Comprehensive Plan for Reading Achievement Dr. Tara Galloway K-3 Literacy Director Dr. Pam Shue Deputy Superintendent of Early Education Comprehensive Plan for Reading Achievement A Section One: foJ Implementation of the Components of Read to Achieve A Section Two: [-er Evaluation of Read to Achieve Section Three: LA Revisions to the Comprehensive Reading Plan Section Four: LA Recommendations For Legislative Changes Public Schools of North Carolina Section One: Implementation of the Components of Read to Achieve Component One: Comprehensive Plan for Reading Achievement (115C-83.4) f?N Component Two: Facilitating Early Grade Reading Proficiency (115C-83.6) Component Three: Elimination of Social Promotion r?x Component Four: Successful Reading Development for Retained Students (115C-83.8) Component Five: Notification Requirements to Parents and Guardians (1150-839) Component Six: Accountability Measures (115C-83.10) f?Nf?N a In Public Schools of North Carolina Component One: Comprehensive Plan for Reading Achievement (115C-83.4) • Develop / Implement / Evaluate • Six major pillars – Standards – Assessment – Instruction - Professional Development - Leadership - Communication and Partnerships • Evidence-based • Aligned with reading development • Personalized Learning Component Two: Facilitating Early Grade Reading Proficiency (115C-83.6) • Formative, Diagnostic Assessment - Professional development - Data informed decisions - Fidelity of implementation • • • • Technology/Personalized Learning Parent Connection Summer Reading Camp Wolfpack Works Initiative Component Three: Elimination of Social Promotion (115C-83.7) RtA Assessment Local Alt. Assessment English Learner GCE Students with Disabilities GCE Reading Portfolio GCE Multiple Retentions GCE Multiple Pathways to Show Proficiency Percentage of Students in NC Demonstrating Proficiency in Reading for Each Pathway Over 5 Years 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 BOG, or Retest *Alternative Assessments d?Good Cause Exemptions Public Schools of North Carolina BOG, ECG, or Retest BOG, ECG, or Retest by Subgroup 2014 2015 2016 2017 --?Amerioan Indian+Asian White ?-?Two or More ?I?Hispanio -?B ack so -r 45 40 2018 BOG, ECG, or Retest by Subgroup 5.x.r 2014 2015 2016 2017 Disadvantaged +English Learner ?-?Students with Disabilities 2018 Public Schools of North Carolina BOG, ECG, or Retest by Subgroup 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 ?*-Amerioan Ind ian-l?Asian White -?Hispanic -?-Two or More +Blaok Public Schools of North Carolina NC Alternate Assessments Total Alternate Assessments by Subgroup 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 - -American Indian -O?Asian White ?-?Hispanio ?Two or More Races --B aok 20 18 16 14 12 10 Chm?50303 Total Alternate Assessments by Subgroup 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 ?Economioa y Disadvantaged ?-?English Learner ?Students with Disabilities Public Schools of North Carolina Good Cause Exemptions Good Cause Exemptions by Subgroup z??i 5 0 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Indian -0-Asian White -?Hispanic ?-?Two or More Races dihBlack Good Cause Exemptions by Subgroup 2014 2015 2016 2017 Economically Disadvantaged -?English Learner ?-?Students with Disabilities 2018 Public Schools of North Carolina Good Cause Exemptions by Subgroup 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 --?American Indian +Asian White -I?Hispanic ?'?Two or More Races Public Schools of North Carolina Component Four: Successful Reading Development for Retained Students (115C-83.8) RtA Alternate Reading Portfolio Local Alternate Assessment 4th grade EOG Twice Retained Demonstrate proficiency Evidence-based interventions implemented Teacher with demonstrated outcomes in reading Component Four: Successful Reading Development for Retained Students (115C-83.8) • Reading Camps – LEAs responsible – Livebinder – Volunteers • High-quality core literacy instruction – 90-minute block – Aligned with student needs Component Five: Notification Requirements to Parents and Guardians (115C-83.9) • Notification in timely manner – Not proficient – K, 1st, 2nd, or 3rd grade deficiency • RtA Guidebook • Livebinder • HomeConnect Component Six: Accountability Measures (115C-83.10) • Accountability Division – Uniform process – Uniform template – Districts report through electronic system Section Two: Evaluation of Read to Achieve NC 08. requires each local board of education to publish annually State on a Web site maintained by that local school administrative unit and to report 2017?18 in writing to the State Board of Education (SBE) by September 1 of each year Read to Achieve Grade the following information on the prior school year: m: The denominator for calculating the required percentages for Rows l, 2, and 3 is all students Number Percentage in membership at grade 3 for the first day of spring testing. For 2017-18 this number is 121,567 of Students Demonstrated reading pro?ciency on the Beginning-of-Grade 3 (BOG3) ELA/Reading Assessment, the End-of-Grade (EOG) ELA/Reading Assessment, or the ECG ELA/Reading Retest scored Level 3 or higher). 