Creating a Sustainable Reading Culture

1
Creating a Sustainable Reading Culture

• Sharon Walpole
• University of Delaware
• Michael C. McKenna
• University of Virginia

2
Goals for these two days

1. Engage you in reflection about your current level
   of GARF implementation
2. Share what we know about upcoming budget cuts
3. Guide you to reflect on your data
4. Demonstrate differentiated lessons so that you
   can better observe them

3
Georgia Reading First Reality Check v

• We have one more year of guaranteed full funding
• We have one additional year of extension funding
  -- but only at 40
• The state must make decisions about how to use
  that funding
• This may be your final chance to use RF resources
  to institutionalize critical aspects of RF

4
What are the critical aspects of GARF?
Intensive intervention
Differentiated small-group instruction
High-quality whole-group instruction
5
What do researchers identify as barriers to such
a plan?

• Problems in translating policy into practice
• Inadequate professional development
• Failure to achieve a supportive culture

6
Federal RF Policy
What actually happens in schools and classrooms
7
Federal RF Policy
What actually happens in schools and classrooms
8
Federal RF Policy
Policy must be interpreted by those who implement
it. Policy is rarely specific enough to leave no
room for flexibility and adaptation at the local
levels (Tabak, 2007).
What actually happens in schools and classrooms
9
Federal RF Policy
In Reading First, there is enough guidance in
policy to enable us to implement our projects to
meet the intent of the legislation. At the same
time, the policy is broad enough to enable us to
tailor our projects to local contexts.
What actually happens in schools and classrooms
10
Federal RF Policy
If a policy is too vague, it invites so much
variation that a program has no distinct
identity. That is not the case in Reading First.
We believe that the policy permits just the right
amount of leeway to ensure both faithful
implementation and reasonable adaptations.
What actually happens in schools and classrooms
11
Federal RF Policy
The policy for Reading First is specific enough,
however, that attempts to subvert it are often in
clear violation of the legislative intent.
What actually happens in schools and classrooms
12
Kersten and Pardo (2007) approvingly describe a
teacher named Celina, who taught from the core
program only on Mondays and did as she pleased
the rest of the week.
13
During this study, Celina demonstrated that she
was adept at finessing her teaching. She
determined she would give a nod to the mandated
basal series and the required 120 minutes of
instruction yet she also maintained a focus on
integrated language arts and writing workshop.
She drew from her four years of experience in a
fairly stable context to teach in a way that she
was not only comfortable with but also that she
felt would best serve her students. (p. 151)
14
We believe that in Georgia teachers like Celina
are rare. The fact is, Reading First expects
teachers to make reasonable adaptations
appropriate for their contexts. This policy is
in accord with research. Klingner et al. (1999)
found that teachers value practices that permit
some modification and that are not overly rigid.
15
The Too-Tight, Too-Loose Dilemma
Limited Press for Change
Tight Control
Temporary Improvement
Loose Control
Adapted from Fullan (2006)
16
The Too-Tight, Too-Loose Dilemma
Limited Press for Change
Tight Control
Temporary Improvement
Loose Control
Adapted from Fullan (2006)
17
In general terms, the solution to motivating
people is to establish the right blend of
tightness and looseness. (Fullan, 2006, p. 37)
Michael Fullan
18
Federal RF Policy
Translating the policy of Reading First into
effective classroom practice is the goal of
professional development.
What actually happens in schools and classrooms
19
Facilitators
PD Program
Teachers
Context
Borko (2004) suggests that in order for a PD
program to influence teacher knowledge, certain
individuals must facilitate the program, mindful
of school and classroom contexts.
Hilda Borko
20
Facilitators
PD Program
Teachers
Context
In Reading First, there are many facilitators
coaches, principals, Academy trainers, program
reps, and even PD architects.
21
Facilitators
PD Program
Teachers
Context
Over time, teachers themselves become
facilitators as they learn together and build a
professional community focused on reading.
22
Facilitators
PD Program
Teachers
Context
The contexts in which they learn are their own
classrooms, which become laboratories where they
can try out new approaches and judge the results
for themselves.
23
What does a good Reading First school look like?
Reading First has many dimensions, and they are
all important. Under the direction of Carolyn
Vincent, RMC has recently provided a checklist to
examine these dimensions. As we proceed, ask
yourself how your own project stacks up.
24
RMC Implementation Checklist

