Draft Action Research Project Progress Report
Title
The Literacy Loop: Impact
of Extended School Summer Sessions on Struggling Students (working title)
Needs
Assessment
As I work in a
Title 1 school, I am acutely aware that most of our students regress over the
long summer, losing skills and dropping in reading levels. It was assumed this is due to lack of
exposure to literacy rich environments and an absence of academic pursuit. Given the funding to host two 3-week summer
school sessions, I took the opportunity to put this prevailing thought to the
test. I provided data to influence
summer school participants based on the following criteria: retention
indicators, math and/or reading failures, RtI participation, and/or an
historical propensity for regression when away from school for an extended
period of time (ie Christmas holiday, Spring Break, etc) as determined by past
year data and anecdotal evidence.
Objectives
and Vision of the Action Research Project
Students
with proven track records of scholastic regression benefit from an extended
literacy and academically rich environment.
Furthermore, these students profit from the low teacher-student ratio
summer school sessions afford to maintain end of year literacy skills and jump
start new knowledge acquisition at the beginning of the new school year.
Data
collected throughout the previous two years from DRA, OS, progress monitoring,
and anecdotal evidence will be compared and contrasted against the same data
source for the current year. Due to the
moderate mobility rate of the campus, some past data and some current data may
not be available. Data sources will include
information gleaned from intervention logs, report cards, and state testing
results, as well.
Review of
the Literature and Action Research Strategy
The
literature review will focus on the relevancy of extended year sessions for
at-risk students as determined by factors such as: retention, content areas
failures, below grade level performance, and RtI classification. These indicators cover all students
regardless of race, ethnicity, gender, low SES, and/or SpEd.
Articulate
the Vision
Due
to the platform in which the research took place, communication of the vision
of the project was not “officially” disseminated. The purpose and scope of the summer school
sessions were presented to staff members participating in the summer school
sessions. They were encouraged adhere to
the academic data provided for each student and focus on providing literacy
exposure and instruction to summer school students per their current literacy
level.
Students
identified as candidates who would potentially benefit from extended summer
sessions were encouraged to participate.
Classroom teachers and administrative staff encouraged parents to
support the summer school opportunity by explaining the campus’ intention of
limiting the impact of literacy and academic regression.
Manage the
organization
Implementation
of the project included the planning and organizing of the two summer school
sessions. The campus was allotted
approximately $100,000.00 for staff salary, transportation, food service, and
materials. All aspects of the budget
were created by myself, as acting summer school Principal, and the campus
counselor, Tia McNeely, who took the role of summer school AP.
Ms
McNeely, Mr Morrison (campus AP), and myself interviewed and hired 22 teachers,
3 paraprofessionals, a registrar, a receptionist, a librarian, and a school
nurse. We also recruited teachers to act
as substitutes. Transportation and meals
were provided to every student. Monies
were used from the budget to pay for two buses; however, food service was able
to provide breakfast and lunch to every student free of charge.
An
allotment of $10,000.00 was earmarked for instructional materials. Math intervention kits, manipulatives, guided
reading books, and big book read alouds were purchased to augment the balanced
literacy approach to literacy. Because
the monies came from Title 1 funds that could not be used to procure school
supplies, the campus provided a $2,000.00 grant from the activity fund to
purchase markers, crayons, folders, paper, etc.
Manage
Operations
As
campus IS, I was responsible to create the parameters and guidelines for
student participation, as well as, develop the instructional focus. I worked in conjunction with the RtI
committee, classroom teachers, and SpEd teachers.
We
conducted two training sessions to communicate the role and responsibilities of
the summer school teachers and staff.
Emphasis was placed on adhering to the data provided to the teachers for
each child assigned to their class. Specifically,
current reading and math levels. They
were instructed to communicate with me if they found discrepancies with the
data provided. In addition, teachers were
given training on the proscribed math remediation program and the components of
balanced literacy.
Respond
to Community Interest and Needs
The
parameters used to identify students for summer school did not exclude students
with special needs if their current IEP indicated instruction in the regular
classroom. Although our campus houses
many SpEd programs, we were not able to accommodate each one. All students identified as SpEd with current
IEPs indicating regular classroom instruction were invited to attend summer
school as long as they fit the parameters.
The findings of the action research, therefore, will serve SpEd students
and regular students equally.
Since
the campus is a Title 1 school with 85% ED, 60% Hispanic, 30% AA, and 10%
misc., all findings will have a significant impact on students with diverse
backgrounds. In fact, this study relies
on students with diverse backgrounds as a means to finding alternative methods
for long-term academic success.
