oregon reading first institute on beginning reading (ibr) leadership session for district team...

Oregon Reading First

Institute on Beginning Reading (IBR)

Leadership Session for District Team Members, Principals, and Mentor Coaches

August 25, 2004

© 2004 ORRF Center2

Content Development

Content developed by:

Oregon Reading First Center Staff

University of Oregon

Prepared by:

Katie Tate

University of Oregon


Acknowledgments

Edward J. Kame’enui, Ph.D., University of Oregon

Carrie Thomas Beck, Ph.D., University of Oregon

Scott Baker, Ph.D., University of Oregon

Barbara Gunn, Ph.D., Pacific Institute for Research

Hank Fien, Ph.D., University of Oregon

Nicole Sherman Brewer, Ph.D., University of Oregon

Rachell Katz, Ph.D., University of Oregon

Trish Travers, Ed. S., University of Oregon

Ben Clarke, Ph.D., University of Oregon

Oregon Department of Education


Review of Reading First Initiative & NCLB: A Federal Perspective


“To provide assistance to State educational agencies and local educational agencies in establishing reading programs for students in kindergarten through grade 3 that are based on scientifically based reading

research to ensure that every student can read at grade level or above not later than the end of grade 3.”

NCLB, 2001, Part B, Sec. 1201.

Purpose of Reading First


(2) “To provide assistance to State educational agencies

and local educational agencies in preparing teachers,

including special education teachers, through

professional development and other support, so the

teachers can identify specific reading barriers facing

their students and so the teachers have the tools to

effectively help their students learn to read.”

NCLB, 2001, Part B, Sec. 1201.

Purpose of Reading First


Review and Recommitment to Oregon Reading First Application and Plan


ORF Letter of Intent to Apply

Component 1: Qualify/No Qualify

Each district has submitted a Letter of Intent to Apply and required attachments—including a commitment to the Reading First project as described in Oregon’s State Application (pp. 65-84 and 167-188) signed by 100% of K-3 certified staff in each applicant school with instructional duties related to reading.

(p. 4, RFP)

(p. 64, Oregon’s Application)


ORF Assurances: District & School

Component 2: Qualify/No Qualify

District and School Information and Assurances of Commitment to the Reading First project as described in Oregon’s State Application (pp. 65-83 and 167-188)

Signed by the Superintendent of the eligible district and by the principal of the applicant school

One District and School Information and Assurances form must be filled out for each school for which the district is applying

(p. 6-8, RFP)



The district and school assure that 100% of the K-3 staff with duties related to reading, the principals, and district participants have been informed and agree to follow the program and assessment guidelines as outlined in Oregon’s Reading First State Application

(p. 64, Oregon’s Application, p. 8, RFP)



As new staff members are hired (including K-3 staff with duties related to reading, the principals, and district participants), the district and school assure that prospective staff will be informed during the hiring process and agree to follow the program and assessment guidelines as outlined in Oregon’s Reading First State Application prior to hiring

(p. 6-8, RFP)

(p. 8, RFP)


Oregon Reading First: 5 Major Elements

3. Reading Programs

1. Goals

2. Assessment

4. Professional Development

5. Implementation


04-05 Oregon Reading First Master Calendar

INCLUDES: Regional IBR dates

Leadership Trainings

Mentor Coach Trainings

DIBELS Testing

SAT-10 Testing


04-05 Oregon Reading First Master Calendar

ITEMS TO ADD:

Coaching Rotation

Grade Level Team Meetings

ERT Meetings

DIBELS Progress Monitoring

LPR Collection

Pacing Timelines for Core Programs

S-I Professional Development

S-I Implementation Dates

Other Inservice Dates

Other?


August, 2004

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat1 2 3

Joint ODE/RFCenter Meeting

4 5 6 7

8 9 10 11 12 13 14

15 16 17 18 19 20 21

22 23

Foundations ofDIBELSPendleton

24LeadershipTraining: NewDistrict/Principals/CoachesEugene

25LeadershipTraining:1. All Principals/District Teams2. All CoachesEugene

26LeadershipTraining:All CoachesEugene

Foundations ofDIBELSMedford

27 28

29 30 31


Institute on Beginning Reading

Year 02Implementation Checklist

Developed by:

Deborah C. SimmonsEdward J. Kame’enui

Hank FienBeth Harn

Carrie Thomas BeckNicole Sherman Brewer

Rachell KatzTrish Travers

Institute for the Development ofEducational Achievement

College of EducationUniversity of Oregon

August 2004

For Each

Student

Instruction

GoalsAssessment

For All Students


Year 02 Implementation Checklist

Includes immediate priorities and the months of September through June.

Tasks organized around 5 of the 7 PET elements:

I. Goals, Objectives, Priorities

II. Assessment

III. Instructional Programs and Materials

IV. Instructional Time

V. Differentiated Instruction/Grouping/Scheduling

Indicate who will complete each task and by when. Regional Coordinators will revisit tasks with

coaches on a regular basis and provide support when needed.


New Teacher Orientation

Consists of a two-day training series: Day 1: Introduction to Oregon Reading First and the

Schoolwide Beginning Reading Model.

