School Operations: Report Writing Template

for

Name of School

Date:________________________

Team Members Preparing Report:

_______________________

_______________________

_______________________

INTRODUCTION

Developed by New Zealand educator Marie M. Clay, Reading Recovery® is a short-term intervention for the lowest-achieving children in literacy in the first grade. Reading Recovery children meet individually with a specially trained teacher for 30 minutes each day for an average of 12-20 weeks. The goal is to develop effective reading and writing strategies and reach the average classroom range of literacy performance by year-end.

Because proficient readers and writers develop early, Reading Recovery is an early intervention. There is strong evidence that retention in grade level and long-term remediation efforts lead to lack of self-esteem, reduced motivation and school dropout. Reading Recovery has a strong track record of preventing literacy failure for many first graders through early intervention. Replication studies have shown that a large majority of children with full programs have been successful in reaching average range literacy performance. There is also evidence across several countries that the effects of Reading Recovery are long-lasting.

Because the goal is successful performance within an average classroom literacy setting, children are discontinued as soon as they perform strongly performance on the Observation Survey (Clay, 1993) and demonstrate a self-extending system. They are expected to continue to learn on their own and to demonstrate the ability to work well within their classroom settings.

Initial teacher training is for one academic year with no loss of service to children. The key to the successful implementation of Reading Recovery is the three-level training model: university trainers, teacher leaders, district- or site-level teacher leaders and school-based teachers. Using a one-way glass screen for observing and talking about lessons with children, teachers in training become sensitive observers of students’ reading and writing behaviors. Trained teachers participate in ongoing ‘continuing contact’ sessions, which provide opportunities to further develop their skills.

DESCRIPTION OF NAME OF SCHOOL

[Use the following guidelines to describe your school and the Reading Recovery program.]

• [Any general information about the school, including name of district or site]
• [The year in which your school initiated Reading Recovery and any important background information.]
• [Names of site coordinator and other administrators closely involved with the RR program implementation. Name of teacher leader(s) and teachers serving the school.]
• [Description of teachers including trained or in-training in Reading Recovery, educational qualifications and professional experience. ]
• [Teachers' number of slots, changes in daily teaching loads, average number of RR children per teacher.]
• [Add any other important information specific to the school.]

There are many implementation factors that can influence Reading Recovery program success, including the role of Reading Recovery in the school, the level of coverage, cost-effectiveness, average number of sessions and weeks, starting dates and missed lessons, teacher selection and development, use of data and support by administrators and the school team.

[Here, you can discuss major issues raised by the data and make recommendations for subsequent school years. Your experience and judgment of the school operations is critical. You can support your insights by quoting or coding and summarizing the qualitative comments. As you write, reflect on your experiences and the qualitative data as you work through the following questions.]

Cost-effectiveness

In Name of School, Reading Recovery is funded by the following sources: [Name the sources. You may also wish to highlight any specific sources of funding applicable to your site and the implications of funding on future maintenance/expansion.]

Level of Coverage

Full “coverage” is when there is sufficient trained teacher time available to serve all of the children defined as needing the service in the school or the district. Schools and districts move to full coverage over time. Full coverage will dramatically decrease the number of children with difficulties.

In this school, there are [Insert number] first graders and [insert number] of first-grade classrooms. Consequently, the level of coverage was [Insert total number who need Reading Recovery but who are not being served, and this number as a percentage of Total number of first-graders.] When there are sufficient trained teachers available to serve all of the children who need the service in the school or the district, the number of children with difficulties will decrease dramatically. The level of coverage for this school is [fill in a percentage].

[Speak to the need for increased coverage in some schools. Discuss the data if appropriate and any plans in your school for working toward full coverage.]

Average Number of Sessions and Weeks

Instructional time is a key aspect of efficiency and effectiveness, and daily lessons are crucial to the success of Reading Recovery. With commitment to daily lessons, more children should be served across an academic year. Table 4 shows the average number of weeks and sessions of Reading Recovery instruction received by children in each of the five status categories. The data show that [add comments on your data like “discontinued children averaged more sessions per week than children in other categories,” or “the number of lessons per week signals a cause for concern,” etc.]

Table 4: Average Number Of Weeks And Sessions Of Reading Recovery Instruction

Notes: Mean Sessions per week is the average number of sessions received per week of instruction for each Reading Recovery child.

Any differences in n between this table and total group in Table 1.1 represent cases with missing data (weeks or sessions).

Source: NDEC

Missed Lessons

Table 5 shows the number of missed lessons by reason. The most common reasons for missed lessons are [add narrative to explain missed lessons, e.g. student mobility, illness etc. for your school.]

Table 5 Mean Number Of Reading Recovery Sessions Missed By End-Of-Program Status

Notes: ‘Number of students’ refers to the number of students for whom data were available for that measure.
Source: NDEC

CONCLUSION

[Write a paragraph to summarize Reading Recovery program implementation in your school. Refer to NDEC School Reports for the number of children served, outcomes for all children and current status of former RR children. Using Moore’s rubric, discuss implementation factors in the school which may have affected student outcome, such as level of coverage, average number of sessions and weeks, missed lessons and teacher or child characteristics.]

RECOMMENDATIONS

[Write a narrative or list specific recommendations for your school for next year. This is an opportunity to call attention to strengths and weaknesses in implementation and to recommend plans for improvement of Reading Recovery program delivery at the school. What support will be needed from teacher leaders, principals or superintendents?]

REFERENCES

     Clay, M. M. (1993). An observation survey of early literacy achievement. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

     Moore, P. & Cook, L. (1999). Rubric for assessing a school's operation of Reading Recovery. Center for Literacy, University of Maine.

     National Data Evaluation Center (June, 2002). Data collection procedures for Reading Recovery and Descubriendo la Lectura, 2002-2003. The Ohio State University: College of Education: School of Teaching and Learning.

     Reading Recovery Council of North America. A principal's guide to Reading Recovery.