THE CORE READING PROGRAMME

2018-2019 PROGRAMME REPORT

AMY DA COSTA, MSC., F/AOGPE

READING PROGRAMME COORDINATOR

GENERAL BASICS OF PROGRAMME STRUCTURE

The Reading Clinic offers tutoring for students with a pattern of dyslexia using the Orton-Gillingham approach. This is a multi-sensory approach to reading and spelling. It is a highly structured, phonetic and rule-based programme which has been found to be successful in helping those who struggle to learn the basic skills of reading and/or spelling due to specific learning differences.

 Students who have had an assessment and who have been identified as having a learning difference consistent with a specific reading disability/dyslexia are eligible for tutoring.  Students will usually receive 3 one-hour tutoring sessions per week by an Orton-Gillingham trained tutor.  Sessions take place either before or after school, or during the school day when provisions are made within the child’s class schedule.  Students are generally enrolled in the programme for approximately 2 years.  Students who have been enrolled for either 36 sessions or 4 months or more are tested in April/May each year to ascertain their current academic achievement level and recommendations for supports and continuation are made to the parents based on the child’s results.

PARTICIPANTS IN THE PROGRAMME (2018-19)

The continued focus of the Core Reading Programme has been on helping students in the early primary years that have a pattern of dyslexia. Students with dyslexia have relative weaknesses in working with the sounds of the language (phonological awareness) and/or with ‘rapid naming’. These weaknesses result in difficulties reading at the single word level and spelling and/or in doing so at an appropriate pace.

This year, given the large number of student enrollments, we continued to prioritize allocation of spaces for students with a clear pattern of dyslexia. We continued to include some students who have: weaker verbal abilities paired with exceptional non-verbal abilities (as long as there was a gap between this and their phonological awareness and/or rapid naming); students who despite phonological awareness and rapid naming being similar to that of his/her verbal abilities, have a weak visual discrimination for letters or words. Students who exhibit weaker language skills were referred to Speech and Language Services either concurrently or prior to tutoring depending on their level of language abilities. Care will be taken over time in paying attention to how each of these students with different profiles perform in the programme.

The number of students in programme has again exceeded the cap of 90 students, with 101 students receiving services at some point during the school year.

The following charts reflect the demographics of the 101 students enrolled (and receiving services) in the programme during the 2018-2019 school year.

Student by Type of School

The Core Reading Programme served students from 29 different schools:

8 private schools (54 students) 18 government schools (44 students) 2 home schools (2 students)

1 adult (1 student)

The ratio of private and public school students has remained relatively consistent with last year’s data. Government School students increased by 1% and Adult students decreased by 1%.

Sex of Students

The change of one additional male student and two fewer female students has shifted the ratio slightly. However, the numbers are relatively consistent.

Grade Level of Students Aligning with our mandate, the Core Reading Programme served mainly Primary School students (72%). This is an increase over last year (71%).

The students in Middle School grade levels were

continuing students who began tutoring in Primary School.

We serviced 73 primary school students, 27 middle school students, 0 high school students and 1 adult.

The adult who received services only did so during a time of day when a child could not be seen. Of the 101 students we worked with this year, 50 received financial assistance towards their direct tutoring fees. Since The Reading Clinic is a registered charity, we do not ask parents to pay tutoring fees to cover the approximately $740,000.00 per year that it costs to run the programme, which would amount to approximately $115 per hour. Instead we charge parents fees ranging from $0 per session to no more than $60 per session. This rate remains considerably below market rates.

Financial Assistance Level 50.5% of families were able to afford the full cost of tutoring.

Cost Per Lesson Full bursary – decrease in need (7-4) Tier 1 – consistent (18-18) Tier 2 – decrease in need (11-6) Tier 3 – increase in need (14-19) Tier 4 – consistent (2-2) Tier 5 – decrease in need (3-1) Full Pay – increase (47-51)

This suggests that not only are more people able to pay full rate this year than in the year prior, but fewer people are requiring lower tier bursaries.

