Implementation

Broadening the Sphere of Influence: Recovery as Part of One District’s Comprehensive Intervention Approach

Jill Baker and Kathleen A. Brown, Long Beach Unified School District, Long Beach, California

The Long Beach Story When reading about efforts to schools and multiple schools depend The story of the Long Beach Unified improve outcomes for students in not only on what happens in schools School District (LBUSD) Intensive urban school systems, it will be no but on how school district central Intervention Model spans more than surprise to learn that many efforts offices create and implement sup- a decade. It illustrates how the inter- do not reach their potential because ports for change,” (Honig, Copland, dependence between central office there is a lack of alignment between Rainey, Lorton, & Newton, p. 5). leaders and school leaders can be central office systems and the efforts It is with this research in mind that used to accelerate teacher skill of leaders and teachers in schools LBUSD has sought to change the development and confidence, build (Chubb & Moe,1990; Malen, implementation outcomes for stu- collective efficacy, and increase rates Ogwaa, & Kranz,1990; Ravitch & dents through its Intensive Interven- of student success. Viterrit,1997). While central office tion Model. staff and school staff are simultane- Based on our experiences, we believe Even after a 19-year commitment to ously working as hard as they can, that every district committed to maintaining a robust district Reading their efforts do not support one ® changing the dynamic between cen- Recovery program, the realization another. According to a Wallace tral office and schools in service to that Reading Recovery was having Foundation study (2010) on central students has the power to do so. With limited reach beyond the students office transformation, “...teaching a shared vision for student success, it served created enough dissonance and learning improvements at single among LBUSD leaders to consider methods for broader impact. Did we want every classroom to be a place where a highly skilled teacher could deliver high-quality first teaching? Yes. Did we want every classroom to be a place where guided reading was implemented based upon Clay’s lit- eracy processing theory? Yes. Did we want every school to have a system of intervention that moved Reading Recovery from a stand-alone program to an integrated part of a response to intervention (RTI) system? Yes. And we believed that our Reading Recov- ery staff had the expertise, experi- ence, and tenacity to support the implementation of an intervention system that broadened the impact of their work in schools. As coaches, Reading Recovery teachers work with all K–2 teachers at a school site on early literacy teaching and learning, with special emphasis on guided reading. These coaches work daily in classrooms with their assigned teachers, like this kindergarten group.

Spring 2018 Journal of Reading Recovery 17 Implementation

central office and school-based roles All of these aspects of district efforts improvement that includes the regu- exist that complement one another were used to inform what became the lar collection and analysis of data, and help create a culture of shared Intensive Intervention Model. learning from one another across accountability and greater opportu- schools, collaboration between central LBUSD serves approximately 75,000 nity for student success. office and schools, and a system of students across 54 elementary and accountability that incorporates all The Intensive Intervention Model K–8 schools, 15 middle schools, and stakeholders in monitoring the suc- was developed after many years of 13 high schools. Currently the third cess of its work. individual LBUSD schools imple- largest district in California, the dis- menting Reading Recovery as an trict’s students speak more than 40 The Intensive Intervention Model intervention for their students. In different and approximate- includes three pillars summarized in fact, 6,527 students were served over ly 20% of the students are English Figure 1. Each pillar is considered the course of 19 years prior to the learners. Like many urban districts, a critical to the model’s success. While implementation of the model. In high percentage of students (69%) in individually the components will support of schools, the LBUSD main- Long Beach face the challenges asso- likely be familiar to many literacy tained its own Reading Recovery ciated with living in poverty. educators, what may be different than training center, staffed with a Read- other intervention approaches is the These demographic factors con- ing Recovery teacher leader. During implementation of the three pillars in tributed to the district’s decision to this same period of time, elementary concert with one another. In its full develop an Intensive Intervention school principals and support staff use, the model is designed to posi- Model as it strived to meet the needs (i.e., counselors and psychologists) tively impact student success across of all students by maximizing the use were trained in the development K–2 classrooms, while building the of supplemental funds (e.g., Title I) and use of RTI systems. Many other capacity of K–2 teachers to meet their during a budget crisis and building a factors also had an influence on students’ needs. model that it could replicate in dif- student achievement in the years ferent schools. In addition, since rates Coordination of services within and leading up to the implementation of student improvement varied across across the three pillars is essential to of the Intensive Intervention Model schools, the district desired to create the success of the Intensive Interven- and should be considered context for a model that would specifically target tion Model. Without it, all stakehold- understanding the current chapter and accelerate the rate of improve- ers are working in isolation and not of the story. Most notably, LBUSD ment in its highest need schools. coordinating their efforts to build a has long focused on high-quality first comprehensive literacy system. In the teaching, including The model emerged in a district LBUSD model, it is the coordination guided reading, and high-quality job where the organizational culture can of services, the commitment to com- embedded professional development. be described as one of continuous munication, and the acknowledge-

