New twist on an Old Song…

While watching Discovery Channel recently , I  experienced a text-to-text connection:Discovery Channel Commercial–Two astronauts floating in space begin singing…”I Love the mountains, I love the clear blue skies….”  I was instantly transported back to a campfire sing-along at Camp Dellwood in Indianapolis, Indiana…

I love the mountains...I love the rolling hills...I love the flowers...I love the daffodils...I love the fireside...When all the lights are low.
Boom dee ah dah. Boom dee ah dah...Boom dee ah dah. Boom dee ah dah…

Complete Lyrics and audio sample illustrated version of lyrics video version of traditional song

The commercial was all the more compelling because of my prior knowledge, and I had to immediately google the lyrics of both the original song and the adaptation.  How did they compare?  Did Discovery exploit this traditional song for the benefit of publicity?

In fact, I think the new version is more inclusive of many life experiences and possibilities in the world.  It demands a certain level of awe for the amazing world we live in, a much bigger world than described in the original lyrics.

What would happen if students learned both versions of this song?  Would they recognize the similarities and differences? Would they be able to guess which one was written first? Which would they find most relevant to their lives?  I became invested in these questions enough to create an illustrated version of the new Discovery Channel lyrics:  I Love the World Picture Book.

A natural follow-up would be to have the students create their own “I Love the World” books… I Love the World Template for Student-Created Song

It’s a simple lesson based on the simplicity of a tune – one stored in summer camp memories.  Thank you, Discovery Channel, for helping this song bubble to the surface once again.

Remember…Reponse to an Image…also, CCore Update!

Reminder! At the top of this page are many items of interest–especially the   item bank portal and the reponse to a visual image link.

Dear Colleagues,                                                                                September 19, 2010

It always happens…you finally feel comfortable with a new format, and it is then replaced by yet something else, supposedly “new” and “improved. ” That seems to be the 21st century norm.  Initially, that’s what I thought was happening when I heard  whispers about the Common Core, officially adopted by Vermont in August 2010.  My inside voice moaned and groaned about how I was finally well versed on the Standards and GEs…and now they were being replaced?!  However, the more I learn about it–the more I believe that, for Vermont, this will be a minor cognitive/behavioral shift.  This is in thanks TO our Standards, Grade Level Expectations, and our participation in the New England Consortium to develop NECAP.   Vermont has been promoting its state standards for 15+ years; state educators are already used to a level of rigor borne out in our performance on NAEP, and; while there surely are inconsistencies, at least the state standards framework articulates a K-12 continuum.   The Common Core may sculpt it a little differently, with its explicit emphasis on career/college readiness, but the rationale for this work is mostly reflected already in our state’s academic framework.

I do have some concerns regarding the political/business machine that fueled Common Core. It did not evolve from an inclusive model-rather it seemed to appear overnight with a rapid fire review and adoption plan.  (See- Alternate view on common core–for a rather strong opinion regarding its history).  Yes, this backstory could linger and possibly derail the effort, especially if there seems to be a pre-selected body of curricular resources being pushed along with the common core framework.  Anything that “smells” like a pre-packaged national curriculum will not set well with most Vermont educators.

But, as of right now,  the state will be providing professional development over the next four years to prepare us for full implementation of the Common Core in Vermont.  The tentative goal is that our instruction and assessments will be in alignment with the Common Core by the year 2015.  At this time, there will be a new assessment replacing NECAP–most likely computer-based with some capability to measure student’s individual growth as well as comparisons to norms.  Until then, we will continue using our state framework and grade expectations, and NECAP will remain our statewide assessment/evaluation tool.  As we go through this transition, it is important to remember all the learning that has transpired over the last 15 years, and that this will serve as foundation and fuel for the next stage.

Stay tuned for updates.  Want more info? Go to Common Core Information Site.

Laura King, ACSU Literacy Leader

2010-2011 Common Writing Task: Response to Visual Image

The materials and resources for this year’s common prompt are found by selecting the page button above–2010-2011 Response to an Image.

The suggested deadline for this common task is September 30.  This gives us a common baseline writing sample at the beginning of the year and allows it to be completed prior to NECAP season.