Allocation of Financial Assistance by School Type

22% of Private School students (12 of 54) were on a bursary (consistent with last year) 80% of Government School students (36 of 45) were on a bursary (reflecting a decrease from 91% last year). The 1 Adult student (1) required on a bursary (consistent with last year).

50% (1 of 2) of Home-schooled children were on a bursary (consistent with last year).

Financial Assistance Bursary Tiers by School Type

Number on a Bursary The graph suggests that the larger bursaries are more often provided to Government School students, with Private School students qualifying at the middle tiers or paying full rate. 82% of “full-pay” students attend Private School.

Cost Per Lesson PROGRAMME OUTPUTS

Student/Tutor Management  In 2018-2019 6530 one-on-one sessions were delivered to 101 students by 45 tutors.

This reflects a 0.5% decrease in the number of sessions held over last year (6561 sessions). Although there was 1 more student than in the prior year, several of the students started late in the school year, pairing with the new tutor trainees. In addition, a greater number of students had 2 sessions per week, resulting in a lower target # sessions. As such, it can be seen that tutors are consistent in meeting their goal number of sessions.

Frequency of Lesson per week 1 2 3 4 or 5

# Students 1 20 79 2

 7 Professional Development Meetings were held for new and established tutors during the year. Additionally: o Dr. Ray hosted a meeting with established tutors to discuss management of challenging behaviors in tutoring. o Training in the Read Naturally programme was offered by Cynthia Armano to the tutors. She offered full-day workshops to train approximately 20 tutors.  There were a total of 26 formal observations this year in addition to informal/drop in observations and ongoing communication with tutors. Family Opportunities and Engagement  All parents with students in the programme for the year were contacted at least twice per year.  26 parent meetings were held this year to review End of Year Test results (plus 10 via phone, 11 sent questions via email) and coordinate next year’s tutoring.  1 screening of The Big Picture: Rethinking Dyslexia was held for parents in April. Technical challenges on the day led to a group discussion for parents.  5 referrals for counseling were made to Dr. Jen Lyne regarding concerns about socio-emotional well being.  A parent community was created via a social media site. Approximately 30% of families joined the private group where they are able to post questions, share articles/tips/strategies.  1 parent/team meeting was held at the student’s school to support students and ensure accommodations were outlined. Many less formal meetings/discussions were held at parent request via email or in person for the same purposes.

Training (outside of tutors)  The Experience Dyslexia © Workshop was delivered twice. In September teachers at a Government Middle School took part in the workshop. In March, in partnership with Kim’s List, the workshop was held again for members of the community (most of whom were teachers).  In partnership with YouthNet, The Reading Clinic provided a workshop to discuss learning differences. Dyslexia was covered by Amy Da Costa, and Dr. Darrien Ray reviewed Autism Spectrum Disorder, Executive Functioning differences, ADHD and Dysgraphia.  In March, an instructor from College made arrangements to bring in students to The Reading Clinic to learn more about learning differences and career opportunities in the field. The students were informally addressed by math and reading programme coordinators who shared information and answered questions about learning differences and career opportunities.

Participation in Events/Fairs  In October 2018, the celebration for The Reading Clinic’s 50th anniversary featured two students from the Core Reading Programme.  The Reading Clinic partnered with the Delta Sigma Theta book fair, hosting a booth and answering questions about The Reading Clinic and dyslexia.  The Reading Clinic partnered with the Bermuda Book Festival, providing volunteers to take/sell tickets at the entry to the event in exchange for part proceeds.  The Reading Clinic partnered with Dutch Pops stall for the 2019 Agricultural Exhibition. Donations  A donor who wishes to remain anonymous gifted The Reading Clinic with a $50,000.00 donation towards the growth and development of the Betty Kitson Library. These funds have been utilized to purchase dyslexia-friendly books, resources and library software.  The Reading Clinic was selected as a charity to support for the Dollars for Hours programme. The Reading Clinic partnered with Berkley Institute. The students designed and built a custom bookshelf/TV cabinet for our library. Policies/Payments  We continued to use the pre-pay method for tuition invoices. Increased oversight on the fees and payment policies saw that parents falling being on payments were contacted to arrange for a payment plan and to consider possibly revisiting the financial assistance application, resulting in a lower accounts receivable amount.

TUTORING

During the 2018/2019 academic school year our students were given a goal/target number of sessions.

Frequency of Lessons 2 lessons per week 3 lessons per week 4 or 5 lessons per week

Goal for the year 54 81 108

This target number (above) indicates the number of sessions recommended to make progress in the programme. Parents were given 3 choices for payments (monthly, twice per year, once per year) for sessions which reflected their level of financial assistance.

Most students had sessions which ran for 1 hour (with some parents opting for a specific class period of 45-50 minutes during the school day). The base lesson cost was $60 per hour or any part thereof for all students.

Whilst most students enrolled for the programme’s start in September, other students began tutoring over the course of the year. Last year’s waitlist was essentially dissolved at the beginning of the school year. However, given that so many students were enrolled in September, a waitlist grew again during this school year (20-30 students). Several of these students were paired with the new tutor trainees partway through the school year

The Reading Programme continued paying tutors a set monthly rate and monitoring the lesson numbers in an effort to achieve the set goal. As with last year, this did encourage many tutors to be consistent with their lesson numbers. However, some still did not meet the target, which was reflected in the number of sessions for which they were paid. As per the agreed policy, tutors who surpassed their goal were not paid for the sessions beyond the target specified, and the additional sessions were considered a donation. Some students who started very late in the year were given a very conservative goal, and as such were given the option to extend their goal by an additional month. This needed to be decided by tutor, parent and TRC prior to the ‘extra’ tutoring taking place.

2 students finished mid-year. 1 had completed the programme successfully, 1 decided to pull out of the programme (for reasons unrelated to satisfaction with tutoring services). By the April term, 3 more students left the programme due to completing the programme successfully/having previously planned to finish early.

TRAINING & SUPERVISION

The Tutor Training Course (Accredited Associate Level AOGPE course) was held between October 2018 and January 2019. The course involved 81 hours of direct training, a lengthy and complex written exam, an oral exam (both with strict pass rates), a mentorship with an established tutor-student pairing (must be ‘passed’) and then an unpaid practicum (27 sessions/hours).

 PARTICIPANTS OF THE 2018-19 TUTOR TRAINING COURSE:

 There were 23 full-time participants on the course (as compared to 25 in 2017).  20 passed both the oral and written exam. The class average was 80%. o 17 passed (with a 90% average). o 3 passed with borderline results. These individuals were given the option for extended and closely monitored mentorships. Only 1 decided to take the opportunity, but has not gone on to do her practicum.  Of the 17 ‘strong’ passes: o 6 have completed the practicum and are officially ‘tutors’, o 5 are working on their practicum o 1 is still working on her mentorship, and o 5 deferred their practicum (due to pregnancy, loss in the family and temporarily due to changes in jobs.  It is estimated that we will have 15 – 17 tutors as a result of this training (more than 2017).

As noted previously, there were 26 formal observations held this year.  ESTABLISHED TUTOR OBSERVATIONS – Active tutors are observed throughout the year. Within the Reading Programme, we make use of formal observations, conducted during the tutoring sessions. These consist of observing the full session and providing verbal and written feedback. In additional to being an opportunity to assist tutors, they are a requirement for tutors who are working on Associate or Certified status with the Academy of Orton-Gillingham Practitioners and Educators. Tutors were also met with individually, as needed.  ‘Paper’ observations were introduced which focused on the lesson planning process, and Orton- Gillingham principles rather than delivery/style.  In addition, informal observations are conducted which entail of a drop-in by an observer on part of a tutoring session. These would not count toward the formal observations.  This reflects a decrease in observations over last year and was due mainly to the Tutor Training course impacting available observation times. In addition to the formal observations, informal observations and communication between programme staff and tutors remained open throughout the year for conversations related to tutoring.

END OF YEAR TESTING AND RESULTS

TESTING PROCESS

Baseline screening results given prior to the start of the Programme act as a baseline from which to measure each student’s progress.

In May, students currently enrolled in the Reading Programme who have either received 4 or more months of tutoring or 36 sessions (whichever comes first) are given an end of year assessment.

There are two sets of assessment measures:  The first, ‘OLD’, includes the following tests/measures: WRMT-III (Word Attack, Passage Comprehension, and Oral Reading Fluency); TOWRE-2; SORT-3; Gates McGinite; TWS-5.  The second, ‘NEW’, includes the WJIV, the TOWRE-2 and Gates McGinite;

The end of year assessments were scheduled over 41 dates between April and July. 2-3students would come for their assessment each day, being seen individually for all measures.

This year, the structure of the assessment process was altered. 2 students would come at a time, being seen by a trained assessor only. This led to more efficient and accurately performed assessments, with increased time per day to score the tests and write the reports.

88 students received end of year assessments during the course of this year. This is a higher number of students than were tested last year. 2 students received assessments a few months early (January/February) due to potentially completing programme. Reports for each child tested before end of June were distributed during the 1st week of July. Parents of these children were invited in for a meeting to review results and discuss recommendations for the upcoming year.

26 parents arranged a meeting in person to review the results (and an additional 10 via phone, 11 asked questions via email).

SCORES

There are four basic areas that are assessed: Decoding, Oral Reading, Comprehension (2 subtests listed), and Spelling. Students in the programme are expected to develop more efficient decoding skills and show improvements in those key areas.

The goal of tutoring is to help students to close the ‘gap’ between themselves and their peers on measures of decoding and encoding.

Of the 88 children assessed, 49 were tested on the measures used last year (OLD) and 39 were tested using a new assessment (NEW). These results will need to be described separately due to the different measures used. Results are based on actual grade placement. OLD TESTING

Of the 49 students tested using the OLD measures, 15 students’ results were not included in this analysis. Of these 15: 3 had baselines which utilized alternate measures, 1 left the programme in December, 1 had stopped tutoring for a few months prior to assessment, 3 were not assessed within the prior year, 4 had results which would not accurately reflect their abilities (due to behavioral challenges during assessment), and 3 of whom this programme had previously been noted as no longer recommended (alternate services more appropriate). As such, the OLD results reflect 34 students.

Overall results: suggest that on average students are maintaining or closing the gap between themselves and their same grade peers on decoding and comprehension measures, but that they are not maintaining the gap on fluency and spelling measures.

Impact of Rapid Naming Abilities and/or Visual Processing Speed on Fluency subtest: Over the last 4 years, the percentage of students in programme with weaknesses in this/these area(s) was: 51%, 45%, 45%and 61% (for OLD testing). Improvements are seen at all levels of RN/VPS ability, but greater improvements (maintaining the gap) are only seen for students who have average or above average RN/VPS skills.

Weal / Low Average Average Or Above all students Rapid Naming or Visual Processing Speed Ability (1st – 24th %Ile) (25th +) Average Level of Growth (in Grade Levels) 0.8 0.7 1.0

Consideration of Learning Profile at it may impact gains:

Students were categorized as 1 of 4 profile types which considered the student’s Verbal Comprehension (VC, a measure of intelligence ) and their Rapid Naming or Visual Processing abilities (RN/VPS, which impact the pace a student can retrieve known information).

NEW TESTING

The 39 students completing the NEW assessments (WJ-IV Achievement) are newest to the programme. 12 students’ results were not included in this analysis. Of these 12: 9 had baselines which utilized alternate measures, 1 was not assessed within the prior year and 2 students’ had results which would not accurately reflect their abilities (due to behavioral challenges during assessment). As such, the NEW results provided below reflect 27 students.

Overall results: suggest that on average students are closing the gap in decoding (explicitly taught), reading accuracy and spelling. Whilst gains are made in sentence reading fluency, and the two comprehension measures, the average was less than 1 year’s growth.

