**[Striving Readers]{.smallcaps}**

**[Implementation of the]{.smallcaps}**

**[Targeted and the Whole School Interventions]{.smallcaps}**

**[Summary of Year 1 (2006-07)]{.smallcaps}**

**[School District #1, Multnomah County, Portland, Oregon]{.smallcaps}**

**[July 2008]{.smallcaps}**

**[Authors:]{.smallcaps}**

**[Bonnie Faddis, Ph.D., RMC Research]{.smallcaps}**

**[Margaret Beam, Ph.D., RMC Research]{.smallcaps}**

**[Karen Hahn, RMC Research]{.smallcaps}**

**[Rita Hale, RMC Research]{.smallcaps}**

**[Lauren Maxim, RMC Research]{.smallcaps}**

###### Elizabeth Vale, RMC Research

*This report was submitted to the U.S. Department of Education, Office
of Elementary and Secondary Education to fulfill requirements of the
Striving Readers grant, Marcia Kingman, Program Officer.*

# Contents

[Contents ii](#contents)

[Exhibits iii](#exhibits)

[Project Description 1](#project-description)

[Targeted Intervention 2](#targeted-intervention)

[Whole School Intervention 3](#whole-school-intervention)

[Logic Models 5](#logic-models)

[Summary of Design of the Year 1 Implementation Study
9](#summary-of-design-of-the-year-1-implementation-study)

[Summary of Level of Implementation Attained for Targeted and Whole
School\
Interventions
20](#summary-of-level-of-implementation-attained-for-targeted-and-whole-school-interventions)

[Discussion of Selected Implications from Year 1 Implementation Study
24](#discussion-of-selected-implications-from-year-1-implementation-study)

[Facilitating Factors for Implementation of Targeted Intervention
24](#facilitating-factors-for-implementation-of-targeted-intervention)

[Variations in Implementation of Targeted Intervention by School
24](#variations-in-implementation-of-targeted-intervention-by-school)

[Barriers to Implementation as Planned
25](#barriers-to-implementation-as-planned)

[Implications for Changes in Targeted Intervention in Subsequent Years
26](#implications-for-changes-in-targeted-intervention-in-subsequent-years)

[Facilitating Factors for Implementation of Whole School Intervention
26](#facilitating-factors-for-implementation-of-whole-school-intervention)

[Variations in Implementation by School
26](#variations-in-implementation-by-school)

[Barriers to Implementation as Planned
27](#barriers-to-implementation-as-planned-1)

[Implications for Changes in Whole School Intervention in Subsequent
Years
28](#implications-for-changes-in-whole-school-intervention-in-subsequent-years)

[Appendix 29](#__RefHeading___Toc204070709)

# Exhibits

[Exhibit 1 Characteristics of the Participating Schools
1](#__RefHeading___Toc204140191)

[Exhibit 2 Xtreme Reading Model 3](#__RefHeading___Toc204140192)

[Exhibit 3 Content Enhancement Routines 4](#__RefHeading___Toc204140193)

[Exhibit 4 Logic Model for Targeted Intervention
7](#__RefHeading___Toc204140194)

[Exhibit 5 Logic Model for Whole School Intervention
8](#__RefHeading___Toc204140195)

[Exhibit 6 Data Sources Linked to Research Questions for the Targeted
Intervention 9](#__RefHeading___Toc204140196)

[Exhibit 7 Data Sources Linked to Research Questions for the Whole
School Intervention 15](#__RefHeading___Toc204140197)

[Exhibit 8 Summary of Implementation of Targeted Intervention in Year 1
21](#__RefHeading___Toc204140198)

[Exhibit 9 Summary of Implementation of Whole School Intervention in
Year 1 23](#__RefHeading___Toc204140199)

## Project Description

Portland Public Schools is the largest school district in Oregon and
serves more than 46,000 students in regular and special programs. Over
2,500 classroom teachers address the needs of a diverse student
population (42% minority; 45% low income; 14% special education; 10%
English language learners). A district needs assessment in fall 2005
revealed that 13 of Portland's 85 regular schools were eligible to
participate in the Striving Readers program: 5 high schools and 8 middle
schools. All of these schools received Title I funding, and none had
achieved Adequate Yearly Progress under No Child Left Behind at the time
of the Striving Readers application in 2005.

