Connecting School with Home Culture

Barb Novak contributed today's post. Barb is a literacy consultant at the Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction and serves as the moderator for this blog.

Confession: Even after spending 10 years working in a variety of Wisconsin public schools, I never felt my bag of tricks for engaging parents and families was quite as full as I wanted/needed it to be. This was especially true for techniques to connect with families who were dramatically different than mine.

So, I've been doing a lot of reading and thinking and talking about what it means to connect school with home culture - especially as it relates to literacy. 

If you're interested in similar ideas, I would recommend Bringing Literacy Home edited by KaiLonnie Dunsmore and Douglas Fisher. This edited volume includes sections about:

• Supporting Families in School-Based Literacy Practices
• Connecting School with Home Culture
• Implications for Family Literacy Research and Scholarship

I found Geneva Gay's chapter ("Teaching Literacy in Cultural Context") particularly helpful. Gay asserts that "underachieving marginalized students of color" (p. 161) need to simultaneously develop academic knowledge and skills and cultural competencies. A teacher's journey to develop the knowledge, skills, and dispositions to teach litearcy in a cultural context is complicated and on-going. Gay suggests teachers begin by packing a "metaphorical suitcase of things that they will take on their multicultural education journeys" (p. 168). The suitcase can be packed, unpacked, and repacked as a teacher's understanding develops.

Gay suggests several key messages (p. 180 - 181):

• Acquire cultural knowledge about your students (including "cultures, histories, and contributions of ethnic groups")
• Use diverse "examples, materials, experiences, and perspectives"
• "Apply academic literacies in the process of teaching and learning about cultural diversity" (p. 181)
• Access students' "cultural literacies, or funds of knowledge" to scaffold academic, school-based literacy

Leading a Balanced Literacy Assessment System

Barb Novak contributed today's post. Barb is a literacy consultant at the Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction and serves as the moderator of this blog.

A big part of my job - a favorite part - is talking to Wisconsin's students, parents, educators, and leaders. What seems to be on everyone's mind lately? 

Assessment.

What are we assessing? How long does it take? How much money does it cost? To what extent is students' privacy protected? What assessments are required? Who analyzes the data? Does the data actually make a difference? How can I access the data? What assessments exist for special populations? Why are certain data sources valued more than others? Who makes decisions about assessments? 

Laura Adams, fellow literacy consultant, and I answer all of these questions and more in the 2014 - 15 season of Literacy Live!, a pre-recorded webinar series for Wisconsin's literacy leaders.

"Leading a Balanced Assessment System" will include about 10 sessions. Each session includes a recording (generally 25 - 30 minutes) about a specific topic related to literacy assessment. Supporting resources accompany each session. New sessions are posted about every three weeks.  The episodes can be viewed at any time. While the sessions can be viewed independently, we do suggest watching with colleagues to take advantage of opportunities for discussion and application.

Introductory episodes include:

• Required Literacy Assessment in Wisconsin: An overview of all assessments required in Wisconsin
• Reflecting On Your Balanced Assessment System: A process for recording details about the assessments in your system that may lead to identifying redundancies or improved communication

Contact me via email (barb.novak@dpi.wi.gov) or phone (608-266-5181) with questions.

What Is Our Role?

Jaimie Howe contributed today's post.

I recently read an article from The Reading Teacher titled “Leader, Teacher, Diagnostician, Colleague, and Change Agent: A Synthesis of the Research on the Role of the Reading Specialist in This Era of RtI-Based Literacy Reform,” by Emily Phillips Galloway and Nonie K. Lesaux. What a mouthful, I know. However, isn’t that truly what our jobs, as literacy coaches/reading specialists, are?  A smorgasbord of responsibilities. We have so many roles and our roles look so different across the state, within districts, and even across schools within the same district.  This article helped me to truly reflect on what my role as “Literacy Coach” entails and how it has evolved.  

In the past, I was always frustrated at the idea of our roles being so inconsistent; however, the more I reflect I understand why that is and why it may be “okay”.  Every building, every district, is at a different point in their journey.  The literacy coach needs to meet the needs of their current situation to move their building/district forward. As I've said before in my posts, we need to differentiate in all that we do, not just with our children.  It doesn't pay to move too fast, putting teachers/staff in a position they’re not ready for (frustration); however, we can’t  move too slow either. A  little push into the discomfort zone is how change happens. Think Vygotsky . . . Zone of Proximal Development.  The idea holds true in all that we do. Change does not happen overnight.  It takes time.

