Academic Literacy Community of Practice Webinar 3: The Content Literacy Continuum: A Tiered Framework for Secondary Sch

1. Academic Literacy Community of Practice Webinar 3: The Content Literacy Continuum: A Tiered Framework for Secondary Schools Hosted by the Center on InstructionApril 30, 2010

2. The Center on Instruction is operated by RMC Research Corporation in partnership with the Florida Center for Reading Research at Florida State University; Instructional Research Group; the Texas Institute for Measurement, Evaluation, and Statistics at the University of Houston; and The Meadows Center for Preventing Educational Risk at The University of Texas at Austin.The contents of this PowerPoint were developed under cooperative agreement S283B050034 with the U.S. Department of Education. However, these contents do not necessarily represent the policy of the Department of Education, and you should not assume endorsement by the Federal Government.2010 The Center on Instruction requests that no changes be made to the content or appearance of this product.

3. COI Staff • Angela Penfold, Director • Ruth Dober, Deputy Director of Communications • Andrea Reade, Research Associate • Mabel Rivera, Deputy Director (ELL Strand) • Debby Miller, Deputy Director (Reading Strand) • Christy Murray, Deputy Director (Special Ed Strand) • Erika Soucy, Technical Assistance

4. Academic Literacy Webinar Series Schedule of Events

5. Today’s Agenda • Formal presentation • Question and answer session with our featured speaker • Evaluation

6. The Content Literacy Continuum: A Tiered Framework for Secondary Schools Don Deshler University of Kansas COI Webinar April 2010

7. Bottom Line: The onlywaythe needle moves on is through an integrated,school-wide approach in which everyoneownspart of the problem and believes big changes in achievement can happen.

8. ROADMAP • Challenges: The Students • Challenges: The Curriculum • Challenges: The System • Pieces of the Puzzle • Effective instruction w/ adolescents • Findings from a new study • Exemplary program • Responses from principals

9. Student Learning Profiles

10. “Clusters” of Poor Comprehenders 80%

11. The Performance Gap Skills / Demands Years in School

12. 2013-2014 The Performance Gap 2 1/2Yrs Skills and Demands 9 th 5 th Years in School 9 th

13. 50 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 40.20 Total score average 39.19 Subtest averages 20.15 20.06 19.57 19.61 P A T A T P Struggling Readers Proficient Readers 0 The Nature of Student Hope? • What is the difference in level of Hope between poor readers and good readers? • The Hope Scale (Snyder, et. al 1991) • T= Total score; • A= Agency score; • P= Pathways score

14. …important for me to be a good reader Poor = 3.23 Good = 3.11 I like it when my teachers say I read well.. Poor = 3.31 Good = 3.29 Important to see my name on list of good readers Poor = 3.12 Good = 2.99 I look forward to finding out my reading grade Poor = 3.40 Good = 3.21 I like reading questions that make me think hard Poor = 2.75 Good = 3.17 I like challenging books Poor = 2.54 Good = 3.19 I enjoy long, hard fiction.. Poor = 2.75 Good = 3.32 I make pictures in my mind .. Poor = 3.03 Good = 3.41 I am a good reader Poor = 2.97 Good = 3.61 Motivation for Reading Questionnaire(Scale of 1 to 4 with 4 being most positive)Guthrie, 2006

15. Rising Aspirations

16. Curriculum Demands

17. Muchmore content • Right hand and left aren’t coordinated • Fragmentedlearning

19. Texts become longer • More sophisticated learning strategies to get through assignments • Good “reading stamina” required

20. Word complexity increases • Dense technical vocabulary (e.g., gametophytes, vascular) • More academic vocabulary (e.g., ancestors, elongated) • Instruction in segmenting & pronouncing

21. Sentence complexity increases • Longer sentences must be parsed automatically for fluency • Recognize and use simple cohesive devices & connective words to understand relationships (e.g., but, if, or, that)