[]{#__RefHeading___Toc204140191 .anchor}Exhibit 1\
Characteristics of the Participating Schools

  --------------- -------- ------------- ---------- ------- ----------- --------- -----------
                                         Percent of                               
                                         Students                                 

  School          Grades   Enroll-ment   Low Income ELL     Non-White   Special   Read 2 or
                                                                        Ed        More Years
                                                                                  Below Grade
                                                                                  Level^a^

  Alpha MS        6--8     672           74         26      52          15        24

  Beta MS         6--8     455           69         16      59          16        25

  Gamma MS        7--8     293           80         10      91          21        30

  Delta MS        6--8     627           58         14      49          16        25

  Epsilon MS      6--8     578           61         12      45          18        18

  Kappa HS        9--12    1,457         41         9       37          14        22

  Lambda HS       9--12    632           67         12      88          22        38

  Sigma HS        9--12    968           65         16      51          18        33

  Theta HS        9--12    727           71         18      59          22        33

  **Total**                6,409                                                  
  --------------- -------- ------------- ---------- ------- ----------- --------- -----------

*Note*. Data for this table taken from the PPS Striving Readers
proposal.\
ELL = English language learner. HS = high school. MS = middle school.\
^a^Based on the spring 2005 Oregon State Assessment Test.

Four of the high schools and 5 of the middle schools determined that
they could meet the research requirements of the Striving Readers
program. All 9 schools had a significant number of students at each
grade level who were at least 2 years behind in reading achievement. At
the time of the application for Striving Readers funds, Portland Public
Schools was just beginning to recover from the neglect to its curriculum
and professional development resources caused by more than 10 years of
funding reductions and drastic staff cutbacks. Schools were committed to
improving reading instruction for struggling readers and embedding
reading strategies into content instruction. School leaders expected the
Striving Readers program to impact more than 6,400 students and 450
teachers in the 9 participating schools.

After examining adolescent reading programs and studying the research on
adolescent literacy, Portland Public Schools selected the Strategic
Instruction Model Content Literacy Continuum developed by the University
of Kansas' Center for Research on Learning to improve teacher
instruction and student reading achievement in the participating middle
and high schools. This report summarizes the first year of
implementation (2006--2007) of the targeted intervention for students
reading at least 2 years below grade level and the whole school
intervention designed to help all students learn the critical content in
all curricular areas.

### Targeted Intervention

The Xtreme Reading curriculum, part of the Content Literacy Continuum
developed by the Center for Research on Learning at the University of
Kansas, serves as the targeted intervention for Portland Public Schools'
Striving Readers program. Xtreme Reading is designed for middle and high
school students who need explicit strategy instruction to develop the
reading skills needed to master critical course content. The Xtreme
Reading program focuses on 7 reading strategies: Vocabulary LINCing,
Word Mapping, Word Identification, Self-Questioning, Visual Imagery,
Paraphrasing, and Inference. The program's core instructional approaches
include direct instruction, teacher modeling, paired student practice,
and independent practice. Reading motivation and self-directed learning
are encouraged through collaborative learning, self-selection of highly
engaging reading texts, and teacher think-aloud modeling. Exhibit 2
summarizes the components and strategies of the curriculum.

[]{#__RefHeading___Toc204140192 .anchor}Exhibit 2\
Xtreme Reading Model

> *Note.* Information provided by the Center for Research on Learning at
> the University of Kansas, November 2007.

