Reading Recovery Teaching Archives - Reading Recovery Council of North America

Thank You, Reading Recovery Community!

Thank You, Reading Recovery Community!

mfarynowski2023-02-08T18:07:55-05:00November 22nd, 2022|General, Latest News, Reading Recovery Teaching, Reflections and Commentary|

Thanksgiving is a time for reflection, togetherness, and gratitude. This year, we’re thankful for every member of the Reading Recovery Community. Thank you for working tirelessly to help children learn to read.

Browse our thank you note gallery below. Add a thank you note you received to the comment section in our community and social media and we’ll add it to this post! Bookmark this post for whenever you need a pick-me-up. Your commitment and passion is appreciated!

Intervention Essentials #3: Full Implementation Maximizes Effectiveness

Intervention Essentials #3: Full Implementation Maximizes Effectiveness

KT Crandall2022-05-25T09:41:55-05:00May 25th, 2022|Latest News, Reading Recovery Teaching|

by Dr. Anne Simpson, Texas Woman’s University

Why does full implementation in Reading Recovery® matter?

The goal of Reading Recovery and Descubriendo la Lectura—Reading Recovery in Spanish—is to efficiently and effectively lift the literacy achievement of children who are experiencing difficulties learning to read and write. School systems that choose to implement the interventions do so with the understanding that reducing the number of first graders who have extreme difficulty learning to read and write not only sets students on the path for success in literacy learning but also benefits the total school as well. Full implementation is essential for maximizing the effectiveness.

What is Full Implementation?

Full implementation, sometimes referred to as full coverage, means that every child who needs Reading Recovery services has access to the intervention at their school during first grade. Children making low progress in learning to read need to make accelerated growth by increasing their rate of progress relative to the expected growth by the end of first grade in order to close the achievement gap. “A school or district has reached full coverage or full implementation when sufficient time and teacher support is available to serve all identified children (RRCNA, 2021, p. 31).

What are the Benefits of Full Implementation?

Students, teachers, and schools benefit from full implementation of the one-to-one intervention that significantly lifts the literacy achievement for each student who receives the intervention. Students develop systems for independent problem solving, often achieving several months of growth in just a few weeks of their daily, individually designed lesson series. Students who make this accelerated progress seldom need referral for long-term interventions, thus reducing costs associated with remedial instruction and referrals to special education. In addition, reducing unnecessary referrals to special education frees time for special education educators to focus their attention on those students who truly need those services. Reading Recovery teachers identify and work with each learner’s strengths and design lessons to support the student making accelerated progress. The focus on a strength-based intervention and teacher expertise lead to a positive and productive learning culture for the whole school. Working from a theory that emphasizes teaching for independence and thoughtful analysis of teaching decisions, schools create a culture of what Fullan & Quinn (2016) refer to as “coherence making.” Schools that operate with coherence build capacity for purposeful action and interaction, building precision in teaching and accountability. The added benefit of full implementation includes the highly trained teachers who share their early literacy expertise to grow collaborative cultures and deepen learning within the total school. While it may take 2–3 years to achieve full implementation, planning for full implementation is an important goal in lifting achievement to within the average band of all readers and writers and reducing the number of referrals to special education or retentions in first grade.

How to Plan for Full Implementation

Reading Recovery’s unique system for lifting individual students’ literacy achievement in first grade requires school leaders to think both about student needs on a campus (across a district) and staffing flexibility to achieve full implementation.

Student Need

To determine the appropriate level of support, teachers typically begin by identifying 20–25% of their first-graders making the lowest progress on their district early literacy performance indicators (Clay, 2005). Reading Recovery teachers then administer An Observation Survey of Early Literacy Achievement (Clay, 2019) to determine the children most in need of Reading Recovery instruction. Classroom teachers and the Reading Recovery teacher or a literacy team work together to determine the students most in need and begin by taking the lowest-performing students. By annually being attentive to changes in demographics, changes in performance standards, and changes due to growth, school teams can anticipate the number of teachers who are needed to provide Reading Recovery instruction for all students who need it.

