Send the link below via email or IMCopy
Present to your audienceStart remote presentation
- Invited audience members will follow you as you navigate and present
- People invited to a presentation do not need a Prezi account
- This link expires 10 minutes after you close the presentation
- A maximum of 30 users can follow your presentation
- Learn more about this feature in our knowledge base article
Do you really want to delete this prezi?
Neither you, nor the coeditors you shared it with will be able to recover it again.
Make your likes visible on Facebook?
Connect your Facebook account to Prezi and let your likes appear on your timeline.
You can change this under Settings & Account at any time.
Literacy Improvement Plan
Transcript of Literacy Improvement Plan
Henry County Middle School students will achieve growth in literacy and numeracy skills that leads to graduation from high school and are necessary for college and / or technical training.
Empowered educators equipping students to be independent learners and thinkers who use the experience to make their goals a reality.
What Does The Data Say?
Insight from the Field
Literacy Improvement Plan
Henry County Middle School
HCMS will reduce the achievement gap in writing by implementing strategies designed to improve students’ ability to present information clearly and efficiently, targeting students in the following categories: males, free and reduced lunch and students with disabilities.
Strategy: Writers Workshop
HCMS will reduce the achievement gap in reading by implementing strategies designed to improve comprehension by students in the following categories: males, free and reduced lunch and students with disabilities.
Strategy: Text Annotations
Strategy: Accountable Talk
Strategy: Question Answer Relationships
Strategy: Collaborative Writing For Authentic Purposes
Making Writing Engaging for Boys...
Immediate Instructional Support
Year Long Instructional Support
Year At A Glance
HCMS will reduce the achievement gap in reading and writing by engaging in collaborative experiences (school and community) that will increase student engagement and academic success of students in the following categories: males, free and reduced lunch and students with disabilities.
Strategy: Co-Teaching / Co-Planning
Co-Teaching / Collaborating With Librarians
Strategy: Self- Paced Learning ... Collaborative Development of Knowledge
Accessible to teachers
(informal visits, open hours before and after school)
Initiate Coaching Activities
(develop schedule, plan with teachers, modeling /co-teaching, debrief lesson, analyze formative assessment, make decisions--next steps)
to work with teachers and students
Bean (2009), p. 126-127
Step 1 Planning
(What are the goals for the lesson? How should data be collected?)
Step 2 Observing
(focus on aspects agreed upon in planning meeting)
Step 3 Analyzing and Reflecting
(identify topics for professional learning)
Step 4 Conferring
(Bean, 2009, p. 129)
"Principal of engagement...Connect out-of-school with inside-school literacies" (Bean, 2009, p. 162)
"Create conditions in classrooms that promote self-efficacy"
(Bean, 2009, p. 162).
Assessment and Support
Initial Screening (DIBELS)
Diagnostic Assessment (IRI)
Progress Monitoring (Oral Reading Checklist)
Data Board / PLC
Formative Assessment / Formative Instruction
(Bean, 2009, p. 179-184)
Materials and Resources
Discuss helpful materials.
Provide a list of resources and materials to be used in instruction.
Model instructional practices.
Book Study McEwan, E. (2007).
40 Ways to Support Struggling Readers in Content Classrooms grades 6-12.
Corwin Press: Thousand Oaks, CA.
Professional Learning, TPGES, School Culture
Organizational Details (Assessment Materials/Data Notebooks/ Resources)
Student Screenings / Diagnostic Assessments
Meet with Teachers in PLC, Determine Need Professional Resources
Plan for Family and Community Involvement
Supporting Teachers in Classrooms (minimum of 1/2 day collaborating)
Meetings with Administrators, Plan Professional Learning, Monthly Strategy Study Groups Co-Planning
Continuous tracking student achievement
Enrollment 534 students
NBCT Teachers Math and Science
Dedicated professionals working to prepare students for college, career and civic life.
"I am concerned about our students lack of stamina for reading and writing."
"I am concerned about the large discrepancy in ability levels. I have some students reading on a Pre-K level while others in the same class are reading college level materials."
"Some kids are simply not motivated."
"We are lacking many valuable resources: time, money and computers to name a few."
58% of males scored less than proficient in Reading.
90% of students with disabilities failed to meet proficiency in Reading.
61% of students who receive free and reduced lunch failed to meet proficiency in Reading.
60% of the students who did not meet proficiency in writing were males.
98% of students with disabilities failed to score proficient in writing.
60% of students on free or reduced lunch failed to score proficient in writing.
"I don't really like school. For the most part, school is pretty boring. The stuff we are learning doesn't always matter in the real world." HCMS Student
Does it help close the gap?
Bean, R. M. (2009). The Reading Specialist: Leadership for the Classroom, School and Community (2nd edition). Guilford Press: New York.
Brunvand, S., & Byrd, S. (2011). Using VoiceThread to Promote Learning Engagement and Success for All Students. Teaching Exceptional Children, 43(4), 28-37.
Chorzempa, B., & Lapidus, L. (2009). "To Find Yourself, Think for Yourself": Using Socratic Discussions in Inclusive Classrooms. TEACHING Exceptional Children, 41(3), 54-59.
Fenty, N. S., McDuffie-Landrum, K., & Fisher, G. (2012). Using Collaboration, Co-Teaching, and Question Answer Relationships to Enhance Content Area Literacy. Teaching Exceptional Children, 44(6), 28-37.
Goldenberg, L., Meade, T., Midouhas, E., & Cooperman, N. (2011). IMPACT OF A TECHNOLOGY-INFUSED MIDDLE SCHOOL WRITING PROGRAM ON SIXTH-GRADE STUDENTS' WRITING ABILITY AND ENGAGEMENT. Middle Grades Research Journal, 6(2), 75-96.