Impact of Rapid Naming Abilities and/or Visual Processing Speed on Fluency subtest: Over the last 4 years, the percentage of students in programme with weaknesses in this/these area(s) was: 51%, 45%, 45%and 61% (for OLD testing)/52% (NEW testing). Improvements are seen at all levels of RN/VPS ability, but substantially greater improvements were seen for students who have average or above average RN/VPS skills.

Weal / Low Average Average Or Above all students Rapid Naming or Visual Processing Speed Ability (1st – 24th %Ile) (25th +) Average Level of Growth (in Grade Levels) 0.4 0.1 0.9

Consideration of Learning Profile at it may impact gains:

Students were categorized as 1 of 4 profile types which considered the student’s Verbal Comprehension (VC – a measure of intelligence ) and their Rapid Naming or Visual Processing abilities (RN/VPS, which impact the pace a student can retrieve known information).

ANALYSIS OF RESULTS:

Students who were tested with the ‘OLD’ assessment continued to have the same overall pattern of progress. Good results were seen with their decoding and comprehension, with a weakness in fluency. Spelling has typically demonstrated slower gains than reading results, with this year’s spelling result falling below the standard.

Students tested with the ‘NEW’ assessment measures had a different pattern of results. Good results were seen with decoding, reading accuracy and spelling, and slower gains were seen in the comprehension measure.

It should be remembered that we are analyzing grade level increases and not necessarily how this relates to the average grade placement. E.g. if a group begin 3.0 grade levels behind and made 1.5 grade levels average improvement, they have improved, but a gap remains. If the group began the year 0.5 grade levels behind, and made 0.6 grade levels improvement, they have closed the gap between themselves and their peers. As such, the increases are relative. For this reason, a shift in how results are displayed is being considered for the future.

We know that each individual with dyslexia is unique, and as a result, expectations are not best considered with a blanket approach. Therefore, the goal of tutoring is to help students to improve their decoding and encoding skills by 1 + years and/or to be in line with the expectations outlined in their most recent learning profile.

DATES AND CHANGES IN 2018-2019

 TRC received an anonymous $50,000.00 donation towards the development of the Kitson Library.  Amy Da Costa has received Fellow Status through the Academy of Orton-Gillingham Practitioners and Educators.  Our Founder, Ms. Elizabeth M. Kitson, after many years of dedication to children with Learning Differences in Bermuda, passed away at the age of 100. We miss her and mourn her loss but are forever grateful for her contribution and commitment.

PLANS FOR THE UPCOMING SCHOOL YEAR

In addition to our commitment to ensure that this goal is accomplished, the following list highlights goals for the 2019-2020 academic school year: 1. Host the Structure of Language (Teacher Training) Course to train teachers in the Orton- Gillingham Approach and the structure of the English Language). 2. Host the Experience Dyslexia workshop at least twice for teachers/organizations, and at least once for parents of current students. 3. The tutors will have an increase in pay for the first time since 2012. The standard rate will now be $55, and the Certified/Fellow rate will now be $60/hr. 4. Encourage a larger number of applications to the AOGPE for tutors to obtain Certified Level status. 5. To run The Reading Clinic Club. APPRECIATION

