Emily Lancaster

11/25/18
READ 605
Evaluation of School Program

Evaluation of a School Literacy Program – Maude Trevvett Elementary School

1. Overview
i. Description
a. The school is PreK through 5th, it is not a Title 1 School, there are 523
students with 26 full time teachers, and it is located in central Henrico County.
The school has 72 ELL students and 303 students who come from
economically disadvantaged homes.

ii. Relationship to School

a. I am an interventionist aide at the school and I work with small groups in
Kindergarten, First Grade, Second Grade, and Fifth Grade. I also provide
additional support in a first and second grade classroom

2. Personnel
i. Interview
a. Henrico County is the only division in the area that doesn’t have a reading
specialist in every school. Full time reading specialists in this area are only placed
in Title 1 schools and non-Title 1 schools are split between reading coaches. The
reading coach I spoke to was a reading coach for Trevvett Elementary School and
seven other schools. She also works in central office with working on assessing
data and solving reading problems within the county. In the individual school
programs, there is small group literacy for students who are below reading level,
and she also looks at the overall school data with administrators and she coaches
teachers and models instruction for them, specifically with instruction or methods
that teachers have specifically asked about. In order to determine instruction,
Henrico County creates pacing guides based on student data and SOLs for each
grade level.
The reading coach uses Fountas & Pinnell and PALs for helping diagnose
students needs and will also look at MAP and SOL scores for more insight into
what the student needs. AIMS testing is also used as an additional screening
measure for specific intervention programs. After students are put into specific
intervention groups, weekly or biweekly data is taken through running records
and lesson checkpoints or another form of summative assessment, which helps to
decide whether to change or continue instruction. When this reading coach was in
one building, she played a large part in planning professional development. She
would plan professional development centered on literacy instruction that teachers
struggled with. She would also model lessons and help teachers design and plan
instructions when they created small groups. She also offered optional
professional development through book studies and online forums, and she
organized field trips for teacher to go and observe an implementation of the type
 of program they were studying.
Other responsibilities that the reading coach had when she was a reading
specialist at a specific school included managing intervention for all students in
the school, being involved in RTI meetings, being a part of the school
improvement and the leadership teams at her school, creating the master schedule
for her elementary school and leading that. She enjoyed working as a reading
specialist because it lent itself to a lot of potential leadership opportunities within
the school. In terms of assessment, she stated that she would like to add the
developmental spelling analysis as a required assessment and she would also like
to have the RAN assessment in order to catch processing delays that students
might have. She also stated that she has noticed a lack of emphasis on phonics and
this has become the root of the problem for older students who struggle with
reading, so she would like a greater emphasis on phonics. Another interesting
statement that she made was how “we (the schools) always say that we’ve given
intervention but it hasn’t been met for a student’s actual instructional need.” I
thought this was really interesting because I have seen this issue in the school I
am in right now and I’ve only been working with intervention for two weeks. She
stated that the biggest issue that she has experienced is the lack of exposure to
books that students have had or the lack of background knowledge that students
have before they get to school. She also thinks a difficulty is that instruction is not
being tailored to what it is that the student needs because teachers don’t know
how to pinpoint the specific instruction. Another difficulty she mentioned was
consistency issues within the classroom, especially with scheduling.
Finally, we discussed the major issues that the reading coach has faced during her
time being a reading coach and a reading specialist. The main problem she has
faced in both positions has been trying to help leaders understand that treating
reading as the foundation of knowledge will help alleviate the worries that we
have about testing and scores. She stated that her passion for reading is not always
met by educational leaders, in both schools and central office, therefore
convincing them to move away from the emphasis on test prep and assessing is
difficult. However, she stated that the department she is in has made efforts in
helping teachers understand that “if you can teach students to be good readers and
good thinkers, then the achievement on assessments will come,” and this can be
done through an adjustment in rigor and instruction within the classroom.

ii. Faculty and Staff Involvement

a. The principal and associate principal both know the programs that are used for
intervention and work with the interventionists to make sure students are
beneficial reading groups.
b. Classroom teachers are involved in knowing the groups that need intervention or
have specific IEPs and they provide additional small group support, but they don’t
delegate what is being done in intervention groups
c. There is a special education teacher who works with the teachers and aides with
reviewing IEP goals and requirements. In the second grade classroom that I am in,
she will sometimes come in to work with a specific small group who use a
reading recovery program to reach their goals. Special education teachers also
 help with students who need assistance with tests being read to them and other
IEP requirements
d. There isn’t a specific reading specialist for this school; instead there is a reading
coach for eight schools. The reading specialist visits each school on a schedule
and will schedule appointments for teachers if they need additional help.