• Leadership
• Common purpose
• Curriculum
• Instruction
• Assessment
• Use of time

• Professional Development
• Coaching/Support
• Use of recurring resources
• District support

25
RMC Implementation Checklist

• Leadership
• Common purpose
• Curriculum
• Instruction
• Assessment
• Use of time

• Professional Development
• Coaching/Support
• Use of recurring resources
• District support

26
Leadership

• Job descriptions, supervision, evaluation of
  leaders support for reading improvement.

27

The principal has a clear understanding with the LC and grade-level chairs about the the duties and expectations of the P and the LC. The Ps role as teacher evaluator has been kept deliberately distinct from the LCs formative role The relationship between the P and LC has evolved over the course of the grant, without well-articulated ideas about who will do what. The LC has made a habit of communicating the results of observations with the P, a fact that teachers know.
28
Leadership

• Leadership is distributed among staff and across
  instructional areas roles.

29

Grade-level teams collaboratively decide which books to study and teachers sometimes make presentations during grade-level meetings. The principal does not micromanage the coach but permits wide discretion with the roles and goals they have established. The coach leads most book studies and the principal oversees almost all of the activities of the coach, somewhat defensively.
30
Leadership

• Turnover of key staff is managed by planned
  succession- reading-based hiring practices.

31
Klingner et al. (1999) found that when principals
consistently supported what was presented in
professional development, teachers implemented
and maintained the practices.
Janette Klingner
32

Administrators are hired on the basis of general administrative expertise and knowledge of reading. New coach is hired on the basis of classroom experience plus reading specialist certification or reading endorsement. Administrators are hired on the basis of general administrative expertise alone. New coach is hired on the basis of classroom experience alone.
33
Leadership

• District staff actively support scientifically
  research based reading improvement practices.

34

District staff regularly participate in PD events and frequently express public support for SBRI. Administrators seize every opportunity to express their pride in RF. This message is conveyed frequently and sincerely at the district and school levels. District staff have adopted a laissez faire attitude toward RF, permitting the principal and coach to manage the project. RF is treated like many other funded initiatives, as a revenue source that comes with hoops through which all must jump.
35
RMC Implementation Checklist

• Leadership
• Common purpose
• Curriculum
• Instruction
• Assessment
• Use of time

• Professional Development
• Coaching/Support
• Use of recurring resources
• District support

36
Common purpose

• Leaders communicate regularly w/staff to sustain
  vision, beliefs, expectations, goals
  commitments for reading success.

37

Leaders are clear in contrasting favorably the systems now in place with the schools reading program prior to RF. Leaders convey the message that RF assessment and instruction are burdens to be borne, at least until funding ends.
38
Common purpose

• Leaders develop nurture a culture of doing
  things in ways consistent with scientifically
  research based reading practices.
• Leaders acknowledge staff efforts that help make
  a difference in student performance.

39

The principal, in tandem with the coach, tracks DIBELS and PPVT-III trends and meets with grade-level teams and individual teachers to explicitly acknowledge student growth. The principal also communicates positive trends upward as well, to district leaders and parents. The principal tends to ignore positive data outcomes, focusing almost entirely on the CRCT.
40

The coach makes a point of expressing appreciation, either individually or in group settings, for contributions to the project. The coach misses many opportunities to acknowledge the contributions of teacher leaders and individual teachers.
41
Common purpose

• Leaders organize school structures (e.g.,
  committees, schedules) resources (budget,
  staffing) in alignment with effective reading
  practices.

42

A school leadership team including the principal, the coach, grade-level leaders, and othersmeets regularly to evaluate the project. The school depends on the coach to monitor reading process and make key decisions concerning the reading program.
43
Common purpose

• Leaders assure that all staff understand act
  upon the variables which impact student learning.

