Literacy Audit Sample Report
Reading/Writing Instructional
Program Overview
Sample
Information collected, compiled and analyzed by
Educational Empowerment, LLC
425 S. Huachuca Street
Benson, Arizona 85602
YvonnShay@aol.com
rvalentine@theriver.com
Literacy Audit Report
Reading/Writing Instructional Program Evaluation
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Strengths












Clear learning objectives are consistently present in classrooms
Alignment of objective and assessment vocabulary is observable in all classrooms
Alignment of learning objectives with state standards is a major strength
Time utilization is focused on the task; time is a cultural value
Teacher use of higher order thinking questioning is evident
Graphic organizers are used in the classroom
Common planning practices, the instructional calendar and grade level planning meetings
support the teaching staff
Time: Teachers devote time to reading and reading instruction
Intervention program and procedures that support timely intervention and consistency
within a grade level
Strong base of phonics instruction
Project Read Report Form and Story Form provide a frame for students to summarize
and understand the structure of text presented
The degree and quality of the integration of reading and writing skills in social studies is
a significant asset.
Challenges







Inconsistency in use of programs and program related vocabulary
Assessment test driven/assessment orientation of instruction creates unproductive
pressure
Inconsistent use of instructional strategies from grade to grade
Emphasis on assessment scores conflict with how students learn and with what is
considered developmentally appropriate practice
Reading strategies (summary, main idea, compare and contrast, phonics) are often seen as
content targets rather than a process to be used by a skilled learner
The semantic and syntactic supports available to the beginning reader are under
developed.
Developmentally appropriate practices at the lower grades are challenged by a culture of
assessment.
Recommendation Summary
1. Continue to focus reading skill application using Project Read—report form—in the
content areas such as social studies and other informational texts.
2. Improve student achievement in writing by initiating and implementing a long-term
school wide literacy improvement professional development program.
3. Augment the currently strong phonics instruction with the addition of a body of
structured instructional strategies that capitalize on the semantic and syntactic supports
available to students.
4. Clarify the role of Accelerated Reader as a part of the reading instructional program. Use
cross grade level teams to discuss AR and ways to communicate to students and parents
the role independent reading and comprehension testing plays in instruction and to plan
bridges to comprehensive approaches to reading instruction.
5. Investigate developmentally appropriate practices and evaluate to what degree they could
be added to the classroom day.
6. Conduct periodic monitoring or mini “audits” using some or all the processes employed
in this literacy audit to document, focus and refine improvement efforts.
7. Share and distribute this report to all stakeholders: leadership, teachers, instructional
assistants, and parents.
SCOPE
The data collection processes selected to capture a complete picture of the literacy instructional
includes both quantitative and qualitative information. The document reflects these collection
processes through, observation forms, checklists, parent focus groups, and teacher and student
interviews. The observations and student surveys produce quantitative data, while the focus
groups, interview and teacher surveys yield qualitative data. All data have been analyzed
relative to research based instructional practices, curriculum alignment, and management.
Specific recommendations are offered. The data collection processes included:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
Classroom observations of reading and writing instruction
Interviews with students
Student surveys
Interviews with teachers of reading and writing
Examination of teacher lesson plans with daily instructional schedules
Administrative interviews
Language Arts review/individual teacher and self evaluation (teacher surveys)
Parent focus group
Observations
Informed observation is central to understanding classroom instruction. The observation
instrument guided the auditor to address research-based components of instructional quality. Dr.
Jerry Valentine University of Missouri, Columbia and Dr. Robert Marzano, a renowned scholar
and educational researcher from the regional center, McREL have documented factors that
represent the “Gold standard” of scientific research. The school, leadership team developed a
schedule that allowed observations in each of the school classrooms of twenty to thirty minutes
each. These observations used data gathering instruments designed to focus the attention of the
observer, and ultimately the teacher and the school, on elements of instructional quality.
The major instructional quality indicators addressed by the data collection practices and this
document include:
1. Instructional Methods – provides information based on J. Valentine’s categorization of
instructional practice
2. Level of Cognition – provides information about the depth of thinking involved in
instructional activities (Marzano’s Taxonomy)
3. Student engagement – expressed globally in terms of the percentage of engagement
observed
4. Use of standards/objectives – identifies instructional focus and alignment to state
standards
5. Instructional practices – research based strategies documented by Marzano, Pickering,
and Pollock
6. Learning culture and environment – reflection on environmental features that have been
shown to support literacy learning
FINDINGS/CLASSROOM OBSERVATION SUMMARY
This Elementary School
Observed Instructional Practices - January 2004
9
Active Learning/Active
Teaching
30
Teacher-Led Conversation
97
Teacher-Led Instruction
42
Student Seatwork/Teacher
Engaged
3
Student Seatwork/Teacher
Disengaged
0
Total Disengagement
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Percentage of Classrooms Observed
Instructional Practices Narrative
This chart answers the question; in how many classrooms at this elementary school was method
X employed? Many teachers use more than one practice during any one instructional period.
