LOS ANGELES UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT MEMORANDUM



Similar documents
LOS ANGELES UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT REFERENCE GUIDE

Secondary Program Descriptions

District 2854 Ada-Borup Public Schools. Reading Well By Third Grade Plan. For. Ada-Borup Public Schools. Drafted April 2012

Technical Assistance Paper

Wappingers Central School District

IDENTIFICATION AND ASSESSMENT OF ENGLISH LANGUAGE LEARNERS

LOS ANGELES UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT REFERENCE GUIDE

Hamilton Southeastern Schools

Caruthers Unified School District. Instructional Program For English Language Learners

Special Education Program Descriptions

RtI Response to Intervention

Special Education Leadership Institute

Master Plan Evaluation Report for English Learner Programs

REVERE PUBLIC SCHOOLS

C Reading Sufficiency Act - Programs of Reading Instruction

Response to Intervention/ Student Support Team Manual Department of Psychological Services

Reading Results with

Nevis Public School District #308. District Literacy Plan Minnesota Statute 120B.12, Learning together... Achieving quality together.

Special Education Continuum of Services

How To Write A Curriculum Framework For The Paterson Public School District

YOUNG FIVES PROGRAM THREE-YEAR SINGLE PLAN FOR STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT. Palo Alto Unified School District

CONNECTICUT SEED Student and Educator Support Specialists Guidance Document

Curriculum and Instruction

The Massachusetts Tiered System of Support

Targeted Reading Intervention for Students in Grades K-6 Reading results. Imagine the possibilities.

2012 University of Texas System/ Texas Education Agency

Basic Skills Teachers Intervention Specialists & Instructional Assistants Support Services Handbook Audubon Public Schools

Response to Intervention Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)

IDEA Preschool $2,000. Grant Notes 2011 IDEA. IDEA School age $27,362. IDEA Preschool ARRA $2,921 IDEA Total: $32,283

Instructionally Appropriate IEPs. A Skills Based Approach to IEP Development Division of Special Populations

Identifying Students with Specific Learning Disabilities. Part 1: Introduction/Laws & RtI in Relation to SLD Identification

MIAMI-DADE COUNTY PUBLIC SCHOOLS PROCESS TO MONITOR CURRICULUM IMPLEMENTATION

AND LEARNING 21st Century Teaching and Learning

Adapted from the Flagler County Public School MTSS Manual

Requirements EDAM WORD STUDY K-3: PRINT AWARENESS, LETTER KNOWLEDGE, PHONICS, AND HIGH FREQUENCY WORDS

M.A. in Special Education / Candidates for Initial License

UTAH S 3 Tier Model of READING INSTRUCTION

Implementing RTI Using Title I, Title III, and CEIS Funds

Trenton Public Schools Academic Plan

SPECIFIC LEARNING DISABILITY

State of Early Literacy Assessment

MULTI-TIERED SYSTEM OF SUPPORT. Response to Intervention Positive Behavior Intervention System Data Teams

Progress Monitoring and RTI System

Performance Goal 1: All students will reach high standards, at a minimum, attaining proficiency or better in reading and mathematics by

Selecting an Intervention to Meet Students Needs: A How-to Resource for Educators

The Future of Reading Education

BEST PRACTICES RESOURCE GUIDE for ELEMENTARY, MIDDLE, and HIGH SCHOOLS

Selecting and Exiting Students Read 180 Program Springfield School District

MTSS Implementation Components Ensuring common language and understanding

Instructional Management Plan

Tier 2 Supplementary Interventions

Springfield Public Schools English Language Learner Recommended Actions and Implementation Plans

READING WITH. Reading with Pennsylvania Reading Specialist Certificate

K-12 Comprehensive Research Based Reading Plans District: Dade

Spring School Psychologist. RTI² Training Q &A

SCHOLASTIC READING INVENTORY (SRI) - Testing Window: Aug. 28 th Sept. 28 th, 2012

School Committee Members. From: Jeffrey M. Young Superintendent of Schools. Additional FY2016 Budget Information. Date: April 10, 2015

Directions: Complete assessment with team. Determine current level of implementation and priority. Level of Implementation. Priority.