### Whole School Intervention

The content enhancement routines, part of the Content Literacy Continuum
developed by the Center for Research on Learning at the University of
Kansas, serve as the whole school intervention for Portland Public
Schools' Striving Readers program. The whole school intervention is
designed to help students understand the key content in all of their
courses. In Year 1 of the Striving Readers project, language arts and
social studies teachers at 5 middle schools and 4 high schools received
training. Math and science teachers will receive training in Year 2, and
the remaining teachers will be trained in Year 3. Exhibit 3 summarizes
the content enhancement routines that are part of the Content Literacy
Continuum. The content enhancement routines are designed for
academically diverse classes to maintain the integrity of selected key
content and to involve students in the instructional process.

[]{#__RefHeading___Toc204140193 .anchor}Exhibit 3\
Content Enhancement Routines

+---------------------------------------+------------------------------+
| Planning and Leading Learning         | Teaching Concepts            |
|                                       |                              |
| -   Course Organizer                  | -   Concept Mastery          |
|                                       |                              |
| -   Unit Organizer                    | -   Concept Anchoring        |
|                                       |                              |
| -   Lesson Organizer                  | -   Concept Comparison       |
+---------------------------------------+------------------------------+
| Exploring Text, Topics, and Details   | Increasing Performance       |
|                                       |                              |
| -   Framing                           | -   Quality Assignment       |
|                                       |                              |
| -   Survey                            | -   Question Exploration     |
|                                       |                              |
| -   Clarifying                        | -   Recall Enhancement       |
|                                       |                              |
| -   Order                             | -   Vocabulary LINCing       |
+---------------------------------------+------------------------------+

> *Note.* Data provided by the Center for Research on Learning at the
> University of Kansas, November 2007.

All of the content enhancement routines follow a 3-step sequence of Cue,
Do, and Review. This sequence draws students' attention to the
instructional process specific to each routine, involves students in the
process, and assesses student understanding of the process. In Year 1
all teachers were introduced to 4 content enhancement routines:

-   **Unit Organizer**---A teaching method used to introduce a content
    unit and show how concepts are related. The Unit Organizer routine
    is typically constructed by the teacher and students at the
    beginning of the unit.

-   **Framing**---Helps students conceptualize the main ideas of a
    topic. The teacher and students construct the Framing routine by
    completing sections for the key topic, is about . . . section, main
    ideas, essential details, and a "so what statement."

-   **Vocabulary LINCing**---Uses auditory and visual memory devices to
    help students learn new vocabulary words. The teacher and students
    construct a LINCs table that includes 5 key components: the term,
    the reminding word, the LINCing story, the LINCing picture, and the
    definition.

-   **Concept Mastery**---Helps students master key concepts and see how
    the concepts relate to the larger body of knowledge. The teacher and
    students construct a concept diagram that displays a definition, key
    points, and good and bad examples.

In addition to these routines, the professional developers offered
optional training on additional routines:

-   **Concept Anchoring**---Associates new concepts to familiar concepts
    to aid understanding. The teacher and students construct an
    anchoring table that explores the distinct and shared
    characteristics of the new and the known concepts.

-   **Concept Comparison**---Helps students understand related concepts
    through comparison of their similarities and differences. The
    teacher and students conduct the comparison though the construction
    of the concept comparison table.

-   **Lesson Organizer**---Used to contextualize the unit within the
    course. The teacher and students construct the lesson organizer at
    the beginning of the lesson.

-   **Course Organizer**---Helps students understand the critical
    content that needs to be learned in the course, how units within the
    course have been organized, and the ongoing routines and strategies
    that will be used.

## Logic Models

Exhibit 4 presents the logic model for the targeted intervention, and
Exhibit 5 presents the logic model for the whole school intervention.

[]{#__RefHeading___Toc204140194 .anchor}Exhibit 4\
Logic Model for Targeted Intervention

[]{#__RefHeading___Toc204140195 .anchor}Exhibit 5\
Logic Model for Whole School Intervention

## Summary of Design of the Year 1 Implementation Study

Exhibits 6 and 7 present research questions, and data sources linked to
the research questions, for the targeted intervention and the whole
school intervention.

