The Mashburn Voice
Spring Semester 2022
University of Central Arkansas Mashburn Center for Learning
The Mashburn Center for Learning creates resources and opportunities that encourage Arkansas teachers to promote a sense of purpose, hope, academic achievement, and resilience for all learners as they experience barriers to learning.
Website: https://uca.edu/else/mashburncenter/
Twitter: @AALIMashburn
Directors' Corner | Dr. Patty Kohler Evans and Dr. Renee Calhoon
“Though I do not believe that a plant will spring up where no seed has been, I have great faith in a seed… Convince me that you have a seed there, and I am prepared to expect wonders.” — Henry David Thoreau
As we marvel at the rain, the hail, the warm spring days, and the cool spring nights, we also glance back at the year that is rapidly coming to an end. Many of us might be shouting for joy, while others of us are shaking our heads, wondering what happened to August through May. We may find ourselves actually doing a little head shaking and shouting at the same time. Either way, there is no doubt that we have been watching each of you plant tiny yet mighty seeds. As Thoreau beautifully stated, we have been prepared all year to expect wonders, and as always, the seeds you have planted are beginning to spring forth and blossom. We are so grateful for each of our contributors this year, and we would be remiss if we did not take a moment to pause, reflect, and say, “Thank you!”. With each new seedling, we know Dr. Mashburn’s dream is one step closer to fulfillment.
In our fall issue of the UCA Mashburn Voice, we introduced you to how SIM aligns with the Response to Intervention (RTI) process and compared it to the SIM Content Literacy Continuum. In this Spring issue, we explore Levels 3, 4, and 5 of the CLC and Tiers II and III of the RTI process with more examples from our Arkansas educators. For additional information on the Content Literacy Continuum and SIM Content Enhancement Routines, check out the links at the end of this issue.
We have asked several of our partners to share some of their work implementing the Strategic Instruction Model in various settings. Dr. Keith Lenz once again opens with an overview of how SIM aligns with the Response to Intervention (RTI) process. You may remember these opening paragraphs from the fall issue. This is followed by four “from the field” reports. Karen Robinson, Merica Howie, and Gia Taylor discuss their work with teachers from across the state in providing professional development and follow-up coaching in several Learning Strategies (Tiers I & II). Another Professional Developer, Kandi Cowart, is actually working with students in Northwest Arkansas, implementing XTreme Reading (Tier III). Dr. Renee Calhoon shares her work with RTI (Tiers I, II, III) to provide a comprehensive picture of the CLC levels 1-5.
Connecting SIM to RTI Through the Content Literacy Continuum Part 2 | B. Keith Ben-Hanania Lenz
Since the development work of the Strategic Instruction Model in the 1970’s, the focus has always been on helping students with differing abilities, including students with disabilities, meet the demands of and be successful in the general education setting. As a result, a strategic approach to instruction for students who struggle with learning content as they pass through the upper elementary curriculum and into the rigorous secondary curriculum, looks different compared to how it is implemented before they enter 4th grade. In 4th grade the curriculum begins to shift from developing the strategies and skills that are needed to learning content to applying the strategies and skills to learn content. This shift is characterized by an increase in expectations for students to learn content independently. In fact, the decrease in attention to how to learn is accompanied with an increased assumption that any necessary strategies and skills that are needed to learn content will be independently acquired by the student as a result of increased exposure and independent effort on the part of the student.
However, research does support this assumption. Numerous studies have shown that once specific in the use of literacy strategies and skills to learn content stops, literacy achievement (i.e., reading, writing, mathematics) significantly slows down or plateaus. For example, if a student leaves 6th grade reading at the 3rd grade level, we can predict, with only content area tutoring and accommodations and no targeted literacy instruction, that student will graduate from high school at about the 4th grade level.