Should you have any questions at all, please contact your literacy representative or Laura King.  Thank you.

Classroom Work Counts too…

Dear All,

Lately I have been involved with many data discussions: Aims data, NECAP results, Lexia Learning, etc.  In contrast to just five years ago, we now are fortunate to have a wealth of quantitative information to inform our instruction, and, with the advent of Power School, an efficient means to organize and analyze it.  Often the resulting data mirrors teachers’ own classroom data, validating the qualitative and informal assessments teacher do constantly.  Sometimes the data uncovers something new to consider; and sometimes the data feels disconnected to the context of the classroom.  These three reactions to data remind us that the most important factor relating to data is how it is understood, how it  impacts instruction; and that is up to an effective teacher.  Confirmed by over two hundred studies, the only factor that can increase student achievement is a knowledgeable, effective teacher.

Nurturing our own professional learning is the  essential ingredient to increasing student learning.  This can be done through mandated courses or professional development opportunities, but such educational experiences can live and die in a vacuum if the school culture does not effectively utilize and affirm teacher knowledge.  Thus, effective teachers depend on school leadership to set a tone of expectancy around best practices.  This suggests an explicit goal-driven vision for both professional and student learning-clearly articulated,  implemented, and documented; a living compact that guarantees highly qualified teachers  who gather, interpret, and respond to different kinds of student performance data in a multitude of ways.

A new chapter of student data will be written with the debut The Vermont Item Bank Assessment (March 2010). Local use of this tool will provide educators with diagnostic information aligned with VT Grade Expectations to inform their instruction and improve student learning.   The item bank was created to address the gap between once-a-year  NECAP scores and the assessment needs for day-to-day instructional planning.  While data like NECAP and Aims scores  are “slices” or snapshots of student proficiency on a set task–we need to consider much much more, whether documenting student progress or planning future instruction. The state’s initiative and its invitation for schools to use these assessments at the local level shows a level of leadership described in the former paragraph.

In light of all this, I attach a general rubric for student oral book report presentations and projects-something that is done regularly in K-6 classrooms. ( Book Project Evaluation Rubric Grading Sheet ) While it is merely an example, I present it for your consideration as part of a bigger question:  Can/Should students’ demonstrated performance on tasks be collected over time to demonstrate students’ growth in communication skills?  Such evidence would cover a wide swath of  of our state grade level expectations, and could be linked to specific units of instruction at specific grades.  Would we feel more confident with our collection of student data used to report student progress  if the data included additional measures such as this?

Power School suggests that schools are gaining power over information.  And twenty-first Century teachers do have amazing tools available to them to quantify student performance.  However, only a multi-faceted data pool will reflect the many dimensions of student learning and classroom instruction.   Therefore, effective teachers must participate in an inquiry process to determine what data is collected, its weight, and how it is used to inform instruction.   If we are the most important factor in student achievement, we must engage in such inquiry.

I anticipate future discussions about the Vermont Item Bank Assessments, welcome responses to the rubric I attach, and value continued professional discourse on the role of  “student data.”

Sincerely,

Laura King

Literacy Coach, ACSU

info on item bank assessment–grade 8 and 10 only; grades 2-7 pending

Lexia in the News…

This Article was recently shared by ASCD  (Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development). Thought folks using Lexia would like to see it….

By the Book: Exploring One School’s Success with a Technology-Based Reading Program

A Texas elementary principal introduces her school to a technology program that she credits with boosting test scores and school ratings.

• By Bridget McCrea
• 01/28/10

Pam Howard is no stranger to technology-based reading programs. In fact, this principal believes in such applications so much that she brings them with her when she takes on positions at new schools. For example, when she accepted the position of principal at Burleson Elementary in El Paso, TX, in 2008, Howard knew it wouldn’t be long before a high number of the school’s 337 students would be shifting to a technology-based reading program she’d previously used at other schools.

Howard credits the program’s track record with creating that loyalty. A principal for the last 10 years, Howard said she’s used Lexia Reading with at least three different schools, all of which benefited from the implementation, based on her observations. “A couple of years ago I was principal at a larger school with a high Hispanic population,” said Howard. “I introduced the reading program, which I’d already been using successfully [with all grades] at another school.”

The Web-based Lexia Reading includes three different levels (early reading, primary reading, and strategies for older students) and is designed to help students acquire and improve foundational reading skills. The application includes monitoring capabilities that instructors can use to assess student progress and react accordingly.

“This reading program provides another way for teachers to target specific areas of learning,” said Howard. The school is using the application for all students in first through fifth grades right now, with each child using the program in 30-minute increments and four to five days per week.

When the initial need arose for a program that would help improve students’ reading scores, Howard said, she shopped around and considered various solutions. She said she selected Lexia based on how easy it was to use and the fact that it was centered on the Web. Howard said she also liked the fact that the program didn’t come with a lot of “gee whiz” bells and whistles that other solutions were touting.

“I noticed early on that this program just got to the point, and that it remained consistent and positive in a way that would really appeal to kids,” said Howard, who was limited by budgetary constraints when it came to implementing the program across multiple schools. “At the larger school district where I was principal, I could only use the reading program on a limited basis because we didn’t have the funds to buy it and use it district-wide.”

Howard said the program has proved especially useful with students for whom English is not their first language. By working with the reading solution for the pre-determined 2.5 hours every week, Howard said, her school’s Spanish-speaking students have been able to post gains not only on reading test scores, but math and science as well.

“It bumps students up and gives them the background knowledge that they need to improve their reading fluency,” said Howard, whose school has posted significant gains in state test scores since implementing the Web-based reading program. “We saw some remarkable gains; I know a good deal of that improvement had to do with Lexia.”

For example, Howard said Burleson Elementary improved from a 38 percent pass rate in reading in 2007 to a 94 percent pass rate in 2008. Math and writing scores also improved, as did the school’s scale scores (which include math, science, and reading). “The pass rate in Texas was at 2100 points in 2008, and our average pass rate was 2280 last year; 2300 is considered college-ready,” Howard explained.

Burleson Elementary’s commendable ratings also rose last year, increasing from 10 percent to 39 percent. “I don’t think it was simply the teaching–which was already in place here–that resulted in the increased percentage,” said Howard. “Our new reading program had a significant impact on those increases.”

For Howard, getting teachers onto the Lexia bandwagon isn’t always easy, even when the school’s reading scores are below par. “I’m fortunate to come into the kind of schools where there is a definite need for improvement,” said Howard, who said she prefers to use classroom-based computers whenever possible but has had to settle for computer labs at her current school.

“I’ve been able to create some consistency with these labs, where the students are scheduled for daily instruction,” said Howard. Depending on the individual student’s needs, teachers decide whether that instruction is to be given in English or Spanish.

When the sessions are finished, teachers access the Web-based program to check on each student’s progress. If, for example, a student scores low on a “silent e” quiz, then the instructor knows to teach that a specific lesson in class and/or via the reading program.

“To get teachers to buy into the tech-based program, you must create an environment where all they really have to do is review and use the reports,” said Howard. “By taking as much of the management as possible off of the teachers’ shoulders, we’ve been able to get a high adoption and use rate.”

About the Author

Bridget McCrea is a business and technology writer in Clearwater, FL. She can be reached at bridgetmc@earthlink.net.

writing prompt suitable for valentines…

Hello All…

I have shared this with some of you, and it may be of interest during February.  It is the video response lesson about Tara and Bella, an elephant and dog duo who are best friends, through thick and thin.  The lesson includes all the links you need for the YouTube video (make sure you can access You Tube on your computer), as well a K-1 and a 2-3 writing template.  Thanks to Lili Foster for reminding me to post this!

Tara and Bella lesson

Amazon link for book info

Laura

Catch and Release…

Hello to ACSU users and beyond!

Click on image for NECAP information

Welcome to ACSU’s Literacy Leadership Team Website. Please visit the resource pages at the top of this post to learn more about who we are, our work in and beyond this supervisory union, and upcoming events.  As the coordinator of this group, I am initiating a monthly post (more often at times), with hopes that this blog/website will become a welcome professional resource. To become a member, simply click on the e-mail subscription link to the right.