[]{#__RefHeading___Toc204140196 .anchor}Exhibit 6\
Data Sources Linked to Research Questions for the Targeted Intervention

+----------------------+------+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| Research Questions   | Data |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|                      | Sou  |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|                      | rces |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+======================+======+===+====+======+===+==========+=======+
|                      | Sur  |   |    |      |   | Obse     | R     |
|                      | veys |   |    |      |   | rvations | ecord |
|                      | and  |   |    |      |   |          | Re    |
|                      | In   |   |    |      |   |          | views |
|                      | terv |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|                      | iews |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+------+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
|                      | D    | D | P  | C    | T | C        | PPS   |
|                      | evel | i | ri | oach | e | lassroom | Re    |
|                      | oper | s | nc |      | a |          | cords |
|                      |      | t | ip |      | c |          |       |
|                      |      | r | al |      | h |          |       |
|                      |      | i |    |      | e |          |       |
|                      |      | c |    |      | r |          |       |
|                      |      | t |    |      |   |          |       |
|                      |      | S |    |      |   |          |       |
|                      |      | t |    |      |   |          |       |
|                      |      | a |    |      |   |          |       |
|                      |      | f |    |      |   |          |       |
|                      |      | f |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+------+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| *Professional        |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| Development for      |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| Teachers (Xtreme)*   |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+------+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| 1.  To what extent   |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     did teachers     |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     participate in   |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     group            |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     professional     |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     development?     |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+------+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| a\. How many hours   |      | √ |    |      |   |          | √     |
| of PD were offered?  |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+------+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| b\. What topics were | √    | √ |    |      | √ |          | √     |
| offered?             |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+------+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| c\. What percent of  | √    | √ |    |      |   |          | √     |
| Tier I teachers      |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| participated in each |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| phase of PD?         |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+------+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| d\. To what extent   |      | √ | √  | √    | √ |          |       |
| were teachers        |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| satisfied with the   |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| group PD they        |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| received?            |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+------+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| 2.  What do teachers |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     believe are the  |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     primary outcomes |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     from the         |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     professional     |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     development they |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     received?        |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+------+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| a\. How has their    |      |   |    | √    | √ |          |       |
| teaching changed?    |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+------+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| b\. How has student  |      |   | √  | √    | √ |          |       |
| learning changed?    |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+------+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| 3.  How could        |      | √ | √  | √    | √ |          |       |
|     professional     |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     development for  |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     teachers be      |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     improved?        |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+------+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+

Exhibit continues

Exhibit (Continued)

+----------------------+------+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| Research Questions   | Data |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|                      | Sou  |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|                      | rces |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+======================+======+===+====+======+===+==========+=======+
|                      | Sur  |   |    |      |   | Obse     | R     |
|                      | veys |   |    |      |   | rvations | ecord |
|                      | and  |   |    |      |   |          | Re    |
|                      | In   |   |    |      |   |          | views |
|                      | terv |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|                      | iews |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+------+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
|                      | D    | D | P  | C    | T | C        | PPS   |
|                      | evel | i | ri | oach | e | lassroom | Re    |
|                      | oper | s | nc |      | a |          | cords |
|                      |      | t | ip |      | c |          |       |
|                      |      | r | al |      | h |          |       |
|                      |      | i |    |      | e |          |       |
|                      |      | c |    |      | r |          |       |
|                      |      | t |    |      |   |          |       |
|                      |      | S |    |      |   |          |       |
|                      |      | t |    |      |   |          |       |
|                      |      | a |    |      |   |          |       |
|                      |      | f |    |      |   |          |       |
|                      |      | f |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+------+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| *Professional        |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| Development for      |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| School Literacy      |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| Coaches*             |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+------+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| 4.  To what extent   |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     did school       |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     literacy coaches |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     participate in   |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     group            |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     professional     |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     development?     |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+------+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| a\. How many hours   |      | √ |    |      |   |          | √     |
| of PD were offered?  |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+------+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| b\. What topics were | √    | √ |    |      |   |          | √     |
| offered?             |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+------+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| c\. What percent of  |      | √ |    |      |   |          | √     |
| literacy coaches     |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| participated in each |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| phase of PD?         |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+------+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| d\. To what extent   |      | √ | √  | √    |   |          |       |
| were school literacy |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| coaches satisfied    |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| with the group PD    |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| they received?       |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+------+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| 5.  How could        | √    | √ | √  | √    |   |          |       |
|     professional     |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     development for  |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     school literacy  |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     coaches be       |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     improved?        |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+------+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| 6.  To what extent   | √    |   | √  | √    |   |          |       |
|     did school       |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     literacy coaches |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     participate in   |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     individual       |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     professional     |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     development with |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     either KU or     |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     district staff?  |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+------+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| *Professional        |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| Development for      |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| School               |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| Administrators*      |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+------+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| 7.  To what extent   |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     did school       |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     administrators   |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     participate in   |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     group            |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     professional     |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     development?     |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+------+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| a\. How many hours   |      | √ |    |      |   |          | √     |
| of PD were offered?  |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+------+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| b\. What topics were |      | √ |    |      |   |          | √     |
| offered?             |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+------+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| c\. What percent of  |      | √ |    |      |   |          | √     |
| school               |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| administrators       |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| participated in each |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| phase of PD?         |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+------+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| d\. To what extent   |      | √ | √  |      |   |          |       |
| were school          |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| administrators       |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| satisfied with the   |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| group PD they        |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| received?            |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+------+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+