Auditors noted each method used by each teacher and therefore the totals of all instructional
practices employed were expected to exceed 100%.
Teacher-led instruction was observed by auditors in 97% of the classrooms and is by far the most
common mode of instruction at this elementary school. Teacher-led conversation requires
intellectual participation of both the students and the teacher and was seen in 30% of the
classrooms during this audit. Teacher-led conversation occurs when many students are talking
about the concept found in the instructional objective with the teacher and with each other. The
teacher leads the discussion (as opposed to orchestrating cooperative groups). Active teachingactive learning occurred in 9% of the classrooms and is intended to capture the concept of
individual or groups of students using and building on learning to create a new and personalized
version of that learning or skill within each student head.
For an auditor to designate the existence of seat work, teacher disengaged the situation requires
that students are doing a worksheet, workbook or independent reading and the teacher is not
attending to any student or relevant activity relevant to advancing the learning objective at least
in part of the period observed. This occurred only in only 3% classrooms.
This Elementary School
Level of Cognition - January 2004
0
Knowledge Utilization
18
Analysis
36
Comprehension
46
Knowledge Retrieval
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
Percentage of Classrooms Observed
Level of Cognition Narrative
The level of cognition is determined by examining the tasks in which the students are engaged,
and the questions asked by the teacher, to determine the degree and depth of thinking and
learning that is likely to occur while doing that task or answering that question. This level of
cognition is based on Robert Marzano’s taxonomy of the levels of thinking required of
successful students.
Levels of cognition have different values in terms of quality instruction. Knowledge Utilization
and Analysis have been shown in research to have greater significance in supporting learning
than questions and activities at lower levels of cognition because Knowledge Utilization and
Analysis activities and questions require more brain activity on the part of the student.
Students at this elementary school were engaged in Knowledge Retrieval/Recall and
Comprehension activities in 46% of the classrooms observed. Knowledge retrieval is basic and
needs to occur before analysis and utilization can occur; there is no information that suggests
higher order lessons did or did not occur later. Knowledge Utilization was not observed and
Analysis—comparing, contrasting, developing or constructing meaning for him or herself—was
used in 18% of the classrooms during this audit. Comprehension activities occurred in 36% of
the classrooms.
This Elementary School
Use of Standards/Objectives - January 2004
91
Clear Objective - Aligned
0
Clear Objective - Not Aligned
0
Clear Objective - Non-Core
9
Unclear Objective
0
No Objective
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Percentage of Classrooms Observed
Use of Standards/ Objective Narrative
This measure identifies lessons that match the state standards and that have clear objectives. In
the observations of this elementary school, 91% had clear objectives aligned to the Texas
Standards. Auditors identified the objective several ways: some teachers began the lesson with a
stated objective, “the focus of this…etc”, some had the objective written on the chalkboard and
in many lessons the objective was woven throughout the lesson and was implicitly stated in that
way. Some lessons, [9%] observed appeared to be activities related to learning but had no
identifiable objective. Instruction that is aligned to state standards and that clearly shows the
connection between lesson and state assessment is a clear strength at this elementary school.
This Elementary School
Instructional Practices - January 2004
70
Instruction, activities aligned
to objective
42
Content connected to prior
knowledge
76
Teacher models/gives
examples
48
Instruction supports different
learning styles
30
Research-based strategies
observed
70
Teacher monitoring /adjusting
42
Teacher checked for
understanding/assessments
27
Teacher knowledge/expertise
of best practices
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
Percentage of Classrooms Observed
Instructional Practice Narrative
“Lesson design clearly aligned and relevant to the objective” means when examined the lesson
was congruent; teacher comments, questions, responses and activities designed matched or were
congruent with the objective. In 70% of the lessons this alignment was clear. Modeling and
clarity of purpose was observed in 76% of the classrooms. Monitoring and adjusting to meet
individual needs was observable in 70% of the classrooms. Auditors noted modifications the
teacher was doing or had done to address individual needs or needs of the whole group. This
monitoring and adjusting occurred in planning (leveled instruction for example) or were “on the
fly” modifications of the lessons’ tone or pace based on student responses. Teacher expertise
and use of “best practices” [27%], represents the frequency of reliance on methods that represent
the current thinking in science or research into how students learn.