Figure 1. Three Pillars of LBUSD’s Intensive Intervention Model

Reading Recovery Classroom Coaching Staff Development I II III • Early identification • Small-group instruction • Linking theory to practice • Short-term intervention (differentiation) • Seamless instruction during • Lowest-achieving first-grade • Focus in Grades K-2 whole group and small group students • Collaborative coaching and individual tutoring • Full implementation • Accountability • Build capacity

18 Journal of Reading Recovery Spring 2018 Implementation

ment that “we all have a job to do” Figure 2. Key Players for a Shared Vision in LBUSD that have led to the model’s success. Each role (central office and school site) involved in implementing this Central Office model is summarized in Figure 2 and Staff will be explained further.

Central Office Leadership Reading School Site In order for all three pillars of the Recovery Administrator Intensive Intervention Model to be Teacher Leader successful, central office leaders must play a crucial role. The support of the LBUSD superintendent, through Reading Classroom allocation of funds and support of Recovery Teacher the vision, was paramount to this Teacher effort. The deputy superintendent of schools, who oversees early childhood efforts in the district, supports the alignment between preschool and the early elementary grades, as well as The Role of School school principal who ensures that this advocates for early intervention. She Principal model becomes an integral part of the fabric of the school. is actively involved in all aspects of In the LBUSD Intensive Intervention the model, including serving as the Model, the site principal acts as an district Reading Recovery site coor- accelerant to the success of the model. The Role of the Reading dinator. Active involvement includes Building on the expectation that Recovery Teacher Leader regular visits to Intensive Intervention principals are instructional leaders, The role of the Reading Recovery sites, collaboration with the teacher the school principal provides formal teacher leader is multifaceted and leader, and analysis of program data and informal feedback to both class- goes beyond the coordination and in order to make informed decisions. room teachers and coaches, closely implementation of the three pillars. The office tasked with supervising monitors implementation efforts, and The teacher leader’s expertise and elementary schools provides stra- seeks observational data to use in experience with early literacy teaching tegic support and input about the planning professional development and learning are valued and utilized implementation of the Intensive with the team. The principal con- in the district at large. The teacher Intervention Model. The assistant nects the learning that is taking place leader attends and participates in superintendent of elementary schools within the intervention model to ongoing professional development regularly participates in site walk- the professional learning of the staff as an affiliated site with the Saint throughs and Reading Recovery at large and readily integrates the Mary’s College of California Uni- principals’ meetings and facilitates model as a component of their school versity Training Center. Apart from communication across the division. action plans and improvement efforts. providing support, coaching, and All of these efforts are coordinated Principals who have experienced the training of Reading Recovery teach- through ongoing communication and model at their schools report tremen- ers, the teacher leader develops those regular opportunities to meet and dous growth in their own working Reading Recovery-trained profession- share ideas. knowledge around early literacy, als as literacy coaches and early lit- enabling them to label effective early eracy staff developers. This endeavor learning and intervention practices takes time and on-going training and and to advocate for early intervention coaching. actions on their campuses. It is the