Exhibit continues

Exhibit (Continued)

+----------------------+------+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| Research Questions   | Data |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|                      | Sou  |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|                      | rces |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+======================+======+===+====+======+===+==========+=======+
|                      | Sur  |   |    |      |   | Obse     | R     |
|                      | veys |   |    |      |   | rvations | ecord |
|                      | and  |   |    |      |   |          | Re    |
|                      | In   |   |    |      |   |          | views |
|                      | terv |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|                      | iews |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+------+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
|                      | D    | D | P  | C    | T | C        | PPS   |
|                      | evel | i | ri | oach | e | lassroom | Re    |
|                      | oper | s | nc |      | a |          | cords |
|                      |      | t | ip |      | c |          |       |
|                      |      | r | al |      | h |          |       |
|                      |      | i |    |      | e |          |       |
|                      |      | c |    |      | r |          |       |
|                      |      | t |    |      |   |          |       |
|                      |      | S |    |      |   |          |       |
|                      |      | t |    |      |   |          |       |
|                      |      | a |    |      |   |          |       |
|                      |      | f |    |      |   |          |       |
|                      |      | f |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+------+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| 8.  How could        |      | √ | √  | √    |   |          |       |
|     professional     |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     development for  |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     school           |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     administrators   |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     be improved?     |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+------+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| *Professional        |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| Development Summary* |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+------+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| 9.  What factors     |      | √ |    |      |   |          |       |
|     contributed to   |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     the successful   |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     implementation   |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     of professional  |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     development?     |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+------+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| *Instructional       |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| Coaching*            |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+------+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| 10. To what extent   |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     did teachers     |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     participate in   |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     coaching?        |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+------+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| a\. What percent of  |      |   |    | √    | √ |          |       |
| teachers worked with |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| their school         |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| literacy coach?      |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+------+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| b\. What activities  |      |   |    | √    | √ |          |       |
| did teachers work on |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| with their school    |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| literacy coach?      |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+------+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| c\. How much time    |      |   |    | √    | √ |          |       |
| did teachers spend,  |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| on average, with     |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| their school         |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| literacy coach?      |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+------+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| d\. To what extent   |      |   |    | √    | √ |          |       |
| were teachers        |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| satisfied with the   |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| coaching they        |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| received from their  |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| school literacy      |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| coach?               |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+------+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| e\. What percent of  | √    |   |    |      | √ |          |       |
| teachers worked with |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| the KU professional  |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| developers?          |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+------+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| f\. What topics did  | √    |   |    |      | √ |          |       |
| teachers work on     |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| with the KU          |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| professional         |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| developers?          |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+------+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| g\. How much time    | √    |   |    |      | √ |          |       |
| did teachers spend,  |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| on average, with the |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| KU professional      |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| developers?          |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+------+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| h\. To what extent   | √    |   |    | √    | √ |          |       |
| were teachers        |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| satisfied with the   |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| coaching they        |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| received from the KU |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| professional         |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| developers?          |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+------+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+

