CBER Research Collaborative

1
CBER Research Collaborative
K-12 Evidence-Based Literary Practices
Intersection of Research Practice
Michael Coyne Michael Faggella-Luby Department
of Educational Psychology
2
CBER Goals

• Research
• Conduct school-based research on developing and
  evaluating evidence based practices in literacy,
  behavior supports, and assessment
• Translating Research to Practice
• Support schools, districts, and states in
  adopting, implementing, and sustaining evidence
  based practices

3
CT Reading Summit
4
CT Reading Summit
5
CT Reading Summit
6
CT Reading Summit

• The Reading Achievement Gap in CT
• A variety of indicators show
• Consistently flat reading achievement over the
  past 10 years
• Persistently large achievement gaps among
  subgroups

7
CBER Literacy
Tier 3 Specialized, Individualized Intervention
for Students at High Risk
5
15
Tier 2 Supplemental Instruction for Students at
Some Risk
Tier 1 Comprehensive Coordinated Reading
Instruction for All Students
80 of Students
8
CBER Literacy

• Intersection of Research Practice
• Questions that have theoretical/conceptual
  importance as well as practical real-world
  relevance
• Critical Questions in an RTI model
• What students should receive additional support?
• What should this support look like?

9
Which students should receive additional support?
10
CBER Literacy

• Which students?
• Use data to make the best, most trustworthy
  decisions about which students need additional
  support.
• Whats new or different about this?

11
Which Students?

• Screen students on measures that predict success
  in general classroom instruction
• Questions/Challenges
• How do we know our measures are predictive?
• Predictive of what?
• Sensitivity/Specificity
• Sensitivity False negatives (Missing kids who
  are at risk)
• Specificity False positives (Identifying kids
  who arent at risk)
• What if our screening measures arent predictive?

12
Which Students?
Project IVIIntensifying Vocabulary Intervention
for Kindergarten Students at Risk of Learning
Disabilities (2006-2010)
Language Vocabulary DevelopmentSpecial
Education ResearchGoal 2 DevelopmentPI
Michael Coyne
Research Purpose Intensify vocabulary
instruction/ intervention to optimize its
effectiveness with kindergarten students most at
risk of learning disabilities.
13
Which Students?
Project ERIEarly Reading Intervention
(2006-2011)
Early Intervention for Young Children with
Disabilities Goal 3 EfficacyCo-PIs Deborah
Simmons Michael Coyne

• Research Purpose
• Test the efficacy of ERI as an intervention
  reading program with kindergarten students at
  risk for reading difficulties
• Intensify ERI for students who are least
  responsive to the intervention

14
Which Students?
Project IVI

• In our previous vocabulary research with
  kindergarten students, weve found consistent
  evidence that overall vocabulary knowledge was
  highly predictive of response to classroom
  vocabulary instruction.

15
Which Students?
16
Which Students?
Project ERI

• We have evidence that our screening measures
  (i.e., PA/AU) were relatively effective in
  identifying kindergarten students at risk for
  reading difficulties and who need intervention
• However, we found that our screening measures did
  not reliably predict which at-risk students would
  respond to the ERI intervention
• But, we did find that students scores on the
  first ERI unit test did predict end-of-year
  outcomes.

17
Which Students?

• Use assessment data to select students to
  receive additional support
• Questions/Challenges
• What criteria do we use?
• Benchmark goals (e.g., everyone below this score)
• National/Local norms (e.g., everyone below this
  percentile)
• Capacity (e.g., we have resources for this many
  students)

18
Which Students?

• What criteria do we use?
• Benchmark goals
• 25 of 60 first graders who scored below the
  DIBLES benchmark
• National/Local norms
• 20 of 60 first graders who scored below the 25
  on national norms.
• 15 of 60 first graders who scored below the 25
  on local norms
• Capacity
• We have the resources to run 4 groups of 5
  students (8 from Class A, 5 from Class B, 4 from
  Class C, and 3 from Class D)
• We have the resources to run 1 group of 5 from
  each class

19
Which Students?
Should additional intervention be our first
priority?
20
Which Students?
Project IVI

• We are planning to screen all students with the
  PPVT
• We will identify the median score across all the
  classroom we are working with
• We will provide additional Tier 2 vocabulary
  intervention to all students that score below the
  median score

21
Which Students?
Project ERI

• We will screen all students on measures that we
  know from research are predictive of future
  reading difficulties (i.e., PA/AU)
• We will provide ERI to all students the fall
  below the 30 on national norms
• We will examine scores from first ERI unit test
  as well as DIBELS progress monitoring measures
• Students scoring below one set of cut-scores
  will receive Tier 3 support
• Students scoring above one set of cut-scores will
  move out of Tier 2

22
Which Students?
Strategic Teaching of At-Risk Students Improving
Reading Comprehension Through Story Structure
Pedagogy (2007-2008)

• Comparison of three Tier 2 Reading Interventions
• Embedded Story Structure (ESS) Routine
• Reading Teacher Instruction
• Sustained Silent Reading
• 128 5th and 6th graders
• 30 min of instruction
• 3 days per week in
• Groups of 7-8
• Measures Cloze, Gates-MacGinitie, Strategy-Use

23
Which Students?
Strategic Teaching of At-Risk Students

• What measures do we have?
• Third Fourth grade RW assessments on 5th 6th
  graders
• Pools Basic(32)/Below basic (54) 5th
  Basic(26)/Below Basic(56) 6th
• What are the benchmarks and goals based on unit
  scores? What else do we know about these
  students?
• Who might benefit and why?
• Who is at-risk and how many are there?

24
Which Students?
Striving Readers Xtreme Reading

• 2 year study of a course in reading strategies
• 17 high schools
• 100-120 students reading 2-4 years below grade
  level
• Measures GRADE Gates MacGinitie
• 12-15 students per class, 60 min/day, one
  semester
• Springfield, MA
• Xtreme (12)
• Read 180
• Control

25
Which Students?
Striving Readers Xtreme Reading

• Measures
• Aimsweb Fluency, Cloze (MAZE)
• GRADE
• Measurement Questions
• Aimsweb only norms through 8th Grade
• Choosing benchmarks
• 50 of 8th for 9th 10th
• 75 of 8th for 11th 12th

26
Which Students?

• What is the profile of the literacy performance
  of students in your school?
• Word analysis skills
• Fluency
• Comprehension
• (Progress monitoring throughout year)

27
Descriptive Study Measures.
Assessment Area Measure Alphabetics Woodcock
Language Proficiency Battery- R
Decoding WLPB-Revised Word Attack Word
identification WLPB-Revised Word
Identification Fluency Pace/Rate Test of
Word Reading Efficiency (TOWRE) Phonetic
Decoding Efficiency (TOWRE) Accuracy Gray
Oral Reading Test-4 (GORT-4)
Vocabulary Expressive Peabody Picture
Vocabulary Test III Reading WLPB-R Reading
Vocabulary subtest Comprehension Reading
Comprehension WLPB-R Passage Comprehension
subtest Listening Comprehension Gray Oral
Reading Tests-4 (GORT-4) WLPB-R Listening
comprehension subtest
The Learner Motivation The Motivation for
Reading Questionnaire (MQR) Hope The Hope
Scale for Motivation Achievement Kansas
State Assessment (KSA)-Reading Subtest
28
Reading Component Profile
? Proficient
? ASRS
115 110 105 100 95 90 85 80 75 70
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
Mean Standard Scores
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
ALPHABETICS FLUENCY VOCABULARY
COMPREHENSION Word ID-Word Att
Rate-Accuracy-SWE-PDE PPVT-WLPB Rd-Vocab-List
Comp Pass Comp-Rdg Comp Scores from the WLPB-R,
GORT, TOWRE, PPVT, Sub tests
Statistically Different
29
Who is at-risk?

• Students who are successful during their 9th
  grade year are 3.5 times more likely to graduate
• One F decreases likelihood of graduating from 83
  to 60
• 2 Fs decreases likelihood to 44
• 3 Fs decreases likelihood to 31

30
Key Questions

• How do you identify, administer, and interpret
  assessments?
• How are placement decisions made? Instruction
  planned? Who is involved in the process?
• What is the role of assessment at the building
  level? Is there an assessment team?
• What is the profile of an at-risk student in your
  context?
• How are you assessing your capacity?
• Time, people (areas of expertise), classroom
  space, attitude, student placements

31
What should this intervention support look like?
32
Intervention Support

• Tier 2 Reading Supports
• A continuum of programmatic, grouping, and
  scheduling options are available to at-risk
  students and coordinated at a school-wide level
• Alterable Components
• Content (e.g., comprehension, fluency, phonics,
  etc.)
• Materials (e.g., intervention component of core
  program, stand alone intervention program, school
  designed strategies)
• Intensity (e.g., specificity, fidelity, quality
  of delivery)
• Interventionist (e.g., classroom teacher,
  paraprofessional, specialist, volunteer,
  principal, etc.)
• Size (e.g., one-on-one, group of 4, group of 8)
• Grouping (e.g., within class, across class,
  across grades)
• Duration (e.g., minutes per day, days per week,
  total weeks)
• Other (e.g., place, time of day, ?)

33
Intervention Support

• What should intervention look like?
• Make intervention decisions based on empirical
  evidence and coherent theory
• What are the active ingredients of effective
  interventions?
• Make intervention decisions based on a schools
  capacity to provide support
• How can we best leverage our personnel,
  expertise, materials, and schedule most
  effectively and efficiently?

