Creating a Sustainable Reading Culture Sharon Walpole University of Delaware Michael C. McKenna University of Virginia.
Download ReportTranscript Creating a Sustainable Reading Culture Sharon Walpole University of Delaware Michael C. McKenna University of Virginia.
Creating a Sustainable Reading Culture Sharon Walpole University of Delaware Michael C. McKenna University of Virginia Goals for these two days 1. Engage you in reflection about your current level of GARF implementation 2. Share what we know about upcoming budget cuts 3. Guide you to reflect on your data 4. Demonstrate differentiated lessons so that you can better observe them Georgia Reading First: Reality Check √ We have one more year of guaranteed full funding We have one additional year of extension funding -- but only at 40% The state must make decisions about how to use that funding This may be your final chance to use RF resources to institutionalize critical aspects of RF What are the critical aspects of GARF? Intensive intervention Differentiated small-group instruction High-quality whole-group instruction What do researchers identify as barriers to such a plan? Problems in translating policy into practice Inadequate professional development Failure to achieve a supportive culture Federal RF Policy What actually happens in schools and classrooms Federal RF Policy What actually happens in schools and classrooms Federal RF Policy What actually happens in schools and classrooms Policy must be interpreted by those who implement it. Policy is rarely specific enough to leave no room for flexibility and adaptation at the local levels (Tabak, 2007). Federal RF Policy What actually happens in schools and classrooms In Reading First, there is enough guidance in policy to enable us to implement our projects to meet the intent of the legislation. At the same time, the policy is broad enough to enable us to tailor our projects to local contexts. Federal RF Policy What actually happens in schools and classrooms If a policy is too vague, it invites so much variation that a program has no distinct identity. That is not the case in Reading First. We believe that the policy permits just the right amount of leeway to ensure both faithful implementation and reasonable adaptations. Federal RF Policy The policy for Reading First is specific enough, however, that attempts to subvert it are often in clear violation of the legislative intent. What actually happens in schools and classrooms Kersten and Pardo (2007) approvingly describe a teacher named “Celina,” who taught from the core program only on Mondays and did as she pleased the rest of the week. “During this study, Celina demonstrated that she was adept at finessing her teaching. She determined she would give a nod to the mandated basal series and the required 120 minutes of instruction; yet she also maintained a focus on integrated language arts and writing workshop. She drew from her four years of experience in a fairly stable context to teach in a way that she was not only comfortable with but also that she felt would best serve her students.” (p. 151) We believe that in Georgia teachers like “Celina” are rare. The fact is, Reading First expects teachers to make reasonable adaptations appropriate for their contexts. This policy is in accord with research. Klingner et al. (1999) found that teachers value practices that permit some modification and that are not overly rigid. The Too-Tight, Too-Loose Dilemma Tight Control Limited Press for Change Loose Control Temporary Improvement – Adapted from Fullan (2006) The Too-Tight, Too-Loose Dilemma Tight Control Limited Press for Change Loose Control Temporary Improvement – Adapted from Fullan (2006) “In general terms, the solution to motivating people is to establish the right blend of tightness and looseness.” (Fullan, 2006, p. 37) Michael Fullan Federal RF Policy Translating the policy of Reading First into effective classroom practice is the goal of professional development. What actually happens in schools and classrooms Facilitators PD Program Teachers Context Borko (2004) suggests that in order for a PD program to influence teacher knowledge, certain individuals must facilitate the program, mindful of school and classroom contexts. Hilda Borko Facilitators PD Program Teachers Context In Reading First, there are many facilitators: coaches, principals, Academy trainers, program reps, and even PD architects. Facilitators PD Program Teachers Context Over time, teachers themselves become facilitators as they learn together and build a professional community focused on reading. Facilitators PD Program Teachers Context The contexts in which they learn are their own classrooms, which become laboratories where they can try out new approaches and judge the results for themselves. What does a good Reading First school look like? Reading First has many dimensions, and they are all important. Under the direction of Carolyn Vincent, RMC has recently provided a checklist to examine these dimensions. As we proceed, ask yourself how your own project stacks up. RMC Implementation Checklist Leadership Common purpose Curriculum Instruction Assessment Use of time Professional Development Coaching/Support Use of recurring resources District support RMC Implementation Checklist Leadership Common purpose Curriculum Instruction Assessment Use of time Professional Development Coaching/Support Use of recurring resources District support Leadership Job descriptions, supervision, evaluation of leaders’ support for reading improvement. The principal has a clear understanding with the LC and grade-level chairs about the the duties and expectations of the P and the LC. The relationship between the P and LC has evolved over the course of the grant, without well-articulated ideas about