Flexible Staffing

Reading Recovery teachers typically serve four students individually in daily lessons for 12–20 weeks (determined by the learner’s progress). The short intensive individual instruction allows teachers to serve between 8–10 students across the school year. Because Reading Recovery instruction is only part of the teacher’s day (typically a .4 FTE), this teacher may use their expertise in a variety of roles within a school during the other part of the day. Flexible staffing models include shared classroom models, English language [EL] services, small-group interventions across other grade levels, literacy coaches, or special education services (RRCNA, 2021).

These flexible staffing models enable schools to achieve full implementation. When a school is fully implemented and all first-grade children who qualify for the intervention have been served by the end of the year, teachers are able to work with kindergarten children or some second-grade students who may have moved in the district or need additional support.

An Example

In a school with four first-grade classrooms, each with 22 students, a school team could anticipate that 17–20 students would benefit from Reading Recovery. To achieve full implementation, the school would need two, possibly three, teachers depending on the makeup of the campus. These two teachers would be able to have 8–10 students in their first 12–20 weeks of instruction and potentially 8–10 students in their second 12–20 weeks of instruction. Teaching for acceleration and efficient entry and exit processes will contribute to the efficiency of the implementation. Close collaboration with the classroom teachers maximizes the successful transition into classroom instruction so that the child can learn with independence.

Full Implementation Achieved

Full implementation is part of a school and district’s comprehensive literacy plan. Striving to achieve full implementation in schools requires dynamic planning annually to anticipate change in student need and teacher availability. Campus leaders, teacher leaders, site coordinators, and teachers can establish systems for annually reviewing outcomes and anticipating future needs. A commitment to full implementation ensures that children most in need are able to make significant growth in their literacy learning. In addition, the commitment to full implementation reduces the long-term costs of intervening services to educational systems. Full implementation is both a process and a goal in maximizing students’ early literacy success.

“Intervention Essentials” is a three-part series featured in the Fall 2021 edition of The Journal of Reading Recovery. View and print a copy of Part 3: Full Implementation Maximizes Effectiveness and subscribe to the blog for future releases.

Interested in full access to The Journal of Reading Recovery? Learn more about becoming a member of RRCNA.

References

Clay, M. M. (2005). Literacy lessons designed for individuals part one: Why? when? and how? Heinemann.

Clay, M. M. (2019). An observation survey of early literacy achievement (4th ed.). Global Education Systems (GES) Ltd.

Fullan, M., & Quinn, J. (2016). Coherence: The right drivers in action for schools, districts, and systems. Corwin.

Reading Recovery Council of North America. (n.d.). Effective implementation. https://readingrecovery.org/ reading-recovery/implementation/ effective-implementation/

Reading Recovery Council of North America. (2021). A site coordinator’s guide to the effective implementation of Reading Recovery (2nd ed.)

About the Author

Dr. Anne Simpson is a professor emeritus at Texas Woman’s University, where she was director of Reading Recovery and Descubriendo la Lectura. She is a Reading Recovery trainer emeritus with the North American Trainers Group.

Intervention Essentials Part 1: Guaranteed Access to a Full Series of Lessons

Intervention Essentials Part 1: Guaranteed Access to a Full Series of Lessons

Elliott Benzle2022-04-11T12:33:52-05:00April 11th, 2022|Reading Recovery Teaching, Teaching|

by Connie Briggs

Why does the Reading Recovery trademark guarantee participating students a full series of lessons
that may be up to 20 weeks of instruction?

“The quality and integrity of your implementation [Reading Recovery] is protected by a trademark annually granted to sites, pending a review of adherence with the Standards and Guidelines of Reading Recovery in the United States …” (Reading Recovery Council of North America, [RRCNA], 2021, p. 33). With over 35 years of research and excellent national student outcome data, schools and districts that adhere to standards and guidelines—and employ an effective implementation plan—can be assured that investing in Reading Recovery will reduce the number of children with reading difficulties and the long-term cost to their systems for educating these children. Adherence to all aspects of the Reading Recovery standards, guidelines, and procedures is key to establishing and maintaining effective interventions.

