Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
Mase
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×
Saving this for later? Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime – even offline.
Text the download link to your phone
Standard text messaging rates apply

0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
573
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide
  • Share about me too.
  • How I get started down this road District literacy initiative. . .
  • Comprehension strategy theory- licensed and expert teachers direct instruction small class sizes The problem is not illiteracy, but comprehension” (Biancarosa & Snow, 2004, p. 10). The work of Jeanne Chall(1983; 1986) introduced the reading community to the notion that children learn to read in grades kindergarten through three, and then read to learn from grades three on up. In reality, as the demands of the content and the difficulty levels of the text as well as the vast amount of information the child must navigate as they make their way through each subject during school, the reader must be able to not only read the words on the page, but understand and attach meaning to those words. In order to do so, the reader must be able to construct meaning of difficult vocabulary, sift through the many details to determine what is most important, activate prior knowledge to attach new learning with previous learning, think critically, and do all of this while continuing through the text fluently.( Allington, 2006; Irvin, et al., 2007; Snow & Biancarosa, 2003). Zone of Proximal Development—individualized, customized instruction. . .scaffolding to support students through the process. I do, we do , you do Formative Assessment to determine zone. . .strengths, areas to improve, etc. Engagement/self-efficacy Dweck and Kohn—Performance vs. growth mindsets, meaningful feedback, Guthrie and Wigfield and Guthrie: choice, control, relevance, Obrien and Vacca— I can because I think I can “ Students who struggle the most re-engaged and REDEFINED themselves as competent when engaged in activities they viewed as relevant using digital tools and popular media” ~ O’Brien, 2008 Research base: Eccles, Wigfield, & Schiefele, 1998: Guthrie, 2008; Smith & Wilhelm, 2002; Strickland & Alverman, 2004) Confidence building is KEY—students must see themselves as academic. . .successful. . .often Striving students sometimes view themselves as outsiders at EVHS—pull them IN
  • Scores: Engagement Fall: 3.4 Spring Engagement: 5.3 Fall Fluency: 9.9 Spring Fluency: 12.3 Fall Comprehension: 13 Spring Comprehension: 17.2 Fall Total: 26 Spring Total: 34.9 Goal is to get students out of instructional zone and into independent 6/8; 12/16 Fluency; 18/24 Comprehension Formative Assessment: Conferencing. . .
  • ANOVA— simply tell us –yes there is a difference somewhere in these three groups. Scheffe will tell us where exactly those differences exist.
  • Discuss why—control and al9 similar populations of students all id’d striving readers, adolescent reading growth is slow. . .research has shown can’t catch up in one year (Allington, 2009) Practical significance—gap between AL9 and Gen9 is narrower than between Control group and Gen9 Using Mean scores. . .but important to note that mean/median scores for all are very similar. . .
  • NPR—important b/c it is what we use to id students. Based on national norms—50% means right smack in the middle compared to students across the nation. . .important to note that general population is skewed to the left w/ mean 71.9% (50 th percentile RIT=223) Practical significance—40 th percentile no longer id’d as striving reader. . .
  • Discuss why—control and al9 similar populations of students all id’d striving readers, adolescent reading growth is slow. . .research has shown can’t catch up in one year (Allington, 2009) Practical significance—gap between AL9 and Gen9 is narrower than between Control group and Gen9 Important implication—in order to narrow reading gap must accelerate reading growth (Allington). Important note: In 8 th grade, Con had negative growth (went backwards); AL9 remained flat (no digression or growth); and general population made approx 4 point gain. . .
  • Fix to show what each group means—green is mean and purple is median add text boxes underneath to label each group.
