Oregon Reading First February 2004 Projectwide Reading Results

Oregon Reading First February, 2004 Project-wide Reading Results: Interpreting Student Performance Data and Designing Instructional Interventions Institute for the Development of Educational Achievement College of Education University of Oregon 1

Acknowledgments § Oregon Department of Education § Institute for the Development of Educational Achievement, College of Education, University of Oregon § U. S. Department of Education, Office of Special Education Programs § Oregon Reading First Supplemental and Intervention Curriculum Review Panel 2

Content Development Content developed by: Edward J. Kame’enui, Ph. D. Professor, College of Education University of Oregon Hank Fien University of Oregon Additional support: Patrick Kennedy-Paine Katie Tate University of Oregon 3

Copyright § All materials are copy written and should not be reproduced or used without expressed permission of Dr. Edward J. Kame’enui or Dr. Deborah C. Simmons. Selected slides were reproduced from other sources and original references cited. 4

IBR Foundational Features: Translating Research into Practice : e d i w l o o Sch & All Each Prev entio n Orien ted Res Foc ults use d lly a c i f i t Sciend Base 5

IBR Guiding Questions 1. 2. 3. 4. Today’s Focus 5. 6. Goals: What outcomes do we want for our students in our state, district, and schools? Knowledge: What do we know and what guidance can we gain from scientifically based reading research? Progress Monitoring Assessment: How are we doing? What is our current level of performance as a school? As a grade? As a class? As an individual student? Outcome Assessment: How far do we need to go to reach our goals and outcomes? Core Instruction: What are the critical components that need to be in place to reach our goals? Differentiated Instruction: What more do we need to do and what instructional adjustments need to be made? 6

Objectives: What You Will Learn and Do The objectives of today’s session are to: 1. Examine DIBELS outcomes for a model district. 2. Review fall and winter Oregon Reading First project-wide student performance data. 3. Examine the kinds of information available from DIBELS reports. 7

Instructional Status Terminology Quarterly Benchmark Goals Final Benchmark Goals and Later Low Risk Established Some Risk At Risk Emerging Deficit 8

Establishing A Baseline Of Performance for a New Program Model District - End of Year Histogram - ORF, Year 1 28% Low risk for reading difficulties 34% Some risk for reading difficulties 38% At risk for reading difficulties 9

Evaluating Response to Efforts Model District - End of Year Histogram - ORF, Year 2 After changes in curricular program, instruction, time, professional development: 57% Low risk for reading difficulties 20% Some risk for reading difficulties 22% At risk for reading difficulties 10

Oregon Reading First Beginning of Year Kindergarten ISF 41% (n=1 O 36) Established 25% (n= 621) Emerging 34% (n= 858) Deficit 11

Oregon Reading First Mid Year Kindergarten ISF 36% (n= 839) Established 46% (n=1 O 71) Emerging 19% (n= 434) Deficit 12

Oregon Reading First - Single School Mid Year Kindergarten ISF 41% (n=28) Established 44% (n=3 O) Emerging 15% (n=1 O) Deficit 13

Oregon Reading First Beginning of Year Kindergarten LNF 32% (n= 8 OO) Established 22% (n= 558) Emerging 46% (n=1157) Deficit 14

Oregon Reading First Mid Year Kindergarten LNF 41% (n= 965) Established 21% (n= 5 OO) Emerging 38% (n= 9 O 1) Deficit 15

Oregon Reading First - Single School Mid Year Kindergarten LNF 56% (n=38) Established 18% (n=12) Emerging 26% (n=18) Deficit 16

Oregon Reading First Beginning of Year Grade 1 PSF 23% (n= 596) Established 41% (n=1 O 34) Emerging 36% (n= 922) Deficit 17

Oregon Reading First Mid Year Grade 1 PSF 72% (n=1759) Established 21% (n= 5 O 2) Emerging 7% (n= 171) Deficit 18

Oregon Reading First - Single School Mid Year Grade 1 PSF 85% (n=53) Established 11% (n= 7) Emerging 3% (n= 2) Deficit 19

Oregon Reading First Beginning of Year Grade 1 NWF 26% (n= 651) Established 24% (n= 61 O) Emerging 51% (n=129 O) Deficit 20

Oregon Reading First Mid Year Grade 1 NWF 32% (n= 789) Established 41% (n= 991) Emerging 27% (n= 653) Deficit 21

Oregon Reading First - Single School Beginning of Year Grade 1 NWF 36% (n=23) Established 3 O% (n=19) Emerging 34% (n=22) Deficit 22

Oregon Reading First - Single School Mid Year Grade 1 NWF 5 O% (n=31) Established 42% (n=26) Emerging 8% (n= 5) Deficit 23

Oregon Reading First Beginning of Year Grade 2 ORF 29% (n= 714) Established 19% (n= 470) Emerging 51% (n=1254) Deficit 24

Oregon Reading First Mid Year Grade 2 ORF 38% (n= 857) Established 14% (n= 3 O 8) Emerging 48% (n=1 O 94) Deficit 25

Oregon Reading First - Single School Mid Year Grade 2 ORF 52% (n=32) Established 13% (n= 8) Emerging 34% (n=21) Deficit 26

Oregon Reading First Beginning of Year Grade 3 ORF 28% (n= 660) Established 25% (n= 585) Emerging 47% (n=1115) Deficit 27

Oregon Reading First Mid Year Grade 3 ORF 34% (n= 776) Established 24% (n= 548) Emerging 42% (n= 967) Deficit 28

Oregon Reading First - Single School Beginning of Year Grade 3 ORF 25% (n=17) Established 34% (n=23) Emerging 4 O% (n=27) Deficit 29

Oregon Reading First - Single School Mid Year Grade 3 ORF 43% (n=29) Established 34% (n=23) Emerging 24% (n=16) Deficit 30

Oregon Reading First Box Plot Mid Year Kindergarten ISF Benchmark goal for all students: 25 -35 correct initial sounds per minute in the middle of Kindergarten. • Students scoring 8 or more in the beginning of Kindergarten are likely to achieve the benchmark goal with effective instruction. 31

Oregon Reading First Box Plot Mid Year Grade 1 NWF Benchmark goal for all students: 50 -60 correct letter-sounds per minute in the middle of First Grade. • Students scoring 24 or more in the beginning of First Grade are likely to achieve the benchmark goal with effective instruction. 32

Oregon Reading First Box Plot Mid Year Grade 2 ORF Benchmark goal for all students: 90 correct words per minute at the end of Second Grade. • Students scoring 44 or more in the beginning of Second Grade are likely to achieve the benchmark goal with effective instruction. • Students scoring 68 or more in the middle of Second Grade are likely to achieve the benchmark goal with effective instruction. 33

Oregon Reading First Box Plot Mid Grade 3 ORF Benchmark goal for all students: 110 correct words per minute at the end of Third Grade. • Students scoring 77 or more in the beginning of Third Grade are likely to achieve the benchmark goal with effective instruction. • Students scoring 92 or more in the middle of Third Grade are likely to achieve the benchmark goal with effective instruction. 34