|
|
|
 |
AEP Online |
Blaschke on Federal FundingReading First Districts Attribute Increases to Reading First Instructional Programs and Assessment SystemsThe Center on Education Policy's (CEP) most recent report on the impact of Reading First reported that 97 percent of districts using the program said it was an "important" or "very important" cause for increases in students’ reading scores, and 92 percent reported the same for Reading First assessment system. CEP also found that 60 percent of Reading First districts reported that they adopted a new reading program in order to qualify for state Reading First grants and that 86 percent required schools to devote a specified amount of time to reading, which averaged about 1.5 hours per day. In its report last year, CEP identified a possible trend of Reading First instructional programs and assessments impacting Title I programs. CEP’s most recent report found that three-fourths of the states and 80 percent of the districts "reported they coordinated the Reading First and Title I programs." The most prevalent type of coordination was changing Title I reading instruction to match Reading First. In many cases, the Reading First instructional program was also extended to non-Reading First schools. Not unexpectedly, of the 35 states reporting improvement in reading scores, 19 said Reading First instructional programs were an "important" or "very important" cause of student improvement. SEAs can set aside up to 20 percent of a state's Reading First allocation to be used for technical assistance and/or professional development, which can include non-Reading First schools' staff. Officials in 21 states reported that offering professional development through Reading First was one of the top three strategies the state used to increase student achievement in schools identified for improvement. Nineteen states provided Reading First curriculum and assessment as a strategy "used to a great extent" in schools identified for improvement. More than half of the states reported that the state-held joint meetings or professional development for Reading First and Title I staff contributed to the extension of Reading First instructional programs and assessments into Title I. Over the last several years, several CEP surveys have found that state and district officials felt that USED enforced "very strictly" Reading First instructional and assessment requirements, second only to its enforcement of AYP and public school choice/SES. The most current CEP study found that 45 states reported they had "sufficient funds" to implement Reading First activities while only 19 states felt they had sufficient funds to implement a system to monitor the quality of SES providers. The most recent CEP findings on the perceived impact of Reading First come on the heels of the first USED-issued report on the implementation of Reading First. The USED findings tend to corroborate CEP's findings. However, the "midpoint" summative state evaluations reported by states this fall (with reviews of these reports according to CEP to be "conducted shortly afterwards") should provide evidence of the overall effectiveness of Reading First. NCLB requires that individual state mid-term reports be reviewed by an expert panel appointed by the Secretary of Education and the National Institute for Literacy, which will determine if a state is making significant progress in order for the state to continue receiving Reading First grants. The recently-released Office of Inspector General investigation of allegations of mismanagement of the Reading First program during the early years questioned the objectivity of the initial panel. Questions, ideas, or in need of more information? Please contact Stacey Pusey at 302-295-8349.
|
Education Turnkey Systems, Inc. For a copy of the most recent CEP report, go to http://www.cep-dc.org/pubs/readingfirst/CEP-ReadingFirst.pdf. |
|
© 2011 The Association of Educational
Publishers |
||