  • Numeracy coordinator. . . .working with (reading and math)
  • The best teachers and principals demand that those kids receive the same rigorous education we want for all kids, the rich education each student deserves (Beers, 2009, p. 4).   National Council of Teachers of English (NCTE) President Kylene Beers (2009) argues that those students are our students of poverty who are continually marginalized and given a lesser education than these children of affluence in American society. Other researchers argue those students are poor, disabled, or even male students (Kozol, 1991; Fuchs & Fuchs, 2006; Wilhelm & Smith, 2006). This researcher contends that in schools across the nation those students are often also students from literacy impoverished childhoods. In order to narrow the achievement gap, provide equal education for all, and fulfill the American promise to all children born with the right to a public education, educators must examine the evidence provided by this study and others like it. When implementing systematic, strategic, and evidence-based reading intervention, those students, striving readers from literacy poor backgrounds, can experience the accelerated reading growth necessary to pursue their dreams, and take their place in this competitive and rapidly changing global arena.  
  • Transcript

    • 1. Dr. Jennifer McCarty Plucker Eastview High School Apple Valley, MN Literacy Coordinator/Reading Specialist Presentation to MASA/MASE Conference Brooklyn Park, MN March 18, 2010
    • 2.
      • Your name
      • Your Role
      • Why you are here or what you hope to get from this round table.
      Jennifer McCarty Plucker, Ed. D
    • 3. Jennifer McCarty Plucker, Ed. D
    • 4.
      • Highlight Components of Striving Reader Course: Academic Literacy 9 and share research/theoretical base.
      • Share Evidence Based Benefits
      • Offer Research Conclusions
      • Offer Components needed for Effective Leadership in Systematic Literacy Intervention.
      Jennifer McCarty Plucker, Ed. D
    • 5.
      • A secondary striving reader in ISD196 is a student who scores at or below the 40 th percentile nationally in reading on at least two, preferably three, standardized test(s) (ISD 196, 2006).
      • Minnesota Department of Education: A Model Secondary (6-12) Plan for Reading Intervention and Development. January, 2006
      Jennifer McCarty Plucker, Ed. D
    • 6.
      • Theoretical Framework:
      • Comprehension Strategy Theory (Chall, 1983, 1996; Harvey & Goudvis, 2000, 2007).
      • “ Zone of Proximal Development”; Just Right Challenge and Gradual Release of Responsibility (Vygotsky, 1978 ).
        • Formative Assessment Research (Afflerbach, 2007; Stiggens, Arter, Chappuis & Chappuis, 2006).
      • Engagement/Self-efficacy Theories (Dweck, 2007; Guthrie & Wigfield, 2000; Guthrie, 2008; Kohn, 1999; O’Brien, 2008; Vacca, 2006; and Wilhelm, 1997).
        • Multi-Literacy and Digital Literacy Research (Alvermann, 2001; Alverman & Eakle, 2007; Antsey & Bull, 2006; New London Group, 1996; O’Brien, 2006).
      Jennifer McCarty Plucker, Ed. D
    • 7. Jennifer McCarty Plucker, Ed. D
    • 8. Jennifer McCarty Plucker, Ed. D
    • 9. Jennifer McCarty Plucker, Ed. D
    • 10. Podcasting, glogster, Moodle, animoto, wikis, poll everywhere, movie maker, digital photography, i-tunes, flip video cameras, the Internet. . . Jennifer McCarty Plucker, Ed. D
    • 11. Jennifer McCarty Plucker, Ed. D
    • 12.
      • Benefit:
      • Accelerated Reading Growth
      Jennifer McCarty Plucker, Ed. D
    • 13. t tests reveal statistically significant mean gains for all areas at the .01 level Jennifer McCarty Plucker, Ed. D
    • 14. Students #1-28 Total score out of 48 Bar Plot to show differences between Spring DRA2 and Fall DRA2 total scores. Jennifer McCarty Plucker, Ed. D
    • 15.
      • 27 of 28 showed growth in reading on the DRA2
      • BUT. . .
      • Did they grow at a faster rate than their peers?
      • How does their growth compare to striving readers NOT in Academic Literacy 9:
      • How does their growth compare to ‘on grade level’ readers in 9 th grade?
      Jennifer McCarty Plucker, Ed. D
    • 16.
      • MAP RIT Score, National Percentile Rank, and Growth (Posttest minus the Pretest score)
      • Variance of Analysis (ANOVA) to determine if statistically significant difference in means (averages) exist between groups.
      • Post hoc analysis (Scheffe) to determine which means are significantly different from which other means
      AL9 (n=28)— treatment group Con (n=21)— control group Gen9 (n=257)— sample from general population Jennifer McCarty Plucker, Ed. D
    • 17.
      • ANOVA: Statistically significant mean difference detected at the .01 level
      • Scheffe: Mean difference is significant at the .01 level for the following pairs:
      • AL9 and Gen9
      • Con and Gen 9
      • No statistical significance for:
      • AL9 and Con
      Jennifer McCarty Plucker, Ed. D
    • 18.
      • ANOVA: Statistically significant mean difference detected at the .01 level
      • Scheffe: Mean difference is significant at the .01 level for the following pairs:
      • AL9 and Gen9
      • Con and Gen 9
      • No statistical significance for:
      • AL9 and Con
      Jennifer McCarty Plucker, Ed. D
    • 19.
      • ANOVA: Statistically significant mean difference detected at the .01 level
      • Scheffe: Mean difference is significant at the .01 level for the following pairs:
      • AL9 and Gen9
      • AL9 and Control
      • No statistical significance for:
      • Gen9 and Control
      Jennifer McCarty Plucker, Ed. D
    • 20.
      • Benefit
      • Students on IEPs identified as Striving Readers experienced Accelerated Reading Growth
      Jennifer McCarty Plucker, Ed. D
    • 21. Jennifer McCarty Plucker, Ed. D
    • 22. Jennifer McCarty Plucker, Ed. D
    • 23. N= 8 Academic Literacy 9 N=12 Control Group Academic Literacy 9 Control Jennifer McCarty Plucker, Ed. D
    • 24.
      • Benefit
      • Raised Self-Efficacy
      Jennifer McCarty Plucker, Ed. D
    • 25. Strong relationship between reading growth and students’ perceived self-efficacy (.883) Jennifer McCarty Plucker, Ed. D
    • 26.
      • Adolescent Striving Readers need a Double Dose of Literacy Instruction
      • One Year of Strategic Intervention is not Enough for Most Striving Readers
      • Strong correlation exists between students’ self-efficacy and reading growth
      • Regular Ed programming for Striving Readers can partner with Special Ed programming to benefit students with reading needs. (Pyramid of Intervention or RTI)
      Jennifer McCarty Plucker, Ed. D
    • 27.
      • Questions to Ponder as a Leadership Team:
      • Are we offering continued support for striving readers throughout high school (9-12)?
      • Are we exploring ways to include our content area teachers in scaffolding to meet their needs?
      • Are we immersing our students in texts at their level in ALL their classes so they get MORE not LESS?
      • Are we resisting the tendency to PULL kids out of their content area classes and instead PUSH in so they are getting MORE not LESS?
      • Are we creative with our schedules to be sure striving readers are getting sustained double (or even triple) doses of literacy instruction?
      Jennifer McCarty Plucker, Ed. D
    • 28.
      • Are we partnering with our SpEd and ELL colleagues to effectively and efficiently offer intervention to ALL who need it?
      • Are we offering equal attention for our striving readers as we do for our GT or AP students (i.e. access to technology, field trip opportunities, our most talented and trained staff, policy to ensure sustained programming)?
      • Are we looking at data and assessment effectively? (relying on triangulation, recognizing unintended consequences, looking for ways to get baseline assessment for new students, training our staff—teachers and counselors on data use)?
      Jennifer McCarty Plucker, Ed. D
    • 29.
      • Our intervention plans must
      • • substantially expand the volume of daily reading;
      • • ensure access to appropriate texts all day long;
      • • provide needed expert, explicit, personalized instruction; and
      • • craft a coherent and balanced array of reading lessons and activities.
      • (Allington, 2006)
      Jennifer McCarty Plucker, Ed. D
    • 30. Contact Information: Jennifer McCarty Plucker, EdD [email_address] [email_address] 651-283-8521 Jennifer McCarty Plucker, Ed. D