Kelly McGonagil

Alverno College
ED 682
Comprehensive Literacy Plan & Report
As a reading specialist, it is my job to support students and teachers with the literacy
process, and ensure that every student is receiving quality literacy instruction through interactive
means. I have experience with K-12 grade students and want to ensure that literacy remains a
high priority school-wide focus.
My educational practices are based on a few core values that I use to guide instruction. I
believe that learning is a lifelong adventure, and as this relates to the literacy process, I want to
provide skills and strategies to ensure a goal of lifelong reading. Through this instruction, I
recognize the individualized needs of every student in the class, and therefore stress a sense of
fluidity and flexibility in my planning. I work to adjust instruction accordingly to best meet
student’s needs, and to ensure individual student success. As teachers, we are learning new
things ourselves, every single day. We do not always have the answers, and therefore I believe
that collaboration across professionals is of the utmost importance.
In providing literacy instruction, I will implement a literacy plan to help improve test
scores, create a positive, interactive, and comprehensive literacy environment starting at the first-
grade level, serve as a resource to teachers and apply this framework to the rest of the school. By
using a greater researched-based foundation, I will help close the achievement gap across early
developmental age groups by implementing a highly interactive reading and writing workshop. I
strive for excellence in my instruction, and cater to the individual needs of my students.
The key concepts of my proposed literacy plan are based on the extensive research and
experience of Professional Development Provider, Sharon Taberski, with support from Professor
of Language and Literacy Education, Dr. Douglas Fisher with reference to Pearson & Gallagher
as well as Primary Reading Specialist, Kathy Collins. Taberski’s Workshop Framework
including both reading and writing workshop are supported by Sharon Taberski’s New Thinking
on the 5 PILLARS of READING. Our previous conceptual knowledge indicates five essential
components to literacy learning, that being phonemic awareness, phonics, fluency, vocabulary,
and comprehension. Taberski’s new take on the 5 Pillars of Reading suggest that readers need
time to read, time to write and time to talk about text, strategies, concepts, and ideas. This
fundamental piece lays the groundwork for her pillars. Taberski’s pillars are comprised of the
following 5 essential areas: accurate fluent reading, background knowledge, oral language and
vocabulary, reading-writing conventions, and repertoire of strategies. At the top of her pillars lies
the end result of instruction. Readers read to understand and find meaning, and thus
comprehension is supported by all five areas of instruction. I have adopted this new approach to
the 5 pillars as it gives educators an idea of what is needed for instruction, what instruction
pieces should be included, and what the end result of instruction should be. These 3 items should
be included in any instructional plan.
The gradual release of responsibility will play an essential role in my literacy plan as
well. “The gradual release of responsibility model of instruction has been documented as an
effective approach for improving literacy achievement, reading comprehension, and literacy
outcomes for English language learners.” (Fisher, Dr. D.) Within this, the teacher will model new
skills and strategies, utilize these strategies alongside students, observe students attending to
these strategies on their own, providing additional instruction as needed, and release
responsibility to the students as these skills become independent.
I will adopt and implement Sharon Taberski’s Workshop Format consisting of both a
reading workshop and writing workshop. Reading instruction will consist of an interactive read
aloud in which the teacher will model important literacy skills and strategies to be used during
the workshop that follows. According to Taberski, the interactive read aloud is a significant
source of vocabulary acquisition, and allows students to “see” thinking as the teacher discusses
thoughts she has about a text out loud (Taberski, 2011). Following, will be a 60 Minute Reading
Workshop in the following format:

Mini-Workshop 1 (25 minutes)