The charts and quotes below are from the article.  I used them to help me reflect on where my current reality is as a literacy coach in my building/district.  I looked at the first chart (Figure 1: The Roles Filled by Reading Specialists Today) and said, “Yep, I do all of these things.”  However, the most meaningful to me was looking at the second chart (TAKE ACTION!) and filling in what my role looked like for each of the 4 years I’ve been a literacy coach.  It is amazing to see how it has evolved. I’ve really done all of these jobs each year, but the percentage spent in each area has completely changed. I challenge you to take a look at your role and reflect on where you have been, where you are now, and where you want to go.

“The role of today’s reading specialist is highly influenced by school type (elementary or secondary), school performance, and the professional culture in the building.”

“Assuming the role of reading specialist in an era of school reform, requires skill

in managing uncertainty and in seeing the possibilities that exist.”

“If this review suggests anything, it is that reading specialists in an era of RtI-based reform,

remain dedicated to supporting students to become readers.”

Galloway, Emily P. & Lesaux, Nonie, K. (2014)  Leader, teacher, diagnostician, colleague, and change agent: A synthesis of the research on the role of the reading specialist in this era of RtI-based literacy reform.  The Reading Teacher, 67(8).

Coaching Prompts

Diane Jenquin contributed today's post.

Over the last few years I have been accumulating prompts, and questions to promote reflection that promotes inquiry and to alter the thinking and behaving  that occurs afterward. I do have to admit I do not know where some of these prompts came from, but the important idea is that they are coaching conversation starters.  I have put 2 questions from each on a bookmark to help prompt myself as a coach along with teaching and practicing with others.

My hope for you is to take what you need out of this and run with it.  Happy Coaching, Diane

Asking Open Questions:

• What might be the best possible ways to…?
• If you taught this lesson perfectly how would it look?
• How do you think the lesson went? What happened that caused it to go that way?
• When you think about what you had planned and what actually happened, what were the similarities and what were the differences?
• As you think about the results you got, what were some of the ways you designed the lesson to cause them to happen?
• When you reflect back on the lesson, what might you do differently?
• What were the strengths of the lesson? What did not work?

Statement of  Ability/. Attitude:

• I know you have been thinking a lot about this, and I am curious about ….
• Its obvious you're committed to this.  What are some things you have been doing?
• As you’ve been thinking about this you probably anticipated…
• As you test your insights where do you think you start?
• I don’t have the answer and I’m curious about your...

Paraphrasing Language:

• Recode and repeat back to the teacher creates conditions for active listening and promotes metacognition.
• So you're feeling…
• In other words…
• Hmm, you're suggesting that…
• Let me see if I understand: You said…
• I want to make sure I got all the points ; you said...your noticing that…

Summarize and Organize:

• So there seems to be 2 key issues here...and…
• On one hand there is… and on the other hand…

Comprehension Focus Groups: Using Leveled Texts

Heather Zimmerman contributed today's post. All of Heather's posts about implementing comprehension focus groups with middle school readers who are struggling can be found here.

As I have been talking with others about my experiences this year with implementing Comprehension Focus Groups at the middle school level, one question that comes up is about leveling texts.  This was one challenge that I encountered early on in the school year.  I wanted to share with you how I tackled this challenge.  On a side note, the way I approached this is not “by the books” necessarily, but it is practical and what needed to be done to make CFGs work for me.

In my CFG, I have anywhere from five to nine students.  (The way we work our intervention time is there cannot be more than 10 students in an intervention.)  At the beginning of the year I had students ranging from a level R to a level V.  I started asking myself how the CFG would run and look if I split them all by level into different CFGs.  I also wondered how my 50 minutes of time would look.  When I met with one CFG, what would the other students do that was effective?  I was told a CFG is supposed to last at a minimum 30 minutes to keep 80% fidelity, I could not meet with two group in one 50-minute period.  So would I only meet with a group two to three times a week?  What would be the most beneficial for students?  And what could I make work?  (All while keeping in mind the three phases, and wanting to keep them all meaningful.)

As I searched for texts, as many of us who search for middle and high school texts know, many of the middle school appropriate texts are not leveled.  I decided to meet my students in the middle...I chose a range of levels for the three independent texts my students would work with.  By doing this though, I make sure to scaffold for those students who needed it and challenge students who are ready to dig to a different level in a text.  