Exhibit (Continued)

+----------------------+------+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| Research Questions   | Data |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|                      | Sou  |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|                      | rces |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+======================+======+===+====+======+===+==========+=======+
|                      | Sur  |   |    |      |   | Obse     | R     |
|                      | veys |   |    |      |   | rvations | ecord |
|                      | and  |   |    |      |   |          | Re    |
|                      | In   |   |    |      |   |          | views |
|                      | terv |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|                      | iews |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+------+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
|                      | D    | D | P  | C    | T | C        | PPS   |
|                      | evel | i | ri | oach | e | lassroom | Re    |
|                      | oper | s | nc |      | a |          | cords |
|                      |      | t | ip |      | c |          |       |
|                      |      | r | al |      | h |          |       |
|                      |      | i |    |      | e |          |       |
|                      |      | c |    |      | r |          |       |
|                      |      | t |    |      |   |          |       |
|                      |      | S |    |      |   |          |       |
|                      |      | t |    |      |   |          |       |
|                      |      | a |    |      |   |          |       |
|                      |      | f |    |      |   |          |       |
|                      |      | f |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+------+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| 11. To what extent   | √    |   |    | √    |   |          |       |
|     did school       |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     literacy coaches |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     implement the    |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     specified        |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     instructional    |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     coaching         |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     activities?      |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+------+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| 12. How does         |      |   |    | √    |   |          |       |
|     coaching vary    |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     with teacher     |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     content area?    |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+------+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| 13. How does         |      |   |    | √    |   |          |       |
|     coaching vary    |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     for content and  |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     Xtreme teachers? |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+------+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| *District and School |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| Level Administrative |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| Support*             |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+------+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| 14. What types of    |      | √ | √  | √    | √ |          |       |
|     support has the  |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     district office  |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     provided to SR   |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     schools?         |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+------+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| 15. What additional  |      | √ | √  | √    | √ |          |       |
|     support is       |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     needed from the  |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     district office? |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+------+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| 16. What types of    |      |   | √  | √    | √ |          |       |
|     support have     |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     administrators   |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     provided to SR   |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     teachers and     |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     coaches?         |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+------+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| 17. What additional  |      | √ |    | √    | √ |          |       |
|     support is       |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     needed from      |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     school           |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     administrators?  |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+------+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| *Staff               |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| Characteristics*     |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+------+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| 18. What recruitment |      | √ | √  |      |   |          |       |
|     strategies were  |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     used to find     |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     teachers and     |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     coaches for SR?  |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+------+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| 19. What training    |      |   |    |      | √ |          |       |
|     and experience   |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     do teachers and  |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     coaches have?    |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+------+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| 20. To what extent   |      | √ | √  |      |   |          |       |
|     did teacher and  |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     coach            |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     characteristics  |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     meet desired     |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     criteria?        |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+------+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| *Classroom Materials |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| and Equipment*       |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+------+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| 21. What materials,  |      | √ |    |      | √ |          |       |
|     software, and    |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     equipment were   |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     Xtreme teachers  |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     expected to      |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     have?            |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+------+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| 22. To what extent   |      | √ |    |      | √ |          |       |
|     did teachers     |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     have the         |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     materials,       |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     software, and    |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     equipment needed |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     for successful   |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     implementation?  |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+------+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+

Exhibit continues

Exhibit (Continued)

+----------------------+------+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| Research Questions   | Data |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|                      | Sou  |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|                      | rces |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+======================+======+===+====+======+===+==========+=======+
|                      | Sur  |   |    |      |   | