California Department of Education, Special Education Division’s special project, California Services for Technical Assistance and Training (CalSTAT) is funded through a contract with the Napa County Office of Education. CalSTAT is partially funded from federal funds, State Grants #H027A080116A. Additional federal funds are provided from a federal competitively awarded State Personnel Development Grant to California (#H323A070011) provided from the U.S. Department of Education Part D of the Individuals with Disabilities Education act (IDEA). Opinions expressed herein are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the position of the U. S. Department of Education.
The Effective Reading Interventions Academy (ERIA) delivers training and ongoing coaching to school site teams of teachers and administrators, helping schools to improve literacy outcomes for their middle and high school students.
ERIA supports schools in taking the following 5 Steps as an approach to improving instruction and outcomes as they move towards implementing the foundational elements of RtI2 (Response to Instruction and Intervention):
Implementing ERIA's five steps impacts student learning while introducing the concepts and practices of needs-based, rather than labels-based, intervention and education. Over the course of three years of training and coaching, ERIA brings the language, foundational elements, and strategies of RtI2 into the school cultures and faculties of middle and high schools.
Ultimately, ERIA practices are assimilated into the professional cultures of the ERIA sites, with the site teams establishing sufficient expertise and structures to continue supporting improved student outcomes through sustained implementation of ERIA practices without ongoing external supports.
Many veteran ERIA sites have made the internal decision to build upon their work in ERIA, leveraging local resources with ERIA's 5 Steps, to pursue districtwide scale-up of these practices or expand them to fully implement RtI2 in a manner aligned to the National RTI Center’s guidelines (at http://www.rti4success.org).
In December 2009, an evaluation of sites implementing ERIA for at least 3 years observed an average eleven percentage point increase for both all students and students with disabilities in the percent of students scoring proficient or above on statewide English-language Arts testing.
ERIA’s annual trainings, ongoing technical assistance, and coaching are organized and delivered to schools in regional cohorts. Each cohort is comprised of a group of schools from a limited number of school districts in the same region. Because the schools in the cohort advance through ERIA’s 5 Steps together, attending the same trainings and facing similar challenges, each cohort forms a collaborative learning community, which supports the sustainability and future scale-up of ERIA practices.
Trainings are delivered to a collaborative Site Team, including teachers and administrators, from each school participating in ERIA. The Site Team members guide and support the process of implementation at their schools.
The following schedule describes how ERIA is delivered to and implemented by sites over their three years of participation:
Sites establish the basics of ERIA, including formation of a Site Team, initial training of staff, piloting of assessments and interventions, and planning for full implementation in Year 2.
Sites begin to fully implement ERIA, using data to identify and assess the specific needs of struggling readers and delivering interventions with fidelity. These activities are fully integrated into the school’s master schedule. The Site Team effectively provides leadership and support for schoolwide implementation of ERIA intervention programs and best practices.
Sites are fully implementing ERIA and beginning to focus on sustaining and building upon these practices, including coaching and supporting fidelity of implementation in the classroom, collaborative data review, and the active use of enhanced instructional practices throughout the core curriculum. ERIA practices have become a part of the school culture, and processes are in place so teachers new to the school are trained and mentored.
Four years after the initial training, ERIA sites graduate and must become self-sustaining without outside supports. However, the learning community formed by the ERIA cohort continues to function, and these ERIA graduates often continue learning from and sharing with other regional schools as they further develop best practices in all areas.
Among the supports ERIA sites receive, annual trainings are a central component. ERIA Content Experts deliver training to ERIA Site Teams and other key personnel, providing the skills and technology necessary to implement ERIA’s 5 Steps.
The Two-Days-Plus-One Training establishes the basics of ERIA. The first two days are with a Content Expert, such as Kevin Feldman, Jan Hasbrouck, et al., who addresses an overview of ERIA and RtI2, such as:
The third day is delivered by a different Content Expert who adds to and reinforces this framework. An additional Booster Training is delivered later in the school year to reinforce implementation and address specific challenges Site Teams have encountered.
The Booster Trainings are focused on how to build upon ERIA’s 5 Steps and to maximize their impact on student outcomes, fleshing out a comprehensive strategy to improve student outcomes after the basic framework has already been moved into place. Additionally, because the booster training makes a Content Expert available to Site Teams which are in the process of implementing ERIA, the booster training can address site-specific challenges and opportunities, such as adding interventions to the core curriculum to address widespread needs or establishing intensive supports for those at greatest risk.