Using Data to Develop and Assess RTI and IEP Goals

South Carolina Literacy Competencies. for Reading Coaches

FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

Multi-Tiered System of Supports SITE-BASED INTEVENTION AND SUPPORTS GUIDANCE For Balanced Score Card Development

Program Models. proficiency and content skills. After school tutoring and summer school available

Effective Early Literacy Support in Philadelphia Promoting Early Literacy Inside and Outside of the Classroom

NYC Department of Education Flexible Programming Guide. March 2012

English Learner Program Description White Bear Lake Area Schools

A COMPREHENSIVE K-3 READING ASSESSMENT PLAN. Guidance for School Leaders

LOS ANGELES UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT Policy Bulletin

ARLINGTON PUBLIC SCHOOLS SPECIAL EDUCATION PROGRAMS AND SERVICES

TAS Instructional Program Design/ Scientifically-based Instructional Strategies

GUIDE TO BECOMING A READING CORPS SITE

SPECIAL EDUCATION SERVICE DELIVERY PLAN

CALIFORNIA S TEACHING PERFORMANCE EXPECTATIONS (TPE)

Best Practices. Using Lexia Software to Drive Reading Achievement

Crockett Elementary Response to Intervention Guide

Monroe Public Schools English Language Learner Program Description and Guidelines Revised, Fall 2012

Writing Instructionally Appropriate IEPs

Education. University Induction Clear Credential Program explore. experience. expand.

Niskayuna Elementary Program

Compton Unified School District. Master Plan for English Learners

LOS ANGELES UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT REFERENCE GUIDE

Center on Education Policy, Reading First: Locally appreciated, nationally troubled

Ongoing Progress Monitoring Across All Tiers of Support. MDCPS Office of Academics, Accountability and School Improvement

Van Meter Community Schools K-12 Lau Plan for Serving English Language Learners

Successful RtI Selection and Implementation Practices

Office of Special Education. Programs & Resources Guide for Families

What is Response to Intervention (RTI)? How does it work in schools with Inclusion?

Colorado Springs School District 11

GRANDVIEW INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT ENGLISH AS A SECOND LANGUAGE POLICY AND PROCEDURES

Recommended School Based Teams

Transcription:

TITLE: NUMBER: MEM- 5738.3 ISSUER: Elementary Guidelines for Reading Assessment and Screening Procedures for Intensive (Tier 3) Instruction and Interventions at Grades 4, 5, and 6 (as applicable) Gerardo Loera, Chief Academic Officer School Support ROUTING All Elementary Schools ESC Instructional Superintendents ESC Elementary Directors Principal Leaders DATE: March 5, 2015 MAJOR CHANGES: BACKGROUND This memo replaces MEM-5738.2. It provides schools with guidance on eligibility and assessment criteria for intensive intervention (Tier 3) for all students, including English Learners. The Introduction of the English Language Arts/English Language Development Framework for California Public Schools states, because learners differ, they may require different types and levels of support in order to achieve their full potential. Schools must have clear plans in place for refocusing and intensifying instruction for students who experience difficulties. Schools can provide support through a systemic multi-tiered approach defined as: Tier 1 Core (effective first instruction) Tier 2 Strategic (more time on specific skills and/or strategies) Tier 3 Intensive (intense and focused instruction maximizing time) Students targeted for this intense instruction are identified by their chronically low performance on one or more literacy measures, i.e., phonemic awareness, decoding, reading fluency, vocabulary development, and comprehension. As outlined in the District s instructional plan, schools should use a multi-tiered system of support to address the foundational skill deficits and accelerate student learning. Multiple measures of assessment should be used to determine appropriate levels of support. Intensive instruction and intervention provides targeted and specific teaching, and includes additional time and the use of targeted curricula, pedagogy, and instruction. It requires optimized academic engaged time, in a smaller group size, with greater frequency and duration. This instruction is based on student data and is monitored to determine students response to effective core instruction and interventions. Intensive instruction and intervention (Tier 3) is School Support Page 1 of 7 March 5, 2015

for students with the most severe reading delays. Intensive instruction and intervention is not synonymous with special education services, but rather a critical step to provide students with a more narrowly focused curriculum that is targeted and intensive. Some students with disabilities also require intensive instruction and intervention and should be included in Tier 3 programs. INSTRUCTIONS: I. IDENTIFICATION BY SCREENING STUDENTS Multiple measures should be used to determine if there is a need to increase instructional time, adjust instructional strategies or teaching techniques, and/or implement supplemental and/or replacement curricula. The purpose of multiple assessment measures is to ensure an effective match of the appropriate intervention to students needs, by identifying why students are having reading difficulty, determining what the next steps in instruction should be to remediate that difficulty, and monitoring progress throughout the course of instruction. This should be done in a collaborative discussion using structures in place such as Student Success Team (SST) and/or Language Appraisal Team (LAT) and including the following possible representatives: School administrator Psychologist Grade level teachers including RST and/or intervention teacher EL Expert, if student is an EL A. Initial Screening for EO, EL, IFEP, and RFEP and Students with Disabilities For the 2015-2016 school year, the following data points should be considered to identify EO, EL, IFEP, RFEP and students with disabilities needing intensive intervention. At-risk student scores: 1. Analysis of CCSS Writing Interim Assessments Mid-Year & Spring that demonstrates significant weaknesses in production of writing 2. DIBELS Next and Text Reading and Comprehension (TRC) End of Year scores*: a Grade 3 Accuracy: 93% and below Words Correct: 0-79 wpm DAZE: 0-13 words (For 2014-15 Grade 3 students showing a decline of School Support Page 2 of 7 March 5, 2015