44

Book studies and other PD have clarified the causal factors affecting reading development. Classroom and grade-level schedules have been revisited and refined on the basis of collaborative teacher input. Most teachers are unable to name more than one or two factors influencing the growth of reading proficiency. Classroom and grade-level schedules, including the use of specialists, were developed early on, without teacher input.
45
Common purpose

• Leaders provide supervision and support to
  strengthen reading instruction.

46

Reading is first among equals wherever discretionary funding is concerned. Interviews with beginning teachers explain RF fully and seek an assurance that the candidate would be comfortable in such an environment. Reading is on a par with other subjects regarding budget priorities. Interviews with beginning teachers focus on general instructional issues.
47

The coach and principal visit classrooms frequently but seldom together. The principal honors the coachs commitment to confidentiality. The coach has established good working relationships with nearly all teachers The coach and principal often confer together during classroom observations. The principal often requests information about observations and conferences from the coach. The coach has failed to overcome the resistance of a number of teachers the principal does nothing about this.
48
Common purpose

• Leaders assure that all instructional areas
  collaborate to create a coordinated reading
  program.

49

Special educators collaborate with the coach and classroom teachers by addressing the needs of students on a pull-out or push-in basis. Special educators work largely in isolation and interact little with RF
50
Common purpose

• Instructional planning occurs within and across
  grade levels to assure consistency seamlessness.

51

District-level special education administrators are supportive of and cooperative with the RF program. District-level special education administrators remain tacitly resistant to RF.
52
RMC Implementation Checklist

• Leadership
• Common purpose
• Curriculum
• Instruction
• Assessment
• Use of time

• Professional Development
• Coaching/Support
• Use of recurring resources
• District support

53
Curriculum

• Differentiated programs are in place.

54

Grade-level team meetings routinely address coordinated implementation of the core program. As a result, walkthroughs on any day reveal that each class is at roughly the same point in the core. The coach has helped build curriculum maps to ensure vertical articulation across grade levels to address the GPS. Teachers from adjacent grade levels occasionally meet to discuss transitions. Teachers at one or more grade levels are often at different points in the core and teach from it in a wide variety of ways. Disconnects at adjacent grade levels are commonplace. Teachers from adjacent grade levels rarely interact.
55

There is a consistent, well-defined plan for using informal assessment data to plan and implement differentiated instruction at all grade levels. This instruction is planned during grade-level meetings and its effects are monitored on a regular schedule. Children are expected to move to different groups and groups are expected to move to higher-order skills. The school is still considering its commitment to differentiation. Implementation is sporadic.
56
Curriculum

• All staff who teach instructional groups are
  trained on the programs they use.

57
The relation between professional development and
the tools used to teach reading is
underestimated. Because teachers instructional
practices are, in part, dependent on their
instructional tools, efforts to enhance teachers
effectiveness in the absence of effective tools
(e.g., effectively designed materials, adequate
time) may make the task not just more difficult
but impossible. (Chard, 2004, p. 180)
David Chard
58

Small-group instruction during the block is guided by assessment results. Tier 3 interventions outside the block are set up and working. Small-group instruction during the block tends to rotate all children through the same activities. Tier 3 interventions outside the block are still a work-in-progress.
59
Curriculum

• Supervision for fidelity (coach and principal).

60

The coach has arranged for company representatives to provide all teachers with adequate training. Teachers are left to their own devices to read manuals and examine materials.
61
Curriculum

• Some staff in school, district or region are
  trained as trainers of supplemental/intervention
  programs to facilitate further training needs
  future.

62

Walkthroughs and observations focus on the proper implementation of the programs adopted. Teachers with a thorough knowledge of supplemental or intervention program are assigned to mentor new teachers. Walkthroughs and observations focus on instructional issues, to the virtual exclusion of core fidelity. New teachers must learn supplemental and intervention programs on their own.
63
RMC Implementation Checklist

• Leadership
• Common purpose
• Curriculum
• Instruction
• Assessment
• Use of time

• Professional Development
• Coaching/Support
• Use of recurring resources
• District support

64
Instruction

• All instructional staff are both supported
  supervised for high fidelity implementation (EAs,
  etc.).