Ongoing Coaching and Support is provided by a Cohort Coach, an accessible resource for sites throughout the year to help Site Teams plan, problem-solve, and support schoolwide implementation. In addition to joining the ERIA Content Expert at primary trainings, the Cohort Coach is funded to visit ERIA sites directly, providing coaching and supporting fidelity of implementation in the classroom.
Data Collection and Monitoring is the crux of ERIA implementation, and none of ERIA’s 5 Steps can proceed until a minimal level of data collection and monitoring is established. Schools are supported in this process by the ERIA Site Team, who receive training and coaching support in the use of existing data, making new assessments, and working with that data to inform decision-making and direct resources.
Once data has been collected, the ERIA Site Team will work with the Cohort Coach to establish criteria that directs available resources to support students around their specific needs. Additional support in data collection and monitoring is also delivered in the form of a data collection stipend and analysis from ERIA program evaluators.
The 5 Steps of ERIA are to (1) identify struggling students with CST ELA or CELDT scores, (2) assess specific student needs, (3) deliver interventions meeting specific needs, (4) monitor and adjust interventions through additional assessment and collaboration, and (5) improve content literacy instructional practices to engage all students.
The Site Team motivates and guides implementation of the 5 Steps, communicates practices and processes to the faculty, and collaborates with educators and the Cohort Coach to direct use of interventions and improved instruction to improve outcomes both for individual students and the school as a whole.
Training is delivered to Site Team members, but having attended an ERIA training is not a prerequisite for membership in a Site Team, which benefits from the perspectives and participation of educators from a variety of roles and levels of experience. Because the Site Team is key to ongoing implementation of, not just establishing, ERIA practices, it is essential that new members are actively recruited and supported so they can contribute effectively and develop into leaders.
While ERIA has been implemented in California since 2004, the 2010-11 school year debuts a revision in ERIA’s practices which reflects best practices as they are recognized today, with a particular focus on establishing these practices in middle schools and high schools. By applying this model at the secondary level, ERIA is designed to assist schools in establishing the foundational elements of RtI2, without requiring RtI2’s most resource- and time-intensive aspects.
The previous year’s CST English-language Arts scores are referenced for each student (or CELDT score) to determine if he or she should be referred for further assessment. These struggling readers may have underlying skill needs which, once assessed, can be addressed within an intervention program. While all students may have specific needs which could be detected through assessment, Site Teams make the decision about which students to further assess based upon available resources.
| CST ELA/CELDT Score | Proficiency Level | Next Step |
|---|---|---|
| 299 or less | Below Basic and Far Below Basic | Definitely refer for further assessment |
| 300 to 349 | Basic | Refer for assessment if resources are available |
| 350 & above | Proficient or Above | Refer for assessment in schoolwide implementation |
All identified struggling readers are given an oral reading fluency test to detect whether they have a fluency or decoding word-level skill need. If they do have a word-level need and resources are available, an additional decoding assessment can determine whether they need decoding supports, or if a fluency-only intervention is more appropriate.
Those who are identified as struggling readers, but for whom a word-level skill need has been ruled out by an oral reading fluency test, will benefit from intervention. If resources are available, a comprehension assessment can determine comprehension level, to more-effectively direct delivery of comprehension interventions.
| Oral Reading Fluency Test Determination | Additional Assessment (if resources are available) |
|---|---|
| Word-level Skill Need | Determine decoding or fluency need with decoding assessment |
| No word-level skill Need | Determine comprehension level with comprehension assessment |
Sites implementing ERIA deliver specific interventions to struggling readers based on their assessed needs. Students receiving interventions continue to participate in the core literacy curriculum. Interventions are delivered as an additional service, most commonly through classes within the master schedule or after-school programs.