who will do what. The P’s role as teacher evaluator has been kept deliberately distinct from the LC’s formative role The LC has made a habit of communicating the results of observations with the P, a fact that teachers know. Leadership Leadership is distributed among staff and across instructional areas & roles. Grade-level teams collaboratively decide which books to study and teachers sometimes make presentations during gradelevel meetings. The principal does not micromanage the coach but permits wide discretion with the roles and goals they have established. The coach leads most book studies and the principal oversees almost all of the activities of the coach, somewhat defensively. Leadership Turnover of key staff is managed by planned succession- & reading-based hiring practices. Klingner et al. (1999) found that when principals consistently supported what was presented in professional development, teachers implemented and maintained the practices. Janette Klingner Administrators are hired on the basis of general administrative expertise and knowledge of reading. Administrators are hired on the basis of general administrative expertise alone. New coach is hired on the basis of classroom experience plus reading specialist certification or reading endorsement. New coach is hired on the basis of classroom experience alone. Leadership District staff actively support scientifically research based reading improvement practices. District staff regularly participate in PD events and frequently express public support for SBRI. District staff have adopted a laissez faire attitude toward RF, permitting the principal and coach to manage the project. RF is treated like many Administrators seize every opportunity to express their other funded initiatives, as a pride in RF. This message is revenue source that comes with hoops through which all conveyed frequently and must jump. sincerely at the district and school levels. RMC Implementation Checklist Leadership Common purpose Curriculum Instruction Assessment Use of time Professional Development Coaching/Support Use of recurring resources District support Common purpose Leaders communicate regularly w/staff to sustain vision, beliefs, expectations, goals & commitments for reading success. Leaders are clear in contrasting favorably the systems now in place with the school’s reading program prior to RF. Leaders convey the message that RF assessment and instruction are burdens to be borne, at least until funding ends. Common purpose Leaders develop & nurture a culture of doing things in ways consistent with scientifically research based reading practices. Leaders acknowledge staff efforts that help make a difference in student performance. The principal, in tandem with the coach, tracks DIBELS and PPVT-III trends and meets with grade-level teams and individual teachers to explicitly acknowledge student growth. The principal also communicates positive trends “upward” as well, to district leaders and parents. The principal tends to ignore positive data outcomes, focusing almost entirely on the CRCT. The coach makes a point of expressing appreciation, either individually or in group settings, for contributions to the project. The coach misses many opportunities to acknowledge the contributions of teacher leaders and individual teachers. Common purpose Leaders organize school structures (e.g., committees, schedules) & resources (budget, staffing) in alignment with effective reading practices. A school leadership team– including the principal, the coach, grade-level leaders, and others–meets regularly to evaluate the project. The school depends on the coach to monitor reading process and make key decisions concerning the reading program. Common purpose Leaders assure that all staff understand & act upon the variables which impact student learning. Book studies and other PD have clarified the causal factors affecting reading development. Classroom and grade-level schedules have been revisited and refined on the basis of collaborative teacher input. Most teachers are unable to name more than one or two factors influencing the growth of reading proficiency. Classroom and grade-level schedules, including the use of specialists, were developed early on, without teacher input. Common purpose Leaders provide supervision and support to strengthen reading instruction. Reading is “first among equals” wherever discretionary funding is concerned. Reading is on a par with other subjects regarding budget priorities. Interviews with beginning teachers explain RF fully and seek an assurance that the candidate would be comfortable in such an environment. Interviews with beginning teachers focus on general instructional issues. The coach and principal visit classrooms frequently but seldom together. The coach and principal often confer together during classroom observations. The principal honors the coach’s commitment to confidentiality. The principal often requests information about observations and conferences from the coach. The coach has established good working relationships with nearly all teachers The coach has failed to overcome the resistance of a number of teachers; the principal does nothing about this. Common purpose Leaders assure that all instructional areas collaborate to create a coordinated reading program. Special educators collaborate with the coach and classroom teachers by addressing the needs of students on a pull-out or push-in basis. Special educators work largely in isolation and interact little with RF Common purpose Instructional planning occurs within and across grade levels to assure consistency & seamlessness. District-level special education administrators are supportive of and cooperative with the RF program. District-level special education administrators remain