EDGEWOOD ISD LITERACY FRAMEWORK 1

Literacy Framework

2010-2011

Board of Trustees

Joseph M. Guerra, President

Johnny R. Perez, Vice President

Tina Morales, Secretary

Lucy M. Hall, Trustee

Estefana Martinez, Trustee

Mary Lou Mendoza, Trustee

Marcelo Montemayor, Trustee

Cabinet

Dr. Elizabeth P. Garza, Superintendent

Karen Hartmann, Executive Director of District Operations

Dr. Mary Miller, Executive Director of Curriculum & Support

Eliseo Rodriguez, Executive Director of Elementary Division

Gloria Valle, Executive Director of Secondary Division

Juan C. Zamora, Executive Director of Business Operations

Edgewood Literacy Framework Committee

Sandra Lomas, Elementary Language Arts/SS Specialist

Erlinda Rodriguez, Early Childhood Specialist

Cathy Tynan, ELAR Specialist

Phyllis Abernathy, Coronado ES

Lorena Donnellan, Coronado ES

Raquel Garcia, Roosevelt

Mary Jane Garza, Cisneros ES

Robert Lopez, Cisneros ES

Patricia Rodriguez, Gardendale ES

Table of Contents

Part 1. Description of the Initiative “Let’s Read”……………………………………………………. / Page 4
Part 2. Goals and Objectives………………………………………………………..………………. / Page 8
Part 3. Context of Literacy-based Learning………………………………………………………… / Page 9
Part 4. Timeframe for Daily Implementation……………………………………………………….. / Page 10
Component Description Overview……………………………………………………………………. / Page 11
Part 5. Component Descriptions-Pre-Kinder……………………………………..………………… / Page 12
Part 6. Component Descriptions-Kinder…………………………………………………………….. / Page 21
Part 7. Component Descriptions- First and Second Grades……………………………………… / Page 29
Part 8. Component Descriptions-Third through Fifth Grades…………………………………….. / Page 37
Part 9. Component Descriptions-Sixth through Eighth Grades…………………………………... / Page 46
Vertical Alignment Documents………………………………………………………………………... / Page 55
Appendix A. Glossary of Key Literary terms for Framework Document…………………………. / Page 88
Appendix B. Recommended Reading Lists for PreKinder-8th Grade……………………………. / Page 93
Appendix E. Observation Protocol…………………………………………………………………... / Page 110
Appendix F. Bibliography…………………………………………………………………………….. / Page 115
Appendix G. Additional Resources………………………………………………………………….. / Page 116
Appendix H. Elements of the Grade Level Reading Strategy-Making Connections…………… / Page 124
Appendix I. A Balanced Approach to Literacy……………………………………………………… / Page 125

Part 1. The Edgewood Independent School District (EISD)

Literacy Framework

Introduction

Misty Sailors, Ph.D.

Miriam Martinez, Ph.D.

Overview to EISD Literacy Framework

Central to effective literacy teaching, learning, and achievement is a strong, central literacy framework implemented in a decentralized fashion. Effective frameworks are framed by a set of goals and purposes that describe the envisioned literacy capabilities of students. For maximum effectiveness, local stakeholders develop such frameworks.

Central to effective frameworks are four components, including (a) curriculum; (b) research-based instruction (direct and indirect); (c) assessment that guides instruction (formal and dynamic); and (d) implementation through the professional development of teachers. The Edgewood Independent School District Literacy Framework was designed based on these premises.

The EISD Literacy Framework was designed to support the Let’s Read! Initiative of the EISD, so that students in the district are both motivated to read and interpret the world around them. Aligned closely with the Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills (TEKS) and the College Readiness Standards (CRS), the EISD Literacy Framework has the following as it core goals:

  1. Students will be lifelong readers, writers, and learners.
  2. Students will read critically in a variety of texts.
  3. Students will clearly express understandings gained from text.
  4. Students will engage in literacy for a variety of reasons
  5. Students will use their literacy skills and strategies to positively contribute to the community and society.

Background and Development Process

The EISD Literacy Framework was created to clearly state the expected instructional literacy practices of teachers, grades PK – 8, as well as expected student outcomes. The framework was developed collaboratively by the EISD Literacy Framework (ELF) Committee, which consisted of campus and district literacy experts as well as external literacy experts. The team was peer nominated and confirmed by district officials. The ELF Committee created documents through a collaborative process, guided by consensus-building activities. Draft documents were vetted at the campus level (teachers), through the District Literacy Team, and presented to administrators. The drafting of this document coincided with the adoption of the basal reading series.

It is the hope of the Committee that because of its grass-roots movement and collaborative and iterative process, the Framework will be implemented fully. Furthermore, it is the hope of the Edgewood Literacy Framework Committee that this document will provide teachers of all levels of experience with a common ground on which instructional practices are drawn in order to provide equitable educational experiences for all students in the EISD.

Research Based Practices of the Framework

The EISD Literacy Framework is grounded in research based practices, including those that have been found to be effective in improving literacy achievement of students from low-income and minority backgrounds.

Print-rich environments. One such practice centers on the creation of classrooms that offer print-rich environments for students (Sailors & Hoffman, 2009). Research has demonstrated that in classrooms (PK – 8) where teachers provide a variety of high quality public and private texts that are imported as well as created locally, student performance is statistically higher than in non- print-rich classrooms (Hoffman, Sailors, Duffy, & Beretvas, 2004).

High quality children’s literature. Within these print-rich classrooms are books that are high-quality children’s literature, including a variety of genres (stories, informational books, and poetry), books of varying difficulty levels, and books that represent the cultural and ethnic diversity of their community (Temple, Martinez, & Yokota, 2011). These books stimulate an interest in reading and provide students with a well-rounded set of books in which to engage.

Time on task with the materials. Time on task is an important factor in reading achievement. That is, the more students read, the better they become at reading (Anderson, Hiebert, Scott, & Wilkinson, 1985; Cipielewski & Stanovich, 1992). Furthermore, one of the characterizing differences between high and low performing classrooms is the amount of on-task reading in which students are engaged (Allington & Johnson, 2000; Pressley, 2000; Taylor et al., 2000).

Task difficulty. Not only must students be engaged in reading, the difficulty of the texts must be taken into consideration if students are going to move forward in their reading development. In his seminal study, Berliner (1981) investigated the relationship between task difficulty and achievement gains in elementary students; success rates of tasks have a direct impact on student learning. Greater learning is linked to tasks completed with higher rates of success and are linked to improved student attitude. Tasks related to moderate successes were less consistently related to learning and hard tasks produced a negative impact on learning, off task behaviors, and negative attitudes by the students. It is imperative that the difficulty of the task (reading and writing in this case) matches the abilities of students.

Text difficulty. In a similar vein, students must be appropriately challenged in order for literacy development to continue.

Easy reading material and independent reading. It has become widely accepted that readers should be given multiple opportunities to engage in “easy” texts as a way of experiencing success with reading as well as practice in reading fluently (Roller, 1998). Instructionally, effective teachers provide students with opportunities to engage in “independent” reading time—time to read books that students are very successful with (they know at least 95% of the words) so that students can practice reading fluently.

Instructional text and guided reading. Similarly, readers need to be given opportunities to read “instructional” texts with the support of their teacher as a way of practicing the skills and strategies they are learning (Roller, 1998). Instructionally known as “Guided Reading,” this type of instruction (and these types of texts) contain familiar words (90-94% of words are known to the reader) while providing challenging opportunities to practice comprehension, word identification and word knowledge strategies as well as monitoring and fix-up strategies.

Read Aloud and shared reading. Finally, while an effective teacher would never ask a student to read a book that would be “Frustrating,” effective teachers see the opportunity to engage their students in these types of books (books too hard for the student to read on their own) as “Read Alouds” or “Shared Reading” books. These opportunities allow teachers to expand the vocabulary of their students and to engage in modeling and “thinking aloud” of reading strategies.

Highly effective instructional practices. Recent studies on teacher effectiveness conducted in “beating the odds” schools—those with a “reputation for producing higher-than-expected results in reading with low-income populations” (Taylor, Pearson, Clark, & Walpole, 2000)—found similarities in the instructional reading practices of “accomplished” teachers.

Small group instruction. Highly effective teachers teach in small groups, according to recent studies. Synthesizing across the most current studies of what he called “enormously effective elementary school teachers” (p. 62), Allington (2002) described the curriculum of these teachers as multisourced, multileveled, and integrated. That is, their curriculum materials reflected the varying levels of student abilities and proficiencies and supported student growth toward independence. Furthermore, these exemplary teachers offered small group instruction for their students with a limited reliance on whole-group instruction.

Focus on comprehension. Additionally, these teachers employed higher-level questions in discussions of text with students. The accomplished teachers asked students to write in response to reading. Research suggests that reading is clearly a priority in high performing classrooms; the focus of acts of reading and writing are on meaning-making rather than “getting the words right.” Metacognition, or the awareness of one’s thinking while reading, was a focus of instruction in highly accomplished classrooms.

Focus on words. Highly effective teachers teach both letter/sound level patterns as well as word (rime/rhyme) patterns. They teach it explicitly and within authentic acts of reading and writing, and in connected texts (sentences, passages, and/or books). These teachers supplement explicit phonics instruction with coaching techniques in which they teach students strategies for applying phonics to their everyday reading.

Authentic acts of reading and writing. Highly effective teachers model and demonstrate literacy skills and strategies within a larger context. That is, they provide opportunities for their students to practice the skill or strategy in isolation and then return to the application of the skill or strategy within the context of reading or writing.

Self-determination as readers and writers. Highly effective teachers also offer their students “managed choices”—not everyone must read the same book, write the same essay, or do the same project. The tasks set forth by accomplished teachers for the students to complete are “open tasks,” such as written responses to readings. There are no “right” answers. In addition, the teachers in these classrooms foster self-monitoring capacities in their students—the students are encouraged to be responsible for their own work and behavior. Finally, the teachers in these classrooms focus on the whole child, including the social, emotional, and academic needs of their students. These teachers are experts on each and every child in their classroom and have a sense of professional responsibility for all children.

Instructional decisions by teachers. Implicit in the research on highly effective instruction is the idea that the actions, characteristics, and behaviors of effective teachers are what matters most for reading instruction with all students as well as for struggling readers. However, there is no guarantee that teachers who “fit the profile” (Doyle, 1983) and subscribe to “highly effective” practices will have high achieving students in their classrooms. Hoffman and his colleagues (2000) argued that “principled” teachers are those who make a difference in the reading development of their students. Principled teachers make instructional decisions based on the needs of students and their vision for reading instruction (Hoffman & Duffy, 1999). While one could very easily argue that all teachers have good intentions for reading instruction with their students, the fact of the matter is, not all students learn to read as easily as others.

This framework is designed to assist new and experienced teachers implement research-based practices in their classrooms in flexible and principled ways.

Part 2. Goals and Objectives

  1. Be lifelong readers, writers, and learners.
  2. Engage in self-generated literacy activities.
  3. Engage in literacy activities outside of school.
  4. Establish academic and personal goals related to literacy.
  5. Read critically in a variety of texts.
  6. Read on grade level (as measured by norm referenced test).
  7. Successfully use grade appropriate skills and strategies.
  8. Connect texts to personal experiences in order to analyze, solve problems, make judgments/decisions and or reconstruct knowledge.
  9. Clearly express understandings gained from text.
  10. Explain what was read to someone else.
  11. Participate in discussions about text read.
  12. Form and express opinions about what was read.
  13. Create a variety of products (songs, dances, poetry, illustrate, technology based).
  14. Articulate their metacognitive processes.
  15. Engage in literacy for a variety of reasons.
  16. Effectively use library resources.
  17. Interact with multiple genres.
  18. Engage in scaffolded sustained silent reading.
  19. Choose books of interest at appropriate reading level for independent reading.
  20. Interact with a variety of media literacy.
  21. Use the internet effectively.
  22. Use literacy skills and strategies to positively contribute to the community and society.
  23. Identify problems in the school and offer research related solutions.
  24. Make informed decisions.
  25. Participate in school and/or community based democratic processes.
  26. Use writing skills in order to address community and/or societal issues and needs.