iii. Recommendations
a. I believe that there should be a reading specialist assigned to every school. I think
that both teachers and interventionists are struggling based on conversations I’ve
had within the school. When teachers run into issues they don’t have a helpful
resource within the school that can help them and interventionists only know so
much. I also think it would help with training in assessments and the creation of
small groups in classrooms.
b. Another recommendation I would make is making sure there is communication
between all personnel involved within the literacy program. This goes for both
scheduling and the programs that are being used within the school. Without
communication, there is a lack of consistency because personnel don’t know who
has done what with the different groups or they don’t know where students should
be starting with intervention.

3. Materials
i. Classroom Reading Materials
a. F&P LLI – This is used with intervention in small groups where a group of
students read small books, doing before, during, and after activities for each book.
It is a scripted program that builds on itself as the students move through the
program.
b. SRA Reading Recovery program – This is a different scripted program that is
used specifically for students with IEPs. It focuses on letter sounds, identifying
and sounding out words, reading passages together to work on oral fluency, and
finishing with a worksheet that assesses picture comprehension, phonemic
awareness, and provides writing practice. There is a fluency assessment at the end
of each section.
c. Uses iPads and laptops for using Clever and MobyMax – Clever has books that
students can listen to as they read or that they can read without listening.
MobyMax has a short story that students read and then answer questions that are
similar to questions they will receive on benchmark tests.
d. Classroom libraries have sections that are sorted by genre or series and another
section that is sorted by reading level. Some classrooms also have book boxes for
each student that they keep at their desk for reading after they are finished with
their classwork.

ii. Readability
a. First Grade
i. Bear Snores On - I used the Fry readability test and this book was at the 1st
grade level so it’s on grade level
b. Third Grade
 i. Cranberry Thanksgiving - I used the Fry readability test and this book was
on the line of 2nd and 3rd grade level so it’s on grade level
c. Fifth Grade
i. Because of Mr. Terupt - I used the Fry readability test and this book was at
the 5th grade level so it’s on grade level

iii. Recommendations
a. One recommendation I would make is using books for whole group reading that
are more differentiated, especially at the lower level. This applies especially when
these books are used for extension activities and students have to reread or look
back through the book. Students at a lower level seem to struggle with
comprehension of the stories and with knowing what the book says.
b. Another recommendation I would make is making sure that teachers have a large
and diverse classroom library where all students can find a book that they can see
themselves in. A lot of classroom libraries seemed outdated and like they could
use more books.

4. Assessments
a. Assessment Materials
a. AIMSweb testing, F&P LLI running records, PALS, MAP testing, SOLS,
classroom summative assessments
b. For literacy, the main formative assessments are PALS (K-3) and SOLs. For
screening measures, this school has started this year with using the AIMSweb
testing and uses LLI running records as summative assessments for progress
monitoring.

b. Description and Evaluation of 2 Assessments

a. Running Records
i. Pros:
1. One pro to this assessment is that it is done consistently enough
where interventionists can use it for progress monitoring. In the
LLI program, running records are done every other day so tracking
students’ progress is really easy and can adjust what books they are
using accordingly.
2. Another pro to this assessment is that it is a quick and gives
specific insight to what students need to work on more.
ii. Cons:
1. One con to this assessment is that because it is done so often, a lot
of times there isn’t enough to continue instruction in small group
during intervention by the time every student has read and their
running record has been conducted.
2. Another con is that even though it allows interventionists to see
where students are struggling, there aren’t any materials that
follow up with helping to scaffold or provide extra support for
these areas.
 b. AIMSweb
i. Pros:
1. One pro about this assessment is that it can be used to screen
students for their reading level and it can also identify at risk
students in areas such as dyslexia or behavioral issues.
2. Another pro is that it collects data and organizes it in a way where
it is color coded so that teachers, interventionists, and
administrators can identify exactly what students are struggling
with and why they are struggling
ii. Cons:
1. Specific to this school, one con about this assessment is that those
giving the test didn’t know anything about it, such as how it was
formatted, what it was testing for, how long it would take, etc.
2. Another con about this assessment is that the length of the
assessment means that students who are taking the test are pulled
from class for an extended period of time. This means already
struggling students are missing periods of instruction within the
classroom.