With this likely outcome in mind, we can begin to think about what kind of interventions should be part of a content-centered secondary curriculum to support students who struggle to learn complex content. To address this challenge, researchers at the University of Kansas Center for Research on Learning (KUCRL) developed a framework specifically designed to help both general and special secondary educators plan and make decisions to increase student success. This framework is called the Content Learning Continuum (CLC). The CLC organizes the different interventions in SIM into an implementation and decision-making framework. In addition, the SMARTER Instructional Cycle helps teachers integrate collaboration, assessment, and progress monitoring into a cohesive support system to guide conversations around instructional decision making. Similar to the ideas associated with the Response to Intervention (RTI) framework that emphasizes the integration of assessment, providing differing tiers (or a continuum) of instructional intensity required for effective instruction, and guiding decision making; CLC emphasizes integrated secondary content-area assessment, providing a continuum (or tiers) of instruction linked to being successful in meeting the demands of the general education content-centered curriculum, and to guiding decisions about interventions across the continuum. The key point here is that the CLC provides a content-centered way of implementing RTI in secondary schools.
To help us understand how RTI and CLC are linked, let’s use a graphic organizer! Figure 1 shows a comparison of the tiers in RTI (on the left) and the levels of instruction in the CLC (on the right). As one might predict, RTI focuses on decision making around three tiers of instruction. Now, let’s take a look at the right column which depicts the levels and types of instruction provided in the CLC framework. Levels 1 & 2 of the CLC are aligned with RTI Tier I instruction. Level 3 in the CLC framework aligns with RTI Tier II instruction. The most intensive levels of CLC are Levels 4 & 5, which align with RTI Tier III. Finally, on the right of the five CLC levels, printed vertically, are Language Support interventions and Strategic Tutoring. These are listed because both tutoring and language support are needed for students across tiers or levels of instruction.
CLC Instructional Levels and Critical Questions
To better understand the types of interventions used and the decisions that are made at each of the CLC levels, a specific question is associated with each level.
Level 3. Intensive Strategy Instruction. How can we provide more intensive strategy instruction to targeted students when embedded strategy instruction is insufficient? Special education teachers, literacy teachers, and other support personnel provide more intensive instruction through additional learning experiences. These may be provided in the general education classroom, in a pullout program, through the offering of a separate course, or through beyond-school tutoring programs. Assessments for screening and ongoing data-based decision making are put in place to help identify students who may profit from these courses. These students are generally those who minimally have developed the decoding skills and fluency levels associated with reading proficiency at the third- to fourth grade level and need to develop the comprehension strategies to successfully meet the literacy demands of the core curriculum.
The Strategic Instruction Model (SIM) and RTI | Mrs. Karen Robinson
The Strategic Instruction Model (SIM) and RTI have been the heart of the work in Southeast Arkansas in addressing the needs of struggling learners. Much work has been done in the state of Arkansas to address K-3 learners, but 4th grade and up has been a work in progress. Schools have identified that many struggling learners have the decoding part of reading down, but the language comprehension piece is missing. I hear teachers say all the time, “They can say the words, but they have no idea what they have read.” This is where SIM comes in. I have used the Acquisition strand of Learning Strategies in small group instruction (Tier 2) and also have shown teachers how to embed the strategies within Tier One instruction. The Inference Strategy has been successful in many of my schools because students do not have a strategic way of approaching a text and answering the questions that are inferential. The Inference Strategy teaches a step-by-step approach to tackle text and it also instructs students on the different types of questions and where to find the answers. Students have to find clues or evidence to back up every question within the text. This is a lifelong skill, not only for any standardized assessment, but just being able to pull information from text in a concise way. For example, I used this strategy successfully with a college student who was having trouble passing her Reading CORE Praxis. She ended up passing the writing portion of the Writing CORE Praxis while we were learning the strategy because of what she had learned about finding evidence in the Inference Strategy. Once students learn the strategy, teachers emphasize doing the strategy with speed and using it outside of the intervention setting. Students have grown in their ACT Aspire scores and in their classwork just by learning a strategic way of approaching text with questions. Teachers have learned a more explicit way of teaching students who struggle. The Learning Strategies Curriculum has many strands of learning to address the needs of struggling students from grades 4-12. Once schools identify what areas of need students have, the Learning Strategies Curriculum has a Strategy for you!
