LITERACY WORKSHOPPurdue University Academic Learning Center 9900 Connecticut Drive, Crown Point, IN 46307-7252

Review of the ResearchLakeshore Alliance for Student Success, Inc. Edward Schoenfelt, Executive Director220 S. 13th Street, Chesterton, IN 46304-2104

Wednesday, October 19, 2011 9:00 a.m. CST

A research study from 2009

Gina Biancarosa, Anthony Bryk, of Stanford University and Emily Dexter, Lesley University “Assessing the Value-Added Effects of Literacy Collaborative Professional Development on Student Learning”. The work described here has been supported by a Teacher Quality Grant from the Institute for Educational Sciences, R305M040086, “Can Literacy Professional Development be improved with Web-Based Collaborative Learning tools: A Randomized Field Trial.” Paper presented at the 2008 Conference of

the American Educational Research Association, New York, New York.

Research indicates the BLI Model works.LASS uses the Literacy Collaborative Model to deploy the BLI into twenty three schools in the membership. This study provides information of a 32% increase in average rate of student learning over three years and substantial growth in teacher expertise. The $3M, 4-year value-added study of Literacy Collaborative effects on teaching and student learning was funded by the USDOE’s Institute of Education Science (IES) and directed by Dr. Anthony Bryk, President of the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching, in collaboration with researchers at the University of Chicago, Northwestern University, Stanford University, and Literacy Collaborative.

The findings include the following during implementation: a) Students’ average rates of learning increased by 16% in the first year, 28% in the second year, and32% in the third year. b) Teacher expertise increased substantially, and the rate of improvement waspredicted by the amount of coaching a teacher received. c) Professional communication amongstteachers in the schools increased over the three years of implementation, and the literacy coordinatorsbecame more central in the schools’ communication networks.

Senate ESEA reauthorization October 12, 2011

Literacy, STEM Education See Big Push in Senate ESEA BillBy Erik Robelen of Education Week - The sprawling g ESEA reauthorizationbill put forward last week by the Chair of the Senate Education committeeenvisions major programs both for Literacy and STEM education. Theliteracy programs are spanning From birth through the end of high school.The STEM program may replace the Exiting mathematics and sciencepartnerships program that allows states and districts far more latitude in thekind of activities they could use the money for.

(QUICK BACKGROUND: FOR THOSE NOT IN THE LOOP, THE NCLB ACT IS THELATEST ITERATION OF THE FEDERAL ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARYEDUCATION ACT, THE MAIN FEDERAL LAW FOR THE K-12 WORLD.CONGRESS IS FAR, FAR BEHIND SCHEDULE IN REAUTHORIZING THE LAW,WHICH LAST WAS UPDATED NEARLY TEN YEARS AGO.)

International Reading Association (IRA)

This position statement was adopted by the IRA Board of Directorsin May 2009. To become fully literate in today's world, students must become proficient in the newliteracies of 21st-century technologies. IRA believes that literacy educators have aresponsibility to integrate information and communication technologies (ICTs) into the curriculum, to prepare students for the futures they deserve. We believe further thatstudents have the right to:

- Teachers who use ICTs skillfully for teaching and learning - Peers who use ICTs responsibly and who share their knowledge - A literacy curriculum that offers opportunities for collaboration with peersaround the world - Instruction that embeds critical and culturally sensitive thinking into practice Standards and assessments that include new literacies - Leaders and policymakers who are committed advocates of ICTs for teachingand learning -Equal access to ICTs

Impact of Literacy Coaches on Teachers’ Beliefs and Practices

Journal of Literacy Research September 2011 43: 215 The field of literacy education has long been concerned with the question of how tohelp classroom teachers improve their practices so that students will improve as readers.Although there is consensus on what characterizes effective professional development,The reading research on which this consensus is based most often is small scale andInvolves direct support provided by university faculty. The South Carolina ReadingInitiative is an exception: It is a statewide, site-based, large-scale staff development effortled by site-selected literacy coaches. Although university faculty provide long-term staffdevelopment to the coaches, the faculty are not directly involved with the professionaldevelopment provided to teachers. In this study we sought to understand whether site-based, site-chosen literacy coaches could help teachers’ beliefs and practices becomemore consistent with what the field considers to be best practices. To understand teacherchange, we used two surveys (Theoretical Orientation to Reading Profile, n = 817; SouthCarolina Reading Profile, n = 1,005) and case study research (n = 39) to documentteachers’ beliefs and practices. We also had access to a state department survey (n =1,428). Across these data, we found that teachers’ beliefs and practices becameincreasingly consistent with best practices as defined by standards set by the SouthCarolina State Department of Education, standards that were consistent with nationalstandards. This suggests that large-scale staff development can affect teachers when the

providers are site-based, site-selected literacy coaches.

Common Core - - - Michigan

www.corestandards.org/voices-of-support/watch/7

?

Average is over

Tony Wagner wrote in his book the

Global Achievement Gap “three C’s”

“critical thinking, effective oral and written

communication and collaboration”

* These are important in the globalization

economy with the merger of IT to inspire

hyper-high imagination society in the USA