34
Intervention Support

• What should intervention look like?
• Researchers need to design intervention studies
  that manipulate instructional components that are
  relevant, meaningful, and feasible
• Who cares? So what?
• Schools need to design intervention support that
  takes into account the best available research.
• Whats the best choice of many options for our
  school?

35
Intervention Support

• What should intervention look like?
• Interventions need to target the needs of the
  students by supporting selection and organization
  of critical content, accessibility of texts, and
  development of independent student learning.
• What are you teaching?
• How is the text a barrier to learning?
• What are the learning strategies needed by your
  students?
• Schools consider capacity and population when
  deciding about offering standard treatment vs. a
  more problem solving approach
• What are the needs of the students?
• What is the capacity of the school?

36
Intervention Support
Project ERI

• Kindergarten students received 1 of 3
  interventions that varied in duration
  specificity
• 30 minutes of ERI
• 15 minutes of ERI
• 30 minutes of basal program
• Results
• 30 ERI gt 15 ERI (duration)
• 30 ERI gt 30 Basal (specificity)
• 15 ERI 30 Basal

37
Intervention Support
Project ERI

• Year 3 Study
• How do we intensify ERI to better support
  students who do not respond to standard
  implementation?
• What should Tier 3 look like?
• Instructional Contrast
• Supplement 30 Standard ERI 15 review
• Replace 30 Individualized ERI

38
Intervention Support
Project IVI

• Year 2 Study
• Students will receive 1 of 2 versions of Tier 2
  vocabulary intervention
• What should Tier 2 vocabulary intervention look
  like?
• What is a meaningful contrast?
• Instructional Contrast
• ?

39
Intervention Support
Strategic Teaching of At-Risk Students

• Duration
• Is two-three days of instruction for 30 minutes
  enough to significantly impact student reading
  comprehension?
• Intensity
• How much professional development and support is
  necessary for first year teachers to have high
  levels of fidelity? Manage behavior?
• Interventionist
• How do we improve communication between classroom
  teaches and support educators?

40
Intervention Support
Striving Readers Xtreme Reading

• Learning Strategy Research
• 30 years of research on Strategic Instruction
  Model
• Validated for 11-5 student teacher ratios
• Employs 8 stage instructional sequence
• Pretest, Describe, Model, Verbal Practice
• Controlled Practice, Advanced Practice, Posttest,
  Generalization
• How do we maintain integrity of strategy
  instruction in larger groups?

41
Intervention Support
Striving Readers Xtreme Reading

• Instructional Stages

42
Intervention Support
Striving Readers Xtreme Reading

• Guided Practice Phases

43
School Wide Intervention Support

• What happens for those students who are reading
  below the 4th grade level?
• 2. Whats in place in core classes to ensure
  that students will get the critical content in
  spite
• of their literacy skills?
• What happens for students who know how to decode
  but cant comprehend well?
• Are procedures for teaching powerful learning
  strategies embedded in courses across the
  curriculum?
• What happens for students who have language
  problems?

44
Content Literacy
is the door to content acquisition higher order
thinking.
45
Building Blocks for Content Literacy
HIGHER ORDER
SUBJECT MATTER
STRATEGIES
SKILLS
LANGUAGE
46

A Continuum of Literacy Instruction
(Content Literacy Continuum -- CLC)
Level 1 Enhance content instruction (mastery of
critical content for all regardless of literacy
levels) Level 2 Embedded strategy instruction
(routinely weave strategies within and across
classes using large group instructional
methods) Level 3 Intensive strategy instruction
(mastery of specific strategies using
intensive-explicit instructional sequences) Level
4 Intensive basic skill instruction (mastery of
entry level literacy skills at the 4th grade
level) Level 5 Therapeutic intervention (mastery
of language underpinnings of curriculum content
and learning strategies)
47
Build Ownership Capacity

• Literacy Leadership Teams
• Driver of literacy work in school
• Distributed leadership
• Work on Leadership Practice
• Organize/supervise work around key instructional
  activities
• Observe, describe, analyze instructional practice
• Create internal accountability mechanisms
• Build common language and expectations

48
Build Ownership Capacity

• Work on instructional practice
• Observe models of practice
• Develop protocols for observing practice
• Rotation of observations in teams
• Focus on observing, describing, analyzing
  instructional practice
• Build common language and expectations

49
Key Questions for intervention support?

• How are current assessments tied to intervention
  selection?
• Who makes decisions about intervention selection?
  How is this tied to PD?
• How do you currently measure fidelity of
  implementation? How are findings used with
  teachers?
• What decisions do you make based on continuous
  data collection?
• How do you respond when kids are not meeting
  expected levels of progress?

50
Questions, Comments, Observations?

• Thank you
• mike.coyne_at_uconn.edu
• mike.fl_at_uconn.edu

51
EXTRA SLIDES

• Building the Plane While Flying
• http//www.youtube.com/watch?vt39EAeE8ehc