What is a Full Series of Lessons?
Per Clay’s (2016) design for this intervention, every Reading Recovery student is entitled to a full series of Reading Recovery lessons, and that is individual lessons of 30 minutes daily for a maximum of 20 weeks. Some children will not require the maximum weeks of instruction. They will accelerate their literacy learning and demonstrate the proficiency levels, the literacy processing system, and the learner independence required to ensure their continued literacy learning with less than 20 weeks of instruction. Their series of Reading Recovery lessons then ends as they have achieved intervention goals. They will receive ongoing literacy instruction from their classroom teachers, most often within average groups. Other children will need 20 weeks of instruction to achieve intervention goals, and a small number will not achieve intervention goals even with 20 weeks of individual instruction. Irrespective of their progress, all students are guaranteed access to 20 weeks of lessons.

Why 20 Weeks?
Adherence to 20 weeks of Reading Recovery instruction for all students in need of this time was suggested by Clay’s early research. Clay (as reported in Clay & Tuck, 1991; reprinted 2009) found that children take different paths to learning and it is not possible to predict at the outset of a learner’s intervention the amount of instructional time needed by the student to reach Reading Recovery goals. In fact, “premature predictions about whether a child would achieve the intervention goals could be wrong for too many children …” (RRCNA, 2021, p. 48).

Learners enter Reading Recovery with differing prior experiences and varying amounts of literacy awareness, i.e., reading and writing concepts and skills. Consequently, some readers make accelerated progress early in the series of lessons allowing them to exit the intervention with less than 20 weeks of instruction. Other readers need more instructional time to establish a literacy processing system and achieve accelerated progress, and many are successful given the full 20 weeks of instruction. For those children who do not reach the intervention goals after 20 weeks of instruction, Clay (2016) confirmed that access to this full series of lessons, 20 weeks, is paramount to collecting rich, diagnostic information critical for planning the ongoing, literacy support most appropriate for these learners following the Reading Recovery intervention.

A secondary rationale is based on the number of instructional days in a school year. In the United States, Reading Recovery teachers serve 8–10 students in two rounds of the 20-week intervention. These teachers instruct their intervention students for one-half of their day and fulfill other teaching duties during the rest of their school day. The schedule is not only more cost-effective for the school but also enables the highly skilled teachers to share their expertise with many other students in classrooms or small groups and share their expertise with other teachers in the school. Thus, the 20-week maximum for the intervention, with teachers engaged in Reading Recovery instruction at .5 FTE, provides both economic and academic benefits.

What Happens During the 20-Week Intervention?
Clay’s literacy processing theory focuses on perceptual and cognitive behaviors that change over time as teachers trained in Reading Recovery instruct on the cusp of individual students’ strengths and understandings. Reading Recovery teachers have a deep understanding of emergent literacy development and are able to successfully scaffold a reader’s competencies in literacy across a series of lessons. Reading and writing are viewed as reciprocal processes so during every daily lesson; children read many books, at both their instructional and independent levels, and compose and write many stories.

One of the hallmarks of instruction is teaching for independence and not doing for the child what he can do for themself. Another hallmark is teaching for problem solving and decision making. Emergent readers must learn to self-monitor when there is dissonance, search for information that will inform a decision, and make a confirmation about the strategic, in-the-head processes that were carried out. Readers entering with limited understandings must learn how to look at print, discriminate among letters, use prior knowledge, link oral language to print, link sounds to letters, develop a repertoire of known words, construct texts, and explore details in print in both reading and writing. The ultimate teaching goal is to support the reader to be constructive and independent as they learn to use phonemic awareness, phonics, oral language, vocabulary, and fluency in the service of reading with meaning (Doyle & Forbes, 2003). The instructional need and the learning path is unique for every student and may require up to 20 weeks of instruction to achieve literacy goals.

