Annie Bradford ED 590 Principalship Fall 2012 SWOT Analysis for Marion High School Reading Lab Internal

Strengths Now in its eighth year of implementation, Reading Lab in Marion Independent School District has made some positive contributions. MISD began implementing Reading Lab as a result of the Board of Education decision regarding specific classroom instruction and teaching methods to raise district standardized test scores. Reading Lab offers direct teacher modeling in correlation to reading comprehension. Comprehension strategies are completed in a cooperative setting to encourage discussion and internalization of specific reading approaches. Teacher read aloud/think aloud activities utilize high interest non-fiction and fiction materials. The text(s) selected are short stories, chapters from novels or memoirs, and targeted at one level higher than a students individual reading ability. Thinking and reading strategies are demonstrated, modeled, practiced, and assessed through cooperative learning strategies. Students also complete Teen Tribune readings and responses each week. This is an online collection of high interest teen articles gathered from national and world newspapers. To discuss non-fiction persuasive topics, the teacher presents texts, which validate both "sides of an issue" for student information and individual conclusions to be drawn. For student individual book choices, students are encouraged to select fiction or non-fiction texts specifically at his/her reading level. It is an open choice for student selection, although, the teacher must approve the text choice. In the high school, many comprehension strategies have become cross-curricular in order to better assist students. For example, in Global Studies, teachers use the round table strategy to correspond with non-fiction texts and media. The GIST strategy has also carried over in to Science, Social Studies and some Vocational classes. Although Reading Lab provides identified students with an environment specific to promoting acquisition and growth in literacy and comprehension skill building, this is an area that will always prove to be challenging for some students. To be identified as eligible for enrollment in Reading Lab, students must score below the 41st percentile (NPR) for reading comprehension on the Iowa Assessment. Though all English teachers have studied strategies to increase student comprehension, Reading Lab teachers have been through rigorous training in instruction designed specifically for students at risk in the area of comprehension and vocabulary. This training prepares the teachers for situationally-specific areas of deficiencies and needs. Reading Lab teachers spend an entire year in Second Chance Reading Training. This training not only teaches strategies in comprehension instruction, but also allows teachers to collaborate with other

educators, including multiple opportunities for collaboration, lesson plan sharing, discussion of successful activities, and provides guidance for activities that require tweaking. Additionally, training for veteran teachers is available after initial training. This allows for constant upgrades and continued instruction in the most recent strategies. External Strengths There is district support for both students and their families; supporting the at-risk student population highlights this. Many times, this group of students experiences a higher risk of dropping out, low class attendance, less than desirable post high school education and career plans, and the possibility of attending alternative school options. The relationships formed between student and the Reading Lab teachers have proven to be essential both academically and socially for both the student and instructional staff. The strong structure and predictability for intended instruction and teaching staff allows students to form a positive student/adult relationship with their instructor. Many times students in Reading Lab will utilize their instructor as a reference or as a mentor-like liaison for everyday life situations which many at-risk students experience. Weaknesses One of the weaknesses is that the identified students cant take other electives for the class is required for them. It is offered only two terms a year at this time, where in past years it has been offered every term. There also is some stigma associated with being in the class. I have overheard students talk about the class and it being for dummies. I have also had a direct experience with a female student who was refusing to attend because she was feeling ashamed for being placed into the class, and parents feeling upset that they cannot opt their own children out of it. The criteria for placement in the class can make it difficult. Only one score is used and that is the Iowa Assessment score. If students score poorly on this assessment, they are put in the class. There is no getting out of it. I have heard the argument that the student didnt care about the test and that it is a misuse of time for some students. They cannot be placed in another class until the next years scores come out. Lastly, not any student can take this class. I think it is a weakness for our school. Some students may wish to take this an elective. Lots of great strategies are taught in this class and some of them are newer and may be beneficial for even your average reader. Lastly, the biggest weakness that I have uncovered is that Reading Lab is not data driven. They do collect scores on a Stanford Reading test as well as bi-weekly in an informal assessment. The problem with this system is that none of the assessments are aligned with the curriculum being taught in class. They are using a program

called Second Chance Reading, which doesnt allow for continuing assessment based on new skills taught. There is no change in curriculum if a student does not make progress. That student just continues to take the class. As a person with a special education background, I am accustomed to using data to drive instruction. As a whole, special education teachers change instruction when there are four data points below the set progress aim line. This is not happening for the group of students who take Reading Lab. External Weakness The biggest external weakness I have come across is that there is no prescribed budget for Reading Lab. The funds have to be approved by the Head of the English Department. So if a reading lab teacher would like some new books, replacements, or has a cost associated with teaching the class, he or she has to submit a request, which is often denied. The initial start up of this venture provided some books and training but there is not ongoing funding. This is a problem for keeping materials up to date. The population that is sometimes served in this lab is a very transient population at times. Books are lost or misplaced and the program materials often take a hit. It is also hard due to the fluctuation of students to really track the progress of any given kid throughout the years of service. New curriculum has not been considered given the push for State Standards aligning to our curriculum. Students often do not want to attend due to the social stigma and attendance can be up and down. Opportunities Reading lab provides many opportunities for students, staff, and families. Students with self-esteem problems have experienced success and are encouraged by that. The chance to be successful in an area in which they have previously not experienced success is provided. The individual gains that some students see are really amazing. Students are able to keep the same teacher every term that they are in Reading Lab. The direct opportunity for kids to connect with an individual teacher and form a relationship as an unofficial mentor makes a great impact on learning. Additionally this benefits the parents in the way that they know someone at the school has an invested interest in their child. Given that currently Reading Lab has no record of impact on students postsecondary outcomes, surveying parents and past Reading Lab students on their successes is an area that many opportunities exist. Discovering the impact Reading Lab has on students as they transition into the community could drive emphasis on specific strategies students felt were most beneficial or change in areas in which students saw no applicable gain. It would be great to call up the past students and/or their families to survey them on the benefits they have experienced by this class.

