1 / 35

Read to Achieve

Read to Achieve. Webinar 3 February 26, 2013. Attendance Report Program Evaluation Report Non-fiction . Agenda. 88.7% of the teachers providing RTA interventions are full time. 47.8% of classroom teachers use differentiated instruction a significant amount of time.

iwalani
Download Presentation

Read to Achieve

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Read to Achieve Webinar 3 February 26, 2013

  2. Attendance Report • Program Evaluation Report • Non-fiction Agenda

  3. 88.7% of the teachers providing RTA interventions are full time. • 47.8% of classroom teachers use differentiated instruction a significant amount of time. Program Evaluation Report

  4. Classroom Activities for RTA students

  5. Time elapsed between RTA referral and meeting to discuss needs of student

  6. RTA Team Meetings

  7. The RTA grant is a legal binding document. Every school that applied for the grant must adhere to the requested research based program.

  8. On the average, fewer than 10% of elementary English language arts texts are nonfiction (Duke, 2004).

  9. In your school, how much time do kindergarten students spend engaged in nonfiction? What about first graders?

  10. The Common Core State Standards, academic benchmarks that have been adopted by 46 states, call for 12th grade reading to be 70 percent nonfiction, or "informational texts" -- gradually stepping up from the 50 percent nonfiction reading required of elementary school students.

  11. Red: Divide the text into three sections: introduction, main body, and review. • Gray: Box the illustrations. • Black: Box labels that help a reader understand the illustration. • Green: Circle each heading and box its corresponding section. • Blue: Circle each sub heading and box its corresponding sub- section. • Purple: Box all questions in the main body of the text. • Yellow: Highlight vocabulary words in main body of the text. • Brown: Box graphs and charts.

  12. Write one word or phrase on a sticky note that summarizes the message of the passage.

  13. To find an effect, ask yourself What happened? because consequently so To find a cause, ask yourself Why did this happen? the effect of

  14. ReadWorks.org A leading non-profit organization that provides a FREE research based, and Common Core-aligned reading comprehension curriculum for grades K-6.

  15. Amelia’s Road by Linda Jacobs Altman

  16. CONTRAST FACT AND FICTION Waiting for Wings by Lois Ehlert Caterpillar Diary by David Drew The Very Hungry Caterpillar by Eric Carle

  17. EVALUATE REALISM The Biggest Bear by Lynd Ward Blueberries for Sal by Robert McCloskey Goldilocks and the Three Bears

  18. DEVELOP PERSPECTIVE The Pain and the Great One by Judy Blume Alexander and the Terrible, Horrible, No-Good Very Bad Day by Judith Viorst

  19. According to NEAP’s 2011 National Report Card only 25%of U.S. 12th graders write at a proficient level and only 3% write at an advanced level.

  20. KRS 158.305 Evidence of implementation shall be submitted by the district to the department for: Reading/Writing Interventions August 1, 2013 Math Interventions August 1, 2014 Behavior Interventions August 1, 2015

  21. Two necessary conditions for students to improve the quality of their writing are explicit instruction in writing techniques and sustained writing practice.

  22. Essentials for a writing workshop • Gathering space for mini lessons • Clipboards for research • Clustered desks for partner work • Writing resource area • Classroom library • Word walls • Shared topic lists

  23. Do not expect perfecTion Expect growth

  24. 0094 judith.halasek@education.ky.gov Attendance Code

  25. Resources Anderson, E., & Guthrie, J. T. (1999, April). Motivating children to gain conceptual knowledge from text: The combination of science observation and interesting texts. Paper presented to the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Montreal, Canada. Caswell, L. J., & Duke, N. K. (1998). Non-narratives as a catalyst for literacy development. Language Arts, 75 , 108-117. Dreher, M. J. (2000). Fostering reading for learning. In L. Baker, M. J. Dreher, & J. Guthrie (Eds.), Engaging young readers: Promoting achievement and motivation (pp. 94-118). New York: Guilford. Duke, N. K., Bennett-Armistead, V. S., & Roberts, E. M. (2002). Incorporating information text in the primary grades. In C. Roller (Ed.), Comprehensive reading instruction across grade levels (pp. 40-54). Newark, DE: International Reading Association. Duke, N. K., & Kays, J. (1998). Can I say Once upon a time: Kindergarten children developing knowledge of information book language. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 13, 295-318. Duke, N. K., Bennett-Armistead, V. S., & Roberts, E. M. (2003). Bridging the gap between learning to read and reading to learn. In D. M. Barone & L. M. Morrow (Eds.), Guthrie, J. T., Van Meter, P., McCann, A. D., Wigfield, A., Bennett, L., Poundstone, et al. (1996). Growth in literacy engagement: Changes in motivations and strategies during concept-oriented reading instruction. Reading Research Quarterly, 31, 306-332. Jobe, R. & Dayton-Sakari,M. (2002). Info-kids: How to use nonfiction to turn reluctant readers into enthusiastic learners. Markham, Ontario, Canada: Pembroke. Joint reading between Head Start children and their mothers. Child Development, 61 , 443-453. Kamil, M. L. & Lane D. M. (1998). Researching the relation between technology and literacy: An agenda for the 21st century. In D. R. Reinking, L. D. Labbo, M. McKenna, & R. Kieffer (Eds.), Literacy for the 21st century: Technological transformations in a post-typographical world (pp. 235-251). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Literacy and young children: Research-based practices (pp. 226-242). New York: Guilford Press. (Note: This is an only slightly different version of the chapter listed immediately above.) Mason, J. M., Peterman, C. L., Powell, B. M., & Kerr, B. M. (1989). Reading and writing attempts by kindergarteners after book reading by teachers, In J. M. Mason (Ed.) Rationale for Teaching Nonfiction Writing Grades K-2 Explorations in Nonfiction Writing by Tony Stead and Linda Hoyt an imprint of Heinemann 2011 Reading and writing connections (pp. 105-120). Boston: Allyn & Bacon. Pelligrini, A. D., Perlmutter, J. C., Galda, L., Brody, G. H. (1990). Report of The National Commission on Writing in America’s Schools and Colleges The Neglected “R” The Need for a Writing Revolution. April 2003 Smith, M. C. (2000). The real-world reading practices of adults. Journal of Literacy Research, 32 , 25-32. Venezky, R. L. (1982) The origins of the present-day chasm between adult literacy needs and school literacy instruction. Visible Language, 16, 112-127. Williams J., et. al. “Embedding Reading Comprehension Training in Content-Area Instruction.” Journal of Educational Psychology, 101.1 (2009), pp. 1-20. http://bit.ly/ruTbrW (subscription only) Wilson, P. T., Anderson, R. C. (1986). What they don't know will hurt them: The role of prior knowledge in comprehension. In J. Oransano (Ed.), Reading comprehension from research to practice (pp. 31-48), Hillside, NJ: Erlbaum.

More Related