed to our Strategic

Reading, Student Team Literature and TD Writing, Transition to Advanced Mathematics, and

Freshman Seminar.

A significant number of adolescents enter high school with reading deficits that lead to

academic failure and emotional roadblocks. These challenges diminish the adolescent reader‘s

chances of becoming active learners. Many of these adolescents, who are not equipped to engage

with high school level reading and writing, lack motivation and at the same time, are struggling

to successfully complete increasingly complex core English requirements. There are a variety of

reasons why struggling readers experience difficulty with text-related activities. Typically, the

challenged adolescent reader can read the text but lacks the comprehension skills to understand

and interpret the complexities of secondary level school text.

The Accelerating Literacy for Adolescents (ALFA Lab) for 9th

grade facilitates student

motivation, engagement, strategy instruction, text comprehension, vocabulary development,

fluency and technology through a consistent rotating class structure and engaging curriculum.


of 66

Students will be placed in teams where they will work individually and/or collaboratively to

complete activities requiring them to apply comprehension skills, word knowledge and writing

skills. The ongoing use of computers, high interest material, a listening post, collaborative

experiences and classroom-based assessment maximizes opportunities for ALFA students to

engage in relevant and meaningful classroom experiences.

As a component of the Talent Development Literacy Initiative, ALFA is an intensive

triple-dose course designed for ninth-grade readers functioning 4 or more years below grade

expectancy. The lab is facilitated by a teacher and a lab assistant with a maximum of twenty

students per class. During the ALFA sessions, the ALFA teacher is primarily responsible for

conducting the guided reading station while the lab assistant monitors and provides ongoing

feedback to the remaining teams. The overall purpose for the ALFA Lab is to improve reading

achievement and increase the independence of struggling adolescents to a degree that they can

successfully meet the literacy requirements of high school courses.

The ALFA Lab incorporates a variety of assessment techniques ranging from formative

to summative measures. The compilation of assessments along with a systematic approach for

examining the results yields a picture of each student that reflects their performance (strengths,

weaknesses, and growth and error patterns) throughout the semester. Since ongoing assessment

of student learning is an essential aspect of the ALFA Lab, informed decisions and adjustments

in instruction can be made to ensure that students are ―on track‖ for reaching the instructional

targets.

Although the TD-High School does not track students into college preparatory,

vocational, or general curricular tracks, GDOE closely monitors the students‘ progress to ensure

that they are adequately prepared for post-secondary education or career paths. All students will


of 66

be required to take and pass a basic set of college preparatory academic courses. In addition to

the main components of the TD-High School model, students will move through research-based

curricula in advanced coursework in English and Language Arts. They will also have credit

recovery opportunities and receive extra help, as needed. There will also be professional staff

development systems in place designed to support implementation of the recommended reforms.

Parent and community involvement activities will take place that aim to encourage students‘

career and college development. These elements should be viewed as mechanisms that are

mutually reinforcing and that offer direct and concrete approaches to enhancing supports and

learning opportunities.

Many middle and high schools inadvertently manufacture the low achievement of many

students by offering high expectation instruction to only a subset of their students (sorting some

students into high-expectation instruction while relegating others to a lower track featuring a

lower-quality education). TD students are heterogeneously grouped in their core academic

classes. Heterogeneous grouping for core academic classes helps TD Schools reach high levels

of academic performance by eliminating lower track sections. To help teachers manage these

heterogeneous classes effectively and teach in ways that help students learn, TD staffs provide

focused and coherent professional development in the use of subject-specific cooperative

learning and teaching-for-understanding instructional methods and classroom management

techniques designed for diverse classrooms.

Talent Development schools participate in the National Network of Partnership Schools.

This network, established by researchers at Johns Hopkins University, brings together schools,

districts, and states that are committed to developing and maintaining a comprehensive program

of school-family-community partnerships. As part of the Network, TD Schools establish Action


of 66

Teams that carry out school, parent, and community involvement activities in a focused and

coherent way. Research shows that students achieve more and at higher levels when their

families are involved in their school. JHTD encourages such involvement, as well as community

partners, especially through the National Network of Partnership Schools, which is also part of

the Center for Social Organization of Schools.

Building Local School Capacity

Embedded within each of the literacy programs being implemented are intensive

professional development opportunities for all teachers within the participating schools.

However, in addition to these three intervening literacy programs for students, GDOE realizes

the need to build capacity specifically among Reading and Language Arts teachers. Based on

student enrollment projections from the GDOE Research, Planning, and Evaluation Division

(RP&E), approximately 800 new teachers will be needed by the year 2013.

This increased estimate in teacher recruitment comes from assumptions about the

approaching U.S. military buildup that will begin in few years, where a large number of civilian

support personnel will eventually enroll their children within GDOE. In addition, new schools

must be built in order to accommodate this increase in population. These estimates also consider

the fact that Department of Defense Education Activity (DODEA) will actively recruit certified

teachers from within GDOE during the same period of time and beyond.

Guam is the only island within Micronesia that has an accredited university. The

University of Guam (UOG), the only state approved teacher certification program, produces

approximately 180 new teachers each year. The majority of these teachers are at the elementary

level. The School of Education and the UOG Yamashita Teacher Corps program have been

successful in graduating an adequate supply of elementary teachers through effective incentives


of 66

and support. The Guam Community College is an accredited 2 year college which provides the

Preschool Early Childhood Education for the birth to kindergarten entry population.

When viewed in the long term, and with the US military build-up in mind, the quantity

of teachers graduating from UOG must increase at least two-fold in the coming years to fulfill

future demand.

By designing and providing comprehensive professional training and development

opportunities in differentiated instruction and best practices at all levels, teachers will be

provided the opportunity to acquire or further enhance their skills and knowledge necessary to

prepare students for the next level of learning. The goal is to develop the district‘s and school‘s

capacity to sustain programs and teaching and learning approaches and strategies proven to

show results in increasing student academic achievement in the area of Reading and Language

Arts for all students. Professional development is an important component in the development of

internal capacity to maintain the project initiatives independently.