68.397 56.3% 2 Did not demonstrate reading pro?ciency on the BOG3 ELA/Reading Assessment, the ECG ELA/Reading Assessment, or the EOG ELA/Reading Retest. 53,170 43_7% 3 The number and percentage of students exempt from mandatory retention in third grade for good cause. Students may be counted in this category only once. 13,198 10.9% The denominator for Row 4 is the number of students from Row 2 minus the number of students from Row 3. The number and percentage of students who took and passed an alternative assessment 4 approved by the State Board of Education (SBE) Read to Achieve Test or locally determined SBE-approved alternative assessment). Students may be counted in the numerator and/or the denominator only once for this category. 17,991 45.0% The denominator for Row 5 is all students in membership at grade 3 for the first day of spring testin 5 Total number and percentage of students retained for not demonstrating reading pro?ciency on third-grade standards. (For 2017-18, students who are not pro?cient will be either: retained in a third grade accelerated class, placed in a transition class with a retained label, or placed in a fourth-grade accelerated class with a retained reading label.) 18.901 15.5% IH Public Schools of North Carolina Students who met Read to Achieve legislation by passing the EOG, BOG or Retest in 2017 and their 4?h grade ELA EOG assessment pro?ciency results in 2018. Number of students Number Percent Number Not Percent Not Assessment meetin 1e islation Pro?cient on pro?cient of Pro?cient on Pro?cient of lOpportunity for thisgreason ign 2017 Grade 4 ELA those that passed Grade 4 ELA those that passed EOG in 2017 EOG in 2017 BOG 1,128 788 70.0 340 30.1 EOG 66.231 57.467 86.8 8,764 13.2 Re-test 540 201 37.2 339 62.8 Students who met Read to Achieve legislation by passing an Alternate Assessment in 2017 and their 4?h grade ELA EOG assessment pro?ciency results in 2018. Number of students Number Percent Number Not Percent Not Assessment meeting legislation Pro?c1ent on pro?crent of Pro?c1ent on Pro?c1ent of lOpportunity for this reason in 2017 Grade 4 ELA those that Grade 4 ELA those that EOG passed in 2017 EOG passed in 2017 Read to Achieve Assessment (direct 2,452 1,001 40.8 1,451 59.1 data) Local Alternate Assessment 13,714 4,378 31.9 9,336 68.1 W1 ah Public Schools of North Carolina Analysis of Third Grade Students with Retention Flags and Subsequent Performanee on the EnglishfLanguage Arts End-of?Grade Test If students were given the following retention ?ag in the speei?ed year after surnrner school: These ?ags are found in the following PS table: no detail in the eoss status ?eld. At the end of the 2016 summer sehool session. 1401 third grade students had a retention ?ag set in PowerSehool: Of those 1401 students, 1302 had an ELA EGG seore in 201?, these are the results ofthe 201'? ELA EGG: Grade level at Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Level 5 time of201?? ?1 . Students Nam ?36 Nurn ?36 Nm ?36 Nurn ?36 Nutn "26 testulg Grade 3 1029 459 42.5 321 34.4 124 11.5 112 10.4 13 1.2 ?ra?e4 223 151 62.2 44 19those 1401 students, 1266 had an ELA EGG seore in 2018, these are the results ofthe 2018 ELA EGG: Grade level at Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Level 5 tirne 012013 a ?1 . Students ?34: Nutn 3?6 ?34: Nam 36 Now '34: testulg Grade 3 3 2 66.2 0 0.0 1 33.3 0 0.0 0 0.0 Grade4 1061 532 50.1 263 24.8 123 11.6 139 13.1 4 0.4 Grade 5 202 122 60.4 52 25.2 14 6.9 14 6.9 0 0.0 Public Schools of North Carolina Section Three: Revisions to the Comprehensive Reading Plan • Feedback from stakeholders • Shared with stakeholders – – – – K-3 Literacy Regional Consultants Regional meetings Master Literacy Trainings July meeting of Reading Commission • Additional work to complete in upcoming months to involve literacy leaders within the agency and stakeholders throughout state Section Four: Recommendations for Legislative Changes • Legislative changes not