ISRP Study Findings

Many of you were thankful for the quick summary and annotated notes of the ELI Retention Guidance, so I thought I would so the same for the ISRP findings.

Highlights

• This portion of the code is set to take effect in 2018.
• Information about a 1-year waiver is not available yet.
• An estimated 25% (about 9,000) of Iowa’s 3rd graders are at risk for reading failure and may benefit from an ISRP.
• Study results show all three conditions were equally effective at preventing a decline of reading skills. This is encouraging!
• There was no statistically significant growth in any of the conditions.
• Median costs would range from $9.25M to $13.82M. Per pupil would range from $1,193 to $1,813.
• Page 4 indicates 5 potential challenges
  • planning
  • hiring
  • student participation
  • class sizes
  • monitoring student progress
• Page 5, “The Wallace Foundations found that students who attended quality summer programs subsequently had better school performance that their non-attending peers and that these benefits were exhibited for at least two years after participation” (McCombs et al., 2011) Yet, the study is unable at this time to determine if this is true for the students who attended the 2016 programs.
• With PD time, preparation and instructional time, teachers worked 110 hours.
• Page 15 displays a graph of the attrition of participation at different times of the study. Initial responses indicated 2,235 students may attend, 1,229 parents consented, 1,111 showed up and 876 students were present for the posttest.
  • Attrition was largest for females, students on free and reduced lunch, Black and Hispanic and those in Title 1 programs.
• Using the aReading computer adaptive test students in the ISRP pretest average was 482 which did increase to and average 485 on the posttest.
• Page 21 outlines the disaggregated results — this is worth a read!
• The bottom of page 21 offers something to think about: “…several teachers reported they did not like the scripted lessons in the treatment conditions or lower level print-based materials that focused more on decoding skills. These educators described preferring to use materials they believed had more motivational comprehension activities. Although it is not possible to determine with the available data, it may be that teachers’ beliefs led them to deliver instruction that was just beyond the abilities of the students most in need of learning foundational reading skills.”
• Across all three conditions, students in special education had lower performance than their peers.
• Page 24 has suggestions for policymakers and practitioners to consider to be better prepared for an intensive reading program.

Report of the 2016 Intensive Summer Reading Program (ISRP) Study

My annotations and highlights

Have a great weekend!

Early Literacy Retention Guidance – a few highlights!

Hi all!

There are a few things I pulled from the guidance that I felt were important to note. Of course, I would encourage you to read through the guidance to ensure you have a clear understanding of the requirements, yet this will help before you are able to do that!

• Goes into effect 2017-2018 school year.
• By Iowa Law, grade placement decisions are made at a local level.
• The decision to retain is not solely based on any one test, it is a collaborative decision.
• Students are promoted to 4th grade when they meet ANY ONE of the four criteria:
  • Meet proficiency standards on the statewide assessment in reading;
  • Are not persistently at risk;
  • Qualify for a Good Cause Exemption; and/or
  • Complete an Intensive Summer Reading Program.
• If they do not meet one of the above criteria, students must be considered for retention.
• Pay attention to Appendix B, page 16 – this page is a visual of the narrative found of pages 3-5
• The guidance also includes a timeline (page 7) which offers a suggested approach to communicating to parents, making summer school and retention decisions.
• Special Education Law and ELI law are separate. Students receiving SDI can not be denied benefits that others are offered (i.e. summer school).
• Students with an IEP are not exempt from a retention decision solely based on having an IEP. See page 9 in the guidance document for the Q&A around this topic.
• Summer 2018 waiver: Guidance on the application process for this is not out yet. There is not a timeline for this information at this time. If a school were to receive the waiver, retention would also be waived for the 2018 school year.

I read the guidance and annotated/highlighted what I thought were big ideas. You can view that version of the guidance here.

For a clean copy of the guidance, click here.

Sample letters have been created for you to adapt and assist in communication Click here to view those. To view a ppt created to share the highlights, click here.

Stay warm and enjoy the rest of your week!

 

Updated Retention Guidance!

earlyliteracyguidance_third-graderetention