A note from Linda: Leadership in a Reading Revolution is two years old! Thanks for joining me on this journey. Don't forget you can click on "view in your browser" and read all previously sent newsletters.

Your work matters.

It’s the time of year when we have analyzed mid-year benchmark data, and we are working towards the end of the year with a renewed sense of urgency. The pressure is on for leaders and teachers, understandably. For many educators, their jobs depend on student performance and we care deeply about having an impact on student outcomes. Let’s dive into how we can have a larger impact during a time of year that feels like we are out of time.

Younger students

Many younger students’ mid-year assessments likely included some foundational skill benchmarks, such as the DIBELS 8 or Acadience assessments. (PS - I have a free course about the DIBELS 8 assessments) Typical assessments include Nonsense Word Fluency (NWF) and Oral Reading Fluency (ORF). We have analyzed students' results by going beyond the composite score by looking at each subtest to identify the lowest skill to begin instruction.

And what is our instructional response? We provide students with more practice in NWF and ORF, pulling pages that mimic the assessment. Here’s the thing, simply providing more practice will not change your current outcomes because you’re not providing targeted INSTRUCTION. You’re providing practice without offering corrections.

We aren’t getting deep or specific enough in our analysis to determine our instructional path forward. When we stop at the subtest without digging into the specific skills students need to design our instruction. Remember that an assessment like NWF helps us see which grapheme-phoneme relationships students are decoding easily (correct letter sounds, CLS) and how well they are decoding connected letters/sounds as whole words (whole words read, WWR). (**Is this new learning for you? Here is a quick reference from Acadience Learning about the NWF assessment.) If we aren’t uncovering the skills students need to learn in order to improve their decoding, we will continue to see the same results from their errors.

What if instead, we looked for patterns of letter-sound correspondences they have yet to master? How might that inform the type of explicit instruction we can provide so that we fill in any gaps in understanding or correct misunderstandings? What if we notice that students consistently read the correct letter sounds, but weren’t reading the words as whole words? This leads us to work with students on blending sounds, working on increased automaticity so that they do not have to sound words out but rather apply the alphabetic principle with efficiency.

Older students

Older students’ mid-year assessments most likely included some comprehension passages, asking students to read multiple passages and answer multiple choice standards-aligned questions. (Questions that aligned to the same standards assessed on the state test.) We’ve analyzed these assessment results deeply, figured out which passages presented issues (spoiler alert… it was probably an informational text) and looked for patterns in performance based on standards.

And what is our instructional response? We find more passages that have the standards-aligned questions students “need to practice” or we start doing an article a day so that they get more practice with informational text. Here’s the thing - simply having a student practice reading passages using your mnemonic device and answering questions will continue getting you the same results. Because you’re not TEACHING them anything new with regards to comprehension instruction. (Newsflash - reading directions is not instruction!)

We aren’t asking the right questions to help us determine our instructional path forward. Remember comprehension is a PROCESS and these traditional assessments are the PRODUCT of comprehension. If we aren’t uncovering the processes students’ used to comprehend, we will continue to scratch our heads about what to teach or lean on the mnemonic device.

What if instead we read the passages closely and asked the questions in The Reading Comprehension Blueprint as a guide? What might it reveal about why students found the passage challenging? Was there a text structure (or multiple) they aren’t familiar with? Were there complex sentence structures in the text? Was the text loosely cohesive and expected the reader to make more difficult connections to infer the meaning and develop a mental model?

There is a pattern in each of these circumstances: the questions we ask during our data analysis matter. And as leaders, it is our charge to work WITH teachers to ensure that they have both the guidance and time to ask the questions that direct them towards a better and more informed instructional response. And you’ll notice that both flowcharts have practice leading towards outcomes. So where is the difference? It lies with providing instruction then targeted practice rather than simply providing assessment practice. Children who spend time deepening their understanding with of skills needed for reading will perform better on the assessment, whether or not they’ve continued practicing the assessment.