C. Significance of Goals and Objectives

The goals and objectives of Project Na'fang gai Tiningo were created to support the No

Child Left Behind Initiative and President Obama‘s vision for diverse, but effective styles in

teaching and learning. These goals and objectives are in line with the Guam Department of

Education‘s District Action Plan, ensuring that all students are provided with high-quality

academic assessment, high-quality teachers, and high-quality school administrators.

The goals and objectives within Project Na'fang gai Tiningo will take into account

multiple factors; literacy program models, assessment methods and results, teacher professional

development database, and the progress and impact on transitioned students, paying particular


of 66

attention to historically underachieving student populations such as the socioeconomically

disadvantaged, English Language learners, and students with disabilities.

Project "Na'fang gai Tiningo" goals are:

1. To improve reading comprehension skills of all participating elementary and secondary

students by one grade level annually by providing them with additional interventions

and support through the district‘s current language literacy programs, the Home

Literacy Program, and Literacy Labs, paying particular attention to historically

underachieving student groups such as the socioeconomically disadvantaged, English

Language learners, and students with disabilities. GDOE will increase the cohort

graduation rate by at least 2% annually; and will reduce the proportion of students who


2. To provide a system of effective instruction and learning through comprehensive

professional development opportunities and training to; a) teachers in differentiated

instruction and best practices at all levels with an emphasis on students‘ instructional

needs and levels of language proficiency; b) Administrators to ensure that they have the

skills and knowledge necessary to support, monitor, and assess stated activities.

3. To provide support to ensure a seamless transition from one level of schooling to

another, the district will identify and assess the literacy skills of students transitioning

from one level of schooling to the next, specifically, students transitioning from Pre-K

to Kindergarten; Elementary (5th grade) to Middle (6th grade); Middle (8th grade) to

High School (9th grade) and 12th

grade students as they prepare to transition into post-

secondary education and/or careers. Historically underachieving students such as


of 66

socioeconomically disadvantaged backgrounds, English Language learners, and

students with disabilities will be monitored closely.

GDOE has prioritized the implementation of three proven literacy programs to address

the low reading performance of Guam‘s public school students as indicated in SAT10 scores; 1)

Success For All (SFA), 2) Direct Instruction (DI), and 3) the Johns Hopkins Talent Development

(JHTD) programs has allowed for a literacy improvement plan for grades kindergarten through

12th grades, which have been supported and approved by teachers and administrators at their

respective schools. These programs deliver tightly sequenced, carefully planned lessons that

give struggling students the structure and practice necessary at becoming skilled fluent readers,

and better thinkers.

The proposed activities within Project Na'fang gai Tiningo include focusing on

increasing literacy skills of at-risk students; Project Na'fang gai Tiningo will implement the

Home Literacy Program (HLP) in the elementary and secondary grades. Through HLP, students

struggling with Reading and Language Arts will have the opportunity and resources to improve

reading skills at home. To further support literacy in the secondary grades, resources in

technology will be provided to support and pilot literacy lab within the JHTD program. These

activities will further support the GDOE‘s goals for increasing literacy skills at all grade levels.

Activities will also focus on analyzing the effectiveness of teaching and learning

strategies as outlined within the current literacy programs to identify the strengths and areas for

improvement. The project will provide schools, parents, and teachers with the resources and

tools necessary to make informed decisions pertaining to the effectiveness of these programs and

its impact on improving Reading and Language Arts skills within the elementary and secondary

grades, reducing dropout rates, and increasing graduation rates.


of 66

In addition, the adopted District Action Plan speaks strongly for the need to improve

student achievement in Reading and Language Arts through a thorough review and improvement

of the district‘s standards and assessment programs, and development of GDOE‘s faculty at all

levels. The district seeks to ensure that the essential elements of a standards-based education

system are of high quality and fully aligned and implemented. Specifically, the district

continuously attempts to align curriculum standards, professional development standards, and

system-wide standards-based assessments. Professional development standards articulated in the

District Action Plan include teacher training programs that emphasize mastery of content,

instructional strategies, and the use of appropriate assessment tools in measuring the progress

students are making toward achieving the standards. Project Na'fang gai Tiningo’ directly

supports these important components of the District Action Plan.

The design for collecting data for Project Na'fang gai Tiningo’ is a long awaited

opportunity to provide an evidence-based data system for improvement and accountability for

the GDOE. GDOE will establish working models for educational innovations and a definitive

methodology for making decisions in regards to specific education programs, specifically in the

area of literacy. The design (discussed in Project Design) entails the collection of data related to

a target cohort of students specifically in Reading and Language Arts, use of technology to

enhance literacy skills in the secondary grades, teacher professional development, students

transitioning from one level of schooling to another, and students and teachers within specific

literacy programs as well as non-reform program schools.

D. Quality of Project Design

The project will implement the Home literacy Program (HLP)in the elementary and

secondary grades. This activity will promote parental involvement and support of student


of 66

reading at home through parent workshops and access to supplemental reading materials. Focus

will be placed on at-risk students in grades Kindergarten 5th

within the schools participating in

the Direct Instruction and Success for All.

Workshops for parents will focus on goals and objectives of the appropriate reading

reform program at the school site, and effective teaching methodologies and practices. The

supplemental reading material corresponding to the appropriate reading reform program will be

loaned to parents in order to further reading skills at the home front. It is hoped that additional

opportunities for reading success are developed by the HLP program, and that it become

implemented strategically and permanently within the GDOE curriculum.

In the secondary schools participating in the Johns Hopkins Talent Development literacy

programs, students will be encouraged to actively participate in the HLP to supplement current

Reading curriculum.

The success of the HLP program in the elementary grades will depend almost entirely on

the participation of parents (and older siblings of the child) in workshops and their cooperation

with literacy program coordinators at the school site. The success in the secondary grades will

depend greatly on active student participation and cooperation with their teachers and literacy

program coordinators.

The HLP and Literacy Lab activities will supplement the current literacy program

(Direct Instruction, Success for All, and the Johns Hopkins Talent Development Programs)

activities currently being implemented in 23 participating schools. Immediate outcomes would

be increased Reading and Language Arts by one grade level at the end of SY 2011-2012.

