Success for All Foundation

Acknowledgments

The Success for All Standards and Curriculum Alignment Department and

preparation of this document are supported in part by a Grant (No. 84.215C) from

the Office of Educational Research and Improvement, U.S. Department of

Education. However, airy opinions expressed are those of the Success for All

Foundation and do not necessarily represent OERI positions or policies.

Many thanks to Success for All trainer Bernadette Jaster for her contributions to

this alignment document.

Copyediting by: Donna Marie Ledbetter

For questions or comments regarding this document or to obtain a copy,

please contact:

Success for All Foundation

Standards and Curriculum Alignment Department

200 W. Towsontown, Blvd.

Baltimore, MD 21204-5200

1-800-548-4998 ext. 2520/2521

email: statealignment @ successforall.net

Permission is granted to duplicate this for educational purposes. Please acknowledge the Success for All Foundation.

Ø ^{Summary of Research on Success for All}

v Success for All is the most extensively and successfully evaluated of all comprehensive school reform models. Studies in many locations by many researchers have found positive effects of Success for All on student reading performance, reductions in special education placements, and many other outcomes. On the basis of this research, an independent review of 24 comprehensive reform models by the American Institutes for Research found Success for All to be one of only two elementary models to receive the highest ratings for research quality and outcomes (Herman, 1999). Research on the achievement outcomes of Success for All is summarized here. For more complete reviews, see Slavin & Madden (2000, 2001).

Ø Studies Using Individually Administered Reading Measure

v Many studies have compared Success for All and control schools on standardized tests designed to be given individually, especially the Woodcock Reading Mastery Test and the Durrell Analysis of Reading Difficulty. These studies follow children in Success for All and control schools STaRting in kindergarten or first grade into the later grades. They have been carried out by three research institutions in high-poverty schools in eleven school districts, including Baltimore, Philadelphia, Memphis, Tucson, Ft. Wayne (IN), and Modesto (CA). About 6000 SFA and 6000 control children were tested.

Ø Effects on District-Administered Standardized Tests

v While individually-administered assessments are far more accurate than district-administered tests and are much more sensitive to real reading gains, educators usually want to know the effects of innovative programs on the kinds of group-administered standardized tests they are held accountable for. There are hundreds of test score reports from individual Success for All schools showing dramatic gains on standardized tests. District test score data can produce valid evaluations of educational programs if comparison groups are available. To obtain this information, researchers have often analyzed standardized or state criterion-referenced test data comparing students in experimental and control schools. The following sections briefly summarize findings from these types of evaluations.

Ø Memphis, Tennessee

v One of the most important third-party evaluations of Success for All/Roots & Wings is a study carried out by researchers at the University of Tennessee-Knoxville for the Memphis City Schools (Sanders, Wright, Ross, & Wang, 2000). William Sanders, the architect of the Tennessee Value-Added Assessment System (TVAAS), carried out the analyses. The TVAAS gives each school an expected gain, independent of school poverty levels, and VH compares it to actual scores on the Tennessee Comprehensive Assessment Program (TCAP). TVAAS scores above 100 indicate gains in excess of expectations; those below 100 indicate the opposite. Sanders compared TVAAS scores in 22 Memphis Success for All schools to scores in a) other reform designs, b) matched comparison schools, and c) all Tennessee schools.

v State of Texas

v The largest study ever done to evaluate achievement outcomes of Success for All was done by Hurley, Chamberlain, Slavin, & Madden (in press). Using data available on the Internet, Hurley et al. compared every school that ever used Success for All anywhere in the State of Texas during the period 1994-1998. Gains in these schools on the percent of students passing the Texas Assessment of Academic Skills (TAAS) reading measures for grades 3-5 were compared to gains in the state as a whole; in each case, gains from the year before program inception to 1998 were compared. (Changes in testing procedures made 1999 scores non-comparable) This following figure shows the overall results, which indicate significantly greater gains for Success for All schools than for the rest of the state for every group of schools. Gains were greatest for African-American and Hispanic students, compared to similar students in the rest of Texas.