Next week, Vermont schools’ NECAP scores will be released. These scores summarize how students performed statewide on the New England Consortium Common Assessment Program’s yearly tests in Reading, Writing and Math.  Each supervisory union and school will be able to see their results and how they compare.  I write this in anticipation of these scores and their impact on professional discourse in the weeks and months to come.

Four months ago, student data was “caught” by way of these assessments.  It is not the only way we evaluate our programs, but it’s one way in which all state schools participate; it’s a fishing derby of sorts: There are a lot of factors that determine your success at the derby-but at day’s end you will have some “net” results (excuse the pun).

Well, the fish have long since been “released,” and teachers have continued to teach their current students and observe how to they respond to various learning conditions.  It’s always the conundrum that it takes four months to see the results of this particular derby-making the results seemingly dated.  Without analysis of and reflection on the results, teachers may simply be left  with regrets, blaming the test “derby” itself; hoping that next year they have better luck-better fish.

It’s taken me awhile to fully recognize that this derby isn’t about the student “fish” at all, but the waters they swim in, and the four month lag time is actually a good thing.  Of course, we should continue teaching these students to the best of our ability and gather classroom-, school-, and district-criterion data to document their growth and progress over the course of the year.  The NECAP data will not discredit this local data about our current groups.  Rather, the NECAP “catch and release” data lets the fish themselves tell us how they swim in bigger waters.  The 2009 data is concerned with the many factors at play in our individual schools, and it, along with data from previous years, should fuel action research and reform at the school, SU, and state level.

With the year half over, I am already starting to think about the next academic year. I am looking forward to studying the 2009 data for this reason.  Where have our students made improvements, and what programmatic changes may be responsible for these improvements? Where is there still work to do? What possible shifts in instructional design could further improve student access to learning opportunities? What professional development and resources are needed to support teaching and learning-so that we can better ensure students internalize concepts and skills and can successfully demonstrate this progress?

Fairness is getting what you need; if we accept that NECAP is a fair test, the results should provide us with what we need to shape excellence for all in 21st century Vermont schools. I believe Vermont educators strive to provide this.  If we probe the results of the most recent NECAP “derby” with this in mind, discussions can propel us forward toward new teaching-learning constructs, versus backward in defense or condemnation of past ones.  Like the students who took the NECAPS in the fall, it’s our turn to keep growing and progressing forward.

Looking forward to many NECAP-related conversations! Responses welcome.

Laura

NEW SITE FOR ACSU!

Remember The acsu wiki page for literacy? (click here if you don’t…)

This is still a great collection of materials/resources for ACSU from 2007-2009.

However, it was becoming too unwieldy and challenging to keep current…so, I have created this new site.  Yes, it’s a blog.

I have kept materials that are still relevant, but tried to organize them a bit.  The column to the right should help you nagivate through this site.

While some items will be posted as a blog entry, I will always categorize them so you can use the category tab at the bottom of the site to find what you need.  There is also a search box.

Probably the neatest thing is the “blogroll”–this is a list of links you might use often or find interesting.  I will also build some “pages;” these will usually be items that seem special enough to get their own page.

I think that’s all for now.  I hope you will find this site even more useful than the former wiki site.  (For fans of the original site–I won’t delete it).

Feedback always appreciated.

Sincerely,

Laura King, ACSU lit “webmaster” (lking@acsu.k12.vt.us)

COMMON Writing Tasks–Response to an Image

COMMON WRITING TASKS, K-6, Response to an Image

During both the 2008-9 and 2009-10 academic school years, we have used Response to an Image common prompts for grade levels K-6.  For each grade level, the same visual image is presented to students in fall and spring, following a grade level protocol.

THESE LINKS WILL TAKE YOU TO THE current 2009-10 RESPONSE TO AN IMAGE assessment materials, K-6:

2009/10 response to visual image materials (these are a most of the documents)

K common prompt+K-6 record sheet

THIS LINK WILL TAKE TO OUR FIRST YEAR/DRAFT MATERIALS From 2008-9:

http://acsulitteam.pbworks.com/2008-2009+Common+Task+Materials

PAST Vermont Professional Development Network Materials

Below are links to past resources provided at state meetings:

2009 literacy workshop materials, grades 4-6

text packet for network meeting above, 4-6

Vermont Literacy Professional Development Network page/materials