65

The coach observes to ensure that recently introduced techniques are properly implemented in a classroom. The coach assumes that techniques recently introduced will be appropriately implemented in classrooms but rarely observes to ensure that this is the case.
66
Instruction

• Instructional planning is guided by frequent
  formative assessment data.

67

The coach routinely uses DIBELS profiles and other data to help teachers plan. The coach summarizes data from grade-level teams after each benchmarking in order to highlight strengths and concerns. The coach rarely shares DIBELS profiles with teachers and is not systematic about the use of other data. The coach rarely discusses data trends with grade-level teams.
68
Instruction

• Additional targeted instruction is provided daily
  for strategic intensive needs students to help
  close the gap.

69

Classroom and grade-level schedules document the daily occurrence of small-group differentiated instruction inside the block inside the block and intervention instruction outside the block. Small-group instruction and intervention are not clearly reflected in schedules and may occur on an irregular basis.
70
Instruction

• Staff and students are acknowledged for progress
  toward larger successes.

71

The principal publicly acknowledges achievement gains, both to students and teachers. The principal and coach avoid explicit comparisons among teachers. The principal minimizes or ignores gains on measures other than the CRCT. The principal and coach make public data trends for individual teachers.
72
Instruction

• Grade-level teams meet 1-2 times per month to
  review data and adjust instructional plans.

73

The coach often encourages teachers to remind their students that testing is not an end in itself but is used to make them better readers. The coach conveys the unspoken message that test scores are the ultimate goal of RF and are the final product of all their efforts.
74
Instruction

• Follow-up to assure revisions are implemented and
  are working.

75

The coach reviews data trends with each grade-level team at least once a month. Grade-level teachers receive little guidance about the use of data, and grade levels vary in their efforts to use data to plan instruction.
76
RMC Implementation Checklist

• Leadership
• Common purpose
• Curriculum
• Instruction
• Assessment
• Use of time

• Professional Development
• Coaching/Support
• Use of recurring resources
• District support

77
In considering growth between bench-markings,
these questions should be asked at each grade
level

• What percentage of benchmark children remain at
  benchmark?
• What percentage of them fell to Strategic?
• What percentage fell to Intensive?

78
In considering growth between bench-markings,
these questions should be asked at each grade
level

1. What percentage of Strategic children remained
   Strategic?
2. What percentage of Strategic children rose to
   Benchmark?
3. What percentage fell to Intensive?

79
In considering growth between bench-markings,
these questions should be asked at each grade
level

1. What percentage of Intensive children remained
   Intensive?
2. What percentage of Intensive children rose to
   either Strategic or Benchmark?

80
Remember

• At grades K and 1, the risk level is a weighted
  combination of DIBELS scores, called the
  Instructional Recommendation.
• At grades 2 and 3, the risk level is ORF.

DIBELS screenings and rescreenings give us clues
about student progress, but they do not tell the
whole story. We combine different types of data
to do that.
81

The coach regularly examines progress-monitoring data between benchmarkings in order to gauge the success of revised instructional emphases. The principal analyzes DIBELS growth from fall to winter and from winter to spring. The coach waits until the next benchmarking to determine whether problems have been adequately addressed. The principal leaves data trends to the coach and does not attend grade-level meetings where these trends are discussed.
82
Assessment

• There is a competent trainer available locally to
  train staff on data collection and use.

83
A major purpose of formative evaluation is to
provide information that enables individuals and
groups to adjust their behavior. Data are meant
to be communicated, and the form data analysis
takes needs to be governed primarily by its
relevance to the questions asked and its clarity
in communicating results (Joyce Showers, 2002,
p. 118)
84

The coach has mastered the administration and interpretation of DIBELS and mentors new teachers in their use. The coach understands how to choose and use informal diagnostic assessment to guide instruction. The coach remains uncertain about how to interpret DIBELS reports and has not kept up with the various reports available. Teachers use only screening results to group and plan instruction.
85
Assessment

• Staff are trained to interpret the meaning and
  implications of the data.

86

In reviewing classroom profiles with teachers, the coach thinks aloud about how certain conclusions are warranted on the basis of the data. Although the coach provides interpretations of profiles to classroom teachers, this is done without explaining how conclusions were reached.
87
Assessment

• School leaders assure that grade level teams meet
  regularly and have the support they need to be
  successful.