Ø TAAS Reading, Gains From Pre-implementation Year to 1998,

Ø SFA Schools vs. State of Texas,

Ø All Students, Grades 3-5

Ø English Language Learners

v Success for All has two adaptations for English language learners, a Spanish bilingual version and an English language development supplement to the English version. In six studies, both versions have been found to be significantly more effective than traditional approaches used with English language learners (Slavin & Madden, 1999).

v Other Outcomes

§ Beyond the many evaluations of reading achievement, Success for All has been found in several studies to reduce assignments of students to special education and to increase the achievement of students already in special education for learning difficulties (Slavin, 1996). It has been found to increase student attendance and reduce retention. Studies of teachers' attitudes have found that teachers favor Success for All and feel that it is effective for men-children. For example, in San Antonio, a new superintendent required teachers in schools implementing a variety of reform models to vote to retain or abandon their model. The vote in 24 Success for All schools averaged 81.1% positive, while that for four other models in 37 schools averaged 36.5% positive.

§ For More Information www.successforall.net,

Ø Overview of the Success for All Alignment with New Jersey Language Arts Literacy Curriculum Framework

v As a complete program, Success for All is one of the most extensively evaluated whole school models in existence. Success for All incorporates a comprehensive set of innovate strategies, each of which is based on its own body of rigorous research. The beginning reading program, Reading Roots, uses a balanced approach emphasizing systematic phonics instruction in the context of meaningful text that is based on research reviewed by Marilyn Adams (1990) and many others. The upper elementary reading approach is equally rooted in research on comprehension, fluency, summarization, spelling, story structure, and vocabulary.

v It is our belief that Success for All can help New Jersey students meet the New Jersey Language Arts Standards. After reviewing the Standards and Progress Indicators, we see that they are very compatible with the Roots & Wings program. Any Progress Indicators not covered in Roots & Wings program may be included in our WorldLab program. Otherwise, we would expect them to be taught at other times during the day.

v Ten years of research on Success for All show that the program significantly improves student reading performance in schools large and small, urban and rural. The research has been conducted by researchers at Johns Hopkins University, the University of Memphis, and California based West End at 23 schools in nine districts. Among the findings:

§ By the end of the first grade, students in Success for All schools have average reading scores almost three months ahead of those in matching control schools;

§ By the end of the fifth grade, students read more than one year ahead of control peers;

§ Success for All reduces the need for special education placements by more than 50%, and virtually eliminated retention;

§ Middle school students who come from Success for All schools continue to read more than one year ahead of those in matching schools;

§ The Spanish versions of Success for All now used in bilingual classes, Lee Conmigo and Alas para Leer, show strong positive effects on student achievement, and

§ Achievement effects are especially strong for students who score in the lowest quartile.

Ø Cooperative learning is the vehicle that drives the Success for All curriculum. The cooperative learning component has an overarching impact on many of the New Jersey standards. Cooperative learning both increases students' motivation and engages students in cognitive activities known to contribute to reading comprehension, such as elaboration, summarization, and rephrasing (Slavin, 1995). Students work together in partnerships and teams, helping each other become strategic^ readers and writers. Emphasis is placed on individual accountability, common goals, and recognition of group success. The cooperative learning component of Roots & Wings will help New Jersey's students achieve learning goals throughout the curriculum.

Ø Success for All Alignment with New Jersey Core Curriculum Content Standards for Language Arts Literacy

v Many of New Jersey's Progress Indicators that are not covered, specifically within Standard 3.5 (All

students will View, Understand, and Use Non-textual Visual Information) are covered within Success for All's WorldLab program, the science and social studies component. Whole school reform is achieved with the implementation of WorldLab in the Roots & Wings Design. WorldLab offers a framework in which to integrate scientific practice and technology. WorldLab simulations draw from the entire content of Grades 1-6 science and social studies and integrate reading, writing, mathematics, and fine arts within that context. While many aspects of the reading and mathematics programs demand rigorous adherence to the program model, nothing precludes the addition of appropriate technology-based extension materials, unless they distract from the 90-minute reading period. The integration of audio-visual presentations, computer training, electronic music composition, and instruction in basic mechanical engineering can effectively augment the spectrum of a Success for All elementary school's curriculum. The program's emphasis on three key components of the scientific method, investigation, experimentation, and simulation, encourage the integration of traditional modes of learning and resources made available by recent technological innovations. WorldLab completes the Roots & Wings vision.