Project Na'fang gai Tiningo’ will focus on identifying each assessment tool, student

progress within specific schools, successes and challenges of each literacy program, the HLP


of 66

program, and the Literacy Lab programs, and how the data collected will help the district to

make informed decisions that impact all students, at all levels.

Although the selected literacy programs share the same goals, to improve student

academic achievement for all students and increase accountability, it is expected that the

methods, approaches, and outcomes will vary.

The fact that the elementary literacy programs, DI and SFA, have been implemented

concurrently over the last two years, with SY 2011-2012 being the third year of concurrent

implementation, it provides GDOE with the tools to conduct longitudinal assessments; to track,

compare, and assess performance within schools with and without literacy program

implementation over a three year period. With the longitudinal data, Project Na'fang gai

Tiningo will have three years of students‘ performance data including but not limited to literacy

programs specific data and SAT10 data, to conduct comprehensive analysis of data on multiple

levels.

Data results from the comprehensive analysis of behavior and student achievement

through the multiple assessment tools will be studied to determine changes over time in

demographics, perceptions, processes, and student achievement. Particular attention will be paid

to student reading below grade level, and historically underachieving student groups such as the

socioeconomically disadvantaged, English Language learners, and students with disabilities.

Teachers teaching within schools participating in the Direct Instruction and Success for

All literacy programs have received intensive professional development opportunities relative to

the specific literacy program being implemented. However, GDOE realizes the need to build

capacity specifically among Reading and Language Arts teachers through comprehensive

professional development opportunities especially in the secondary grades where teachers have


of 66

not been provided the same level of intensive professional development opportunities as a result

of the lack of a literacy program.

Enhancing the knowledge and skills of new and experienced educators through high-

quality and continuous teacher professional development and training is essential to providing all

students with opportunities to be successful learners. To effectively plan professional

development and to select teachers for participation, project personnel along with school

administrators, will evaluate student data to systematically target educators‘ needs such as

knowing how to administer benchmark measures, using student data to inform instruction,

knowing how to identify and implement effective interventions to meet student needs, and how

to use student data to reflect on and improve the overall instruction and intervention provided to

students. Ongoing professional development is key to building capacity needed to improve and

sustain effective implementation over time.

A stand-alone workshop has less than a 5% chance of actually changing teacher practice

in the classroom. However, if you add on-going and embedded professional development,

provide professional learning communities where teachers interact with their colleagues, and

ensure on-going support from coaches and administrative staff, the chance of really affecting

teaching and learning increases dramatically -- to nearly 90% (Joyce and Showers, 2002).

Administrators will be provided professional development opportunities in the areas of

how to use student data to reflect on and improve the overall instruction and intervention

provided to students, how to use student achievement data to make informed decisions at the

school level.

One of Project Na'fang gai Tiningo’ goals are to conduct a comprehensive study on

specific groups of students who transition from one level of schooling to another. The passage of


of 66

students from the middle grades to high school is the most difficult transition point for

adolescents. Their chances of failing in grade nine is three to five times higher than that of any

other grade. Transition initiatives involve cooperation and understanding between middle school

and high school administrators about the importance of preparing middle school students for

high school level learning. It also involves increased communication between middle school and

high school teachers about what middle school students need to know and be able to do in

reading, math, and language arts, in preparation for challenging high school courses.

The district will identify and assess the literacy skills of students transitioning from one

level of schooling to the next, specifically, students transitioning from Pre-K to Kindergarten;

Elementary (5th grade) to Middle (6th grade); Middle (8th grade) to High School (9th grade) and

12th

grade students as they prepare to transition into post-secondary education and/or careers.

Reading and Language Arts scores of a cohort set of students who move from specific

elementary school feeder bands into specific middle feeder bands into a specific high school will

be collected and assessed. More importantly, literacy program – schools as well as non-reform

program schools will be identified for this evaluation. The evaluation will include historically

underachieving students such as socioeconomically disadvantaged backgrounds, English

Language learners, and students with disabilities will be monitored closely.

The Literacy Team will review, assess, and use the evaluation results to determine

current success and challenges within specific transitional phases; identify strategies to address

challenges, and maximize on successes. Literacy Team meetings provide a collaborative context

for analyzing school data, identifying problems, posing solutions, evaluating alternatives, and

making recommendations. The Literacy Team will meet regularly and as needed to review

student data and select appropriate interventions to address reading challenges of struggling


of 66

readers at all levels. Progress monitoring, program evaluation, and school plans are critical

components for continuous school improvement.

Project Management

PROJECT Na'fang gai Tiningo’s goals and objectives:

GOAL1: To improve reading comprehension skills of all participating elementary and

secondary students by one grade level annually by providing them with additional interventions

and support through the district‘s current language literacy programs, the Home Literacy

Program, and Literacy Labs, paying particular attention to historically underachieving student

groups such as the socioeconomically disadvantaged, English Language learners, and students

with disabilities. GDOE will increase the cohort graduation rate by at least 2% annually; and

will reduce the proportion of students who drop-out by at least 1% annually.

Objective 1.1: Increase the reading scores of the students group every year by one grade level

as measured by the respective literacy programs, SAT10, and Head Start benchmarks through the

through the development and implementation of a student home reading program.

TASK 1.1.A: Identify at-risk students based on reading scores and other appropriate

criteria determined by program within identified schools.

TASK 1.1.B: Procure appropriate supplemental reading books,

TASK 1.1.C Give students books for the appropriate reform program to read at home

TASK 1.1.D Have students record reading activity on monitoring sheet

TASK 1.1.E Teacher, Parent and/or Consultant will follow up on reading activity

MEASURE: 1.1.A-E: 1. List of students participating

2. Inventory of books purchased

3. Reading Monitor Sheets

4. Report on Monitoring Activities done

5. Analysis of reading scores

TASK 1.1.F: Monitor, track, and assess students' reading skills utilizing the respective

literacy program and Head Start assessment Creative Curriculum progress report each

quarter and at the end of the school year, and use information to modify or improve

program activity.