Positive Outcomes
Every child who receives a full series of Reading Recovery lessons makes progress with two positive outcomes. First, the majority of the lowest-achieving readers and writers make accelerated progress and “have reached grade-level expectations in reading and writing, demonstrating strategic activities that will foster continuing achievement in the classroom with little or no additional support beyond the classroom” (RRCNA, 2021, p. 27). The second positive outcome involves two sets of students: those who, after 20 weeks of instruction, have made impressive gains and have a literacy processing system under construction but need additional support to reach average levels of literacy proficiency. Often, this support comes from the classroom teacher. The second set of students are those few who have made limited progress after a full series of 20 weeks of instruction and are deserving of long-term support. These children are recommended by the school team for further specialist help. “Both [of these outcomes] are positive for the child and for the school” (RRCNA, 2021, p. 27).

Conclusion
Each child deserves every opportunity to leave first grade as a confident reader and writer. Becoming literate is crucial to school success; research studies have shown that learners who are poor readers at the end of first grade are likely to be poor readers at the end of fourth grade as well (Juel, 1988). For more than 35 years in the United States, Reading Recovery, a highly successful, research-based, data-driven literacy intervention has helped schools to meet the challenge with a promise of 20 weeks or less.

“Intervention Essentials” is a three-part series featured in the Fall 2021 edition of The Journal of Reading Recovery. View and print a copy of Part 1: Guaranteed Access to a Full Series of Lessons and subscribe to the blog for future releases.

Interested in full access to The Journal of Reading Recovery? Learn more about becoming a member of RRCNA.

References

Clay, M. M. (2016). Literacy lessons designed for individuals (2^nd ed.). Heinemann.

Clay, M. M., & Tuck, B. (1991). A study of Reading Recovery subgroups: Including outcomes for children who did not satisfy discontinuing criteria. Report on research funded by the Ministry of Education, Auckland, New Zealand. Also see Watson, B., & Askew, B. (Eds.). (2009). Boundless horizons: Marie Clay’s search for the possible in children’s literacy (pp. 80–94). Heinemann.

Doyle, M. A., & Forbes, S. (2003). How Reading Recovery teaches the five essential elements of reading instruction and more: National Reading Panel recommendations—and beyond. The Journal of Reading Recovery, 3(1), 1–17.

Juel, C. (1988). Learning to read and write: A longitudinal study of 54 children from first through fourth grades. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80(4), 437–447. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/0022-0663.80.4.437

Reading Recovery Council of North America. (2021). A site coordinator’s guide to the effective implementation of Reading Recovery (2^nd ed.).

Connie Briggs is a professor emeritus at Texas Woman’s University and a Reading Recovery Trainer Emeritus with the North American Trainers Group.

What is your song?

What is your song?

Kimberly Reynolds2023-02-08T18:10:08-05:00May 12th, 2021|Reading Recovery Teaching, Reflections and Commentary|

by Kim Reynolds

Have you ever heard a song from the past that brings you right back to that very moment in time as if nothing has ever changed? I used to laugh at my parents as an “oldie but goodie” came on the radio causing them to embarrassingly break out into song. This would often lead to stories from their past, some of which brought laughter and others that brought tears. Every time I hear Night Fever by the Bee Gees, I remember sitting on the couch in the living room with my sister watching my parents practice their disco dancing. Yes…they took disco lessons!!! I bet you have found yourself reminiscing about a memorable time in your life as a song quickly takes you back in time.

I now find myself doing the same thing with my own kids. I start obnoxiously singing a Whitney Houston or Laura Branigan song that I hear playing in the middle of Target, which often leads to them conveniently losing me in the store. I love using music to “pump up” before a tough meeting or to “wind down” after a challenging day! Music can also be a great way to accompany a much-needed therapeutic cry, which has happened more than normal this year. I have even cleverly set up my playlist to motivate my way through what I think will be an amazing workout on that daunting treadmill. The music makes me feel like I can successfully run a marathon…even it is for only 15 minutes.

This brings me to our recent Reading Recovery/Literacy Lessons training class graduation celebration. I have a tradition that I pair music to each teacher based on a funny memory, a challenging experience, or a successful moment. This unexpected part of the evening is not on the agenda and catches everyone by surprise, which makes it even more fun when I break out into song with my well-planned playlist.

It has been a challenging year in teaching, but my colleague, Leslie McBane, and I were able to overcome many obstacles that were out of our control to be able to successfully train our teachers. As always, I found comfort in Clay’s words, “The intent is not to find an excuse for the lack of progress, or a label to explain the child’s difficulty, or to state what was thought to be wrong with the child’s past experience at home or at school. The intent is to find a way to get around the roadblock and establish or re-establish accelerated learning.” (Clay, 2016, p. 168). The roadblock that Clay referenced was a doozie this year!! It was rough going, but we did it!!

I made it my goal to find the music to represent this unforgettable time in our lives during our recent end-of-year celebration. You can reminisce with me while I take you through my playlist. Cue in the Jaws theme song. As we began our journey this year, we weren’t sure what to anticipate. There was a lot of uncertainty and tentativeness heading into murky waters. Kelly Clarkson’s Stronger helped us to face the fantastic amount of learning, teach the most challenging students during a pandemic, and balance life in general with tremendous strength.

This brought me to Human by Christina Perri. As we managed to have school visits (remotely and in-person), teach Behind The Glass lessons via Google Meet, and instruct our students with face masks while maintaining social distance, we all came to realize that we are only human. I wanted the teachers to realize that we have survived amazing odds and we need to celebrate. This leads us to Pharrell Williams’s upbeat song Happy. The teachers’ positive energy, willingness to take on new learning, and flexible attitudes have been essential this year. We can clap and be happy together.

At the end of my crazy introduction, I played a song with a memory from this year for each teacher accompanied by my great dance moves! The teachers have overcome many challenges personally and professionally. Luckily the tears and laughter helped us to find a unique perspective and a common experience that will keep our professional and personal bond strong for many years to come.

I used music to make my way through the teaching and learning challenges and newfound opportunities of the pandemic. I drove through the roadblocks that Clay referenced with my playlist in hand trying not to hit the potholes of everyday life. I hope you find your song as I cue in mine… Life is a Highway by Rascal Flatts. I know that we can find our way together even when the pavement is a little rough. I’ll bring the disco ball.

Congratulations to the latest graduates of the Reading Recovery/Literacy Lessons (year 1) teacher training program at The Ohio State University. Pictured above are (back row, left to right) Reading Recovery Teacher Leader Leslie McBane, Kim Myers, Tricia Kucinic, Taylor Kiehl, Melissa Cottrill, Reading Recovery Teacher Leader, Kim Reynolds, and (front row, left to right) Renee Klein, Brittany Maynard, & Cheryl Grimm.

Kim Reynolds is a Reading Recovery Teacher Leader with Dublin City Schools in Dublin, Ohio. She is also the Reading Recovery and Literacy Lessons Docent, The Ohio State University, and a LitCon presenter.

Learning Loss-Myth or Reality (Check)

Learning Loss-Myth or Reality (Check)

Blog Author2023-02-08T18:10:09-05:00March 18th, 2021|Classroom Teaching, General Education, Latest News, Reading Recovery Teaching, Reflections and Commentary, Teaching|

by Kathleen A. Brown

Learning Loss: one of the many topics of conversation in the education world of the pandemic. As school districts across the nation are working tirelessly to open schools, many are planning for the loss of learning due to online instruction and the effects of the pandemic.

