Lawrence Family Development Charter School

34 West Street, Lawrence, MA 01841 * Ph: (978) 689-9863 Fax (978) 687-6555
“Strengthening the family …building community”

Title IIA
Needs Assessment Team Meeting

Wednesday, October 24, 2012

Agenda

1. 2012-2013 PD Team Members

• Erica Crescenzo, K-1
• Elaine Fuller, Grade 1
• Kristen Fletcher, Grade 2
• Alicia Slocum, Grade 4
• Laurie Medrek, Grade 6
• Rudy Jaime, Spanish Grades 5/6
• Emily Banta, ESL All Grades
• Hali Castleman, ESL All Grades
• Donna Carbone, Title I math
• Janis Brodeur, SPED Grades 7/8/Mentor Coordinator
• Stephanie Cross, Science Department Chair
• Lisa Conran, Head of Academy for Early Academic Preparation/SPED Coordinator
• Stephanie Cole, Head of Upper School/Title I Coordinator
• Katherine Allen, Head of Lower School/Literacy Director

2. Title IIA Background

• U.S. Department of Education Federal Title IIA Document
o p. 24
• DESE 2011 Title IIA Newsletter
o LFDCS HQT status

3. $46, 662 FY13 PD Allocation

• Mentoring stipends
• Breadloaf
• Book Talk (book)

4. Looking Ahead 2012-2013 LFDCS PD Team

• Book Talk Book 3 ($1662)
o Team develops a system for selecting the title of third book for faculty to read as
part of this year’s Book Talk
• Identify parent representatives to serve on PD Team
• Develop a system for evaluating the effectiveness of PD

1|Page
LFDCS Title IIA Needs Assessment Survey 2013
 o Respecting anonymity
• Anonymously survey teachers and analyze student data to inform the writing of 2013-2014
LFDCS PD Needs Assessment

5. Upcoming Meetings
• To Be announced after coordinating calendar with Principal Karl

Lawrence Family Development Charter School

34 West Street, Lawrence, MA 01841 * Ph: (978) 689-9863 Fax (978) 687-6555
“Strengthening the family …building community”

Title IIA
Needs Assessment Team Meeting

Wednesday, March 06, 2013

Agenda

6. Book Talk
• Share out of ideas for picking book #3 ($1662/55= $30)
• Consensus
• Plan of Action
• Follow up- who will do…

7. Needs Assessment- Driving Factors

• PARCC Update
o New Assessment Prototype
• Common Core Needs Assessment
http://www.ode.state.or.us/search/page/?id=351
• ACCESS
o WIDA
o Sheltered English Instruction
• Parent Survey

To Do:
• Look through packet of information
• Speak to teaching team colleagues to gather ideas
• Brainstorm what information would be beneficial to collect on the instructional needs of
your grade span/content area/area of specialized instruction
• Jot down ideas and how best to collect this information through survey to be administered
to staff in April
• I will send a template out for you to record ideas and email back to me by March ------

8. Looking Ahead 2012-2013 LFDCS PD Team

2|Page
LFDCS Title IIA Needs Assessment Survey 2013
 • Anonymously survey teachers and analyze data collected and student data to inform the
writing of 2013-2014 LFDCS PD Needs Assessment
• Identify parent representatives to serve on PD Team
• Present information at SSC
• Develop a system for evaluating the effectiveness of PD for 2013-2014
o Respecting anonymity

Title IIA Team

Name Instructional Focus
Erica Crescenzo Early Elementary

Elaine Fuller Early Elementary

Kristen Fletcher Early Elementary

Alicia Slocum Upper Elementary

Laurie Medrek Upper Elementary

Donna Carbone Upper Elementary

Grade7/8

Rudy Jaime Spanish

Emily Banta ESL

Hali Castleman ESL

Janis Brodeur SPED

Stephanie Cross Science

Lisa Conran SPED

Stephanie Cole Title I

Katherine Allen Literacy

3|Page
LFDCS Title IIA Needs Assessment Survey 2013
 LFDCS

Title IIA Needs Assessment Survey

Spring 2013

Directions: Please complete this paper copy and return to the front desk receptionist of your
school by Friday, May 3rd. To protect anonymity and to efficiently organize open responses,
please submit ALL open response answers electronically by logging into:

http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/LZ985RV

This link has also been emailed to you.