MEASURE: 1.1.F:

1. Report and analyze student assessment results.


of 66

TASK 1.1.G: Monitor, track, and assess students' SAT10 reading scores and Head Start

assessment Creative Curriculum progress report and compare to prior year assessment

results, and use information to modify or improve program activity.

MEASURE: 1.1.G:

1. Report and analyze results.

TASK 1.1.H: Analyze results of reading scores, using respective literacy assessment

results and SAT10 scores at the end of the year and identify successes and challenges,

and use results to modify and/or improve processes, activities, lessons, and professional

development strategies accordingly.

MEASURE: 1.1.H:

1. Report on progress results, successes, challenges, and identified solutions.

TASK 1.1.I Design and develop Community Partnership Programs and Activities with

the private and public sectors, include the Guam Public Library, University of Guam and

the Guam Community College Libraries, the Parent Information Resource Center, local

books stores, and other entities to provide additional resources and encouragement for

students to read.

MEASURE: 1.1.I:

1. List of participating community partners

2. Report on progress and results

Objective 1.2: To increase the language and literacy skills of at-risk secondary student

populations through the use of literacy labs. Integrate technology at the student level to assist in

the development of literacy and communication skills, to promote the acquisition of knowledge

in meaningful context, and to increase the engagement of all students.

TASK 1.2.A: Procure necessary technology hardware (student workstations) and

software for participating secondary schools.

MEASURE: 1.2.A:

1. Inventory report of procured equipment.

TASK 1.2.B: Identify at-risk students based on reading and language arts scores and

other appropriate criteria within identified secondary schools.

MEASURE: 1.2.B:

1. List of participating students.

TASK 1.2.C: Monitor, track, and assess student reading and language arts scores

utilizing the respective literacy program quarterly and at the end of the school year and

use information to modify or improve program activity.


of 66

MEASURE: 1.2.C:

1. Report on Monitoring Activities and results.

2. Pre/Post test scores.

TASK 1.2.D: Monitor, track, and assess student SAT10 reading and language arts scores

and compare to prior year assessment results and use information to modify or improve

program activity.

MEASURE: 1.2.D:

1. Report on results.

TASK 1.2.E: Monitor, track, and assess student‘s ability to use technology (computer,

internet, and other equipment) to complete assignments

MEASURE: 1.2.E:

1. Report on Monitoring Activities and results.


OUTCOME: At least 75% of the students will have successfully increased their reading and

language arts scores by at least one grade level as measured by the appropriate literacy program

assessment and SAT10 or Head Start pre-literacy indicators will show improvement from the

baseline determination towards developmentally appropriate levels. GDOE will increase the

cohort graduation rate by at least 2% annually; and will reduce the proportion of students who


GOAL 2: To provide a system of effective instruction and learning through comprehensive

professional development opportunities and training to a) teachers in differentiated instruction

and best practices at all levels with an emphasis on students‘ instructional needs and levels of

language proficiency; b) To provide Administrators to ensure that they have the skills and

knowledge necessary to support, monitor, and assess stated activities.

Objective 2.1: By the end of SY 2011-2012, at least 50% of the district‘s Reading and

Language Arts teachers within the participating schools will have participated in a specialized

training in the area of Reading, Language Arts, Differentiated Instruction, and/or best practices

by highly knowledgeable professionals (i.e., professors, trainers, etc)

TASK 2.1.A: Contract the services to provide training for identified Reading and

Language Arts teachers

MEASURE: 2.1.A:

1. Course/training/Workshop outline

2. Course credits earned.

3. Workshop/training evaluations.

4. Participant roster.

TASK 2.1.B: Identify Reading and language Arts teachers.


of 66

MEASURE: 2.1.B:

1. Database of initial teachers‘ participation/Database of teachers who

successfully completed trainings and/or workshops.



4. Teacher certification listing.

OUTCOME: At least 100 teachers will receive training, and at least 75% of the teachers will

report that training has improved their teaching skills and ability to maintain GDOE teaching

certification.

Objective 2.2: By the end of SY 2011-2012, at least 75% of Administrators within the

participating schools will have participated in specialized training in the area of monitoring and

assessing the implementation of stated activities.

TASK 2.2.A: Provide administrators with training to help them acquire and develop the

knowledge and skills necessary to support and monitor implementation of stated

activities, including effective literacy instructional practices.

MEASURE: 2.2.A:



OUTCOME: At least 20 Administrators will receive training, and at least 75% of the

Administrators will report that they have successfully taken an active role in supporting,

monitoring, and assessing gains and challenges within their respective schools.

GOAL 3: To provide support to ensure a seamless transition from one level of schooling to

another, the district will identify and assess the literacy skills of students transitioning from one

level of schooling to the next, specifically, students transitioning from Pre-K to Kindergarten;

Elementary (5th grade) to Middle (6th grade); Middle (8th grade) to High School (9th grade) and

12th

grade students as they prepare to transition into post-secondary education and/or careers.

Historically underachieving students such as socioeconomically disadvantaged backgrounds,

English Language learners, and students with disabilities will be monitored closely.

Objective 3.1: Determine the literacy skill level of students transitioning from one level of

schooling to another to identify challenges and successes.

TASK 3.1.A: Identify cohort groups of students moving from a specific Pre-School or

Head Start into specific elementary school feeder bands, into specific middle feeder

bands, and into specific high schools.

MEASURE: 3.1.A:


2. List of schools/program students are participating in.


of 66


TASK 3.1.B: Establish and implement a seamless, articulated system that supports the

child/student as he or she transitions between each level of schooling.

MEASURE: 3.1.B:

1. Identified system of support


TASK 3.1.C: Establish regular opportunities for communication and collaboration

among educators within and across grades, as well as between pre-K and elementary,

elementary and middle educators, and middle and high school educators. Plan and

engage in regular cross-disciplinary meetings among all teachers involved focusing on

the analysis of, and response to, student assessment data.