pursued at this time • Recommendations for revisions in implementation to ensure stronger statewide support for K-3 literacy ➢Collaboration with Teacher Preparation Programs ➢Support LEAs with Reading Camp challenges ➢Focus on early interventions, instruction, and parent involvement Support LEAs with Reading Camp Challenges Statewide Reading Camp Data 2018 (as of September 14, 2018) Students Invited to Students Attending .Of tStu?ients School Year Third Grade Reading Third Grade Reading r0 a 6? Attendmg Readlng Camp Camp amp 13,489 3,228 2018 30,904 (43.6% of invited (23.9% of those students) attending camp) A change in reporting was made in 2017-18 to include some good cause exemptions in the eligible for reading camp numbers. Good cause exemptions now included are: Students with Disabilities, English Learners and students who have been previously retained. Due to this change, a new chart has been created to delineate the change in reporting. Statewide Reading Camp Data 2014 2017 Students Eligible for . Number of Students School Year Third Grade Reading Taggegs ?ttl?ndani? Pro?cient a?er Camp after Good Ea ea Attending Reading . amp Cause Exemptlons Camp 12,827 3,426 2014 18,373 (69.8% of eligible (26.7% of those students) attending camp) 12,5 86 4,151 2015 20,240 (62.2% of eligible (33.0% of those students) attending camp) 12,703 3,816 2016 21,410 (59.3% of eligible (30.0% of those students) attending camp) 12,640 3,701 2017 21,428 (59.0% of eligible (29.3% of those students) attending camp) Public Schools of North Carolina Focus on: Early Interventions, Instruction, and Parent Involvement MCLASS Reading 3D: TRC Number and Total Percentage (Text Reading Comprehension) Percentage for Each Number Grade 1 and Grade 2 Level of Pro?ciency of 2017-2018 End-of-Year Results Students The number and percentage of first grade Level 3 Level 4 students demonstrating reading Pro?cient Above 53,727 52% comprehension at grade level. 29,055 Pro?cient 28% 24,672 24% The number and percentage of ?rst grade Level 1 Level 2 students not demonstrating reading Far Below Below 49,415 48% comprehension at grade level. Pro?cient Pro?cient 29,963 1 9,452 29% 1 9% The number and percentage of second grade Level 3 Level 4 students demonstrating reading Pro?cient Above 59,128 56% comprehension at grade level. 28,902 Pro?cient 27% 30,226 29% The number and percentage of second grade Level 1 Level 2 students not demonstrating reading Far Below Below 46,092 44% comprehension at grade level. Pro?cient Pro?cient 3 3,3 18 12,774 32% 12% Public Schools of North Carolina Next Steps • Focus on evidence-based practices for delivering effective reading instruction (WolfPack Works, Hill Center Training, Personalized Learning, Learning Technologies) • Place emphasis on team approach to analyzing data to implement interventions and strategic support • Develop a Standard Treatment Protocol to intervene as quickly as possible and build a continuum of connected supports with maximum human capacity to increase rate of improvement for students • Clearly define Core Supports to seamlessly support students vertically K-3 • Provide guidance and support for LEAs in developing Reading Camps • Collaborate with Higher Education and LEAs to provide opportunities for teacher candidates/teachers to be literacy specialists rather than generalists • Focus on excellent reading instruction and parental involvement Issues Session Where We Stand: Review of State Testing Results and Major Initiatives • Review trend data and most recent results on 3rd grade reading proficiency • Major initiatives in place on improving reading proficiency Read to Achieve Grade 3 EEnd-of-IYear Filesults End-of-Year Results Over 5 Years 2017-2018 2016-2017 2015-2016 2014-2015 2013-2014 Retained Alt. Assessment IGCE Not Pro?cient BOG EOG Retest I Pro?cient BOG EOG Retest Public Schools of North Carolina 09 - WolfPack Works (NC State) Hill Center Training a 0% ?e 6% - Re ional Statewide Co?aborative Support - Personalized Learning ?@6327 - Deep dive into statewide data - Focus on early literacy $3 - Develop Reading Camp Canvas Course - Literacy Leaders Conference and Reading Camp Summit - Learning Technologies - Implementation of law - Professional development - MCLASS Reading 3D - Master Literacy Trainers partnership for literacy - Regional meetings with strategies leaders - Collaboration with Higher - NCCAT Partnership Education Reading Camp site ViSitS - Focus on providing support for - Virtual Canvas Courses excellent reading instruction Public Schools of North Carolina