4|Page
LFDCS Title IIA Needs Assessment Survey 2013
Thank you for your feedback as we look ahead to planning 2013-2014!!!

5|Page
LFDCS Title IIA Needs Assessment Survey 2013
 Title IIA:

Under Section 9101(23) of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA), NCLB requires all students
to be taught by highly qualified teachers in core academic subjects. Per §9101(11), the core academic
areas are defined as: English, reading/language arts, mathematics, science, foreign languages, civics and
government, economics, history, geography and the arts (visual art, theater, music and dance).

The purpose of Title II, Part A is to increase the academic achievement of all students by helping schools and
districts improve teacher and principal quality and ensure that all teachers are highly qualified through high-
quality professional development.

The term “high-quality professional development” means professional development that meets the criteria
contained in the definition of professional development in Title IX, Section 9101(34) of ESEA. Professional
development includes, but is not limited to, activities that:
• Improve and increase teachers’ knowledge of academic subjects and enable teachers to
become highly qualified;
• Are an integral part of broad schoolwide and districtwide educational improvement plans;
• Give teachers and principals the knowledge and skills to help students meet challenging
State
academic standards;
• Improve classroom management skills;
• Are sustained, intensive, and classroom-focused and are not one-day or short-term
workshops;
• Advance teacher understanding of effective instruction strategies that are based on
scientifically based research; and
• Are developed with extensive participation of teachers, principals, parents, and
administrators.

Section 9101(37) of ESEA, as amended by NCLB, defines scientifically based research as “research that
involves the application of rigorous, systematic, and objective procedures to obtain reliable and valid
knowledge relevant to education activities and programs.” The statute then explains that this kind of
research:

1. Employs systematic, empirical methods that draw on observation or experiment;

2. Involves rigorous data analyses that are adequate to test the stated hypotheses and justify
the general conclusions drawn;

3. Relies on measurements or observational methods that provide reliable and valid data across
evaluators and observers, across multiple measurements and observations, and across studies by the
same or different investigators;

6|Page
LFDCS Title IIA Needs Assessment Survey 2013
 4. Is evaluated using experimental or quasi-experimental designs in which individuals, entities, programs,
or activities are assigned to different conditions and with appropriate controls to evaluate the effects of
the condition of interest, with a preference for random-assignment experiments, or other designs to the
extent that those designs contain within-condition or across-condition controls;

5. Ensures that experimental studies are presented in sufficient detail and clarity to allow for
replication or, at a minimum, offer the opportunity to build systematically on their findings; and

6. Has been accepted by a peer-reviewed journal or approved by a panel of independent experts

through a comparably rigorous, objective, and scientific review.

The statute also requires that all SEA activities supported with program funds must be based on a
review of scientifically based research, and the SEA must maintain documentation that explains why
it expects those activities to improve student academic achievement.

7|Page
LFDCS Title IIA Needs Assessment Survey 2013
 Math

Check the column that applies:

Need Support/Refining All Set Not Applicable

My lessons and units focus on specific,
grade-level Common Core State Standards
for Mathematics.
We have implement best practice
research-based instruction focused on
student learning as defined by the
Common Core State Standards for
Mathematics, using multiple indicators of
student performance data.
I have identified the scope and sequence
so students will have a strong foundational
knowledge and deep conceptual
understanding called for in the Common
Core State Standards for Mathematics.
We, as a team, have documented how
student learning is connected within
content and across grade levels.
Class time and homework time has been
structured so students have time to
practice speed and accuracy.

My/Our students are given opportunities

to write and speak about their
understanding of core math concepts
applied to new situations.

I give students opportunities to discover

and identify math problems in their
everyday world.