88

Just as the block is protected, the principal has ensured a daily joint planning time for each grade level. The coach attends grade-level meetings at least every other week. Although the principal has arranged for joint planning time, teachers at each grade level rarely meet.
89
Assessment

• Data are used in grade level team planning
  process to verify/modify instructional variables
  as needed.

90

The coach facilitates discussion of grade-level profiles, with the aim of achieving consensus on instructional priorities. Although the coach examines grade-level profiles, little effort is made to achieve consensus of grade-level teams about instructional priorities.
91
Fortunately, a degree in statistics is not
required to sensibly analyze data (Joyce
Showers, 2002, p. 118)
92
RMC Implementation Checklist

• Leadership
• Common purpose
• Curriculum
• Instruction
• Assessment
• Use of time

• Professional Development
• Coaching/Support
• Use of recurring resources
• District support

93
Use of time

• Adequate training time and collaborative planning
  time are built into the school schedule.

94

The schedule ensures adequate joint planning time for teachers at each grade level. Teachers at each grade level find it difficult to collaborate because their planning periods are too brief or are not scheduled at the same time.
95
Use of time

• The school schedule and classroom schedules are
  built around reading as top priority.

96

The block plus intervention minutes exceeds the allotment for other core areas, and teachers maintain their schedules with fidelity. Although more time is scheduled for reading than for any other subject, teachers often depart from the written schedule as they see fit.
97
Use of time

• Allocation of time to activities is prioritized
  time needed is given to reading less time to
  lower priorities.

98

The ratio of whole-class to small-group activities is clearly understood and is maintained by all teachers every day. The ratio of whole-class to small-group activities varies among teachers and from day to day for the same teacher.
99
Use of time

• Reading instructional time is protected from all
  controllable interruptions.

100

Announcements and special events are prohibited during the block. Classroom schedules are posted in the hallway, and the coach and principal routinely check to ensure that activities occur when they are scheduled. Announcements and special events sometimes occur during the block. Classroom schedules are not required to be posted in the hallway and, even when they are, teachers do not always observe time allocations.
101
Use of time

• Leaders provide supervision support to assure
  that planned time is actualized.
• The principal supervises time usage within
  instruction between instructional segments
  (transition times).

102

The principal observes to ensure that scheduled time allocations are followed throughout the block, that transitions are efficient, and that the pace of instruction is brisk. The principal focuses on instructional dimensions other than use of time.
103
Use of time

• Differentiated instruction begins early the first
  month of school.

104

Reports based on benchmark testing are generated without delay, and the coach uses these reports to help teachers plan differentiated instruction. Benchmark profiles are slow to be generated, and the formation of differentiated groups is haphazard and inconsistent.
105
I support capturing the benefits of targeted,
teacher-directed instruction provided to small
groups of students organized by ability or skill
(Murphy, 2004, p. 76).
Joseph Murphy
106
RMC Implementation Checklist

• Leadership
• Common purpose
• Curriculum
• Instruction
• Assessment
• Use of time

• Professional Development
• Coaching/Support
• Use of recurring resources
• District support

107
Professional development

• All staff who lead instructional groups are
  trained supported in the programs they teach.

108

Core representatives supply adequate implementation instruction to all teachers, paraprofessional, the coach, and the principal this implementation instruction is guided and adapted by the schools leadership team to reflect data and differentiation. Paraprofessionals are routinely excluded from program implementation sessions, even though they are expected to support implementation efforts. Implementation instruction does not adapt to the GARF commitment to differentiation.
109
Professional development

• All staff are trained to interpret data from the
  schools formative assessment system.

110

The coach plans PD on the Cognitive Model to help teachers use DIBELS appropriately and to implement other informal diagnostic assessments. The coach helps teachers interpret classroom profiles without having provided an overview of the strategies. The coach is slow to meet with teachers about DIBELS profiles and unsystematic about informal diagnostics.
111
Professional development

• Staff new to the school are provided the training
  and support needed to do their job well.