academic performance from beginning of year to present, administer Benchmark 3 of DIBELS Next End of Year) Text Reading and Comprehension: L or below b Grade 4 Accuracy: 94% and below are at risk Words Correct: 0-94 wpm are at risk DAZE: 0-19 words are at risk Text Reading and Comprehension: P or below c Grade 5 Accuracy: 96% and below are at risk Words Correct: 0-104 wpm are at risk DAZE: 0-17 words are at risk Text Reading and Comprehension: S or below d Grade 6 (elementary campuses) Accuracy: 95% and below are at risk Words Correct: 0-94 wpm are at risk DAZE: 0-14 words are at risk Text Reading and Comprehension: V or below For more information on DIBELS Next Cut Points refer to the following link: http://dibels.org/papers/dibelsnextbenchmarkgoals.pdf B. Grades 4, 5/6 Additional Decision Points for English Learners (ELs) A student is expected to increase a minimum of one ELD level per year as measured by the CELDT. When considering an EL for intensive instruction, the principal or designee should convene a Language Appraisal Team (LAT) meeting to review all the identifying data points. The following data points from the 2014-2015 school year should be considered for the 2015-2016 school year to identify the ELs in Grades 4 and 5/6, who have been enrolled in US schools since Kindergarten (equating to a minimum of 5 consecutive years of instruction), needing intensive intervention. These students are potential Long-Term English Learners if not reclassified before the start of their sixth year of instruction. These students require both specialized ELD and Literacy Instruction to meet reclassification criteria. For students with less than five years who are not making benchmark progress refer to the Language Appraisal Team (LAT) and EL Master Plan for guidance. At-risk student scores: A CELDT sub-score of 2 or below in reading or writing. School Support Page 3 of 7 March 5, 2015

C. Possible Additional Screening Measures for Diagnostic Purposes To ensure that students needs are explicitly addressed, the following measures are highly recommended to determine intensity of instruction levels. Students who met the decision points noted above and score at an intensive level in the following assessments should receive intensive instruction and intervention. Students who score at benchmark to strategic levels in the following mentioned assessments need further problem-solving analysis to determine the level and type of interventions required. 1. LANGUAGE! Reading Scale (LRS) Placement Test* 2. LRS Placement Decisions Lexile Scores: 430 or below Intensive 431 and above Strategic or Benchmark 3. CORE Phonics Survey* This test assesses phonics and phonics-related skills that have a high rate of application in decoding skills. Testing directions and assessments can be downloaded at http://achieve.lausd.net/page/1665 > Elementary Language Arts > Assessments > Tier 3 (Replacement Program) Assessments > CORE Phonics Survey. Intensive Scores: a. Letter Names/Sounds 0-64 b. Decoding 0-24 c. Reading 0-24 *For access to LRS or Core Phonics Survey, contact: Marjorie Proctor, Coordinator, Elementary ELA at 213-241-5686 or marjorie.proctor@lausd.net. II. IMPLEMENTATION Each school site is responsible for providing and ensuring academic interventions are of high quality, increasing intensity and duration to address the identified student need, and can be executed with integrity. While core content is the foundation for all instruction and intervention, differentiated support at this level may call for a supplemental curriculum (approved by the State for 4 th through 6 th grade). The Treasures program alone might not offer the intensity, frequency, and duration needed for students meeting the assessment criteria explained earlier, and as such cannot be used as an adequate, stand-alone intervention for Tier 3 support. The Treasures supplementary Triumphs is similarly not a stand-alone program to be used for Tier 3 or as a replacement of the core program. III. MATERIALS As the District continues to move to a more autonomous system of School Support Page 4 of 7 March 5, 2015