Dual Intensity: I create opportunities for

students to make use of skills through
extended application of math concepts
and participate in drills.
Assessment: I have read and understand
the organizational design of the PARCC
Math Preliminary Assessment Blueprint.
Assessment: My team has developed
formative assessments that mirror this
multi-layered assessment format.
Assessment: My team has developed and
utilizes rubrics that have been aligned with
rubrics of other grade levels.
Math Further thoughts: Log onto Survey Monkey link emailed to submit electronic comments
please

8|Page
LFDCS Title IIA Needs Assessment Survey 2013
 ELA Core

Check the column that applies:

Need Support/Refining All Set Not Applicable

I understand the key components of
Appendix A of the ELA 2011 MCF.
I understand the progressive
relationship of the ELA 2011 MCF
across all grade levels.
I have read and understand the
organizational design of the PARCC
Content Model Frameworks for my
grade level.
I have read and understand the
organizational design of the PARCC
ELA Preliminary Assessment
Bluepirint.
I analyze results from student
learning data to plan standards
driven instruction.
I understand the need for a balance
of literature and informational text
as emphasized by the ELA 2011 MCF.
I have begun collecting a toolbox of
resources of increased informational
texts and poetry as emphasized by
the ELA 2011 MCF.
I have begun collecting or designing
a toolbox of formative assessments
to monitor student understanding of
a variety of text.
We are currently using assessments
that require students to use a variety
of modalities. (manipulative, picture,
written symbols, oral/written
language, real-life situations).
I understand the key areas of focus
relating to Close Reading and Text
Dependent Questioning.
I understand the key areas of focus
relating to Text Complexity.
I understand the key areas of focus
relating to writing and the different
requirements for students.
Assessment: My team has developed
formative assessments that mirror
this multi-layered assessment
format.
Assessment: My team has developed
and utilizes rubrics that have been
aligned with rubrics of other grade
levels.

9|Page
LFDCS Title IIA Needs Assessment Survey 2013
 I understand formative assessments
and the management of record
keeping (e.g., standards based
report cards).
I utilize the strategy Claim, Evidence,

10 | P a g
LFDCS Title IIA Needs Assessment Survey 2013
 Reasoning to support the deep
teaching of inferencing and
analytical comprehension skills.

I am comfortable with teaching the

Foundation of Reading Skills:
Print, Concepts, Phonological
Awareness, Phonics, and Fluency
(can elaborate specifics in further
thoughts).
ELA Further thoughts: Log onto Survey Monkey link emailed to submit electronic comments please

Writing

Check the column that applies:

Need Support/Refining All Set Not Applicable

I am familiar with the CCS Writing
Standards.
I understand how to explicitly
teach the writing the genres
outlined in the CCS Writing
Standards.
Assessment: My team has
developed and utilizes rubrics that
have been aligned with rubrics of
other grade levels.
Writing Further thoughts: Log onto Survey Monkey link emailed to submit electronic comments please

Spanish

Check the column that applies:

Need Support/Refining All Set Not Applicable

I understand the key components of
Appendix A of the ELA 2011 MCF.
I understand the progressive
relationship of the Spanish 2011
MCF across all grade levels.

11 | P a g
LFDCS Title IIA Needs Assessment Survey 2013
 I have read and understand the
organizational design of the PARCC
Content Model Frameworks for my
grade level.
I have read and understand the
organizational design of the PARCC
ELA Preliminary Assessment
Blueprint.
I analyze results from student
learning data to plan standards
driven instruction.
I understand the need for a balance
of literature and informational text
as emphasized by the ELA 2011 MCF.

12 | P a g
LFDCS Title IIA Needs Assessment Survey 2013
 I have begun collecting a toolbox of
resources of increased informational
texts and poetry as emphasized by
the 2011 MCF.
I have begun collecting or designing
a toolbox of formative assessments
to monitor student understanding of
a variety of text.
We are currently using assessments
that require students to use a variety
of modalities. (manipulative, picture,
written symbols, oral/written
language, real-life situations).
I understand the key areas of focus
relating to Close Reading and Text
Dependent Questioning.
I understand the key areas of focus
relating to Text Complexity.
I understand the key areas of focus
relating to writing and the different
requirements for students.
Assessment: My team has developed
formative assessments that mirror
this mutli-layered assessment
format.
Assessment: My team has developed
and utilizes rubrics that have been
aligned with rubrics of other grade
levels.
I understand formative assessments
and the management of record
keeping (e.g., standards based
report cards).
I utilize the strategy Claim, Evidence,
Reasoning to support the deep
teaching of inferencing and
analytical comprehension skills.
Spanish Further thoughts: Log onto Survey Monkey link emailed to submit electronic comments please

Science The DESE will be publishing new science standards in the near future...