Ensure your practice is aligned with what the evidence points to - students need to develop word recognition skills with automaticity while simultaneously developing their language comprehension skills. (What is named in The Simple View and Scarborough’s Rope; learn more here.) Check out previous newsletters for related reading:

• ​Diving Into Comprehension​
• ​Types of Skills​
• ​Standards Aren’t Instruction & Are Standards Enough?​
• ​Knowing Our Readers​

If this time of year feels as though you are out of time, spend it wisely by focusing on the targeted and specific instruction you can provide students. Stop focusing on giving them more assessment practice - it won’t get you the outcomes you seek.

Leadership Moves:

1. Ask better questions about students’ assessment results.
2. Stop allowing assessment practice to take the place of targeted instruction.
3. Support teachers in this work with time and space for reflection.

What does this mean for me?

It is not too late to check in on teachers’ instructional plans and the data used to inform them. Take a look at what teachers are doing in response to your data dives - are you seeing practice that looks like the assessments you provided at mid-year and will again at the year’s end? If so, stop and reflect on whether teachers are providing INSTRUCTION or providing ASSESSMENT PRACTICE. If you are observing the latter, make a change, starting with a data session that digs into the assessment results you have. What does it really tell you about the instruction students need?

Revolution Resources

​

Each month, I'm hosting a workshop for instructional coaches. Each workshop will align with the indicators in the Coaching System Assessment. Watch the recording from February's session and subscribe to my YouTube channel so you don't miss any upcoming recordings. Download the Coaching Log Audit handout: Coaching Log “Audit” (1).docx​ March's workshop, "The Coach's Role in an Improvement Cycle" will explore a coach's stance when teachers are in a Plan-Do-Check-Act improvement cycle. Register for March's workshop here

Coaching System Assessment Download the PDF: LRC Coaching System Assessment PDF - Final.pdf​ ​Watch the Deep Dive Series!

Literacy System Assessment​​ Download the PDF: LRC Literacy System Assessment PDF - Final.pdf​ ​Watch the introduction to this tool!

Listen, Linda (a Spotify playlist) I've collected all of my podcast guest appearances in one place. Make sure to follow along for new episodes as they come out! Listen, Linda • Linda Rhyne... Ep. 24: Using the Painted Es... PREVIEW   ​

Where have we been?

New Podcast Recording! I had the pleasure of joining April Smith on her podcast, The Science of Writing Instruction. We discussed how to use The Painted Essay to support structured writing for students. And of course, we gabbed about our shared passion for The Reading League! ​ Take a listen and be sure to leave April a review! Your download and feedback helps him grow his audience. The podcast is available across platforms. Listen to the episode

Mebane Early Literacy Summit I shared my session The Text Matters at the Mebane Early Literacy Summit in early February. In this session, we explored the differences between constrained and unconstrained skills to determine how they apply to standards-based comprehension instruction. Using The Reading Comprehension Blueprint questions, we engaged in a planning process that centers the text to determine what skills are required to access the text. This approach is applicable with any curriculum, as it uses the texts provided paired with student needs to determine the course of action. I also represented The Reading League North Carolina in multiple sessions.

The Literacy View Ep. 115: Leadership Matters Imagine my surprise when my colleague texted me to say, "this podcast is talking about YOUR article!" Say what? Faith and Judy hosted guests Pati Montgomery and Angie Hanlin to discuss leadership amidst the science of reading movement. They have a book coming out (yes, mine is pre-ordered) called It's Possible to help leaders with clear steps towards literacy success. My ASCD article, Why Leaders Must Learn the Science of Reading, is discussed in the first few minutes and linked in the show notes. (GASP - come pick me up off the floor!) Take a listen and be sure to leave a review! Your download and feedback helps them grow their audience. The podcast is available across platforms. Listen to the episode

Where can we connect? Bold font shows events at which I'm presenting. 7/9 - 7/10 - Get Engaged Coaching Con | Learn more here​ 10/8 - 10/10 The Reading League 9th Annual Conference | Learn more here​ ​ Check out my calendar