operation, it will be the school site s decision and obligation to use evidenced-based and validated methods and/or programs that will best meet the needs of students needing intensive interventions. Schools may choose to utilize a standard protocol intervention that is scientifically research-based and has a high probability of producing a change for a large number of students. LANGUAGE! Focus On English Learning, 4 th Edition is an example of an evidence-based replacement program. The Division of Special Education and the Office of Curriculum, Instruction, and School Support are collaborating to support schools that choose to use this particular intervention and embrace a collaborative model of instruction for Tier 3 instruction. Another example of an evidence-based replacement program is Read 180. Please reference MEM-5737.3 for more information regarding this replacement program. IV. DEVELOPING INFRASTRUCTURE As site administrators formulate matrices and make staffing decisions for the next year, these options for class formations should be considered: 1. Providing a dedicated 2-hour block of instructional time in order to maximize the ability to support the intensive needs of these students, moving them as quickly as possible back into Core instruction with Tier 2 support. 2. Providing 45-60 minutes of English Language Development/Standard Academic Language Development, in accordance with the English Learner Master Plan. The following should be considered for ELs in Grades 4 and 5/6, who have been enrolled in US schools since Kindergarten (equating to a minimum of 5 consecutive years of instruction) needing intensive intervention: 1. ELs with ELD proficiency levels of 1-3 should receive the 2-hour Literacy instruction within LANGUAGE! Focus On English Learning, 4 th Edition and ELD targeted instruction for their EL proficiency level. 2. ELs with ELD proficiency levels of 4 or 5 should receive the 2-hour Literacy instruction within LANGUAGE! Focus On English Learning, 4 th Edition and ELD targeted instruction for their EL proficiency level. 3. ELs with disabilities in grades 4, 5/6 in the special day program who participate on the general education curriculum and who have limited reading skills are strongly encouraged to be placed in intense literacy intervention in lieu of the core program (e.g., Treasures). Grade level teaming possibilities: 1. Schools should not develop self-contained classrooms for Tier 3 School Support Page 5 of 7 March 5, 2015

instruction for the entirety of the day but should departmentalize for the intensive intervention block and ELD period. 2. Co-teaching between the general education and special education teacher is a best practice and provides for inclusive, integrated instruction. 3. Grouping Grade 4 & 5 students in need of intensive intervention together for the Literacy/Language Development block. 4. Use of human resources-intervention teachers/coordinators, resource specialists, instructional coaches, special and general education teachers to support provision of Tier 3 instruction. Other considerations 1. Only teachers who are authorized with a multi-subject credential are to be the teachers of record for Tier 3 replacement programs. 2. Non-disabled students (those who do not have an IEP) may not be placed in a class that is solely taught by a special education teacher. The class must be co-taught with a general education teacher. 3. Resource Specialist Program (RSP) teachers may not carry a roster or be assigned to teach this program. Per BUL-1258.1, RSP teachers are not authorized to provide pull-out/separated instruction that replaces the core program. Students receiving RSP services who are being targeted for intensive reading instruction must receive that instruction from a general education teacher, though RSP collaborative support may be designated by the IEP team. However, given the intensive nature of this program, RSP support (e.g., coplanning or co-teaching) is not usually needed. 4. To the greatest extent possible, students with disabilities should be integrated with their nondisabled peers for this instruction. V. CONTINUING STUDENTS Grade 4 students who have received a year s instruction in a standard protocol intervention program, such as LANGUAGE! Focus On English Learning, 4 th Edition, should continue from where their instruction left off as they move into Grade 5. Students new to the program should begin with Book A. This may create two sections of instruction, those students new to the program, and those continuing within the program. Any student who has successfully completed both Books A and B at the elementary level must move back into core instruction, and receive the necessary strategic supports and interventions (Tier 2) within core instruction. Book C from LANGUAGE! Focus On English Learning, 4 th Edition is not appropriate for the elementary level with a possible exception of a sixth grade classroom at elementary level. School Support Page 6 of 7 March 5, 2015

ASSISTANCE: For assistance or further information, please contact Literacy/Language Arts Elementary Coordinator Marjorie Proctor (213) 241-5333 or by email at marjorie.proctor@lausd.net. For assistance with Special Education issues, contact Diana Inouye at (213) 241-6701 or by email at diana.inouye@lausd.net. For assistance with English Learner issues, please contact Elementary Coordinator for English Learner Instruction Carla Gutierrez at (213) 241-5582 or by email at carla.gutierrez@lausd.net. School Support Page 7 of 7 March 5, 2015