– Mini lesson 1 (10 minutes)
– Reading conferences or small group reading
– Independent reading 1 (partner reading)
Mini-Workshop 2 (25 minutes)
– Mini-lesson 2 (10 minutes)
– Reading conferences or small group reading
– Independent reading 2 (read alone)
Reading Share (10 minutes)
 The purpose of this format is to provide an opportunity to use that gradual release of
responsibility. The teacher will demonstrate and model specific reading strategies during the mini
lessons and students are then given the opportunity to use the modeled skills and strategies
immediately during independent or small group reading time.
To follow reading workshop, I will implement a 45-minute writing workshop. The format
will be consistent with the reading workshop. This consistency will be necessary in ensuring
students understand the expectations during workshop time. Writers workshop will present as
follows:
Mini-lesson or Writing Share (10 minutes)
Use literature or student samples to present skill
Conferences OR small group (25 minutes)
Meet one-on-one or with a small group
Independent writing
Students not with the teacher use time to write
Writing share (10 minutes)
Specific areas that will guide my instruction for this group of first-grade students include
areas in both reading and writing. Students participated in a variety of assessments including the
Measures of Academic Progress Reports, the Phonemic-Awareness Skills Screening, the Gentry
Developmental Spelling Test, the Phonetic Survey-Sentence Dictation, Writing Sample and
Marie Clay’s Running Record Samples. In the area of reading, data analysis indicated challenge
areas in self-correction, with 5/10 students not obtaining the desired 1:2 or 1:1 self-correction
rate, cross-checking for meaning, re-reading and retelling skills, and phonological skill
development specifically in the area of syllable segmentation in which 9/10 students
demonstrated challenges with this skill. Writing assessment indicated challenge areas in idea
development, creating a concrete beginning, middle and end, punctuation and conventions, letter
formation, and spelling.

As I break down the data even further in order to guide my whole group and small group
focus, I become aware of the range of reading levels seen among first grade students. For
students A-J, students are reading at a level D – J reading level, indicating a range from
Transitional to Advanced Beginner on the reading continuum. Students running record
observations indicated high needs areas in self-correcting, monitoring reading, and checking for
meaning. Phonemic-Awareness Skills Screening indicates a high needs area in the area of
syllable segmentation. Three out of ten students demonstrated little to no understanding of this
concept. Additional areas of challenge were seen in phoneme isolation, segmentation, and
substitution. Although deficits lie in these areas as well, the focus will be on syllable
segmentation as mastery in this area is essential to learning the remaining skills as well.

Resulting from the data gathered, a whole group focus in reading workshop will be
improving student’s self-correction rates, and cross-checking for meaning. Kathy Collins
indicates that “Readers need to think about what would make sense and use meaning and context
to help them (Collins, 2004). In doing so, the teacher will model thinking that should occur while
reading texts, as they orally ask themselves “Does it make sense”, “Does it look right,” “Does it
sound right”. A small group will need a focus in syllable segmentation. Using physical
responses, such as hand-clapping or tapping on the tabletop will be used to assist this small
group in mastering this skill.

As it relates to writing instruction, based on the data gathered, a whole group focus in
writing workshop will work on using details to present ideas in their writing work. Students will
learn the importance of details, and how they enhance comprehension for their readers. This
focus on details and understanding will relate to reading workshop as students work toward
developing cross-checking for meaning skills. An additional small group will focus on
developing proper letter formation for 2/10 students. These students will receive extra practice
using white boards to assist them in properly creating the letters “b and d”. Through this small
group focus, students will learn that when there is clarity in their written work there is clarity in
understanding.

This plan is very fluid and flexible and does not represent a concrete way of teaching. Best
practice would be to individualize areas of instruction as much as possible. This may mean
restructuring, reformatting, and re-evaluating data to best meet the needs of every learner in the
class. To provide an example of the flexibility of my instruction, I will offer alternatives to each
focus group. In terms of reading, should students, as a whole class, fail to meet proficiency
standards in improving self-correction rates and cross-checking for meaning, I will redefine what
these terms mean to ensure understanding of the concept, and then implement manipulatives that
prompt students to ask themselves “Does it make sense?”, “Does it sound right?”, “Does it look
right?” at the end of each page they read. As it relates to my small group reading focus, should
students not meet proficiency standards in improving syllable segmentation skills, I will utilize a
different strategy for learning, such as Elkonin Boxes. If I notice students are still struggling in this
area, I may revert to an earlier skill such as syllable blending.
Writing Workshop is also very fluid and flexible in terms of what instruction methods are
being used, and when. For example, should students as a whole fail to meet the overall focus in
using details in the written work they create, I propose using more guided practice with this skill.
Sharon Taberski stressed the importance of guided practice and how it can greatly enhance a child’s
independent literacy skills. (Taberski, 2011). In addition, should students continue to struggle with
letter formation I will make greater use of classroom visual supports, and teach students how to
use these while they monitor their work.
The following roles must clearly be defined for instruction to be effective. As the teacher,
we must set individual goals for students, as well as the class whole, inform students of the
workshop structure, skills, and strategies, assess the student’s current levels of functioning while
monitoring progress, and model appropriate strategies and skills and release responsibility to the
students. Students must come to workshop prepared to follow classroom rules and guidelines
during workshop time, participate in discussion and be an active learner, take care of the
classroom library and writing materials, work independently or with a partner and inquire,
communicate, and think about texts in a meaningful way. The classroom environment also plays
an important role. Within this instructional area students can experience success and growth, and
they need an environment conducive to achievement. The classroom shall provide a rich reading
and writing culture, house the classroom library filled with appropriate leveled books, and
encourage and promote lifelong skills. It is also the role of the classroom to showcase writing
work and to guide and remind students of strategies through charts and posters.
In summary, the following items are essential for students to learn and retain literacy
skills. Based on Sharon Taberski’s New Thinking on the 5 Pillars of Reading, children need time.
This shall include time to read, time to write, and time to talk about texts. Students also need to
be provided a wealth of strategies in which they gain independence in accurate fluent reading,
background knowledge, oral language and vocabulary, and reading-writing connections. In
growing their skills within these areas, students cultivate comprehension. I propose a
comprehensive literacy plan that focuses on mastering these skills through a structured workshop
framework. I have confidence that this plan will not only boost literacy productivity, but
encourage a lifelong love for reading.
SOURCES