As I reflect on my work with CFGs and have a frame for a few groups, next year, I will continue to add different levels of texts to my library.  I wanted to have a range, but knew that as I started the year, I might not have all that I need in place.  But even though not all the texts are perfectly leveled, teacher expertise is just as important.  I think my students have had just as powerful experience in CFGs as I help meet their needs as individual learners looking at the same text.

What’s it like to be in a session with Diane Sweeney?

Bobbi Campbell contributed today's posts. Bobbi's recent posts focus on her learning around student centered coaching (facilitated by Diane Sweeney).

This blog entry is an example of a full-day professional development opportunity with Diane Sweeney, including coaching reflections and notes in response to the content.

The essential questions for the session were:

• EQ1: How can a coach guide goal setting towards culturally and linguistically responsive instructional practices?
• EQ2: What are some coaching skills that bring about culturally and linguistically responsive instructional practices?
• EQ3: How might learning labs create opportunities for teacher collaboration in MMSD?

Read about the content of the session and Bobbi's notes (shared in PDF using GoogleDrive).

Centering Curriculum Conversations Around Learning Targets

Carrie Sand contributed today's post. Her other recent posts about planning professional learning can be found here.

I love the fact that my principal loves professional resources as much as I do. I love the fact that my principal orders professional resources and then puts them in my mailbox with a note that says “Add this to your shelves when you’re done.” I love that one of his favorite resources is the magazine “Educational Leadership” from ASCD. And what does my principal love from all of this.….he loves the fact that every time I find a wonderful idea to implement from my freebie, he technically gets the ‘shout-out’ for the great find!! It really is a small price to pay for a free subscription to a great resource and, in the end, we’ve both agreed that it’s a win-win.

NOTE: Wisconsin educators can access the article Carrie mentions in this post completely free using BadgerLink.

So it was in the October 2014 issue where I found the article titled “Learning Targets on Parade” by Susan M. Brookhart and Connie M. Moss that got me thinking more about my work as a coach and the many hours a coach puts into fostering, supporting, implementing, writing, leading, revising, vetting (and many other “-ings”) curriculum. I like working with curriculum and I think most coaches would agree that they value the importance of building a strong universal instructional system; and, when you work with really great teams, the conversations about rigor and expectations and scope and sequence really feel like a true work of collaboration. My problem is that these deeply collaborative discussions about curriculum are too few and far between. In fact, much too often, the curriculum meetings I am part of become groups of people working next to one another on independent tasks: one person finding a great website, one an electronic tool or graphic organizer, another creating a google doc or form. The rich collaborative discussions that really drive great curriculum are missing.

As a coach, I began to wonder how I could hone in on a specific focus point to help spark these discussions. As I read further into the article, I realized that learning targets were the place to go to accomplish this goal.  As outlined in the article by Brookhart and Moss, learning targets should go beyond rewording the language of the standards into the basic “I can…” statement many teachers have implemented in their classrooms. Instead, learning targets need to tell the students “exactly what they’re suppose to learn and what their work will look like when they learn it.” As I read more in the article, I learned that the authors claim that in order to write a good learning target (or objective statement)  a teacher must: write the learning, not the activity as the learning target; write a new learning target each day so students get the sense of how lessons build on one another; and embody the learning target within the performance task of the day so the activity feels meaningful, important, and essential to the learning.

With learning targets more clearly defined and having a specific protocol for writing them, I continued on into my October issue of EL. Next, I encountered the article “The Quest for Mastery: What practices do high-performing urban schools have in common?” by Joseph F. Johnson Jr, Cynthia L. Uline, and Lynne G. Perez. Now, my small, rural Wisconsin school might be the exact opposite of the definition of “urban,” but if an author sticks the words “high performing” in their title, you can bet that I’m reading on! It was here again that I read about the practice of creating objective-driven lessons, and how teachers can use learning targets, or objective statements, as conversation focal points in team meetings to plan curriculum that focuses on a depth of understanding, and ultimately mastery, of content and standards. As outlined in the article, teachers benefit from conversations with colleagues centered around writing strong objectives, as well as purposeful planning for academic vocabulary, avoiding and pointing out common misconceptions, and connecting the knowledge to prior learning.

In the past few months, I have worked to refocus curriculum meetings based on these considerations. I have followed an informal protocol that involves beginning curriculum work by initiating discussions centered around writing strong objective statements, and then considering the vocabulary, misconceptions, and connection to prior learning each lesson entails. As a result, our curriculum work has sparked conversations that are deep and meaningful. These conversations have also moved beyond curriculum meetings to team meetings and PLC time. When teachers take ownership and implement the process on their own, I know my work as a coach has been successful.