Check the column that applies:

Need Support/Refining All Set Not Applicable

13 | P a g
LFDCS Title IIA Needs Assessment Survey 2013
 I understand the need to pair
literary text with expository texts
to strengthen the teaching of
science content and the
synthesizing of critical thinking and
analytical skills.
I utilize the strategy Claim,
Evidence, Reasoning to support
the deep teaching of science
content.
Science Further thoughts: Log onto Survey Monkey link emailed to submit electronic comments please

14 | P a g
LFDCS Title IIA Needs Assessment Survey 2013
 ESL

Many teams at LFDCS have expressed a need for further training in best practices of sheltered English instruction.
Fortunately, LFDCS staff members will be participating in mandatory Rethinking Equity and Teaching for English Language
Learners (RETELL) during the 2013-2014 school year. To learn more about this training please read the below DESE
description:

Strengthening teaching and learning for English language learners is central to closing the proficiency gap. Rethinking Equity and Teaching
for English Language Learners (RETELL) is a Department initiative to improve and support the academic achievement of English language
learners in our Commonwealth. RETELL brings a systemic approach that combines professional development for Sheltered English
Immersion (SEI) teachers designed to enable them to make rigorous content accessible to their English learners. Moreover, new curriculum
standards and assessment for ELLs will undergird RETELL. RETELL will require that SEI teachers and the administrators who supervise them
to complete updated SEI professional development or its equivalent, with high priority placed on teachers with ELLs currently in their
classes. This ambitious undertaking will involve tens of thousands of educators at various stages in their careers as well as the
organizations that prepare, support, and employ them.

http://www.doe.mass.edu/retell/

Check the column that applies:

Need Support/Refining All Set Not Applicable

I know the MEPA (ACCESS) levels of
all of my ELL students.
I know which students have been
FLEPed
I feel comfortable assessing the
speaking proficiency of my ELLs
using the WIDA Speaking Rubric.
I feel comfortable assessing the
writing proficiency of my ELLs using
the WIDA Writing Rubric.
I know how to craft Performance
Indicators (WIDA’s lesson
objectives) that align with my CCS
lesson objectives.
I know ESL strategies to shelter
reading content.
I know ESL strategies to shelter
writing content.
I know ways to scaffold speaking
and listening activities for my ELLs.
I feel comfortable using CAN DO
descriptors in my planning and
assessment for ELLs.
I understand the WIDA progress
reports the ESL staff disseminates
and how to explain them to
parents.

15 | P a g
LFDCS Title IIA Needs Assessment Survey 2013
 I understand the purpose of
ACCESS and what it tests.
I have multiple strategies to teach
vocabulary to my ELLs.
I understand the process through
which students are labeled FLEP.
I know who to contact in the event
that I have concerns about a FLEP
student.

16 | P a g
LFDCS Title IIA Needs Assessment Survey 2013
 ESL Further thoughts: Log onto Survey Monkey link emailed to submit electronic comments please

Special Education

Check the column that applies:

Need Support/Refining All Set Not Applicable

I am familiar with students IEP goals.
I am comfortable with how we align IEP
goals with CCSS.
I am comfortable with how to modify
work for accordingly to meet IEP goals.
I understand how the new curriculum
with a focus on career readiness in a way
that works for all students including those
with alternative assessments.

I understand how we can address unique

instructional concerns, provision of
supports, accommodations and
appropriate IEP development and still
retain the rigor and high expectations of
CCSS.

I am understand how to meet the unique

set of needs of those students identified
with social/emotional disabilities.
SPED Further thoughts: Log onto Survey Monkey link emailed to submit electronic comments
please

Open Response (Log onto Survey Monkey link emailed to submit electronic comments please):

General

Are you familiar with the DESE MA Model Curriculum Units?

How has LFDCS Vertical teams impacted your professional growth?
How has LFDCS Vertical teams impacted your grade level’s/content area’s instruction?
What instructional focus do you think would be useful for Vertical Teams to concentrate on in 2013-2014?
Book Talk

What do you think the objective of LFDCS’ Book Talk Series is?
Katherine Allen Standard 2 Page 17
 How could the Book Talk experience be more useful to your professional growth?

Breadloaf

What do you think the objective of LFDCS Breadloaf PD training is?

Has Breadloaf made an impact on your team’s writing instruction? How?
Are you interested in participating in Bread Loaf PD?

Lawrence Family Development Charter School

34 West Street, Lawrence, MA 01841
(978) 689-9863

TO: Ralph Carrero, Superintendent; Patricia Karl, Principal and Stephanie Cole, Title I Coordinator

CC: Title IIA Team, Jamie Wu and Roy Nelson

FROM: Katherine Allen

DATE: March 8, 2013

RE: Title IIA Carryover Grant

LFDCS was awarded Title IIA carryover money from FY12. The grant to obtain this money
($15,000) was submitted on December 28, 2012 allocating these funds for the following
professional development resources:

Professional Books-

Katherine Allen Standard 2 Page 18

 Author and Title # Copies/Grade levels Price

The Core Six: Essential $14.35 x 60 = $861.00

Strategies for Achieving
Excellence with the Common 60 copies one for each teacher
Core by H. Silver (2012)- book to in K-1 through grade 8
be used in all grade levels during
vertical team study groups to
help with transition in
instructional techniques based
in new Common Core
Standards.

Text Complexity Raising Rigor in $24.95 x 56 = $1400

Reading by D. Fisher (2012)-
book to be used in all grade
levels during vertical team study 56 copies one for each teacher
groups to help with transition in in K-1 through grade 6 and
instructional techniques based non-math content teachers
in new Common Core grades 7 and 8
Standards.

Great Ways to Differentiate $29.95 x 30 = $900.00

Mathematics Instruction by M.
Small (2012)- book to be used in
all grade levels K-8 during grade
level math study groups to
improve individualized math
instruction.
30 copies one for each teacher
of math in grades
K-2 through 8 (including 2 title
I math interventionists)

Creating Robust Vocabulary by $20.11 x 30= $600

I. Beck (2008)- book to be used
in all grade levels K-8 during 30 copies one for each teacher
grade level ELA study groups to in grades
enrich core vocabulary K-2 through 8
instruction

Beyond Pizza Pies: 10 Essential
Strategies for Supporting
Fraction Sense by J. McNamara
(2010)- book to be used in grade
levels 3-5 during grade level
15 copies one for each teacher $23.07 x 15 = $350
in grades 2-5 (including 2 title I
math interventionists)

Katherine Allen Standard 2 Page 19

 study groups to improve the
teaching of fractions.

Extending Children's 30 copies one for each teacher $21.57 x 30 = $641

Mathematics: Fractions & of math in grades
Decimals: Innovations In
Cognitively Guided Instruction in grades
by S. Empsom (2011)- book to K-2 through 8 (including 2 title
be used in all grade levels during I math interventionists)
grade level math study groups
to improve the teaching of
fractions.

Online VoyagerU Professional Development Targeted Courses-

Course Title and Focus Grade Levels Price

VoyagerU Professional $200 x 14 = $2,800

Development- Instructional
Stategies for Fractions. For Grade 3-6 (including 2 title I
teachers in grades 3-6. At the math interventionists)
end of this course, participants
will be able to:

•Understand the important role

fractions play in mathematical
proficiency

•Understand how to effectively

implement the CRA instructional
sequence

•Effectively complete error

analysis in student work

•Competently implement
instructional strategies to
effectively teach fractions

VoyagerU Professional $200 x 14 = $2,800

Development- Math Vocabulary.
For teachers in grades K2-3. At K2- grade 3

Katherine Allen Standard 2 Page 20

 the end of this course,
participants will be able to:

•Understand the importance of

teaching and assessing
vocabulary in mathematics

•Apply strategies to overcome

the different challenges math
vocabulary presents in both
teaching and learning

•Effectively implement both

general and specific
instructional and assessment
techniques that increase the

effectiveness of math
vocabulary instruction

VoyagerU Professional $200 x 10 = $2,000

Development- Fluency. For
teachers in grades K2-2. At the K2- grade 2
end of this course, participants
will be able to:

•Learn ways to measure and

improve student fluency

•Define and understand the

importance of fluency in reading
development

•Discover when and how to

assess reading fluency

•Acquire the tools to target

instruction to improve student
fluency

VoyagerU Professional $200 x 13 = $2,600

Development-Small-Group
Intervention. For teachers new 3 ESL teachers
to LFDCS. Teachers develop 4 K-2 Teachers
skills in differentiating
instruction to ensure all

Katherine Allen Standard 2 Page 21

 students master the critical 6 new teachers
skills necessary to be grade-
level readers:

•Recognizing the components of

effective intervention

•Identifying students at risk of

non-retention

•Setting goals, monitoring

progress, and accelerating
student learning

•Delivering effective small-

group intervention

http://www.voyageru.com/secure/index.jsp

Name of Grant Program: Reading First Professional Development Partnerships Fund

Code: 728

PART III - REQUIRED PROGRAM INFORMATION (NARRATIVE) AND INSTRUCTIONS

1. District and School Participating

Lawrence Family Development Charter School has been selected to participate in the
FY2010 Reading First Professional Development Partnerships. It has been identified by the
DESE as an eligible district and school due Grade 3 MCAS scores and socioeconomic
level. LFDCS is currently funded (2008-2009) by Reading First and is on the 2008 list of
schools serving Grade 3 that are identified for Restructuring. Additionally, in 2008 with a
CPI of 73.4, LFDCS’ Grade 3 ELA CPI was less than 80.

2. Critical Issue

Katherine Allen Standard 2 Page 22

LFDCS’ critical issue is to figure out how to best close our students’ knowledge deficits
while strengthening oral language skills.

Upon reviewing the 2007-2008 Reading First data provided by the Donahue Institute an
interesting contrast in proficiency levels emerge. According to the stanine measurement
of the GRADE, LFDCS has not been able to make a sizable reduction of students at Tier
III. From 2004-2008, there has been just a slight decrease of Tier III (stanine 3 or lower)
students in Kindergarten through Grade 3. This trend parallels the stagnant percentage
of students at Tier I (stanine 5 or higher). Although there have been slight increases in the
percentage of students at Tier I according to the GRADE data, overall the numbers are
consistent from 2004-2008.

This GRADE data is curious. Especially in light of the fact that LFDCS has seen such
tremendous movement of students reaching Tier I in Oral Reading Fluency as measured
by the DIBELS. At Grade 3 alone, there has been a 55% point increase of Tier I students
from 2004-2008.

It is also interesting to note that LFDCS’ GRADE and DIBELS data reflects no significant learning
gaps between any subgroup and aggregate data. However, an analysis of the Grade 3 ELA
MCAS data from the last three years reveals a noticeable learning gap in the percentage of LEP
students making proficiency. Generally LFDCS has had a low aggregate proficiency rate on the
Grade 3 ELA MCAS, yet the LEP students’ rate of proficiency is significantly lower.

The contrast between the GRADE and DIBELS data, as well as, our Grade 3 students’
(both aggregate and LEP) consistently low ELA MCAS proficiency rates has forced us to
start digging deeper. All these findings echo what in E.D. Hirsch outlines in The Knowledge
Deficit. Our students in the primary Grades are doing an adequate job at decoding and
reading fluently, but making inferences, defining vocabulary and understanding the
intricacy of language structure is problematic and thus compromising our students’
reading comprehension.

Interestingly, LFDCS has realized significant student growth in Grades 5 and 6 according
to the GRADE data, perhaps reflecting what E.D. Hirsch points out as a delayed effect of
language development in which academic progress can take until to Grade 5 to
emerge.

Katherine Allen Standard 2 Page 23

LFDCS enters the upcoming 2009-2010 school year with the focus of addressing the
language deficit which results from the experiential and economic poverty of our
students. Not only do we need to continue a laser like focus in Kindergarten through
Grade 3 building our students’ phonemic awareness, phonic skills and reading fluency,
but we also need to make a concerted

PART III - REQUIRED PROGRAM INFORMATION (NARRATIVE) AND INSTRUCTIONS - continued

effort to close our students’ knowledge deficits and strengthen our students’ oral
language skills through systematic exposure to rich language and vocabulary instruction.