tacitly resistant to RF. RMC Implementation Checklist Leadership Common purpose Curriculum Instruction Assessment Use of time Professional Development Coaching/Support Use of recurring resources District support Curriculum Differentiated programs are in place. Grade-level team meetings routinely address coordinated implementation of the core program. As a result, walkthroughs on any day reveal that each class is at roughly the same point in the core. Teachers at one or more grade levels are often at different points in the core and teach from it in a wide variety of ways. The coach has helped build curriculum maps to ensure vertical articulation across grade levels to address the GPS. Disconnects at adjacent grade levels are commonplace. Teachers from adjacent grade levels occasionally meet to discuss transitions. Teachers from adjacent grade levels rarely interact. There is a consistent, well-defined plan for using informal assessment data to plan and implement differentiated instruction at all grade levels. This instruction is planned during grade-level meetings and its effects are monitored on a regular schedule. Children are expected to move to different groups and groups are expected to move to higher-order skills. The school is still considering its commitment to differentiation. Implementation is sporadic. Curriculum All staff who teach instructional groups are trained on the programs they use. The relation between professional development and the tools used to teach reading is underestimated. Because teachers’ instructional practices are, in part, dependent on their instructional tools, efforts to enhance teachers’ effectiveness in the absence of effective tools (e.g., effectively designed materials, adequate time) may make the task not just more difficult but impossible.” (Chard, 2004, p. 180) David Chard Small-group instruction Small-group instruction during the block is guided by during the block tends to assessment results. rotate all children through the same activities. Tier 3 interventions outside the block are set up and working. Tier 3 interventions outside the block are still a “work-inprogress.” Curriculum Supervision for fidelity (coach and principal). The coach has arranged for company representatives to provide all teachers with adequate training. Teachers are left to their own devices to read manuals and examine materials. Curriculum Some staff in school, district or region are trained as trainers of supplemental/intervention programs to facilitate further training needs future. Walkthroughs and observations focus on the proper implementation of the programs adopted. Walkthroughs and observations focus on instructional issues, to the virtual exclusion of core fidelity. Teachers with a thorough knowledge of supplemental or intervention program are assigned to mentor new teachers. New teachers must learn supplemental and intervention programs on their own. RMC Implementation Checklist Leadership Common purpose Curriculum Instruction Assessment Use of time Professional Development Coaching/Support Use of recurring resources District support Instruction All instructional staff are both supported & supervised for high fidelity implementation (EAs, etc.). The coach observes to ensure that recently introduced techniques are properly implemented in a classroom. The coach assumes that techniques recently introduced will be appropriately implemented in classrooms but rarely observes to ensure that this is the case. Instruction Instructional planning is guided by frequent formative assessment data. The coach routinely uses DIBELS profiles and other data to help teachers plan. The coach rarely shares DIBELS profiles with teachers and is not systematic about the use of other data. The coach summarizes data from grade-level teams after The coach rarely discusses each benchmarking in order data trends with grade-level teams. to highlight strengths and concerns. Instruction Additional targeted instruction is provided daily for strategic & intensive needs students to help “close the gap.” Classroom and grade-level schedules document the daily occurrence of smallgroup differentiated instruction inside the block inside the block and intervention instruction outside the block. Small-group instruction and intervention are not clearly reflected in schedules and may occur on an irregular basis. Instruction Staff and students are acknowledged for progress toward larger successes. The principal publicly acknowledges achievement gains, both to students and teachers. The principal minimizes or ignores gains on measures other than the CRCT. The principal and coach avoid explicit comparisons among teachers. The principal and coach make public data trends for individual teachers. Instruction Grade-level teams meet 1-2 times per month to review data and adjust instructional plans. The coach often encourages teachers to remind their students that testing is not an end in itself but is used to make them better readers. The coach conveys the unspoken message that test scores are the ultimate goal of RF and are the final product of all their efforts. Instruction Follow-up to assure revisions are implemented and are working. The coach reviews data Grade-level teachers trends with each grade-level receive little guidance about team at least once a month. the use of data, and grade levels vary in their efforts to use data to plan instruction. RMC Implementation Checklist Leadership Common purpose Curriculum Instruction Assessment Use of time Professional Development Coaching/Support Use of recurring resources District support In considering growth between benchmarkings, these questions should be asked at each grade level … 1. What percentage of benchmark children remain at benchmark? 2. What percentage of them fell to Strategic? 