Spring 2018 Journal of Reading Recovery 19 Implementation

During training sessions, the literacy coaches have opportunities to col- laborate, work through challenging issues at their school sites, study and use common coaching and staff development resources, and provide feedback on how to grow and improve the coaching and staff development components of the Intensive Intervention Model. As Askew, Pinnell, and Scharer (2014) state, “An effective comprehensive literacy system requires a high level of expertise among educators within the school. When children struggle with Central office staff, school site administrators, and the teacher leader observe the some aspect of learning, the teach- coaching component of the model in action three times a year. After a briefing ers most expert in those areas should of work being done with the classroom teacher and a walk-through, participants provide the intervention service” (p. gather for a coaching conversation. Here, the literacy coach, classroom teacher, 24). Training sessions with literacy site principal, and assistant superintendent for elementary schools discuss their coaches help to develop this expertise. observations after a guided reading lesson. Two to three times a year, the teacher leader also provides early literacy assigned classroom teachers. Class- and within our district. The teacher training for central office staff and room observations follow this brief- leader takes on the task of analyz- school site administrators, aligned ing, and the walk-through concludes ing site, district, and state data for with teacher learning. In addition with a debriefing by all participants. literacy growth for all students. For to the content learning, these meet- The classroom observations are example, after careful analysis of ings provide opportunities for central focused on the coaching in action in Observation Survey tasks at the high- office staff, principals, and assistant a small group instructional setting. est needs schools, Concepts About principals to learn from each other, The debriefing portion of coaching Print scores were noted as lagging. It share ideas and resources, and col- walk-throughs allows all participants was discovered that shared reading lectively move forward in building to share insights, ask questions, and and interactive were not being a comprehensive literacy system at suggest possible next steps to move used consistently, if at all. Train- school sites and within the district. their work forward. The coaching ing and coaching were provided to Bringing school site administrators walk-throughs have also added a level improve and remedy the situation. and central office staff into the imple- of accountability for all participants. Across the Intensive Intervention Model, data is reviewed regularly to mentation of the model was another Developing strong relationships and inform, improve, and refine the col- critical decision that helped build, building trust among all stakeholders lective work of building a comprehen- grow, and strengthen the Intensive provide authentic opportunities to be sive literacy system at school sites and Intervention Model, as illustrated by vulnerable and transparent — and to within our district. coaching walk-throughs. Three times take risks. Continuous improvement a year, central office staff, school site could not happen at an accelerated administrators, and the teacher leader rate without the variables mentioned The Role of the Reading observe the coaching component of previously. Recovery Teacher/Literacy the model in action. The coaching walk-throughs begin with a brief- The use of data is an integral part of Coach ing conducted by the coaches who measuring our individual and collec- The role of the Reading Recovery share the work they implement with tive work on improving early literacy teacher has expanded greatly in the teaching and learning at school sites Intensive Intervention Model. The

20 Journal of Reading Recovery Spring 2018 Implementation

teacher supports and works with the evaluative, the coaching cycle builds The Reading Recovery teachers/ highest need first-grade students by mutual accountability between the literacy coaches are important mem- providing one-to-one literacy instruc- literacy coach and classroom teacher bers of the RTI team at their school tion using individually designed les- for refining teaching practices and sites. Due to their daily and intense sons. The second role is as a literacy moving the work forward. It is imper- work with all K–2 students, they coach, working with all K–2 teachers ative that the literacy coach works on are equipped with data, daily teach- at a school site on early literacy teach- building a strong relationship with ing experiences, and observations ing and learning, with special empha- the classroom teacher in order to gain to share. This information helps sis on guided reading. On a daily trust and earn respect; if trust and guide decisions and next steps for basis, these literacy coaches work respect are missing, the work will be the most-in-need students at a school in classrooms with their assigned challenging, move at a slower pace, or site. Brandon is an example of a stu- teachers. In contrast to previous even become stalled at times. dent who was followed closely and intervention models, a deliberate provided support in Grades K–2. In The third role of the Reading Recov- decision was made to focus Reading kindergarten he was identified as ery teacher is early literacy staff devel- Recovery teachers on teacher develop- being at risk for a myriad of reasons. oper. This component of the model ment—leading to increased student In particular, classroom and district helps bring the theory and practice achievement—rather than assigning assessments revealed he was strug- together for classroom teachers and the teacher to direct student interven- gling with literacy development. In school site administrators. K–2 teach- tion (e.g., pullout student support). first grade, he qualified for Reading ers annually participate in 12 hours Although the literacy coaches work Recovery and his lessons were suc- of early literacy professional develop- with all students in the classroom cessfully discontinued. With regular ment during release time from their setting, the highest-need students are support and monitoring, he entered assigned duties. The content of the given priority. The classroom teacher second grade as a capable reader professional development is linked and the literacy coach work together and writer and continues to do well directly to daily literacy teaching and to set goals for student achievement in school both academically and coaching back in the classroom. This in literacy development and for the socially. This success story was made professional development allows class- refinement of teaching practices. possible due to the coordination of room teachers to be better equipped services, regular communication by Each week, the classroom teacher to help all students in the classroom all members of the RTI team, and the and literacy coach participate in a because they are learning the why expanded sphere of influence of the coaching cycle as illustrated in Figure and how behind early literacy best Reading Recovery teachers. 3. Since the role of the coach is not practices.