3. Higher Education/Organizations Participating

During the 2009-2010 school year, Lawrence Family Development Charter School will
work in partnership with the Hanson Initiative for Language & Literacy (HILL) as well as
with Teachers21.

4. Plan for Initiative

LFDCS has three objectives for FY2010 Professional Development:

A. To strengthen primary teachers’ understanding of language structure and SBRR

B. To strengthen team planning to include the ELE coordinator
C. To close our students’ knowledge deficits and strengthen students’ oral
language skills

Research has shown that teachers who have training and experience in the study of language
acquisition are better able to create and deliver educational programs appropriate for the different
developmental levels of students. An understanding of instructional routines that support oral
language development is critical for building students’ conceptual knowledge and vocabulary.
Scientific research on vocabulary instruction reveals that most vocabulary is learned indirectly
through everyday experiences with oral and written language, however some vocabulary must be
taught directly through systematic explicit instruction.
LFDCS has developed a plan to strengthen students’ oral language development and build
background knowledge in Kindergarten through Grade 3 with specific attention to the
implementation of a systematic and explicit vocabulary program, daily morning meetings for
language scaffolding, socio-dramatic play and music/rhyming activities, as well as a two-pronged
PD series.

Katherine Allen Standard 2 Page 24

Working with the HILL will allow for LFDCS to continue the high level of professional
development training realized during the previous years of the Reading First Grant.
Founded in January 2001, the Hanson Initiative for Language & Literacy was formed to
address the gap that exists in thousands of schools: the inability of teachers to adequately
teach the literacy skills children need to read and write.

The HILL has worked to address this gap by developing a school reform model based on
the science of reading research. The HILL’s focus has evolved to address the literacy
needs evident within districts and across the state of Massachusetts. The HILL is currently
the professional development provider for the Massachusetts Reading First and working
with over 130 schools in Massachusetts and across the nation.

The HILL will provide LFDCS teachers Kindergarten through Grade 3 with LETRS (Language
Essentials for Teachers of Reading and Spelling) training Module 4 The Mighty Word:
Building Vocabulary and Module 6 Digging for Meaning: Teaching Text Comprehension.
LETRS is a professional development program designed to help educators understand
scientifically-based reading research, the structure of the English language, and explicit
teaching methodologies for language, reading, spelling, and writing instruction. LETRS
trainings help teachers to gain in-depth, useful instructional information that
complements their everyday teaching practices and allows teachers to reach, through
explicit, scientifically-based methods, students who might otherwise fail. LETRS training is
especially important at this point in time as only two of LFDCS’ sixteen Kindergarten
through Grade 3 teachers attended the initial Reading First Reading

PART III - REQUIRED PROGRAM INFORMATION (NARRATIVE) AND INSTRUCTIONS -

continued

Academies. Beyond the LETRS trainings, the HILL will be on-site one Tuesday a month to
provide embedded professional development working in classrooms coaching teachers
and holding an hour long PD session afterschool pertaining to langauge and vocabulary
instruction.

To complement the LETRS training, Teachers21 will be working with LFDCS to provide
embedded professional development in ELL category training and in effective use of
team planning and data analysis to achieve high-performing teams at all Grade levels.
This team planning model will aid in LFDCS’ goal for developing a strong, systematic,
content-based SEI curriculum, using DESE guidelines (February 2009) “Guide for
Developing a Content-Based English as a Second Language Curriculum” for classroom
teaching of language development. Teachers, especially in Grades K-3, will team plan
Katherine Allen Standard 2 Page 25
with the ELE Coordinator to enrich classroom language instruction in an effort to hasten
the delayed effect of language development.