With this knowledge and data, MISD could present the community with hard facts detailing the importance and relevancy in continuation of this program that possibly better prepares and equips students with the necessary skills to be successful in obtaining and maintaining a career post-secondary. Though skills in reading may not always be deemed job-retention worthy in the areas in which these students typically wind up being employed, the communication skills gained by the strategies and tasks covered are certainly applicable. Reading Lab also has the opportunity to prepare students in non-academic areas. In addition to communication skills, students need to be proficient in time management and awareness related to task completion. Reading Lab requires students to complete and discuss a minimum of three books per term. The demand to not only finish but also articulate comprehension of a lengthy reading stresses the necessity for attention to task and meeting time constraints. If the class required that students to graph and chart progress in regards to books read and comprehension there-of, weekly scores in fluency and comprehension scores, acknowledgement of success or failure is inevitable. Another opportunity Reading Lab affords is that of ongoing professional collaboration and exposure to the most recent strategies available for improvement in reading comprehension. Because Grant Wood AEA offers classes in SCR for veteran teachers, they are currently up-to-date on cutting-edge concepts and methods. A final area in which opportunity exists is the option for students beyond the typical age and proficiency-required enrollment to continue with instruction in reading comprehension. Currently MISD does not require proficient (no matter of how close to the non-proficient score they may be) students to continue with Reading Lab. Offering the class as an elective to students interested in further instruction could be made available. Threats The threats are many when it comes to the success of continuing reading lab. There is some trouble getting parents and students to buy-in to the class. This is mainly due the stigma of the class. Kids dont like to be singled out and they dont like for others to know that they need additional help in any area. There is also not a set budget for the class. I am actually surprised about this. I asked and it sounds like the English Department was given some money for start up costs, but there is not a yearly budget for the class. This lack of set funds creates issues for the staff that teach the class for they have to ask the Head of the English Department if they need materials. Not always are Reading Lab materials something that is high on the list of things to purchase. I was even told by one of the teachers that she has spent her own money on a set of books. This is not a great set up for a class that serves a fairly significant portion of our student population here at Marion High

School. The teachers of the class state that the materials are outdated, and there is a lack of high interest, low reading level books at their disposal. There has been no update on the curriculum used since its implementation. In addition to materials the teachers are wishing they had a shared planning period so that they may touch base regularly to ensure that students are getting a cohesive curriculum and to provide consistency across the program. Variance for Students Because Reading Lab is only required for students at or below the 40th percentile on the Iowa Assessments, students who scored at the 41st percentile, who could every bit as much benefit from the instruction of Reading Lab, are left behind. This distinction eliminates the opportunity for students who may be in need of instruction to a marginal or otherwise indiscriminate level wanting. Similarly, students who have had Reading Lab in the past or who have seen the successes of Reading Lab students and wish to take the course as an elective cant. The class is required only for non-proficient students and isnt offered for those who wish to improve skills. Another variance for students is the level and specificity of instruction they receive. Though to an extent instruction is individualized, the nature of the class doesnt allow for complete individualization of content. There is no change in instruction based on student performance. Lastly, a variance for students is that those who have had instruction in specific reading comprehension strategies arent encouraged to generalize those strategies to other core content areas. Variance for Teachers In tandem with the variance in follow through for students who have had Reading Lab instruction but dont generalize its benefits to other core curricular areas, teachers who wish to reinforce and implement statistically proven successful strategies are not equipped. Reading Lab teachers share strategies and methods of instruction that promote increased comprehension, and interested core-content area teachers employ these; however, those general education teachers that may be less comfortable with the introduction of instruction without training may be hesitant to incorporate and encourage unfamiliar concepts. This lack of generalization to and reinforcement of strategies to other areas may undermine their import and value. Another variance among teachers, similar to that above, is that not all teachers are trained in Second Chance Reading. Staff cannot be expected to assist students in strategies with which they are not familiar. As enthusiastic as they may be, general

education teachers who are not trained in or comfortable with the most recently accepted methods of increasing comprehension may be tentative in student support. Student Achievement Analysis Unfortunately there is little data across the years of any given student or group of students to make general statements about gains and achievement of student in Reading Lab. During an interview with the principal, he stated that there really isnt any evidence of Reading Labs success. He feels that it doesnt hurt the students. He asked if there is a better way to serve these kids and answered himself that it is very possible. He also said that he doesnt really feel that taking Reading Lab changes scores. He said he thinks most would progress at about the same rate and rarely do you see students have huge gains. What he hasnt seen a lot of in the past 8 years is student achievement go down in anyway. Scores of the students rarely decrease. Students are given the Stanford Reading Assessment in August and January every year. Bi-weekly they use the Jamestown Readers to do individual assessments. Very little is done with this data. The Stanford Reading Assessment provides a level for students to start at on the Jamestown Readers. It also gives teachers a target for what grade level students should be selecting for their independent reading. This is a summative assessment and is done twice a year but does not really drive instruction. The Jamestown Readers assessments are used bi-weekly. This is an informative assessment. The data from these vary as to what is done with it depending on the teacher. Some teachers just give the test and input the score in the grade book. Other teachers allow students to track their progress individually. They may do this in a data folder as they have set individual goals. The different types of stories they are using for the testing allows for review of strategies based on type of story prior to the testing period. In addition to the two assessments, students are required to track the number of minutes they read on a reading log. An intervention lesson is designed to address a specific need that has become evident from watching and listening to children as they read and write. Children with similar needs should grouped together to make efficient use of instructional time (comprehension or fluency). To assist the students to move from where they are to where they need to be, teachers focuses less on modeling and more on scaffolding instruction. I think that the data collection would be more relevant if the program was aligned. None of the current data is really being used to drive the instruction of the class on a consistent basis. To show results or to track data is beneficial for showing the importance of a program like Reading Lab. What we are telling these students and the staff is that providing the opportunity to read is what is helping these kids, lets show the data to prove it. Unfortunately, the current program being used does not allow for continuous assessment to determine skill acquisition.

If the program would remain as is, I would track data on the Iowa Assessment. You could compare students based on the teacher they had, the strategies they learned, and the change in either their vocabulary or comprehension scores. We are hoping this class will help them out of the 40th percentile and below. I would like to look at data from transcripts to see the average number of terms students are enrolled in the class before passing out of it. I would also be interested in how the change from offering the class every term to now only offering it only twice a year effects test scores. Other things that I would track would be GPA changes, attendance, and discipline referrals to the office. I am curious how many kids at our alternative school were once Reading Lab students and how many of the students who dropped out experienced Reading Lab. Conclusion/Recommendations Reading Lab offers students to work on their weaknesses in the area of reading. It potentially can help they raise their achievement in many content areas. The staff at the high school that teach the class are working hard to help this at risk population. It is beneficial for most that take the class. I would recommend the following changes take place to strengthen the program: The atmosphere of the class would change, as I recommend that the class be open to other students than just those under the 40th percentile. You should analyze whom to include based on student need, but I recommend offering it to juniors and seniors as an elective. I also suggest offering it to students who are freshmen or sophomores based on a request form that would be signed by parents. In addition to allowing more students to take the class, I recommend a name change. Currently, Reading Lab shows up on a students transcript as Second Chance Reading. I have heard many negative comments about this. Students call it the Dummies Class amongst other things. Changing the name is a fairly easy process as noted by the counselors office. They would just need to know what to call it and make the change in the Program of Studies. I have suggested something like Literature Connections or Literacy Concepts to administration for their consideration. Reading Lab teachers could help all teachers understand more about reading comprehension. I see a benefit to having the Reading Lab teachers do a PD about some of the strategies others could use cross-curricular. I recommend they also meet with vertical teams at times to help suggest strategies based on curriculum presented or discussed. I encourage them to do a monthly/quarterly newsletter about the strategies that have been introduced, how they work, how they could be used, and where to get more information on each of the strategies. This could go out electronically to all the staff. They could even include in this some fun stuff they

have helped other staff with, give examples of how they have teamed with others, and some book recommendations/reviews by the students of Reading Lab. At this time I would recommend that Reading Lab continues and begins to make some changes to move the class into a more positive light. I am highly recommending that a team of teachers be formed to look into a new curriculum for the class. The curriculum should be standards-based, research-based, and allow for continuous assessment based on curriculum taught. If Reading Lab is to prove to be effective in helping this population of students, monitoring of their progress must be done. I have researched a few programs and have a few ideas; I do feel however that this needs to be a decision made by a team of people. There are tons of great programs out there that are working in schools and there is data to prove their success. I would recommend that the team look at the following programs that are age appropriate for high school aged students: -Project CRISS -Strategic Literacy Initiative -Reading is FAME -Reading Advantage -Literacy Navigator -Scholastic Read 180 There would be some cost associated with purchasing a new curriculum. Since the Reading Lab has had such support for its existence there is hope that there would be funds that could be allocated for acquiring new curriculum. Literally the program has cost hardly anything since it started and the curriculum used needs to be supported by our district. There is also a possibility of writing grants, requesting assistance from local businesses, and asking for help from the Marion Foundation during their yearly dispersal of funds.