Figure 3. LBUSD Reading Recovery Teacher’s Weekly Coaching Cycle

MONDAY TUESDAY WEDNESDAY THURSDAY FRIDAY

• Set purpose for • Literacy coach • Classroom • Classroom • Reflect and plan coaching models instruc- teacher tries out teacher or for next steps tional strategy/ instructional literacy coach best practice for strategy/ refines instruc- ➧classroom ➧best practice ➧tional stragtegy/ ➧ teacher • Literacy coach best practice • Classroom observes and teacher observes debriefs with • Debriefing after classroom session teacher

Spring 2018 Journal of Reading Recovery 21 Implementation

The Role of the Classroom children can enter the world of ing strong relationships, consistent Teacher literacy and begin early to use and effective early literacy teaching literacy in their learning of con- practices, professional development, All K–2 classroom teachers at an tent. (p. 203) accountability, and regular com- Intensive Intervention Model school munication in all components of the participate in the coaching model and Building capacity at a school site Intensive Intervention Model. early literacy staff development. A is one of the original tenets of the central focus has been on the devel- Intensive Intervention Model. Over opment of guided reading practices in time—with daily teaching of guided Getting Started all classrooms. Teachers work actively reading, effective coaching, and For a school or district that is com- with their assigned literacy coach early literacy professional develop- mitted to building a comprehensive to refine early literacy teaching and ment—the majority of classroom literacy system, there are a number of learning in their classrooms. Since teachers participating in the model ideas for getting started that may be teaching is isolating by nature, most have become instructional leaders at helpful. Excellent resources that have classroom teachers welcome the help, their sites, welcoming visitors and been utilized over time in LBUSD support, and guidance of a literacy colleagues to observe their teaching. include Promising Literacy for Every coach. Initially, the classroom teacher Many teachers have allowed their Child: Reading Recovery and a Com- and literacy coach work collaborative- coaches or principals to video record prehensive Literacy System (Askew, ly to coordinate schedules, arrange them in order to be used as examples Pinnell, & Scharer, 2014), Systems for the classroom setting for small-group for other colleagues at their site. Change In Literacy Education (Lyons instruction, set teaching and learning Another positive outcome resulted in & Pinnell, 2001), and The Art of goals, examine data to form initial the inclusion of classroom teachers Coaching (Aguilar, 2013). guided reading groups, and gather and principals in the planning and Beyond these foundational resources, appropriate books to ensure daily delivery of early literacy staff develop- districts should consider defining implementation of guided reading. ment. These changes and outcomes and recording their aspirations for Furthermore, the classroom teacher could not happen without build- what an early literacy system could participates in the weekly coaching cycle and professional development sessions described in Figure 3. Figure 4. Lessons Learned in LBUSD As the collective work has evolved, the skill set, successful experiences, and confidence of classroom teach- ers have grown immensely. The most important and exciting change for classroom teachers was seeing stu- dent literacy achievement improve. DeFord, Lyons, and Pinnell (1993) state: • Always keep the children in mind and at the center of all decisions. Providing high-quality instruc- • Celebrate small and big changes. tional time for children at risk can be thought of as a safety net • Communication at all levels is important. that captures children, offering • Examine many different types of data. more support at a critical time, • Leadership at all levels is necessary. so that they can fully profit from • Building strong relationships is essential. good, ongoing teaching in their • Don’t be afraid to innovate and take risks. school or district. That, in itself, will have impact on a system. • Change takes time. With good coverage, almost all • Be willing to change course if what you are doing is not working.