Individual schools purchase interventions programs according to their own needs and resources. Specific intervention programs are suggested due to widespread use by existing ERIA sites, though sites may implement any evidence-based intervention which has been vetted by the What Works Clearinghouse (http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/)or Florida Center for Reading Research (http://www.fcrr.org/). Sites receive training, coaching, and other support from the ERIA Content Expert and Cohort Coach in implementing intervention programs with fidelity.
| Assessed Student Needs | Examples of Intervention Programs |
|---|---|
| Decoding/Fluency (word-level skill needs) | REWARDS |
| Fluency (not decoding) | Read Naturally |
| Comprehension (not decoding/fluency) | REWARDS Plus |
Monitoring student progress is a process of assessment and collaborative review, followed by a change in student placements if one is warranted. Monitoring should happen at least three times per year, ideally at the beginning of school and again at the end of the Fall and Spring semesters. In fully implemented RtI2, monitoring happens at least monthly, and some ERIA schools have found weekly reassessment to be relatively easy and quite helpful once a robust and computerized assessment infrastructure has been established.
| At the Beginning, Middle, and End of the School Year... |
|---|
| Reassess Students in Fluency or Comprehension |
| Collaborative Review Including Student's Teachers |
| Adjust Intervention and/or Instruction if Indicated |
Improving instructional practices and student engagement is an ongoing aspect of ERIA, both in the core curriculum and in interventions. Student success across the core curriculum depends on mastering reading comprehension, a goal which can be best served through schoolwide use of best practices and improved instructional methods.
The Institute of Education Sciences (IES) conducted a research synthesis resulting in five recommendations presented in the practice guide, Improving Adolescent Literacy: Effective Classroom and Intervention Practices, which are supported by ERIA. While early ERIA trainings focus mainly on establishing a schoolwide framework (screening, assessment, intervention and monitoring), instructional improvement strategies and supports become an increasingly important part of ERIA trainings in the second and third years.
| The Institute of Education Sciences (IES)'s 5 Recommendations For Improving Adolescent Literacy |
|---|
| 1. Provide explicit vocabulary instruction. |
| 2. Provide direct and explicit comprehension strategy instruction. |
| 3. Provide opportunities for extended discussion of text meaning and interpretation. |
| 4. Increase student motivation and engagement in literacy learning. |
| 5. Make available intensive and individualized interventions for struggling readers that can be provided by trained specialists. |
Since 2004, CalSTAT has funded training and other supports to help over 60 sites implement ERIA at 23 school districts in 8 counties. CalSTAT (California Services for Technical Assistance and Training) is a special project of the California Department of Education, Special Education Division, which administers the State Personnel Development Grant (SPDG), among other activities. CalSTAT is housed at Napa County Office of Education (NCOE).
Of sites implementing ERIA in the past, three middle schools have already received recognition as Leadership Sites through a rigorous, competitive process for exemplary literacy intervention programs (another CalSTAT program). These sites have received additional support to develop schoolwide programs in literacy and other areas and to act as regional leaders, delivering technical assistance to other schools. To learn more about this program, visit http://www.calstat.org/leadershipSiteAward.html.
Follow-up surveys have been conducted with educators who have attended ERIA trainings, with a majority of these participants saying they have implemented ERIA strategies, shared the strategies with others, and that the strategies worked well. Some of the comments from those follow-up surveys include the following:
“Due to ERIA’s support, our school was selected to be a site model for the county department of education’s RtI Network. We shared how much the support of ERIA and the systems support helped us make huge gains in our RtI journey.”
“It has improved all of our small group lessons”
“We were able to bring the information back to our school as well as share with other schools in our county who are just beginning to start up RtI and may possibly be interested in ERIA.”
“The main difference has been more progress monitoring. We can do these once a week while our students are on the computers. This helps us evaluate our weekly instruction.”
To learn more about ERIA, as well as CalSTAT’s other activities distributing technical assistance across California, visit http://www.calstat.org/effectivereading.html.
This document was developed for CalSTAT by the SPDG Evaluation Team of Cheryl “Li” Walter, PhD, and Alan Wood.
CalSTAT (California Services for Technical Assistance and Training), at Napa County Office of Education, is a special project of the California Department of Education, Special Education Division. Visit CalSTAT at http://www.calstat.org.
“California Department of Education, Special Education Division’s special project, California Services for Technical Assistance and Training (CalSTAT) is funded through a contract with the Napa County Office of Education. CalSTAT is partially funded from federal funds, State Grants #H027A080116A. Additional federal funds are provided from a federal competitively awarded State Personnel Development Grant to California (#H323A070011) provided from the U.S. Department of Education Part D of the Individuals with Disabilities Education act (IDEA). Opinions expressed herein are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the position of the U. S. Department of Education.”