MEASURE: 3.1.C:



OUTCOME: The district will be equipped with the tools necessary to make instructional

decisions relative to the effectiveness, success, and challenges of current literacy programs,

instructional approaches, and professional development strategies and its impact on preparing

students as they transition from one level of schooling to another. The data will allow the district

to determine if current practices, strategies, and programs are making a positive difference in

raising professional and academic skills and greater literacy awareness and participation.


of 66

GOAL OBJECTIVE ACTIVITY MEASURE OUTCOME

1.1.A: Identify at-risk students based on

reading scores and other appropriate criteria

determined by program within identified

schools.

1.1.A: List of participating students.

1.1.B: Procure appropriate supplemental

reading books

1.1.B: Inventory of books purchased

1.1.C Give students books for the appropriate

reform program to read at home

1.1.C: Reading Monitor Sheets

1.1.D Have students record reading activity on

monitoring sheet

1.1.D: Report on Monitoring

Activities done

1.1.E Teacher, Parent and/or Consultant will

follow up on reading activity

1.1.E: Analysis of reading scores

1.1.F: Monitor, track, and assess students'

reading skills utilizing the respective literacy

program and Head Start assessment Creative

Curriculum progress report each quarter and at

the end of the school year, and use information

to modify or improve program activity.

1.1.F: Report and analyze student

assessment results

1.1.G: Monitor, track, and assess students'

SAT10 reading scores and Head Start

assessment Creative Curriculum progress

report and compare to prior year assessment

results, and use information to modify or

improve program activity.

1.1.G: Report and analyze results.

1.1.H: Analyze results of reading scores, using

respective literacy assessment results and

SAT10 scores at the end of the year and

identify successes and challenges, and use

results to modify and/or improve processes,

activities, lessons, and professional

development strategies accordingly

1.1.H: Report on progress results,

successes, challenges, and identified

solutions.


Striving Readers Project Na'fang gai Tiningo

LOGIC MODEL MANAGEMENT PLAN

1. To improve reading

comprehension skills of all

participating elementary and

secondary students by one

grade level annually by

providing them with additional

interventions and support

through the district’s current

language literacy programs, the

Home Literacy Program, and

Literacy Labs, paying particular

attention to historically

underachieving student groups

such as the socioeconomically

disadvantaged, English

Language learners, and students

with disabilities. GDOE will

increase the cohort graduation

rate by at least 2% annually;

and will reduce the proportion

of students who drop-out by at

least 1% annually.

At least 75% of the students will have

successfully increased their reading

and language arts scores by at least

one grade level as measured by the

appropriate literacy program

assessment and SAT10 or Head Start

pre-literacy indicators will show

improvement from the baseline

determination towards

developmentally appropriate levels.

GDOE will increase the cohort

graduation rate by at least 2%

annually; and will reduce the

proportion of students who drop-out

by at least 1% annually.

1.1 Increase the reading scores of

the students grouop every year by

one grade level as measured by the

respective literacy programs,

SAT10, and Head Start benchmarks

through the development and

implementation of a student home

reading program.


of 66


1.1.I Design and develop Community

Partnership Programs and Activities with the

private and public sectors, include the Guam

Public Library, University of Guam and the

Guam Community College Libraries, the Parent

Information Resource Center, local books

stores, and other entities to provide additional

resources and encouragement for students to

read

1.1.I:

1. List of participating community

partners

2. Report on progress and results

1.2.A: Procure necessary technology hardware

(student workstations) and software for

participating secondary schools.

1.2.A: Inventory report of procured

equipment.

1.2.B: Identify at-risk students based on

reading and language arts scores and other

appropraite criteria within identified secondary

schools.

1.2.B: List of participating students.

1.2.C: Monitor, track, and assess student

reading and language arts scores utilizing the

respective literacy program quarterly and at the

end of the school year and use information to

modify or improve program activity.

1.2.C:

1. Report on Monitoring Activities

and results.


1.2.D: Monitor, track, and assess student

SAT10 reading and language arts scores and

compare to prior year assessment results and

use information to modify or improve program

activity.

1.2.D: Report on results.

1.2.E: Monitor, track, and assess student’s

ability to use technology (computer, internet,

and other equipment) to complete assignments.

1.2.E:

1. Report on Monitoring Activities

and results.


1.2: To increase the language and

literacy skills of at-risk secondary

student populations through the use

of literacy labs. Integrate

technology at the student level to

assist in the development of literacy

and communication skills, to

promote the acquisition of

knowledge in meaningful context,

and to increase the engagement of

all students.


of 66


2.1.A: Contract the services to provide training

for identified Reading and Language Arts

teachers

2.1.A:

1. Course/training/Workshop outline




2.1.B: Identify Reading and language Arts

teachers.

2.1.B:

1. Database of initial teachers

participation/Database of teachers

who successfully completed trainings

and/or workshops.



4. Teacher certification listing.

2.2: By the end of SY 2011-2012,

at least 75% of Administrators

within the participating schools will

have participated in specialized

training in the area of monitoring

and assessing the implementation of

stated activities.

2.2.A: Provide administrators with training to

help them acquire and develop the knowledge

and skills necessary to support and monitor

implementation of stated activities, including

effective literacy instructional practices.

2.2.A:



At least 20 Administrators will

receive training and at least 75% (15)

of the Administrators will report that

they have successfully taken an active

role in supporting, monitoring, and

assessing gains and challenges within

their respective schools.

2. To provide a system of

effective instruction and

learning through

comprehensive professional

development opportunities and

training to a) teachers in

differentiated instruction and

best practices at all levels with

an emphasis on students’

instructional needs and levels

of language proficiency; b) To

provide Administrators to

ensure that they have the skills

and knowledge necessary to

support, monitor, and assess

stated activities.

At least 100 teachers will receive

training, and at least 75% of the

teachers will report that training has

improved their teaching skills and

ability to maintain GDOE teaching

certification.

2.1: By the end of SY 2011-2012,

at least 50% of the district’s Reading

and Language Arts teachers within

the participating schools will have

participated in a specialized training

in the area of Reading, Language

Arts, Differentiated Instruction,

and/or best practices by highly

knowledgeable professionals (i.e.,

professors, trainers, etc)


of 66


3.1.A: Identify cohort groups of students

moving from a specific Pre-School or Head

Start into specific elementary school feeder

bands, into specific middle feeder bands, and

into specific high schools

3.1.A:


2. List of schools/literacy program

students are participating in.

3. Report on progress results,


solutions.

3.1.B: Establish and implement a seamless,

articulated system that supports the

child/student as he or she transitions between

each level of schooling.

3.1.B:




solutions.

3.1.C: Establish regular opportunities for

communication and collaboration among

educators within and across grades, as well as

between pre-K and elementary, elementary and

middle educators, and middle and high school

school educators. Plan and engage in regular

cross-disciplinary meetings among all teachers

involved focusing on the analysis of, and

response to, student assessment data.

3.1.C:




solutions.

3. To provide support to ensure

a seamless transition from one

level of schooling to another,

the district will identify and

assess the literacy skills of

students transitioning from one

level of schooling to the next,

specifically, students

transitioning from Pre-K to

Kindergarten; Elementary (5th

grade) to Middle (6th grade);

Middle (8th grade) to High

School (9th grade) and 12th

grade students as they prepare

to transition into post-

secondary education and/or

careers. Historically

underachieving students such

as socioeconomically

disadvantaged backgrounds,

English Language learners, and

students with disabilities will be

monitored closely.

The district will be equipped with the

tools necessary to make instructional

decisions relative to the effectiveness,

success, and challenges of current

literacy programs, instructional

approaches, and professional

development strategies and its impact

on preparing students as they

transition from one level of schooling

to another. The data will allow the

district to determine if current

practices, strategies, and programs are

making a positive difference in raising

professional and academic skills and

greater literacy awareness and

participation.

3.1: Determine the literacy skill

level of students transitioning from

one level of schooling to another to

identify challenges and successes.


of 66

E. Quality of Literacy Team

The GDOE Literacy Team will be responsible for examining the current state literacy programs,

review of current literacy research, determine actions for a future literacy plan, practices and policies; and

proposed actions for improving literacy for all students in all content areas.

The purpose of the plan is to assist stakeholders in intervening early and preparing students to be

work and college ready. An important emphasis of the plan is to provide professional development to

teachers so that they are equipped with research-proven strategies that improve student literacy

proficiency. The GDOE Literacy Team will continue to revise the plan as necessary and provide guidance

to stakeholders for implementation.

The Guam Department of Education‘s (GDOE) expanded the process of literacy

improvement by establishing the GDOE Literacy Team in April 2011. The Literacy Team

includes representatives who have expertise in the following areas:

Literacy development and instruction for children in the following age/grade levels:

o Birth to school entry

Assistant Superintendent of Special Education

Project Director, Head Start Program

o Kindergarten through grade 5



Administrator, Research, Planning and Evaluation

School Level Facilitator, Success For All Program

School Level Facilitator, Direct Instruction Program

School Program Consultant, ESL Program

o Grades 6 through 8



Project Director, Oceanview Middle School, Johns Hopkins Talent

Development Program

o Grades 9 through 12



Project Director, Southern High School, Johns Hopkins Talent

Development Program

Managing and implementing an effective literacy program at the school, district,

and State levels



of 66



School Level Facilitator, Success For All Program

School Level Facilitator, Direct Instruction Program

Evaluation of literacy programs



Planning for and implementing a response-to-intervention model that includes

utilization of universal screening, multiple tiers of instruction, early intervening

services, validated interventions, and student progress monitoring to inform

decision-making




Screening and performance measurement in the areas of phonological awareness,

word recognition, phonics, vocabulary, comprehension, fluency, and writing


Validated interventions and instruction for struggling readers, limited-English-

proficient students, and students with disabilities



Teacher, coach, and principal professional development



Teacher preparation and state licensure/accreditation in literacy development and

instruction



The GDOE Literacy Team will be responsible for examining current state of literacy

programs, review of current literacy research, determine actions for a future literacy plan,

practices and policies; and proposed actions for improving literacy for all students in all content

areas.

The purpose of the plan is to assist stakeholders in intervening early and preparing

students to be work and college ready. An important emphasis of the plan is to provide

professional development to teachers so that they are equipped with research-proven strategies


of 66

that improve student literacy proficiency. The GDOE Literacy Team will continue to revise the

plan as necessary and provide guidance to stakeholders for implementation.

The GDOE Literacy Team along with the GDOE management team designed and

developed the goals and objective of Project Na'fang gai Tiningo. Involvement of the

development of the project design ensures that the Literacy Team members share common goals,

to improve student academic achievement for all students, improve teacher quality, and ensure a

seamless transition across school programs and from one level of schooling to another.

F. Evaluation

District Evaluations Tools

The evaluation model of the student achievement is divided into three categories: School

level, District level and Statewide Assessment. First, at the school level, program specific

assessments will be used to track and inform teachers of student progress in terms of their

achievement. The Direct Instruction, Success for All, and the Johns Hopkins Talent

Development programs each possess specific assessment tools and instruments to track, monitor,

and assess student progress and achievement. The literacy program assessment design is

comprehensive in a manner in which teachers, coaches, coordinators, and administrators are

taught to routinely use student assessment data to identify students who may be in need of

remedial help and decide on an appropriate intervention or strategy that could be used to help

that student better comprehend the material.

Next, at the district level, a common set of accountability measures will be developed and

applied to all three reform programs to monitor each school‘s implementation efforts. This data

will be used by department leadership, coordinators, program consultants, administrators and

teachers to identify implementation issues and offer support in specific areas. These


of 66

recommendations will be an integral part of the next steps in the selection and implementation of

literacy programs within the schools.

Lastly, at the district level, student achievement is measured by the district‘s state-wide

assessment tool, the Stanford Achievement Test 10th

Edition (SAT10), student scores are

reported as SAT10 performance levels (Below Basic, Basic, Proficient, and Advanced), SAT10

percentile scores, and SAT10 mean scaled scores.

The SAT10 is given annually in the spring to grades 1st through 12

th and assesses

students‘ achievement in a wide range of content knowledge in the areas of Language Arts,

Reading, Math, Science, Social Science and Spelling. Student scores are then compared to a

nationally sampled group of students called a ―norm group‖ that is representative of the country

and who took the test at the same time of the year.

The SAT10 provides the District with diverse scores for different interpretive purposes.

However, the primary score that is used by the Department is the Students‘ Performance Level

which classifies a student as scoring in the Below Basic (Level 1), Basic (Level 2), Proficient

(Level 3) or Advanced (Level 4) categories. Our goals are to increase the number, as denoted by

a percentage, of students who score in the Proficient (3) and Advanced (4) categories. These

categories indicate a solid mastery of the content material and indicate that the student is

prepared for the next grade.

Results from the SAT10 reports are used to monitor student progress in comparison to the

norm and content referenced standards. SAT10 results are also used to report student progress,

as mandated by P.L. 28-45, ―Every Child Is Entitled to an Adequate Education Act.‖

Specifically, SAT10 provides a measure of student achievement once a year. However,

teachers need to regularly monitor student progress throughout the school year so to identify


of 66

students who are falling behind and need the extra help to catch up with their peers, to target

specific areas for improvement, to make appropriate lesson modifications, and to ensure that

placement aligns with individual academic performance. Informed decisions and adjustments in

instruction can be made to ensure that students are ―on track‖ for reaching the instructional

targets.

The literacy program specific assessment tools and instruments provide teachers and the

schools with the information necessary to monitor student progress throughout the school year

through the collection and assessment of student performance data monthly, quarterly, and

annually. Regular classroom assessments assist teachers in designing instructional programs that

meet specific needs of students, resulting in improved student achievement and total school

performance.

Data collection and reporting are essential for designing relevant instructional plans and

can strengthen school-family-community relations. Understanding the data is pertinent to

understanding student characteristics and ascertaining the effectiveness of instructional programs

is equally important. The more that teachers, administrators and school support providers know

how to use data, the more effective they will be in identifying ways by which parents and

community members can support efforts to improve student performance.

Results from the tri-fold assessment coupled with the assessment report of Project

Na'fang gai Tiningo, will provide the district with the critical information to determine if

current practices, strategies, and professional development programs are making a positive

impact on academic skills and literacy awareness.

Furthermore, the GDOE recognizes the significance of aligning student assessments with

the adopted GDOE Content Standards and Performance Indicators. The GDOE is currently in the


of 66

final stages of developing a criterion-referenced assessment tool based on the adopted GDOE

standards and performance indicators which will be used as an annual summative evaluation.

This evaluation model will take into account rates of change in student scores by tracking student

progress and the effects of literacy programs (Direct Instruction, Success for All, and the Johns

Hopkins Talent Development programs) on students‘ performance on the state-wide assessment.

A comprehensive analysis of the data collected at all levels of evaluation will help the

Guam Education Policy Board, department leadership, and stakeholders in determining the

overall effectiveness of current literacy programs.

Project Na'fang gai Tiningo Evaluation Model

A participatory approach to evaluation will be employed for two reasons. First, a

participatory approach is one that will allow for maximum capacity building among the staff

responsible for project implementation -- and capacity building not only in terms of teacher

quality, but also in terms of program administration, is critical to the project‘s success. Secondly,

a participatory approach links the ‗community-of-theory‘ with the ‗community of practice‘,

thereby linking knowledge gained through evaluation to the practical users of such knowledge,

making for a truly data-driven project that allows for maximum alignment and synergy between

lessons learned and activities implemented.

Just as there are many different approaches to evaluation, there are at least as many

definitions for evaluation. For the purposes of this project, evaluation is defined as a systematic

process that is integral to project implementation and carried out in a planned and purposeful

manner and used as a formative tool throughout the project.. It is important to note that

stakeholders agree that the evaluation will be used as a process for enhancing knowledge and


of 66

decision making, whether the decisions are for refining the project, process, product, system or

organization, or for determining whether or not to change, continue or expand the project.

For the purposes of the Striving Readers – Project Na'fang gai Tiningo, three types of

evaluation will be employed which are outlined below:

Developmental Evaluation – the Project Na'fang gai Tiningo Literacy Team

plays an integral role in the project design and development. The Team will use results from

the various assessment tools and instruments to amend or enhance project design throughout

the grant cycle to address challenges and build upon successes.

Process Evaluation – typically relies heavily on process data and evaluation

measures to improve the operational implementation of the project. In a participatory

evaluation approach, all individuals involved in project implementation are also involved in

collecting and understanding process evaluation data. Moreover, decisions for project

improvement are shared. Not only does this help build capacity, in the Pacific Islands, this

approach is culturally appropriate and correct.

Outcome Evaluation – is implemented for the purpose of determining the

projects value and efficacy and helps project administrators make a final

evaluative judgment regarding the project. Outcome evaluation relies on data

collection efforts and requires reliable and valid data be collected throughout the

project lifespan. Outcome evaluation can be ongoing, but is generally used at the

completion of a project.


of 66



BUDGET NARRATIVE

Year 1 JUSTIFICATION

$49,897.00 The Program Coordinator IV (PCIV) will function as Project Na'fang gai Tiningo 's

statistician. This individual will work closely with the Project's Program Manager to ensure

goals and objectives are achieved. Roles and responsibilities will include but not limited to

Communicating, monitoring and evaluating the activities of contracted consultative services;

Collecting, analyzing, interpreting, reporting, and communicating results and findings; Will

conduct regular teacher/class observations, Will assist and train school personnel in assessing

and interpreting student achievement and skills levels; Collection and compilation of SAT10

and literacy program specific data to gauge student achievement at the district level; Will

meet regularly with School Administrators to identify success and challenges pertaining to

transitioning students; Will prepare quarterly and annual reports for Project Na'fang gai

Tiningo ; Will coordinate with schools to align program components and activities with

federal, local and district requirements.