Collins, Kathy. (2004). Growing Readers. Portland, Maine: Stenhouse Publishers.

Fisher, Dr. Douglas. Effective Use of the Gradual Release of Responsibility Model.

Taberski, Sharon. (2011). Comprehension from the Ground Up. Portsmouth, New Hamshire.
Heinemann.
Kelly McGonagil
Alverno College
ED 682
A Reflective Look at Integrating Literacy Development

Literacy learning plays a fundamental role in the education of our students. It is essential
to have a thorough understanding of how students acquire language and relate it to text.
Throughout this course I gained a sense of appreciation for teachers who instruct reading at this
basic, fundamental level, however, as a high school special educator, there were many areas I
found to be challenging throughout this course. I will use these weaknesses to set appropriate
goals for my future learning.

As it relates to assessment, I feel confident in my abilities to administer various reading

assessments. I have a strong understanding of what I need to be searching for in terms of
strengths and weaknesses in my students, but I struggle with analyzing the data and therefore
creating meaningful instructional focuses based on the high needs areas. Completing this task for
one student was manageable for me, however, I became slightly overwhelmed with the amount
of information ten students produced. Perhaps this relates to what little expertise I have in
teaching reading and literacy skills. I therefore have a goal of gaining confidence in creating
meaningful instructional areas based on the analytical data provided by assessments. I recognize
the importance of mastering this skill, as this will ultimately guide my whole group reading
instruction as well as for individual students.

As it relates to instruction directly, again I am confident in implementing and conducting

instructional plans, but feel I need work in knowing when students have mastered the skills being
addressed. My goal in this area is that I gain a greater knowledge base on the reading and writing
stages, and understand what specific needs are addressed in each one.

As a special educator, I strive to differentiate instruction for all students with whom I
work. I am able to recognize individual student needs, but whole group instruction is an area in
which I could improve. I often work one-on-one with students, and have a confidence in tailoring
these lessons to directly meet individual needs on any given day, but how can I make group
lessons meaningful for everyone when reading levels are extremely widespread? Seeking the
answer to this is where my goals for differentiation lie.

I appreciated the background knowledge and theories this course provided and thought
the texts used, were some of the most meaningful, helpful and useful that I have encountered in
my coursework thus far. I often had to reflect on how I could use what was being taught in a high
school special education classroom consisting mostly of students with significant needs. I realize
that this was meant to introduce the topic of literacy instruction, and was tailored for that
younger population, and I found myself really appreciating the overall frame work, trusting that
it could benefit the students I currently work with.

Professionalism is an essential trait for our field of work, and I feel this comes naturally
to me. Overall, it appears a common theme lies within confidence in my instruction and
confidence in my presentation. I know this will come with time, as instructional practices
become more routine. I often second guess the choices I make, but as with students learning
literacy, with success comes confidence. The more success I experience in instruction, the more
confident I will feel in providing meaningful instruction.