Proficiency in Sentence Writing: A Tier II Strategy | Merica Howie, OUR Arkansas Education Service Cooperative
Ozarks Unlimited Resources (OUR) Educational Cooperative has been offering SIM Routines and Strategies professional development sessions for more than a decade and is now expanding SIM offerings to include video, online, Zoom, hybrid, and live sessions to support teachers in offering targeted interventions for students in grades 4-12. One of the most popular Learning Strategies sessions has been the Fundamentals and Proficiency in Sentence Writing. Several area schools have implemented the Sentence Writing strategies in a variety of ways:
Omaha Elementary is building Sentence Writing into their grade level curriculum to prevent any student from falling through the cracks;
Berryville Middle and High Schools are using SIM Content Enhancement Routines in ELA and social studies classrooms with a variety of Learning Strategies supports (including Sentence Writing) in Special Education and English Language Learning classrooms;
Forest Heights Elementary School in Harrison is implementing Sentence Writing to support 3rd and 4th grade resource students in getting off to a great start with solid sentences.
Oark School is implementing Sentence Writing in middle and high school resource classes to bring student writing up to grade level.
Harrison High School is implementing a variety of Learning Strategies in their Special Education classes.
Amanda Gist Elementary in Cotter is implementing Sentence Writing in their 5th and 6th grade Special Education classes.
Western Grove High School is using a variety of Learning Strategies (including Sentence Writing) to support both Special Education and interventions in literacy;
Searcy County is using Sentence Writing to close gaps during their intervention time for grades 7-8; and
Lead Hill School is using a variety of SIM Learning Strategies (including Sentence Writing) to target interventions for sophomores.
As a OUR Literacy Specialist and SIM Professional Developer, I have been coaching teachers at each of these schools to enhance effectiveness and maintain fidelity to the research. Students are showing progress in their writing assignments, motivation, and application outside the school setting.
Main Idea Learning Strategy : A Tier II Strategy | Gia Taylor, Northcentral Arkansas Education Service Cooperative
Recently I had the opportunity to offer the Main Idea Strategy professional development virtually. Teachers looking to help students gain comprehension skills attended from all over the state. This work is so very important because as students advance in grade level, they transition from "learning to read" to "reading to learn". They are not only asked to read and comprehend text books, but also are expected to read independently and take notes from lectures. Many students struggle to decipher what information is truly important. The SIM Learning Strategies give students the tools to access and make sense of content. I am looking forward to coaching and supporting the teachers who attended this PD. Through the teachers' data collection, I am confident we will see the positive impact that this work has on student learning.
Level 4. Intensive Basic Skill Instruction. How can we teach the foundational literacy skills needed to learn the strategies needed to independently learn critical content? Special education teachers, reading specialists, and speech-language pathologists team to develop intensive and coordinated instructional experiences designed to address several literacy deficits. Special education teachers and reading specialists will most likely deliver these services. They also assist content teachers in making appropriate adaptations in content instruction to accommodate severe literacy deficits. Intensive instruction in listening, speaking, and writing can also be part of these services. Services may be delivered one-to-one, in small groups, in a pullout program, through the offering of a separate course, or through beyond-school programs.
Xtreme Reading and RTI | Mrs. Kandi Cowart
I was introduced to the Xtreme Reading Program several years ago and was a believer immediately in what it had to offer my students and me. The mission of the Xtreme Reading Program is to empower adolescent learners to reach academic goals and to teach them the strategies, habits of learning, and knowledge regarding reading and literacy that are required to thrive in the 21st century. In addition, the Xtreme Reading curriculum is appropriate for students who exhibit the following: poor reading fluency, small sight vocabularies, limited understanding of word and multiple word meanings, limited background and conceptual knowledge, and demonstrate few skills in using strategies that enhance understanding and remembering oral and written language. Due to it being a comprehensive program that is designed to provide consistent, intensive, and explicit instruction that struggling adolescent readers need to become competent and confident readers, I knew I had to learn more. I wanted my students at Washington Junior High in Bentonville, Arkansas to participate in a class where the Xtreme Reading curriculum was being taught. I wanted them to have the opportunity to become strong readers and stronger students.