c. Analysis of Data
a. I wanted to analyze the aimsweb testing data, so I had to work with the head
interventionist who is in charge of analyzing the data for all intervention students
and organizing groups so that students are receiving the correct instruction. We
looked at the first grade results for this test, which monitored student progress and
identified at risk students. We had data for all first grade students and then
narrowed it down to students who were below grade level and needed
intervention, focusing on the areas in which they struggled. The data was
organized and each area that was tested was color coded for each student, based
on which percentile they were in for that area. Students who were orange were in
the lower percentile, students who were green were on grade level, and students
who were blue were in the higher percentile and usually above grade level. Using
this system, we looked at how many students from the grade were in orange and
those were mainly students who were already identified and recommended for
intervention. After sorting this data, we looked at areas in which students would
need instructional support. In first grade, students are tested on phoneme
segmentation, letter word sounds fluency, word reading, oral reading, and
auditory vocabulary. Based on the way students did for each skill, we rearranged
student groups and made sure those who scored similarly were placed together so
that we could target instruction explicitly to what they needed. For example, three
students scored poorly with phoneme segmentation and they are at a lower
reading level, so they were placed in a group together.
 d. Recommendations
a. I think that more types of formative assessment can be integrated within both
classroom instruction and intervention blocks that do not have to revolve around
lengthy tests that monitor progress or worksheets. I think that there is a large
expectation for students to progress leaps and bounds within a small amount of
time without small, quick assessments being done that assess whether they are
picking up on foundational knowledge for reading.
b. Another recommendation I would make is to make the materials that students are
using during intervention consistent with how they will be assessed. When
students are used to a certain format, such as reading little books, they will do
better when they are working with the same format for their formal assessment.

5. Organization
a. Literacy Block Description
a. First Grade
i. At the beginning of the block, the class does whole group reading. The
teacher does a read aloud and they work on whatever skill they are
learning for that week (identifying beginning, middle, and end,
summarizing, retelling, etc.). Students then go into stations where they
meet with the teacher, work on an extension activity that goes with the
read aloud, read to self in the classroom library, and do a word study
activity. One group is pulled for intervention at this time. This all takes
place between 8:00 and 9:30 AM. At 10:30 AM, students have their final
small group. The group pulled for intervention at 8:30 does their final
group with additional support from the interventionist.
b. Third Grade
i. The first part of this block looks similar to first grade. However, instead of
having a read aloud during whole group, they work on a strategy or skill
that applies to reading, such as identifying the main idea or different text
features. They then apply this to a passage as a class. In stations they have
read to self, small group with the teacher, and working on the computer
with a reading website. After small groups, they have word work which is
similar to word study where the class discusses different word features
such as prefixes/suffixes or homophones. They then have a 30 minute
writing block where they either do independent writing or they work on a
specific writing assignment as an extension a skill or a read aloud they’ve
done.
c. Fifth Grade
i. The whole group and small group part of this literacy block is similar to
the first and third grade block, with grade level activities. In the writing
block, the class is working on how to structure their writing and grammar.
During the I/E block, there is more literacy activities and the teacher either
does another station or the class will work on an independent writing
activity.
b. Schedules
a. First Grade
i. 8:00 – 8:30 Whole Group
8:30 – 9:30 Small Group (three stations for 20 minutes)
10:30 – 10:55 Final Small Group (20 minutes)
b. Third Grade
i. 8:00 – 8:30 Whole Group
8:30 – 9:30 Small Group (three stations for 20 minutes)
9:30 – 10:00 Word Work
10:00 – 10:30 Writing
c. Fifth Grade
i. 8:00 – 8:30 Whole Group
8:30 – 9:30 Small Group (three stations for 20 minutes)
12:00 – 12:30 Writing
Monday, Thursday, Friday – I/E 12:30 – 1:00
Tuesday – I/E 12:30 – 12:40
Wednesday – I/E 1:00 – 1:30

c. Intervention
a. First Grade
i. In first grade, intervention comes in at 8:30 during the start of small
groups. Instead of that group going to their first station, they work with the
interventionist for the 20-25 minute period of the station. Some classes,
such as the one I observed and work in for intervention, have additional
support and the teacher uses that time to have the group go to the
interventionist with questions or work with the interventionist on the
station activity they are doing.
b. Third Grade
i. In third grade, intervention is done at 9:00 during small group. Students
are pulled for additional reading practice with their interventionist.
c. Fifth Grade
i. Intervention is done during the I/E block, which is at 12:30. During this
time, students are working on additional assignments while the small
group is pulled for LLI instruction.