Day 2: Foundations of DIBELS

Training may be provided at the district/school level or through the Oregon Reading First Center

Each school will receive a copy of the Day 1 presentation and materials for use if the training is to be provided at the local level.

Dates for the Introduction to Oregon Reading First and DIBELS sessions provided by the OR RF Center TBA.


Letter of CommitmentOREGON READING FIRST

SIGNATURE OF COMMITMENTFOR NEW TEAM MEMBERS

By signing below, Oregon Reading First team members indicate commitment to participate in allOregon Reading First Institutes on Beginning Reading during the period of the Oregon ReadingFirst grant funding.

“We the undersigned K-3 staff members are willing to participate in and fully supportthe Oregon Reading First grant.”

Please Print Clearly

First Name Last Name Title District SchoolSignature ofCommitment


Communications Protocol

Based on the following assumptions:

1. The Oregon Reading First Grant Program is a collaborative partnership between the Oregon Department of Education and the Oregon Reading First Center.

2. Both the Department and the OR RF Center are committed to clear, coordinated and consistent communication, both internal and external.


Communications Protocol

Defines the responsibilities of each unit and the persons responsible.

Units include:

Oregon Department of Education

OR Reading First Center

Regional Coordinator

Coach

District

School

Classroom

WRRFTAC


Communications Guidelines and ProtocolIf the Issue/Question is about . . .

Contact Contact Information

Budgets and Spending Plans

Russ Sweet [email protected]

(503)378-3600 X4448

Professional Development Plans

Regional Coordinator [email protected]

[email protected]

[email protected]

SAT-10 Assessments Barbara Gunn [email protected]

DIBELS Regional Coordinator or

Josh Wallin

[email protected]

(541)346-3529

. . .

mailto:[email protected]




Program Fidelity Checklist:

UPDATEUPDATE


Program Fidelity Checklist

District _____________________ School _____________________ Teacher ID #_____________________

Observer ____________________Date_______________________ Program / Lesson _________________

Name of Group ______________ Number of Students _________ Grade __________________________

Time Spent Observing ________ Special Considerations ________________________________________

Instructional TargetPhonemic Awareness = PA Phonics = PH Fluency = FL Vocabulary = V Comprehension = COther (e.g., writing, music) = O

Time Heading Activity Grouping Primary Instructor Level ofImplementation

Write instart andstoptime.

Write inmajorheading.

Write in activity. Circle the maininstructional target of the activity.Slash other targets (s) theteacher emphasizes.

WholeClass

SmallGroup

Indep Teacher = TSpecialist = SEd Asst = A

N = NoneP = PartialF = Full

Activity 1:

PA PH FL V C O

W S I T S A N P / P+ F

Comments


General Features of Instruction (Circle Approximate Level of Implementation)Primary Instructor: Teacher Specialist Assistant Grouping: Whole Class Small Group

1. Teacher modeled instructional tasks when appropriate.1 2 3 4 5

Provided no models. Followed curriculum, but studentsneeded more models.

Followed curriculum and providedmore models to meet students’needs.

Comments

2. Teacher provided explicit instruction.1 2 3 4 5

Provided no explicitinstruction.

Followed curriculum, but studentsneeded more explicit instruction.

Followed curriculum and providedmore explicit instruction to meetstudents’ needs.

Comments

3. Teacher engaged students in meaningful interactions with language during lesson.1 2 3 4 5

Provided noopportunities to developlanguage.

Followed curriculum, but studentsneeded more languagedevelopment.

Followed curriculum and providedmore language development tomeet students’ needs.

Comments



4. Teacher provided multiple opportunities for students to practice instructional tasks.1 2 3 4 5

Provided noopportunities forpractice.

Followed curriculum, but studentsneeded more practice.

Followed curriculum and providedmore practice to meet students’needs.

Comments

5. Teacher provided corrective feedback after initial student responses.1 2 3 4 5

Provided correctivefeedback less than 20%of the time.

Provided corrective feedback 41-60% of the time.

Provided corrective feedback81-100% of the time.

Comments

6. Students were engaged in the lesson during teacher-led instruction.1 2 3 4 5

Engaged less than 20%of the time.

Engaged 41-60% of the time. Engaged 81-100% of the time.

Comments



7. Students were engaged in the lesson during independent work.1 2 3 4 5

Engaged less than 20%of the time.

Engaged 41-60% of the time. Engaged 81-100% of the time.

Comments

8. Students were successful at completing activities.1 2 3 4 5

Successful less than20% of the time.

Successful 41-60% of the time. Successful 81-100% of the time.

Comments

9. Teacher encouraged student effort.1 2 3 4 5

Gave positive feedbackless than 20% of thetime.

Gave positive feedback 41-60%of the time.

Gave positive feedback 81-100% ofthe time.

Comments


Observation Feedback

Areas Implemented Well:

Identified Area(s) for Student Support:

Action Plan:

Follow-Up Date:


Oregon Reading First:Mentor Coach Job Description

Mentor Coach Qualifications

Mentor Coach Duties and Responsibilities

Mentor Coaches will NOT . ..

Review of Oregon Reading First Assessment:

Priorities and AlignmentPriorities and Alignment

oregon reading first institute on beginning reading (ibr) leadership session for district team...

Documents