I currently teach the Xtreme Reading curriculum in two of my classes. The classes are made up of students who are consistently scoring below grade level on MAP tests and ACT Aspire. As a result of teaching the curriculum, my students seem to be extremely proud of accomplishing tasks they were unable to complete on the pretests. They are also really enjoying our guided reading novels. I cannot wait to see how their MAP scores increase at the end of the school year.
Level 5. Therapeutic Intervention. How can we help students learn the underlying language skills needed to acquire content literacy skills and strategies? Speech-language pathologists deliver curriculum-relevant language therapy in collaboration with special education and other support personnel who are teaching literacy. Speech-language pathologists collaborate with special education teachers to assist content teachers in making appropriate modifications or accommodations in content instruction to address the needs of students with language disorders. Speech-language pathologists work with special education teachers to help students with language disorders acquire learning strategies.
Finally, across the five levels of the Content Literacy Continuum (CLC), educators are required to support instruction with Strategic Tutoring and Language Support to ensure that students receive that they need to be successful at each CLC level. Strategic tutoring helps students learn and apply learning strategies as a part of tutoring to complete assignments and study for tests. Language support provides curriculum-relevant language therapy in collaboration with special education and other support personnel who are teaching literacy.
Although professional development is required to implement the CLC, it is more appropriate to conceptualize CLC adoption as a school-improvement initiative requiring more than professional development. Adopting the CLC is framed in the context of helping schools meet their school-improvement goals. Serious attention must be paid to tapping into or creating the infrastructures to promote individual and systemic change, including data-based decision making, effective leadership activities, and the creation of professional learning communities.
The Content Literacy Continuum: Putting it all Together | Dr. Renee Calhoon
During my time as principal at Cabot Middle School North, I had the opportunity to learn with other educators about the Content Literacy Continuum (CLC) and how it was a framework that could be used to assist us with making informed decisions for meeting the literacy needs of all students. As we learned more, we started to recognize the connections between the CLC and RTI for academics, Backwards Design, PLCs, common planning, formative assessments, and much more. Due to the close connections this model had with the initiatives we were attempting to implement in our building, we decided to use the CLC Framework to enhance what we were already doing as well as to determine what professional learning was needed to meet the needs of both teachers and students. We began by using data to create a system of support and safety nets for all students as well as professional development plans to support the learning of educators who would be working at all levels of the CLC. Figure 2 provides an overview of what decisions were made at each level of the CLC and how each aligned to RTI for academics.
As a result of using the CLC Framework, teachers became more collaborative and intentional with planning for literacy instruction during PLCs as well as providing learning opportunities in a partnership manner with students. In addition, students started learning strategies that helped them become more independent learners in the general education classrooms. Another positive outcome achieved was our speech-language pathologist learning the SIM Learning Strategies along with special educators so she could assist them with making appropriate modifications or accommodations to address the needs of students with language disorders. She also worked with our special education teachers to help students with language disorders learn the SIM Learning Strategies in the classroom.
To sum it up, the CLC Framework assisted us with making strategic decisions that provided our students with learning opportunities to gain skills needed to help them become more independent learners and teachers with professional learning opportunities that enhanced their knowledge and skills for meeting increasing academic demands, high-stakes testing, and ultimately the specific needs of their students. As you can see, the CLC Framework resulted in a win - win situation for all involved!
In our next volume, fall 2022, we will weave our SIM CLC work through the UCA Mashburn Center for Learning with the Arkansas Division of Elementary and Secondary Education (DESE) emphasis in implementation of effective inclusive practices. We look forward to sharing with you. In the meantime, we hope you have an amazing summer. Plant some seeds, and watch them grow!