$49,897.00

$18,576.01 Government of Guam provides for fringe benefit packages consisting of medical, dental, and

life insurance, social security and/or retirement. (36.88% for medical, dental, retirement,

and $174 for Life Insurance Benefits)

$18,576.01

$0.00 No Funds Requested for this project

$0.00

Budget: May 1, 2011- September 30, 2012

Description

(121) BENEFITS

Program Coordinator IV (1 FTE)

Total Salaries

Total Benefits

(221) TRAVEL: Off-Island

Total Travel

(111) SALARIES

Program Coordinator IV


of 66



Year 1 JUSTIFICATIONDescription

$17,300.00 To procure instructional classroom equipment to include but not limited to interactive

literacy lab student work stations (desktop computers/laptops and printers) for identified

technology based instructional methods, other similar technology, and accessories necessary

to enhance teaching and learning in the classrooms. ($700 x 20 student workstations; $300 x

6 printers) Additional equipment such as a laptop, printer, and other necessary software and

accessories necessary for the Program Coordinator to efficiently and effectively conduct

project specific activities including but not limited to data collection, analysis, data

presentation, reporting requirements, and other relative activities. ($900 x 1)

$25,500.00 To procure classroom books and resources for instructional resources for participating

schools to include but not limited to activity books, classroom dictionaries, classroom library,

trade books, literature kits and references, literacy software, and other relevant teacher,

student, parent resource materials, kits may include trade books, literature kits and

references. (Estimated at 30 schools x $1,000)

$42,800.00

$2,000.00 To procure necessary administrative supplies for project school personnel to effectively

conduct classroom observations, data collection, review and analysis, professional

development activities, and other materials to ensure student progress are collected, assessed,

and are used to drive decisions; and other necessary items necessary to support the

implementation of the program.

$25,000.00 To include but not limited to the procurement of instructional supplies to support program

implementation in the classrooms at all participating elementary and secondary schools by

providing academic consistency with the characteristics of the identified literacy programs,

program specific student workbooks (consumables), as well as professional development

activity supplies and materials.

(240) SUPPLIES AND MATERIALS

(250) EQUIPMENT

Instructional Teacher/Student Classroom

Resource Materials - Home Literacy

Program Instructional equipment: (To

include but not limited to

Teacher/Student Kits, Student/Teacher

Textbooks, literacy kits, classroom

library books, etc.)

Administrative Supplies: including, but

not limited to folders, pens, printer ink

and toner cartridges, CD ROMs, note

pads, binder clips and other office

supplies necessary to facilitate the

program.

Instructional Supplies: Including but not

limited to pencils, paper, world maps,

stop watches, clickers, teacher/student

planners, stickers, stamps, flash drives,

staplers, and program specific student

workbooks (consumables) and materials.

Total Equipment

Instructional/Technology Equipment: To

include but not limited to Literacy

Lab/Student Computers and Printers,

and necessary computer hardware;

software and equipment upgrades, etc.


of 66




$29,492.50 To procure necessary instructional supplies to build literacy libraries for the participating

elementary and secondary schools for the Home Literacy Program to provide students with

additional resources to enhance their reading and language skills.

$62,500.00 Upon successfully completing a series of required professional development trainings and

workshops relevant to the projects goals, objectives, and activities, Teachers will be provided

with instructional supplies and materials geared towards supporting literacy in the

classrooms through building literacy classroom libraries, other instructional resources, and

teacher/student supplies and materials. (Estimated at 250 teachers @ $250)

$118,992.50

$55,000.00 Fees to support consultative services for professional development for teachers,

administrators, and school personnel, and parent workshops to encourage student and parent

participation; activities include but not limited to Differentiates Instruction, Best Practices,

Data Analyses, and other relevant trainings and workshops to build Program capacity,

increase skills and knowledge of teachers, administrators, and school personnel to ensure

effective implementation of the project; and parent information workshops to build thier

knowledge and skills as it pertains to their child's literacy skills.

$12,000.00 Graduate level professional development workshops/trainings for participating Reading and

Language Arts teachers. Courses to include but not limited to Language and Literacy

Development; Middle/Secondary Reading and Writing in the Content Areas, Seminar in

Literacy for Children and Young Adults, Advance Methods in PK-12 School Literacy, and

Organization and Supervision of Reading Programs ($720.00 per credit x 6 courses x 117

personnel)

Consultative Services: Professional

Development, Workshops, Conferences

(Higher learning institutions and Off-

Island trainers);

Professional Development: Graduate

Credits

Teacher Professional Development

Incentive: Instructional Supplies and

Materials (Including but not limited to

pencils, paper, world maps, stop

watches, clickers, teacher/student

planners, stickers, stamps, flash drives,

staplers, and program specific student

workbooks (consumables) and

materials.)

Home Literacy Program Instructional

supplies: including but not limited to

grade-level specific paperback libraries,

read-alongs and storybooks.

Total Supplies and Materials

(230) CONTRACTUAL


of 66




$11,000.00 Funds requested for venues to conduct the professional development trainings workshops,

and institutes

$1,500.00 Funds requested to support the printing and advertising services for program manuals,

training materials, student materials, and advertisements for procurement and as deemed

necessary.

$1,500.00 Funds requested to support servicing and repair of project specific technology equipment to

ensure continued use for program specific purposes; maximizing the life span of the

equipment, and for updating all electronic equipment.

$81,000.00

$0.00 No Funds Requested for this project - Not Applicable

$0.00

$0.00 No Funds Requested for this project

$0.00

$311,265.51 Total Direct Cost

$311,265.51

$1,701.49 Funds requested at 3.4% as per the U.S. Department of Interior, National Business Center

rate agreement.$1,701.49

$0.00 No Funds Requested for this project - Not Applicable

$0.00

$312,967.00

Total Other

(710) INDIRECT COSTS

Total Indirect Cost

TOTAL DIRECT COSTS

Total Other

CONSTRUCTION

OTHER (Miscellaneous)

Total Contractual

Repair of electronic equipment to

include but not limited to laptops,

tablets, and desktop computers.

Total Contractual

Photo Copying and Advertising

Services

Training venue for district-wide

professional development conferences

and trainings

TOTAL COST

(290) TRAINING STIPENDS

Total Training Stipends


of 66


of 66

the guam department of education (gdoe) is a single public ... · pdf filestudents by one...

Documents