112

The coach has developed a system for bringing new hires up to speed in all dimensions of RF. Training of new hires is sporadic and haphazard, and the coach depends on grade-level peers to fill in gaps in a new hires knowledge.
113
Professional development

• Training topics are identified from data on
  student performance.

114

After interpreting data, the coach guides grade-level teams in the selection of topics and books for study. The coach uses data from individual teachers to plan observations and offer instructional recommendations. PD opportunities are often selected on the basis of popularity rather than need.
115
Professional development

• Training is differentiated by position and need.

116
Not all teachers should receive the same type,
amount, or intensity of professional
development. (Chard, 2004, p. 188)
Chard believes this statement to be true but
cautions that definitive research evidence does
not yet exist.
David Chard
117

Book studies vary by grade level. The focus of coachs observations is guided by data. Book studies are sometimes inappropriate for the grade level at which they are read. The focus of a coachs observations is negotiated between teacher and coach and may have little to do with available data.
118
Professional development

• Training is valued, as indicated by allocation of
  time, resources and follow-up support to ensure
  that training goals are met.

119

The school purchases a new intervention program and arranges for implementation from a company rep. The coach conducts observations and follow-up conferences to support implementation. Teachers responsible for teaching the new intervention program are expected to learn the program during planning time. The coach must learn the program in the same way.
120
RMC Implementation Checklist

• Leadership
• Common purpose
• Curriculum
• Instruction
• Assessment
• Use of time

• Professional Development
• Coaching/Support
• Use of recurring resources
• District support

121
Coaching Support

• Adequate support is allocated to provide a useful
  level of the coaching function (e.g., alternate
  funding for coaching or an alternate model of
  support is provided beyond Reading First
  funding).

122

The district prepares for the end of funding by building in funding for the continuation of the coach. LEA administrators consider two plans 1 A fully funded position, using Title I resources 2. A combination of Title I and local funds to fund a half-time coach, half-time specialist The district has no plan for preserving the coachs position beyond the funding period. The coach will probably be offered a classroom teaching position.
123
Coaching Support

• The instructional support function (coaching or
  alternate model) is provided to all staff who
  teach instructional groups (classroom teachers,
  instructional specialists, paraprofessionals).

124

The coach has developed a personal schedule that ensures observations and conferencing with all teachers within Reading First. Book studies and group presentations systematically include specialists as well as classroom teachers. The coach believes that specialists have enough expertise that coaching is not required. The coach therefore focuses on classroom teachers. Book studies and group presentations are planned with classroom teachers in mind.
125
Coaching Support

• Coaching support for staff is differentiated by
  individual need and linked to student
  performance.

126

The coach tracks DIBELS trends and allocates more time to those teachers whose children do not register the kinds of gains hoped for. The coach deliberately apportions equal time to all teachers, both to achieve equity and to avoid singling out troubled teachers.
127
Coaching Support

• Staff are acknowledged for efforts to improve
  implementation and to enhance student learning.
• Coach or principal provides guidance and support
  for grade level team meetings in use of data to
  guide instruction.

128

Principal and coach attend meetings after benchmarking to discuss grade-level results and to guide a consensus about how to proceed as a group. The coach presents benchmark results but does not help teachers formulate a plan to address assessed grade-level needs. The principal does not attend these meetings.
129
RMC Implementation Checklist

• Leadership
• Common purpose
• Curriculum
• Instruction
• Assessment
• Use of time

• Professional Development
• Coaching/Support
• Use of recurring resources
• District support

130
Use of recurring resources

• Regularly recurring school district resources
  are optimized to support reading results.

131

The LEA and principal meet each year to consider the allocation on non-RF funds so that RF efforts can be optimized. The LEA advocates for this allocation with other district leaders. The LEA and principal operate on the assumption that RF grant funding is sufficient to realize project goals. Other district leaders view RF funds as a license to redirect non-RF funds to non-reading priorities.
132
Use of recurring resources

• Leaders seek additional resources at the local
  level to support reading results.