22. Structural complexity increases • Elementary: structures signaled explicitly. • One relationship explained at a time. • HS: structures not signaled explicitly • Several logical relationships between ideas • Interrelationships of section headings not apparent

23. Graphic representations become more important • Elementary: Text stands on own w/o graphic • HS: Graphics critical to understand interrelated ideas or synthesize info across sections

24. Conceptual challenge increases • Abstract concepts relying on sophisticated knowledge & previously learned concepts • Build relationships across a conceptual domain

25. Texts vary widely across content areas • Each content area demands a different approach to reading, thinking, writing • Norms of evidence & logic can vary • Different details are valued • Different values assigned to precision of reporting • Cope with primary sources

26. System Roadblocks(Somewhat hidden)

27. Optimal use of instructional time

28. “It’s only 14 minutes” 14 minutes/period X 5 periods/week X 36 weeks/year = 2,520 minutes/year 42 hours 7 school days

29. Fully tapping available resources

31. Teacher beliefs that struggling learners can be successful

32. Given high quality instruction, how confident are you that struggling adolescent readers can read close to grade level?

33. Teachers’ Expectations & Explanations • Satisfied if 50% of students master 50% of content • Struggling learners fail because • Attitudes & goals • Skills & abilities

34. Teachers’ Explanations • Biggest barrier to struggling learner success • Student attitudes • Students neglect of work • Low ability • Poor attendance • Unsupportive parents

35. Pieces of the Puzzle

36. Performance Gap Skills & Demands Current Support Years in School

37. Performance Gap Skills & Demands INSTRUCTIONAL SUPPORTS • Literacy-based instruction • Standards-informed curriculum planning • Motivation strategies • Engaging instructional materials & activities Instructional Supports Current Support Years in School

38. Performance Gap Skills & Demands PROFESSIONAL LEARNING SUPPORTS • Protocols for observing, describing, analyzing practice • Team planning for cohesion • Instructional Coaching • Student driven professional development Professional Learning Supports Instructional Supports Current Supports Years in School

39. Performance Gap SYSTEM SUPPORTS Skills & Demands • Literacy leadership teams • Tiered instructional supports (CLC) • Data guidance tools • Behavioral supports • Responsive scheduling • Strong building & district leadership • Internal accountability mechanisms System Supports Professional Learning Supports Instructional Supports Current Supports Years in School

40. Bottom Line: The onlywaythe needle moves on is through an integrated,school-wide approach in which everyoneownspart of the problem and believes big changes in achievement can happen.

41. Content Literacy Continuum

42. Begin by…. Getting a profile of the literacy performance of students in your school

43. Screen for….. • Word analysis skills • Fluency • Comprehension • Vocabulary

44. Possible Tools • Group Reading Assessment & Diagnostic Evaluation (GRADE) • Gates-MacGinitie Reading Tests • Test of Silent Word Reading Fluency

45. What are the implications? • Jefferson HS 3+ Yrs below grade • Word Recognition 5% • Comprehension 22% • Prairie View HS 3+ Yrs below grade • Word Recognition 27% • Comprehension 43%

46. Then ask….. Five questions about literacy supports

47. 5 Questions 1. What’s in place in core classes to ensure that students will get the “critical” content in spite of their literacy skills? 2. Are powerful learning strategies embedded in courses across the curriculum? 3. What happens for students who know how to decode but can’t comprehend well? 4. What happens for those students who are reading below the 4th grade level? 5. What happens for students who have language problems?

48. Finally…. Use a “content literacy” framework to determine an action plan

49. CONTENT CLASSES • Enhanced Content Instruction • Embedded Strategy Instruction Continuum of Literacy Instruction SUPPLEMENTAL CLASSES • Intensive Skill Instruction • IntensiveStrategy Instruction INDIVIDUALIZED • Intensive Intervention Improved Literacy KU-CRL CLC- Lenz, Ehren, &Deshler, 2005

50. So….What’s Content Literacy The listening, speaking, reading, and writing skills and strategies needed by students to learn in each of the academic disciplines