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 –Int’l Dyslexia Association

2. The Rationale Study Group can bridge gaps between K-12 classrooms and IHE literacy programs

3. 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

4. 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

5. Early Literacy Instructional Practice • Review of IRA and NAEYC standards • Results from survey • Research base validation of results

6. 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

7. 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

8. Highest rated areas of Early Literacy

9. Lowest Rated Areas of Early Literacy

10. 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)

11. Adolescent MSResults - 5Top to 5 Lowest Percentages n=7

12. Adolescent Literacy (High School) • Focused on content-embedded literacy • Instruction geared toward college or employment preparation • Extended Learning Opportunities • Authentic relevance

13. Adolescent HS Results - 5Top to 5 Lowest n=4

14. QI’s + 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

15. Example: QI (Intensive Special Needs) Researched interventions are targeted to individual diagnostic assessment results 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. QI’s + IRA Standard to Identify Key Teacher Competencies (Literacy)

16. 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)

17. 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

18. 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

19. 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/publications/nrp/smallbook.htm