This Elementary School
Learning Culture and Environment - January 2004
18
Print-Rich Environment
97
Effective Classroom
Management
91
Positive Climate, Respect for
All
100
Instructional Time Focused
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Percentage of Classrooms Observed
Learning Culture and Environment Narrative
Focused instructional time and classroom management are notable strengths of this elementary
school’s teachers. Students were attentive, compliant, engaged and focused on what it was the
teacher or calendar had determined that they learn that part of the day. In this measure the
auditors made note of the pace required by nearly all teachers and found it to be brisk and at
times relentless.
It may be helpful to describe what this report means by print rich especially in light of the
literacy environment evaluation found below. “Print rich” means a classroom of students has a
preponderance of opportunities to read, and re read student made and class-made posters, charts,
lists, poems, stories, big books, little books, letters, buzz books (shared writing), poetry
notebooks, writers notebooks, journals and such a classroom possesses a large collection of
fiction and information texts in an accessible classroom library. A large collection in this context
is approximately 40 books per student or one thousand books for 20 student classrooms. A print
rich environment was rated as 18% for this elementary school
Recommendations
1. Capitalize on the current success to continue to focus reading skill application in the content
areas such as social studies and other information text. This is a whole school program that is
producing results; students apply reading skills of summarizing, compare/contrast
effectively.
2. Use school-wide strengths of focus, communication and planning within grade, phonics,
teaching to the objective, and alignment to refine other aspects of the literacy instructional
program.
3. Improve student achievement in writing by initiating and implementing a long term school
wide literacy improvement professional development program with the following features;
Learn and Implement “Writer’s Workshop” as envisioned by Lucy Calkins and the group of
authors who currently write as specialists for the teachers of writing. (Donald Graves, Ralph
Fletcher, Calkins, Katie Wood Ray, et. al.) Such a instructional process will include the
routine practice of:










The management and structure of writer’s workshop
Mini lessons—topics, sequence of instruction and management
Use of Writer’s Notebooks
Author mentors
Genre study
Writing around a seed idea
Revising
Editing
Celebrating writing/publishing
The Writing Process
Writer’s workshop increases the student opportunity to write meaningful text, develop
independent writing skills and use thinking skills. This will strengthen the active learning/
active teaching nature of instruction and transfer the responsibility for learning writing to the
students. After training and coaching for implementation school leaders and teachers could
expect to see increased student responsibility, increased student use of information and skill,
enhanced student levels of cognition, increased teacher modeling, increased use of student
connections to prior knowledge and ample teacher and student opportunity to use the
research based strategies discussed above.1
4. Make reading instruction more balanced or comprehensive by augmenting the currently
strong phonics instruction with the addition of a body of structured instructional strategies
1
manipulatives, concrete objects/props, graphic organizers, role play, simulations, music, art, body
language/gestures, related to culture, overheads, posters/films) 1) identifying similarities/differences 2)
summarizing/note taking 3) reinforcing effort/recognition 4) homework & practice 5) nonlinguistic representations
6) cooperative learning 7) setting objectives/providing feedback 8) generating/testing hypotheses 9) cues, questions,
advance organizers
that capitalize on the semantic and syntactic supports available to students as they acquire
skills in reading. Phonics/Phonology is strong and must continue to support the student as
they incorporate the other cues to unlocking meaning from text. Train teachers in
instructional strategies that strengthen the students’ ability to internalize specific learning
tools proven to help them be lifelong readers and learners. These comprehensive literacy
strategies have a foundation within the Title One program, are closely related to writer’s
workshop and expand what teachers are now doing with leveled group instruction for
reading. Other strategies like read aloud, shared reading, focus poetry, and guided reading
can emerge from reading instructional expertise as it now exists. The foundation is strong.
5. Further enhance reading instruction by clarifying the role of Accelerated Reader as a part of
the reading instructional program. Use cross grade level teams to discuss AR and ways to
communicate to students and parents the role independent reading and comprehension testing
plays in instruction and to plan bridges to comprehensive approaches to reading instruction.
6. Investigate developmentally appropriate practices and evaluate to what degree they could be
added to the classroom day.
7. Conduct periodic monitoring or mini “audits” using some or all the processes employed in
this literacy audit to document, focus and refine improvement efforts. Such monitoring would
also be helpful to the staff development effort by making the learning connected to the
degree that it is an internal part of the work.
8. Share and distribute this report to all stakeholders: leadership, teachers, instructional
assistants, and parents. Steps in stakeholder involvement:






Review audit results and recommendations with principal and leadership team
Develop a plan with administrators and teacher leaders to disseminate
information
Share information with all teachers, central office, parents and Board members
Develop a list of priority “next steps” - an action plan with learner outcomes,
intervention objectives, time line, responsible parties, target audiences and
available resources
Work the plan
Make modifications as needed based on processes in working the plan