3. What percentage fell to Intensive? In considering growth between benchmarkings, these questions should be asked at each grade level … 1. What percentage of Strategic children remained Strategic? 2. What percentage of Strategic children rose to Benchmark? 3. What percentage fell to Intensive? In considering growth between benchmarkings, these questions should be asked at each grade level … 1. What percentage of Intensive children remained Intensive? 2. What percentage of Intensive children rose to either Strategic or Benchmark? Remember … At grades K and 1, the risk level is a weighted combination of DIBELS scores, called the Instructional Recommendation. At grades 2 and 3, the risk level is ORF. DIBELS screenings and rescreenings give us clues about student progress, but they do not tell the whole story. We combine different types of data to do that. The coach regularly examines progressmonitoring data between benchmarkings in order to gauge the success of revised instructional emphases. The principal analyzes DIBELS growth from fall to winter and from winter to spring. The coach waits until the next benchmarking to determine whether problems have been adequately addressed. The principal leaves data trends to the coach and does not attend grade-level meetings where these trends are discussed. Assessment There is a competent trainer available locally to train staff on data collection and use. “A major purpose of formative evaluation is to provide information that enables individuals and groups to adjust their behavior. Data are meant to be communicated, and the form data analysis takes needs to be governed primarily by its relevance to the questions asked and its clarity in communicating results” (Joyce & Showers, 2002, p. 118) The coach has mastered the administration and interpretation of DIBELS and mentors new teachers in their use. The coach remains uncertain about how to interpret DIBELS reports and has not kept up with the various reports available. The coach understands how Teachers use only screening to choose and use informal results to group and plan diagnostic assessment to instruction. guide instruction. Assessment Staff are trained to interpret the meaning and implications of the data. In reviewing classroom profiles with teachers, the coach “thinks aloud” about how certain conclusions are warranted on the basis of the data. Although the coach provides interpretations of profiles to classroom teachers, this is done without explaining how conclusions were reached. Assessment School leaders assure that grade level teams meet regularly and have the support they need to be successful. Just as the block is protected, the principal has ensured a daily joint planning time for each grade level. The coach attends grade-level meetings at least every other week. Although the principal has arranged for joint planning time, teachers at each grade level rarely meet. Assessment Data are used in grade level team planning process to verify/modify instructional variables as needed. The coach facilitates discussion of grade-level profiles, with the aim of achieving consensus on instructional priorities. Although the coach examines grade-level profiles, little effort is made to achieve consensus of grade-level teams about instructional priorities. “Fortunately, a degree in statistics is not required to sensibly analyze data” (Joyce & Showers, 2002, p. 118) RMC Implementation Checklist Leadership Common purpose Curriculum Instruction Assessment Use of time Professional Development Coaching/Support Use of recurring resources District support Use of time Adequate training time and collaborative planning time are built into the school schedule. The schedule ensures adequate joint planning time for teachers at each grade level. Teachers at each grade level find it difficult to collaborate because their planning periods are too brief or are not scheduled at the same time. Use of time The school schedule and classroom schedules are built around reading as top priority. The block plus intervention minutes exceeds the allotment for other core areas, and teachers maintain their schedules with fidelity. Although more time is scheduled for reading than for any other subject, teachers often depart from the written schedule as they see fit. Use of time Allocation of time to activities is prioritized; time needed is given to reading; less time to lower priorities. The ratio of whole-class to small-group activities is clearly understood and is maintained by all teachers every day. The ratio of whole-class to small-group activities varies among teachers and from day to day for the same teacher. Use of time Reading instructional time is protected from all controllable interruptions. Announcements and special Announcements and special events are prohibited during events sometimes occur the block. during the block. Classroom schedules are posted in the hallway, and the coach and principal routinely check to ensure that activities occur when they are scheduled. Classroom schedules are not required to be posted in the hallway and, even when they are, teachers do not always observe time allocations. Use of time Leaders provide supervision & support to assure that planned time is actualized. The principal supervises time usage within instruction & between instructional segments (transition times). The principal observes to The principal focuses on ensure that scheduled time instructional dimensions allocations are followed other than use of time. throughout the block, that transitions are efficient, and that the pace of instruction is brisk. Use of time Differentiated instruction begins early the first month of school. Reports based on benchmark testing are generated without delay, and the coach uses these reports to help