d. Recommendations – Instruction in Literacy Block

a. During whole group reading for first grade, one recommendation would be to
focus on comprehension and discussion throughout the read aloud and not just at
the end. Also, the extension activity done in small group should be done as a class
if the students are not allowed to refer back to the book for the activity, especially
for students who are doing the activity in their final small group 2 hours after the
book was read.
b. For third and fifth grade, I would recommend that teachers make sure they have a
time for a read aloud, even if it is only 10 to 15 minutes. This applies especially
 for fifth grade because reading is so focused on students reading silently to
themselves.

e. Recommendations – Literacy Block Schedule

a. One recommendation I would make is to make sure that there is consistency
within scheduling and to eliminate splitting up the literacy block, especially with
small group stations. Something I noticed within the classes I was in is that when
the literacy block was split up, when the class went back to their literacy activities
for the last thirty minutes there wasn’t a lot of productivity during that time.

f. Recommendations – Intervention
a. One recommendation for intervention would be to make sure it’s targeting the
students’ needs instead of just going through the motions. With the intervention
provided, the program is solely based on reading and comprehension, so it’s
assumed that that’s where students are struggling. However, I have noticed that
once intervention started, other issues in literacy arise and should have a greater
focus, such as issues with naming letters and recognizing their sounds or lack of
vocabulary, especially with high frequency words.

6. Professional Development
a. Planning of Professional Development
a. Professional development is done on teacher workdays for part of the day. The
last professional development meeting was on October 8th for teachers. Teachers
attended different types of professional development and met with teachers from
across the county to talk about what difficulties they are facing at the beginning of
the year and to get ideas from other teachers. The next professional development
day is February 18th.

b. Recommendation – Professional Development

a. One recommendation I have for improvement in professional development is
planning it more regularly at a site-wide level. Teachers are receiving three
professional development days throughout the school year and these are school
system wide. The school can help by providing site-wide professional
development a couple of more times a year, or at a needs-based level. By doing
so, the teachers can focus on creating goals that are effective on grade level and
school level. The professional development they usually have, though it focuses
on broader subjects such as instructional techniques for struggling readers or
helping with outreach to students who are dealing with trauma, it doesn’t provide
support for what teachers are struggling with on the classroom level in whatever
subject. For example, teachers may be struggling with helping students achieve
concept of word and phonemic awareness so they may benefit more from
professional development that revolves around that.

c. Coaching
a. Teacher/Classroom Information
 i. I worked with a second grade teacher in an inclusion classroom during her
literacy instruction block, which consists of thirty minutes of whole group,
an hour of small group stations, and thirty minutes of writing. Her stations
change on a day-to-day basis between five different stations.
b. Coaching/Support
i. We decided to focus on the writing instruction part of the day, working on
a lesson about beginning, middle, and end. We chose the book Grandpa’s
Teeth, which the teacher read at the beginning of whole group instruction.
In order to work on identifying these parts of a story as a class, I suggested
doing it as a whole group rather than having students fill in a graphic
organizer as a worksheet. In order to do this, we decided to use the
Promethean board and create the three boxes where the description of the
beginning, middle, and end would go. This worked because it could tie
into the writing lesson where students would work on drafting their own
story, and the could teacher could use that draft as a way to assess their
understanding of the different story parts and how a story is structured.
During this time, the teacher worked with the class to fill in what
happened at the beginning, middle, and end of the story. After the class
had filled in the parts together about Grandpa’s Teeth, the teacher
explained that they were to go back to their seats and draw three boxes on
a page in their writing journal where they would begin drafting a story of
their own.
c. Observation Notes - **Check end of paper for notes**
i. Whole Group Instruction
1. Instruction was really good but not all students were engaged and
had trouble staying on task with discussion
2. One student was sitting at his desk reading for about five minutes
before called to the carpet
3. Redirection was done well when students got off topic
4. The teacher made sure to remind students of carpet and discussion
rules throughout the lesson
ii. Student Activity
1. Some students struggled with getting started on the writing
assignments because they didn’t understand the directions
2. Lack of teacher monitoring during student’s creating their
beginning/middle/end chart, so a lot of students fell behind
3. Though this is where the whole group lesson with direct instruction
ended, there was a need for more scaffolding and direct support
was needed.
iii. Overall
1. Whole group instruction was good and to the point while still
being informative and with discussion
2. The follow up activity was good and linked with both the whole
group instruction and the unit that students are working on,
however this is where the lesson began to unravel
 3. Four or five students were overlooked by the teacher and the aide
and didn’t fully understand the assignment
4. Of the students who were struggling, three of them had IEPs and
could have benefitted from differentiated instruction
d. Conference Notes - **Check end of paper for notes**
i. Whole Group Instruction
1. The teacher and I discussed how she felt the lesson went
2. Both of us thought this part of the lesson went well and we
discussed how to better engage students by setting a purpose by
adding a preparation activity for the activity
3. We talked mainly about the activity that the students did at their
desks in their writing journal. I suggested that she spent a couple of
minutes with each student conferencing after walking around the
classroom and evaluating what students seem to be struggling and
what students seem to be doing the activity. She should start her
conferences with those who are either not on task or who are
struggling to write
4. We also talked about how we could differentiate the instruction the
next time she did it or something like it by having an already made
graphic organizer (because this seemed to be really struggling with
creating it in their journal or by having a list of themes or ideas that
students could write about (this was the other part students seemed
to struggle with
e. Reflection – Providing Support and Feedback
i. Going into this experience, I was really uncomfortable because I felt out
of place due to my lack of experience, especially in the area of coaching
and providing feedback to another teacher. I felt as though I could identify
both successes and issues within the instructional period, but I have
always been the one being observed and supported, not the other way
around. Throughout the experience, I felt a little better because I work
with this teacher on a daily basis anyway and she’s really open and easy to
have a discussion with about the lesson and how it went. However, even
towards the end, I felt under qualified and like I could have done this part
of the assignment better if I had more experience with talking to teachers
about instruction and how to do it better in a way that wasn’t student
teaching, practicum, or in a college classroom. I think it was a good
experience because it pushed me out of my comfort zone, but I think I
would do better at it after teaching full time and being within a school
environment consistently, which would help gain a rapport with other
teachers where I wouldn’t feel unfit for what I was doing. Also, I’m not
quite sure I understood the coaching part of this assignment, so I didn’t
step in during instruction because (a) I didn’t know if I was supposed to
and (b) I didn’t feel comfortable doing it in the first place.
 d. Recommendation – Coaching
a. There isn’t a large amount of coaching done at this school and when it is done,
teachers don’t get introduced to any new way of instruction. I think one
recommendation that I would have in terms of coaching is having more
observation of teachers, either by teachers or by the reading coach. By doing this,
teachers will learn more about their instruction from watching others and having
others watch them. This is another way that teachers can learn and grow
professionally without having to attend professional development and it can be
done in certain areas of literacy instruction that teachers need/want to learn about.
For example, if a teacher is struggling with teaching vowel patterns effectively,
they can observe another teacher and see if they find any new techniques to use.

7. Communication
a. Description
a. School Level
i. On the school level, there is information on the school website and
posted in the school about different literacy events that are happening
both at the school and within the community, such as at the local
library.
b. Grade Level
i. Depending on the grade, teachers will send home different literacy
materials for students to work on with their parents. In grades 1-5,
small books are sent home for students to read to their parents as a part
of their homework. In kindergarten, sight words are sent home and by
the end of the school year they are sending small books as well.
c. Classroom Level
i. Almost every teacher in the school has a classroom blog that updates
weekly. These blogs detail what students are working on in class, in all
subjects, and the teachers give “parent homework”. This homework is
usually focused on different literacy skills that students are working on
in class, such as retelling and summarizing stories or identifying letter
sounds.

b. Recommendations
a. One recommendation would be to have more information for parents about
community resources that they can use for more literacy activities or
experiences. For example, having information about events that are going on
at the local library that isn’t connected to what the school system is doing
(read aloud events at the library, book discussions happening, etc.) Along with
this, schools could include events that help with adult literacy for parents who
may struggle to get involved because their literacy isn’t strong.
b. Another recommendation I would make is having parents or community
members come in for read aloud or another literacy activity. This is mainly
because there doesn’t seem to be a large outreach within classrooms for
visitors to come in to read and discuss a book with students
Share Evaluation with the Administrator