Ø Roots & Wings is all about integrating experiences and knowledge from all subject areas. The goal of Roots & Wings is for every student to become a thoughtful, strategic, and enthusiastic reader, writer, scientist, mathematician, historian, economist, and geographer. Are we reaching this goal? The research says "yes". Roots & Wings schools have had substantial gains on the Maryland School Performance Assessment Program (MSPAP), a state-of-the-art test designed to test students' ability to comprehend, analyze, categorize, synthesize, evaluate, and apply their knowledge to solve real-life problems. The Roots & Wings program will help New Jersey's students achieve the goals and academic expectation set for them by the New Jersey Department of Education.

Ø An Overview of New Jersey Standards and Progress Indicators for Language Arts Literacy Curriculum Framework

Ø Standard 3.1

v All students will speak for a variety of real purposes and audiences.

§ Descriptive Statement: Speaking, both formally and informally, is critical to the learning process. Language arts literacy develops when students in large and small groups engage in discourse and dialogue about literature, nonfiction, and topics of current concern and interest. Students should have opportunities to prepare and participate in more formal presentations, such as speeches, panel discussions, and debates. They should have opportunities to use language for a variety of other purposes, including questioning, sharing information, telling a humorous story, and helping others to achieve goals. Students should recognize that what they hear, write, read and view contributes to the content and quality of their oral language.

Ø Standard 3.2

v All students will listen actively in a variety of situations to information from a variety of sources.

§ Descriptive Statement: Through active listening, students gain understanding and appreciation of language and communication. They develop an awareness of the role of sound, including intonation, rhythm, pace, enunciation, volume, and quality, in combination with words and/or visual presentations to convey meaning. Effective listeners are able to restate, interpret, respond to, and evaluate increasingly complex messages conveyed through sound. Students should have opportunities to listen to language used for a variety of purposes including telling a story, sharing information, questioning, persuading, and helping others to achieve goals. Students should recognize that they what they say, write, read, and view contributes to the content and quality of listening experiences.

Ø Standard 3.3

v All students will write in clear, concise, organized language that varies in content and form for different audiences and purposes.

§ Descriptive Statement: Writing is a complex process that may be used for self or others in communication, expression, and learning. Proficient writers have a repertoire of strategies that enables them to vary form, style, and conventions in order to write for different audiences, contexts, and purposes.

§ Writing activities should include opportunities for students to think about their ideas and feelings and the events and people in their lives. Through writing, students are able to describe experiences, examine and organize their perceptions of them, and link them to events and experiences in the lives of others. Students should be helped to understand the recursive nature and shifting perspectives of the writing process, and should be encouraged to take risks, collaborate, and reflect as they compose increasingly complex texts with appropriate conventions of spelling, grammar, and punctuation as they revise, edit, and publish. They should learn to examine their writing not only as a product but also as a mode of thinking. They should recognize that what they hear, speak, read, and view contributes to the content and quality of their writing. Writers need to be able to complete projects for a variety of purposes.

Ø Standard 3.4

v All students will read a variety of materials and texts with comprehension and critical analysis.

§ Descriptive Statement: Reading is a complex process through which readers actively construct meaning and connect with others' ideas. The reading process requires readers to relate prior knowledge and personal experiences to written texts; respond to texts in aesthetic and critical ways; recognize and appreciate print as a cuing system for meaning; and understand words, their variations, and their contexts. Students should recognize that what they hear, speak, write, and view contributes to the content and quality of their reading experiences.