22 Journal of Reading Recovery Spring 2018 Implementation

look like in their district. Make time opment for teachers and leaders while to take stock of current resources pushing ourselves to cultivate shared About the Authors and personnel in order to see what accountability that will ensure that is possible. Pilot ideas or model at our students benefit from our efforts. Dr. Jill Baker has served as a teacher, a few schools first before expand- Clay (2014) concludes: principal, and cen- ing systemwide. Make a 3- to 5-year The matter of accommodating tral office admin- commitment to measure the model’s diversity and individual differ- istrator in the effectiveness — allowing the time ences in learning paths is com- LBUSD over the and space to experiment, course plex. We must keep our criteria last 26 years. She correct, and grow from learning relative and give assistance to the currently serves as together. Select school sites eager to deputy superintendent of schools, lowest achievers in any program. build a comprehensive literacy system supporting a number of pre-K to It is time for us to institutional- in order to build momentum with high school initiatives, including ize early preventive intervention early adopters. Choose and develop early learning and the alignment accessible to all children who signature literacy instructional prac- between preschools and elemen- need it, as part of the overall sys- tices that can be shared across the tary schools. She can be reached at tem of delivering education, and [email protected] system. Schedule regular time with as the first step in a process of all stakeholders to reflect, redefine, Kathleen A. improvement of literacy learning redirect and review the model or sys- Brown has worked at all levels of schooling. (p. 232) tem for continuous growth. Finally, for 33 years as a celebrate and acknowledge the group’s In LBUSD, we will continue to strive teacher, literacy strengths and together work on areas to embody Dr. Clay’s vision. specialist, and Reading Recov- for improvement. ery teacher. She References has served as the Conclusion Aguilar, E. (2013). The art of coaching: Reading Recovery teacher leader in As we reflect on our work over Effective strategies for school transforma- LBUSD for the last 18 years. Kath- the past 8 years, we have learned tion. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. leen provides early literacy training a great deal about the ingredients Askew, B. J., Pinnell, G. S., & Scharer, P. for the district and serves on a vari- ety of early intervention/early liter- of an intensive intervention system L. (2014). Promising literacy for every acy committees. She can be reached that positively influence individual child: Reading Recovery and a compre- hensive literacy system. Worthington, at [email protected] students and support the capacity- OH: Reading Recovery Council of building of an entire school and other North America. schools within the system. A few of Chubb, J. E., & Moe, T. M. (1990). those lessons learned are summarized Lyons, C. A., & Pinnell, G. S. (2001). Politics, markets, and America’s schools. in Figure 4. Systems for change in literacy education. Washington, DC: The Brookings Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. In a district that places such high Institution. Malen, B., Ogawa, R. T., & Kranz, J. value on continuous improvement, Clay, M. M. (2014). By different paths to (1990). What do we know about common outcomes. Portsmouth, NH: we find ourselves celebrating how far school-based management? A case Heinemann. we have come in building a compre- study of the literature—A call for hensive literacy system and asking DeFord, D. E., Lyons, C. A., & Pinnell, research. In W. H. Clune & J. F. ourselves how to have an even greater G. S. (1993). Partners in learning. White (Eds.), Choice and control impact on our students’ and teachers’ New York: Teachers College Press. in American schools (pp. 289–342). lives. We recognize that continuing Honig, M. I., Copland, M., Rainey, Philadelphia: Falmer. to link the three tiers of intervention L., Lorton, J. A., & Newton, M. Ravitch, D., & Viteritti, J. P. (1997). with the three pillars of the model is (2010). Central office transformation New schools for a new century: The imperative. We must also continue to for district-wide teaching and learning redesign of urban education. New cultivate leadership at all levels, pro- improvement. New York: The Wallace Haven, CT: Yale University Press. vide high-quality professional devel- Foundation.

Spring 2018 Journal of Reading Recovery 23