I cannot stop wondering what learning loss is and how it is measured? Is learning loss measured by attendance, homework, assignments, quizzes, tests, or achievement reports? Maybe learning loss is measured by the lack of student engagement, motivation, or attention? Whatever the case may be, I do agree there will be some learning loss, but the key question is how we strategically plan for it, without watering down our teaching and spending too much time on remediation. Vince Gowmon so eloquently helps us to ponder the following, “Instead of teaching children to get ‘there’, why not let them be ‘here’? Where is ‘there’ anyway? The world needs more ‘here’ than there.”

As adults, we have focused too much on what the students have lost academically. But the pandemic has taken a toll on student’s social and emotional well-being as well. If we interviewed students and families what would they say is their greatest loss during the pandemic? Perhaps they would say: loss of a loved one, a job, a place to live, poor mental health and wellness services, food insecurities or unstable and unsafe home environment, or inability to see and connect with others. There is a myriad of things for us to consider as we plan for post-pandemic schooling.

In Reading Recovery, our students come to us with a supposed “learning deficit” and we celebrate each student as an individual, discover their strengths, valuing their cultural background, language, and life experiences. Through careful observation and assessment, Reading Recovery teachers focus on a student’s assets instead of the student’s deficits. Through carefully planned and executed lessons, Reading Recovery teachers provide targeted instruction, scaffolds, and prompting to foster accelerated learning to help close the achievement gap.

Children are resilient and what they bring to our classrooms, in person or virtually, needs to be acknowledged, valued, respected, and honored. I cannot help but think of Marie Clays’ words of wisdom that remind us that students take different paths to common outcomes and that is both okay and important to take into consideration in instruction. Cassi Clausen reminds us “Ask any child development expert, and they will tell you that children do not develop in a straight line. There are no average children. There are no standard children.”

I have some concern students will be set up for more learning loss if we treat students the same, think they ALL have a loss of learning and we teach to the floor and not the ceiling. As educators, we must have the mindset of acceleration, not remediation, value our student’s new knowledge and experiences, and fill in the gaps when necessary. As Marie Clay has stated in “Literacy Lessons” page 20, “Achieving acceleration is not easy but it must be constantly borne in mind.” Moving forward, ongoing keen observation, formative assessments, and differentiation will be more important than ever. And we must celebrate individual differences as assets. We approach student learning to start where each child is and take them as far as we can. During Mary Howard’s presentation at LitCon 2021, she challenged educators to think about interventions as opportunities throughout the entire school day, not as an isolated act or time. She also expressed interventions should not work in isolation but be connected to a comprehensive learning system. This vision for intervention would be inclusive for all students in need.

When we safely open our schools again, students will be bringing with them a myriad of experiences and new learning from their families, communities, and the world at large. How do we capitalize on that learning and their experiences moving forward?

It will take coordinated and strategic efforts to get our students back on track socially, emotionally, and academically. In the Long Beach Unified School district, literacy teachers and intervention specialists are being refocused to build cohesiveness, implement effective and proven interventions, and be trained in the use of best practices. In his keynote speech at LitCon, Cornelis Minor implored us to look at the following:

We need to be more attentive to school-based outcomes…
…and attentive to the mindsets & systems that drive those outcomes.
We can understand how those systems impact curriculum, pedagogy & school/classroom culture.

Let us not be too quick to remediate but let us also accelerate and provide necessary scaffolds along the way. Instead of focusing on learning loss, why not focus on learning recovery or learning enrichment. Our children have a lot to teach us if we let them. As one of my Reading Recovery students reminded me, “I am not good at reading yet, but I know a lot about animals and drones.”

William Butler Yeats suggests, “Education is not the filling of a pail, but the lighting of a fire.” It is our moral imperative to educate our students during the best of times and the worst of times. The children are counting on us. Let us not let them down.

Kathleen A. Brown has worked in the field of education for 36 years as a classroom teacher, literacy specialist, and Reading Recovery teacher; serving as the Reading Recovery teacher leader in Long Beach Unified School District for the last 20 years. She provides literacy coaching and training for the district and serves on a variety of early intervention/early literacy committees.