§ Proficient readers use a repertoire of strategies (including phonics, context clues, and foreshadowing) that enables them to adapt to increasing levels of complexity, and they develop lifelong habits of reading and thinking. A diversity of materials provides students with opportunities to grow intellectually, socially, and emotionally as they consider universal themes, diverse cultures and perspectives, and the common aspects of human existence. The study of literature allows students to return to the materials and reconstruct meaning as they examine their own reading along with the writer's shaping of text and the cultural, historical, and psychological contexts for composing.

Ø Standard 3.5

v All students will view, understand, and use non-textual visual information.

§ Descriptive Statement: In the language arts literacy classroom, students learn how to view in order to be able to respond thoughtfully and critically to the visual messages of both print and nonprint. Effective viewing is essential to comprehend and respond to personal interactions, live performances, visual arts that involve oral and/or written language, and both print media (graphs, charts, diagrams, illustrations, photographs, and graphic design in books, magazines, and newspapers) and electronic media (television, computers, film). Students should recognize that what they speak, hear, write, and read contributes to the content and quality of their viewing.

Success for All Alignment with New Jersey Core Curriculum Content Standards

Language Arts Literacy

4^th Grade

Ø Content Standards and Progress Indicators

v 3.1 All students will speak for a variety of real purposes and audiences.

§ Use listening, writing, reading, and viewing to assist with speaking.

§ Adjust oral communications for different purposes and audiences.

§ Use oral communication in response to the reactions of others.

§ Modify oral communication in response to reactions of others.

§ Participate in collaborative speaking activities, such as choral reading, plays, and reciting of poems.

§ Participate in discussion by alternating the roles of speaker and listener.

§ Talk with others to identify, explore, and solve problems.

§ Speak before a group to express thoughts and ideas, convey an opinion, present information, and tell a story.

§ Use the conventions of spoken English, such as grammar and appropriate forms of address.

§ Read aloud with meaning.

§ Give directions and/or instructions.

§ Tell, retell, summarize, and paraphrase ideas.

§ Use visual aids and nonverbal behaviors to support spoken messages.

Ø SFA Components

v Early Learning

§ Cooperative Learning

§ Theme Learning

§ Phonemic Awareness

§ Star

§ Peabody

§ Emergent Writing

§ Letter Investigations

§ Eager to Read

§ Shared Book Experience

§ Learning Centers

§ KinderRoots

v KinderCorner Roots

§ Cooperative Learning

§ Listening Comprehension

§ Story Motivation and Story Introduction

§ Vocabulary Introduction and Review

§ Teacher Guided Discussion

§ Partner Reading

§ Shared Treasure and Story-Related Writing

§ Peabody Language Development or BookEnds: Language links

§ Celebration

v Writing from the Heart Wings

§ Cooperative Learning

§ Treasure Hunt

§ Treasure Hunt Discussion

§ Story Retell

§ Story Test

§ Partner Discussion

§ Written Response Partner Reading

§ Meaningful Sentences

§ Partner Share

Ø Assessment

v Words Out Loud

v Practice

v Pretest

v Test

v Adventures in Writing

v Partner Share

v RC Lesson

Ø Extension/Enrichment Activities

v Two-Minute Edit

v Book Club Activities

v Language Mechanics Lessons

Ø 3.2 All students will listen actively in a variety of situations to gather information from a variety of sources.

v Theme Learning

v Cooperative Learning

v Phonemic Awareness

v Use speaking, writing, reading, and viewing to assist with listening.

v Demonstrate comprehension of a story, interview, and oral report of an event or incident.

v Listen for a variety of purposes, such as enjoyment and obtaining information. Or Interpret meaning through sounds, such as BookEnds: Language Links

v How does speaking style reveals character in an oral interpretation. Listen attentively and critically to a

v Develop listening strategies, such as asking relevant questions, taking notes, and making predictions, to understand what is heard.

v Follow oral directions.

Ø Writing from the Heart Wings

v Treasure Hunt Discussion

v Story Retell

v Story Test

v Partner Discussion