Part 3. Context of Literacy-based Learning

Campus staff must ensure that the context of the classrooms and campus is such that will support the literacy-based activities and behaviors described in this literacy framework. The terms below explain expectations for classrooms and the campus environment to create a community of readers and writers.

  • Print-Rich Environment: A print-rich environment is one in which students can interact with text and print around them, which research says leads to increased learning and comprehension. Such environments may include word walls, labeled centers, displayed student products, teacher-created posters, instructional aids, etc. and are not exclusively limited to the classroom. Staff should consider the quality, content, accessibility, purpose, design and quantity of texts and print in their classrooms and campus. Staff should also be intentional about the print in the classroom environment and school setting by providing text that is meaningful, authentic, content-driven, and chosen by students whenever possible. (Types of text examples are as follows: Limited Text Process Charts; Writing on Paper;Work Product Displays;Instructional Aids;Extended Text Process Charts;Reference Materials;Journals;Portfolios;Serials;LeveledTexts;Textbooks;Tradebooks;Computers/Electronic;Organization/Management;Student/Teacher Published Work;Social/Personal/Motivational;Games/Puzzles/Manipulatives)
  • Classroom Libraries: One way to engage students in independent reading is by providing quality classroom libraries. When establishing classroom libraries, staff should consider providing books on various reading levels and topics of interest as well as a variety of genres toincludeaward winning books and multicultural selections. Staff should purposefully arrange and display books so that they are appealing and attractive for students to browse and checkout. Staff should consider seating at, accessibility to, and maintenance of the classroom library throughout the year.
  • Scaffolded Sustained Silent Reading: While past research may indicate mixed results for sustained silent reading (SSR), new research is indicating that “scaffolding” of SSR is more beneficial. By bolstering the interaction between the student and teacher, during and after SSR, through brief discussions and interactions, student engagement will increase. Helping students select books of interest, monitoring students during reading and holding them accountable for their reading through questioning, are practices staff should engage in to scaffold SSR.
  • Using Intentional Instruction Model for the Teaching of Cognitive Strategies: To improve comprehension, students use metacognitive strategies that allow them to monitor and assess their ongoing performance. Teachers initially model metacognition through the think aloud process by naming the strategy, stating when the strategy is used, stating why the strategy is used and explaining/modeling how the strategy is used.
  • Literacy Team Roles and Responsibilities: To develop literacy instruction, literacy teams will be created at each campus consisting of the Principal, Instructional Facilitator, Librarian, Special Education Teacher, and Interventionist(s). The purpose is to conduct model lessons based on intentional instruction, conduct observations and provide coaching, and facilitate and monitor the implementation of the district literacy plan. (See Appendix E for Coaching Protocols)

EDGEWOOD ISD LITERACY FRAMEWORK 1

Part 4. Timeframe for Daily Implementation

PreK/K / 1st/ 2nd / 3rd-5th / 6th-8th
Shared Reading
15 minutes x 2 per day for a total of 30 minutes / Shared Reading
15 minutes daily (includes word study)
(2 x a day with one integrated in another content area) / Shared Reading
15 minutes daily (includes word study) / Either Shared Readingor Writing and Word Study
20 minutes daily
Guided Reading (with Word Study)
Small groups: 15-20 minutes with 3 groups = 60 minutes / Guided Reading and Literature Circles (with independent reading occurring simultaneously)
45 minutes daily (includes word study) / Guided Reading(with independent reading & literature circles occurring simultaneously)
45 minutes daily (includes word study) / Guided Readingor Writing
Independent Reading/ Literature Circles
or Independent Writing
(occurring simultaneously)
35 minutes daily
Guided Writing
Small group: 15 minutes. Meet with one group a day / Shared Writing
15 minutes daily (includes word study) / Shared Writing
15 minutes daily (includes word study)
Independent Reading
During DEAR time 15 minutes and during small group times / Guided Writing (independent writing occurring simultaneously)
45 minutes daily (includes word study) / Guided Writing (independent writing occurring simultaneously)
45 minutes daily (includes word study)
Independent Writing
Journaling (occurring during guided reading time)
Word Study
10 minutes daily
120 minutes / 120 minutes / 120 minutes / 65 minutes

ELAR Elementary: 150 minutes