133

The principal and LEA make a united case for hiring an additional reading specialist to provide intervention instruction throughout the day. The principal is not aggressive in advocating for additional resources, and district leaders believe that RF funding is more than enough to achieve project goals.
134
RMC Implementation Checklist

• Leadership
• Common purpose
• Curriculum
• Instruction
• Assessment
• Use of time

• Professional Development
• Coaching/Support
• Use of recurring resources
• District support

135
District support

• District leaders are briefed and are
  knowledgeable about formative assessment results.

136

The coach, with the knowledge of the principal, invites district leaders to state-of-the-school presentations. Together, the principal and coach provide regular briefings for district leaders about RF progress The coach and principal both hope for non-interference from the district and interact with the LEA only to the least extent possible.
137
District support

• District leaders review student reading
  performance regularly and recognize staff for
  student progress.

138

District leaders, at the request of the LEA, attend state-of-the-school presentations and publicly acknowledge successes. The coach summarizes these successes in advance for the benefit of the principal and district leaders. District leaders adopt a hands-off attitude toward RF and rarely make public shows of support  nor are such shows requested by the coach or by the principal.
139
District support

• District leaders maintain visibility in the
  school in support of higher reading achievement.

140

The LEA visits the school in some capacity at least once every week. The LEA makes a point of being visible, sometimes attending grade-level meetings and accompanying the coach on walkthroughs. The LEA meets with the principal but only rarely with the coach. The LEA is rarely seen by teachers.
141
District support

• District leaders consider support needed for
  reading in the schools when allocating resources
  (staffing, budgeting, calendars) and setting
  district priorities.

142

District leaders use their RF schools as a model in considering the needs of non-RF schools. Funding for coaches and materials is sought, for example. District leaders allocate discretionary funds for more intensive CRCT preparation programs.
143
District support

• District leaders explore how district policy,
  procedure and culture can support reading
  outcomes and take action on these opportunities.

144

With the help of the coach, the district initiates a reading first initiative (lower case!). Reading becomes the number one district priority and leaders express their support by seeking additional funding from non-RF sources. Reading First is treated as just another in a long succession of projects that will come and go.
145
District support

• District leaders assign, support and supervise
  principals other staff to support reading
  outcomes. Every effort is made to find and assign
  to principal supervisor positions the person
  whose training, experience, knowledge, skills,
  and credibility are best matched to the
  instructional needs of the students and the
  support needs of the staff.

146

Hiring and promotion policy for principals includes reading expertise as a mandatory quality. This policy applies to non-RF schools as well. Hiring and promotion of principals relies almost exclusively on non-reading factors.
147
RMC Implementation Checklist

• Leadership
• Common purpose
• Curriculum
• Instruction
• Assessment
• Use of time

• Professional Development
• Coaching/Support
• Use of recurring resources
• District support

148
The starting point is to observe that nothing
tried so far really works. (Fullan, 2005, p. 13)

Michael Fullan
149
References

• Borko, H. (2004). Professional development and
  teacher learning Mapping the terrain.
  Educational Researcher, 30(8), 3-15.
• Chard, D. (2004). Toward a science of
  professional development in early reading
  instruction. Exceptionality, 12(3), 175-191.
• Fullan, M. (2006). Turnaround leadership. San
  Francisco Jossey-Bass.
• Fullan, M. (2005). Leadership and sustainability
  System thinkers in action. Thousand Oaks, CA
  Corwin Press.
• Joyce, B., Showers, B. (2002). Student
  achievement through staff development (3rd ed.).
  Alexandria, VA ASCD.
• Kersten, J., Pardo, L. (2007). Finessing and
  hybridizing Innovative literacy practices in
  Reading First classrooms. The Reading Teacher,
  61(2), 146-154.
• Klingner, J. K., Vaughn, S., Hughes, M. T.,
  Arguelles, M. E. (1999). Sustaining
  research-based practices in reading A 3-year
  follow-up. Remedial and Special Education, 20,
  263-274.
• Murphy, J. (2004). Leadership for literacy
  Research-based practice, PreK-3. Thousand Oaks,
  CA Corwin Press.
• Tabak, I. (2006). Prospects for change at the
  nexus of policy and design. Educational
  Researcher, 35(2), 24-30.

150
Next steps Only you know
We have prepared a checklist that you can use for
Action Planning, and we will post it on the
Architect site.