James, L., Abbott, M., & Greenwood, C. R. (2001). How Adam became a writer. Teaching Exceptional Children, 33(3), 30-37.
Kennedy, M., & Deshler, D. (2010). Literacy instruction, technology and students with learning disabilities: Research we have, research we need. Learning Disability Quarterly, 33(4), 289-298.
Kinniburgh, L., & Baxter, A. (2012). Using Question Answer Relationships in Science Instruction to Increase the Reading Achievement of Struggling Readers and Students with Reading Disabilities. Current Issues In Education, 15(2), 1-9.
Klipper, B. (2014). Making Makerspaces Work for Everyone. Children & Libraries: The Journal Of The Association For Library Service To Children, 12(3), 5-6.
Lee, R. (2006). Effective learning outcomes of esl elementary and secondary school students utilizing educational technology infused with constructivist pedagogy. International Journal of Instructional Media, 33(1), 87-93.
Loeper, Rachel. (2014)"Combat Sports Bloggers, Mad Scientist Poets, And Comic Scriptwriters: Engaging Boys In Writing On Their Own Terms."
Afterschool Matters 19: 36-43. ERIC. Web. 21 Sept. 2014.
Nierengarten, G. (2013). Supporting Co-Teaching Teams in High Schools: Twenty Research-Based Practices. American Secondary Education, 42(1), 73-83.
Porter-O'Donnell, C. (2004). Beyond the Yellow Highlighter: Teaching Annotation Skills to Improve Reading Comprehension. English Journal, 93(5), 82-89.
Toll, C. A. (2006). The Literacy Coach’s Desk Reference Processes and Perspectives for Effective Coaching. National Council for Teachers of English: Urbana, IL.
Four features of the boys’ engagement with the writing process:
• Banter and physicality
• Frequent breaks to talk about form or content with peers and adults
• Sharing work with the writing community throughout the writing process
• Sharing work beyond the writing community" (Loeper, 2014, p. 38)
"The significant difference found for low performing students suggests that Writing Matters [technology based program] was effective in influencing the writing of its target population of struggling students" (Goldenberg, et.al., 2011, p. 92).
The students began to view themselves as in charge of their own progress and as empowered authors capable of telling their story to the reader. (James, L. Abbot, M. & Greenwood, C. 2001, p. 36)
Porter-O'Donnell states in his 2004 research that annotating "was not as much of a problem or a source of complaint for struggling readers because they found that the time it took to annotate was less than the time it took to reread the text several times" (p. 88).
"Engaging students in literary dialogue encourages complex thinking" (Chorzempa, B., & Lapidus, L., 2009, p. 58).
"School is ok...I guess. My favorite class is Math. I like my teachers, but
the stuff we do can be kind of boring."
"Significant gains were made in reading by the 10 student participants in comprehending science expository text after a 4- week implementation period" (Kinniburgh, L, & Baxter, A. 2012, p. 1).
"Formative data will provide important information related to the implementation of the co-teaching practice and summative data supplies details needed for rethinking and revision of the program" (Cook & Friend, 1995).
"Kids with disabilities, like all kids, can enjoy and learn from simply using 3-D printers and may very much want to join in the robotics and other maker programs you already offer" (Klipper, 2014, p. 6).
"Another benefit of VoiceThread is that it is specifically designed to promote the collaborative development of knowledge by providing students the opportunity to share their voice and express opinions regardless of their ability" (Brunvand & Byrd, 2007, p. 6).
Professional Learning that Works
Conference Record Sheet
How It's Going:
For Future Discussion:
Action Steps by Teacher:
Action Steps by Coach:
Bring to Next Meeting: (Toll, 2005)
Planning for Action Chart
Success Looks Like / Sounds Like
(Toll, 2005, p. 65)
Record Teacher Name and Code in Spreadsheet
NGSM=New Goal Setting Meeting
DLP=Demonstration Lesson Planning
DLFM=Demonstration Lesson Follow Up Meeting
CTFM=Co-Teaching Follow-up Meeting
(Toll, 2005, p. 71)
Pre-Coaching Session Survey
Rank each of the following statements according to the following scale: 5 very confident, 3 somewhat confident, 1 not confident at all
1. Meeting needs of all learners in my classroom. 5 4 3 2 1
2. Effectively use formative assessment to guide instruction. 5 4 3 2 1
3. Effectively use resources (print and digital). 5 4 3 2 1
4. Effectively facilitate learning in my classroom. 5 4 3 2 1
5. Empower students to be the "doers" and "thinkers". 5 4 3 2 1
Post-Coaching Session Survey
Rank each of the following statements according to the following scale:
5 strongly agree, 3 somewhat agree, 1 do not agree at all
1. I feel better prepared to meet needs of all learners in my classroom.
5 4 3 2 1
2. I feel better equipped to effectively use formative assessment to
guide instruction. 5 4 3 2 1
3. I feel that I have a selection of resources (print and digital) that could
be used to further learning. 5 4 3 2 1
4. I feel that I can apply strategies that will allow me to effectively
facilitate learning in my classroom. 5 4 3 2 1
5. I feel that I can apply strategies that will empower students to be the
"doers" and "thinkers". 5 4 3 2 1
Data Collection Procedures / Monitoring
Pre-Coaching Session Survey
Post-Coaching Session Survey
Teacher Goal Setting
Teacher Needs Identified for Professional Learning
Follow-up With Individual Teachers
Amy Treece--EDU 598
Self-Assess Needs for Strategy Implementation
Plans for action
Co-Planning Session (materials/resources)
Follow Up As Needed