teachers plan differentiated instruction. Benchmark profiles are slow to be generated, and the formation of differentiated groups is haphazard and inconsistent. “I support capturing the benefits of targeted, teacher-directed instruction provided to small groups of students organized by ability or skill” (Murphy, 2004, p. 76). Joseph Murphy RMC Implementation Checklist Leadership Common purpose Curriculum Instruction Assessment Use of time Professional Development Coaching/Support Use of recurring resources District support Professional development All staff who lead instructional groups are trained & supported in the programs they teach. Core representatives supply adequate implementation instruction to all teachers, paraprofessional, the coach, and the principal; this implementation instruction is guided and adapted by the school’s leadership team to reflect data and differentiation. Paraprofessionals are routinely excluded from program implementation sessions, even though they are expected to support implementation efforts. Implementation instruction does not adapt to the GARF commitment to differentiation. Professional development All staff are trained to interpret data from the school’s formative assessment system. The coach plans PD on the Cognitive Model to help teachers use DIBELS appropriately and to implement other informal diagnostic assessments. The coach helps teachers interpret classroom profiles without having provided an overview of the strategies. The coach is slow to meet with teachers about DIBELS profiles and unsystematic about informal diagnostics. Professional development Staff new to the school are provided the training and support needed to do their job well. The coach has developed a system for bringing new hires “up to speed” in all dimensions of RF. Training of new hires is sporadic and haphazard, and the coach depends on grade-level peers to fill in gaps in a new hire’s knowledge. Professional development Training topics are identified from data on student performance. After interpreting data, the coach guides grade-level teams in the selection of topics and books for study. The coach uses data from individual teachers to plan observations and offer instructional recommendations. PD opportunities are often selected on the basis of popularity rather than need. Professional development Training is differentiated by position and need. “Not all teachers should receive the same type, amount, or intensity of professional development.” (Chard, 2004, p. 188)* *Chard believes this statement to be true but cautions that definitive research evidence does not yet exist. David Chard Book studies vary by grade level. Book studies are sometimes inappropriate for the grade level at which they are read. The focus of coach’s observations is guided by data. The focus of a coach’s observations is negotiated between teacher and coach and may have little to do with available data. Professional development Training is valued, as indicated by allocation of time, resources and follow-up support to ensure that training goals are met. The school purchases a new intervention program and arranges for implementation from a company rep. The coach conducts observations and follow-up conferences to support implementation. Teachers responsible for teaching the new intervention program are expected to learn the program during planning time. The coach must learn the program in the same way. RMC Implementation Checklist Leadership Common purpose Curriculum Instruction Assessment Use of time Professional Development Coaching/Support Use of recurring resources District support Coaching Support Adequate support is allocated to provide a useful level of the coaching function (e.g., alternate funding for coaching or an alternate model of support is provided beyond Reading First funding). The district prepares for the end of funding by building in funding for the continuation of the coach. LEA administrators consider two plans: 1 A fully funded position, using Title I resources 2. A combination of Title I and local funds to fund a half-time coach, half-time specialist The district has no plan for preserving the coach’s position beyond the funding period. The coach will probably be offered a classroom teaching position. Coaching Support The instructional support function (coaching or alternate model) is provided to all staff who teach instructional groups (classroom teachers, instructional specialists, paraprofessionals). The coach has developed a personal schedule that ensures observations and conferencing with all teachers within Reading First. The coach believes that specialists have enough expertise that coaching is not required. The coach therefore focuses on classroom teachers. Book studies and group presentations systematically include specialists as well as classroom teachers. Book studies and group presentations are planned with classroom teachers in mind. Coaching Support Coaching support for staff is differentiated by individual need and linked to student performance. The coach tracks DIBELS trends and allocates more time to those teachers whose children do not register the kinds of gains hoped for. The coach deliberately apportions equal time to all teachers, both to achieve equity and to avoid “singling out” troubled teachers. Coaching Support Staff are acknowledged for efforts to improve implementation and to enhance student learning. Coach or principal provides guidance and support for grade level team meetings in use of data to guide instruction. Principal and coach attend meetings after benchmarking to discuss grade-level results and to guide a consensus about how to proceed as a group. The coach presents benchmark results but does not help teachers formulate a plan to address assessed grade-level needs. The