Literacy Study Group Report

1
Literacy Study Group Report

• Quality Indicators Review and Recommendations

Sarah McPherson - NYIT, Facilitator Roberta
Schnorr SUNY Oswego Rene Wroblewski St.
Bonaventure Lynne Burke Intl Dyslexia
Association
2
The Rationale

• Study Group can bridge gaps between K-12
  classrooms and IHE literacy programs

3
Purpose of Quality Indicators

• Assess quality of district instructional programs
  and practices in the areas of literacy
• Determine priority need areas
• Prescribe and plan activities to change practices
  and improve outcomes for students with
  disabilities
• NYVESID, November, 2007

4
Activities

• Gather input from Inclusion Task Force
• Circulate to Critical Friends in Higher Ed
  Community
• Conduct Statewide Survey
• Analyze survey results
• Report findings
• Submit recommendations

5
Purpose of Survey

• To map the "geography" of literacy practices at
  teacher preparation institutions around the
  state.
• To inform participating institutions about this
  geography and continue to develop Task Force
  capacity to provide services to its member
  institutions.
• To use the Literacy Quality Indicators to forge a
  closer link between SETRC, higher education
  institutions, and K-12 professional development.

6
Levels of Quality Indicators for Literacy

• Early Literacy Instructional Practice
• Adolescent Literacy (Middle Level)
• Adolescent Literacy (High School)
• Specially Designed and Intensive Reading for
  Students with Disabilities
• Systemic Support

7
Early Literacy Instructional Practice

• Review of IRA and NAEYC standards
• Results from survey
• Research base validation of results

8
Early Literacy

• Foundation for all future learning
• Opportunity to develop skills for decoding
• Competence with text
• Comprehension and critical thinking
• Develop a love for literature

9
Joint Position Statement (NAEYC, 1998)

• 1. It is essential and urgent to teach children
  to read and write competently, enabling them to
  achieve todays high standards of literacy.
• 2. With the increasing variation among young
  children in our programs and schools, teaching
  today has become more challenging.
• 3. Among many early childhood teachers, a
  maturationist view of young childrens
  development persists despite much evidence to the
  contrary.
• 4. Recognizing the early beginnings of literacy
  acquisition too often has resulted in use of
  inappropriate teaching practices suited to older
  children or adults perhaps but ineffective with
  children in preschool, kindergarten, and the
  early grades.
• 5. Current policies and resources are inadequate
  in ensuring that preschool and primary teachers
  are qualified to support the literacy development
  of all children, a task requiring strong
  pre-service preparation and ongoing professional
  development.

10
Applicable Standards for Early Literacy

• Foundational Knowledge
• Instructional Strategies and Curriculum Materials
• Assessment, Diagnosis, and Evaluation
• Creating a Literate Environment
• Professional Development

• Promoting Child Development and Learning
• Building Family and Community Relationships
• Observing, Documenting, and Assessing to Support
  Young Children and Families
• Teaching and Learning
• Becoming a Professional

• IRA

• NAEYC

11
Highest rated areas of Early Literacy
Phonemic awareness 100.0
Assessment 90.9
Phonics, decoding 90.9
Comprehension 90.9
Scaffolded instruction 90.9
Vocabulary development 90.9

Comments from respondents Comprehension before, during, and after reading strategies, questioning strategies, scaffolding Assessment - Informal and formal approaches, running records, portfolios, miscue analysis Phonemic awareness and phonics - concepts about print, interactive reading and writing, oral language experiences Comments from respondents Comprehension before, during, and after reading strategies, questioning strategies, scaffolding Assessment - Informal and formal approaches, running records, portfolios, miscue analysis Phonemic awareness and phonics - concepts about print, interactive reading and writing, oral language experiences
12
Lowest Rated Areas of Early Literacy
Assistive technology 36.4
Spelling 36.4
Handwriting 36.4
Universal design for learning 18.2

The appropriate use of technology and assistive technology, in particular, can allow access to the curriculum for many students with varying literacy needs (Hasselbring Bausch, 2005/2006). The appropriate use of technology and assistive technology, in particular, can allow access to the curriculum for many students with varying literacy needs (Hasselbring Bausch, 2005/2006).
13
Adolescent Literacy Middle Grades

• Focus on reading to learn particularly in
  content areas
• Analysis of the behavior and habits of good
  readers
• Explicit instruction in strategies for
  approaching text structures, organization, and
  comprehension
• The writing process (prewriting, drafting,
  revising, editing, and publishing)

14
Adolescent MSResults - 5Top to 5 Lowest
Percentages
n7
15
Adolescent Literacy (High School)

• Focused on content-embedded literacy
• Instruction geared toward college or employment
  preparation
• Extended Learning Opportunities
• Authentic relevance

16
Adolescent HS Results - 5Top to 5 Lowest
n4
17
Preparing ALL Teachers as Effective
Reading Professionals

• Supporting and Assessing Critical Literacy
  Education Competencies

18
QIs IRA Standard to Identify Key Teacher
Competencies (Literacy)

• Example IRA Standards (for Reading Specialist)
• Use assessment information to plan, evaluate and
  revise effective instruction for all students,
  including those at different developmental stages
  and from varied cultural and linguistic
  backgrounds.

• Example QI (Intensive SpNeeds)
• Diagnostic reading assessments
• are used to identify instructional deficits

19
QIs IRA Standard to Identify Key Teacher
Competencies (Literacy)

• Example IRA Standards (for Reading Specialist)
• Use in-depth assessment information to provide
  individualized instruction for struggling
  readers, collaborate with other professionals to
  plan and implement appropriate instruction for
  individuals.

• Example QI (Intensive Special Needs)
• Researched interventions are targeted to
  individual diagnostic assessment results

20
Use QI and IRA Standards to Design Course Content
AND Related Field Experience Requirements

• Specify Critical Competencies related to Special
  Educators role as Literacy teacher (e.g.,
  diagnostic assessments, intensive, individualized
  instruction, monitor progress and adjust,
  collaborate with teammates for all day literacy
  programming)
• Provide structured courses and supervised FIELD
  EXPERIENCES to support Candidates development of
  key competencies (including student teaching
  requirements)
• Design and implement PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENTS for
  candidate DECISION MAKING related to key
  BEGINNING PROFESSIONAL COMPETENCIES (for all
  certification roles)

21
Recommendations

• Universal Design for Learning
• Technology assistive, instructional and
  productivity
• Authentic real-world relevant instruction
• Multiple intelligences
• Project-based learning
• Pre-service programs with more intense field
  experience
• More rigorous assessment of pre-service teachers

22
Next Steps

• Continue review of literacy preparation program
• Collect additional data from more survey
  responders and syllabi review
• Include of English Language Learners in QIs
• Develop strategies for implementing QIs in higher
  education program
• Align programs with QIs
• Continue to build stronger linkages between
  Higher Ed and SERTC

23
References

• Hasselbring, T. S. Bausch, M. E. (2005/2006).
  Assistive technologies for reading. Educational
  Leadership, 63(4), 72-75.
• International Reading Association Standards for
  Reading Professionals (2004). Standards for
  Reading Professionals. A Reference for the
  Preparation of Educators in the United States,
  Developed by the Professional Standards and
  Ethics Committee of the International Reading
  Association.
• National Institute of Child Health and Human
  Development. (2000). Report of the National
  Reading Panel. Teaching children to read an
  evidence-based assessment of the scientific
  research literature on reading and its
  implications for reading instruction. Retrieved
  July 28, 2008, from http//www.nichd.nih.gov/publi
  cations/nrp/smallbook.htm