I would like to thank Dr. Darrien Ray for his excellent support as the Assessment Coordinator. His management of the large assessment caseload and the transition from assessment to tutoring has been smooth. His feedback and review of End of Year assessments has also been a tremendous support. I would like to thank: Dr. Faries for his hard work in fostering donor relationships to support our programmes, involvement in outreach/awareness/fundraising activities; Carolyn Brown for all of her great work as a Programme Assistant, and for helping keep the organization and calm in this busy programme year; Juliet Pearman for her support with mutual students; DeAndrea Easton for her organization and efficiency; our End of Year assessors Susannah Cole and Christina Frost-Hartwig; the Library Committee, as well as our generous tutors who always lend a supportive hand. I would like to thank the Board and Trustees for their great work. It is thanks to their commitment, their time spent on committees, reviewing budgets, and planning for the future of The Reading Clinic that we are a success. Although this year we have mourned the passing of our Founder, Mrs. Elizabeth (Betty) Kitson, we still wish to recognize her contributions. Due to her knowledge and expertise, the Reading Clinic has supported the literacy and well-being of children of Bermuda for over 50 years. The Core Reading Programme could not function without the continued efforts of the tutors who attend tutors’ meetings and workshops on their own time. They put in countless volunteer hours, without which the programme could not function so efficiently to provide help where needed. We are grateful to Cynthia Armano (our 2018 Centre on Philanthropy Volunteer of the Year) for donating her time to training programmes and library development. The Library Committee (Cynthia Armano, Cheryl Symons, Adela Ruberry, Linda Dill, Dale Martin, Andrea Pereech, Penny Saltus, Liz Arnold, Stacey Kyme, Lisa Robinson, Sherie Burrows, Gelena Thompson, Gisele Richards, Sherma Webbe-Clarke, Iris Grant, Charlie Oleksak, Tammy Fitzgerald, Anne-MarieSchramm, Pam Francis, Judith Hayward) which has worked hard at ordering, organizing, inputting and setting up our newly updated library. Additionally, we are grateful to Helen Hay and Sophie Wightman (tutors), who donate part of their tutoring fees to The Reading Clinic.

READING PROGRAMME TUTORS

Victoria Aldeea Cynthia Armano Carolyn Brown Sherie Burrows Denise Carey Amy Da Costa Katherine Dill Linda Dill Sandra Faries Jessica Figueiredo Christina Frost- Judithanne Tammy Fitzgerald Pam Francis Sara Franklin Hartwig Galloway Iris Grant Amanda Harkness Helen Hay Dr. Judith Hayward Janyia Heaven Cynthia Lancer- Robert Horton Stacey Kyme Lisa Latham Antonia Lee Barnes Elizabeth Lee Tracy Madeiros Dale Martin Robin Miller Charlie Oleksak Norma-Jean Gisele Richards Lisa Robinson Adela Ruberry Penny Saltus Richardson Anne-Marie Marlo Santiago Martina Smith Marina Sousa Nancy Swart Schramm Sherma Webbe- Cheryl Symons Kimberlee Tankard Gelena Thompson Sophie Wightman Clarke We wish to thank the schools who have worked with us to assist students by facilitating referrals, allowing tutoring during school hours and finding tutoring spaces on school premises.  Bermuda Center for Creative Learning  Purvis Primary School   Sandy’s Middle School  Chatmore Preparatory School  Somerset Primary  Dellwood Middle School  Somersfield Academy  Francis Patton Primary School  St. George’s Preparatory School  Gilbert Institute Primary  T. N. Tatem Middle School  Harrington Sound Primary  St. David’s Primary School  Mount St. Agnes  Victor Scott Primary  Northlands Primary  Warwick Academy  Paget Primary  West End Primary  Port Royal Primary  West Pembroke Primary  Prospect Primary School  Whitney Institute

We are most grateful for the hard work of the Administrators from these schools and wish to thank them for allowing us to tutor at their school throughout the year. The Core Reading Programme would also not be available to many of our students without the charitable donations we receive from so many business and individuals throughout Bermuda. We are truly grateful for every gift that is made to help children to learn, grow and soar!

 Lead Sponsor: HSBC

 Major sponsors: An anonymous individual donor Renaissance Re  Sponsors:

Aspen Reinsurance Argo Group Ernest E. Stempel Foundation Bacardi International Appleby Bermuda An anonymous individual donor The Reading Clinic Foundation Ministry of Education Axis Specialty Ltd Chubb Foundation Lady Cubitt Compassionate Association For further information regarding the Reading Programme, please contact:

MS. AMY DA COSTA MSC., F/AOGPE READING PROGRAMME COORDINATOR

The Reading Clinic 54 Serpentine Road Pembroke HM 08 Bermuda Tel: 441-292-3938 (ext. 228) [email protected]