principal does not attend these meetings. RMC Implementation Checklist Leadership Common purpose Curriculum Instruction Assessment Use of time Professional Development Coaching/Support Use of recurring resources District support Use of recurring resources Regularly recurring school & district resources are optimized to support reading results. The LEA and principal meet each year to consider the allocation on non-RF funds so that RF efforts can be optimized. The LEA and principal operate on the assumption that RF grant funding is sufficient to realize project goals. The LEA advocates for this allocation with other district leaders. Other district leaders view RF funds as a license to redirect non-RF funds to non-reading priorities. Use of recurring resources Leaders seek additional resources at the local level to support reading results. The principal and LEA make a united case for hiring an additional reading specialist to provide intervention instruction throughout the day. The principal is not aggressive in advocating for additional resources, and district leaders believe that RF funding is more than enough to achieve project goals. RMC Implementation Checklist Leadership Common purpose Curriculum Instruction Assessment Use of time Professional Development Coaching/Support Use of recurring resources District support District support District leaders are briefed and are knowledgeable about formative assessment results. The coach, with the knowledge of the principal, invites district leaders to state-of-the-school presentations. Together, the principal and coach provide regular briefings for district leaders about RF progress The coach and principal both hope for noninterference from the district and interact with the LEA only to the least extent possible. District support District leaders review student reading performance regularly and recognize staff for student progress. District leaders, at the request of the LEA, attend state-of-the-school presentations and publicly acknowledge successes. The coach summarizes these successes in advance for the benefit of the principal and district leaders. District leaders adopt a hands-off attitude toward RF and rarely make public shows of support – nor are such shows requested by the coach or by the principal. District support District leaders maintain visibility in the school in support of higher reading achievement. The LEA visits the school in some capacity at least once every week. The LEA makes a point of being visible, sometimes attending gradelevel meetings and accompanying the coach on walkthroughs. The LEA meets with the principal but only rarely with the coach. The LEA is rarely seen by teachers. District support District leaders consider support needed for reading in the schools when allocating resources (staffing, budgeting, calendars) and setting district priorities. District leaders use their RF schools as a model in considering the needs of non-RF schools. Funding for coaches and materials is sought, for example. District leaders allocate discretionary funds for more intensive CRCT preparation programs. District support District leaders explore how district policy, procedure and culture can support reading outcomes and take action on these opportunities. With the help of the coach, the district initiates a “reading first” initiative (lower case!). Reading becomes the number one district priority and leaders express their support by seeking additional funding from non-RF sources. Reading First is treated as just another in a long succession of projects that will come and go. District support District leaders assign, support and supervise principals & other staff to support reading outcomes. Every effort is made to find and assign to principal & supervisor positions the person whose training, experience, knowledge, skills, and credibility are best matched to the instructional needs of the students and the support needs of the staff. Hiring and promotion policy for principals includes reading expertise as a mandatory quality. This policy applies to non-RF schools as well. Hiring and promotion of principals relies almost exclusively on non-reading factors. RMC Implementation Checklist Leadership Common purpose Curriculum Instruction Assessment Use of time Professional Development Coaching/Support Use of recurring resources District support “The starting point is to observe that nothing tried so far really works.” (Fullan, 2005, p. 13) Michael Fullan References Borko, H. (2004). Professional development and teacher learning: Mapping the terrain. Educational Researcher, 30(8), 3-15. Chard, D. (2004). Toward a science of professional development in early reading instruction. Exceptionality, 12(3), 175-191. Fullan, M. (2006). Turnaround leadership. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Fullan, M. (2005). Leadership and sustainability: System thinkers in action. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press. Joyce, B., & Showers, B. (2002). Student achievement through staff development (3rd ed.). Alexandria, VA: ASCD. Kersten, J., & Pardo, L. (2007). Finessing and hybridizing: Innovative literacy practices in Reading First classrooms. The Reading Teacher, 61(2), 146-154. Klingner, J. K., Vaughn, S., Hughes, M. T., & Arguelles, M. E. (1999). Sustaining research-based practices in reading: A 3-year follow-up. Remedial and Special Education, 20, 263-274. Murphy, J. (2004). Leadership for literacy: Research-based practice, PreK-3. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press. Tabak, I. (2006). Prospects for change at the nexus of policy and design. Educational Researcher, 35(2), 24-30. Next steps: Only you know We have prepared a checklist that you can use for Action Planning, and we will post it on the Architect site.