The dates for the HILL trainings are:

• Thursday and Friday-August 27, 28

• Tuesday-October 6
• Tuesday-November 10
• Tuesday-December 8
• Tuesday-January 12
• Tuesday- February 2
• Tuesday- March 2
• Tuesday- April 6
• Tuesday- May 4

The dates for the Teachers21 trainings are:

Indicators of Success

5. Research on Implemented Practice

Research has found that vocabulary knowledge is a strong predictor of reading

comprehension performance and academic achievement (Nagy, 1988; Anderson &
Freebody, 1981). Vocabulary knowledge correlates strongly with reading and oral
comprehension (Biemiller, 2005). Students need to know 90-95% of the words in a text in
order to comprehend what is read. According to the National Reading Panel 2000 Report
(p. 4-3), benefits in understanding text by applying letter-sound correspondence to
printed material come about only if the targeted word is in the learner’s oral vocabulary.
When the word is not in the learner’s oral vocabulary, it will not be understood when it
occurs in print.

Students from low SES homes are exposed to 13 million words by age 4 while kids high SES
professional homes are exposed to 50 millions words by the same age (Hart & Risley,
1995). Once established, such differences are difficult to ameliorate (Biemiller, 1999; Hart
& Risley, 1995). It is in the early language learning that the Matthew effect begins to take
hold. Those who know many words and possess the background knowledge to
comprehend what they mean will learn more words and world knowledge later on, while
those who know few words in early Grades fall further behind in later Grades (Hirsch,
2006). Students from non-English speaking homes are often low SES and may have
Katherine Allen Standard 2 Page 26
minimal exposure to academic language. Children’s speaking and listening skills lead the
way for their reading and writing skills, and together these language skills are the primary
tools of the mind for all future learning (Roskos, Tabors, & Lenhart, 2005).

PART III - REQUIRED PROGRAM INFORMATION (NARRATIVE) AND INSTRUCTIONS -

continued

6. Evaluation
Using a common template provided by the Department of Elementary and Secondary
Education (Department), LFDCS will report on the changes in teacher knowledge and/or
practice as well as pre/post student achievement data.
a. Essential Research Questions:
1) What are the effects of a systematic vocabulary program on students’ oral language
skills?
2) With a concerted effort in strengthening students’ oral language skills, is there a
measurable increase in students moving out of Tier III?
3) Does a concerted effort in closing students’ knowledge deficits have a long term
positive increase in grade 3 ELA MCAS proficiency?
b. To gauge changes in teacher understanding of language structure and SBRR, LFDCS
will utilize the pre and post assessment associated with LETRS training. Open ended
questions will be asked of teachers pertaining to their knowledge of scientifically-based
reading research, the structure of the English language, and explicit teaching
methodologies for language, vocabulary and comprehension instruction.
c. To monitor students’ Language Development, LFDCS will utilize a battery of assessments
to include: DIBELS Word Use Fluency, the Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test, GRADE, a
LFDCS created Formative Assessment based on MEPA release items and Weekly
Assessments connected to Elements of Reading: Vocabulary program.
d. In conclusion of the FY2010 Professional Development, LFDCS will develop a report in
collaboration with the HILL and Teachers21 describing the effectiveness of the
implementation of the proposed research-based instructional strategies in K-3. This report
will be shared with the Department at the conclusion of the project.
e. The Head of the Lower School/Reading Director, Katherine Allen, will be responsible for
conducting and reporting on the evaluation. Certified in Elementary 1-6 and Reading K-
12, Ms. Allen has been the Reading First Reading Specialist at LFDCS for the last three years.

7. Matching Funds
Katherine Allen Standard 2 Page 27
Describe how the matching funds will help to support this grant and how this grant is connected to
efforts the district is supporting with American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) stimulus funding.
Extra text- may be cut

To help teachers understand the essential knowledge students at each Grade level
should to be expose to and familiar with, LFDCS will be purchasing E.D. Hirsch’s Core
Knowledge Series: Resource Books for Kindergarten through Grade Six. The content of this
resource will be used to build teachers’ background knowledge as well as be
incorporated into daily morning messages and morning meetings.

Morning meetings will also be utilized in Kindergarten through Grade 4 as an arena for
students to participate in structured speaking, listening and word play activities.

In order to address this need, LFDCS will be purchasing the Elements of Reading: Vocabulary
supplemental literacy program to be used in Kindergarten through Grade 3.

Katherine Allen Standard 2 Page 28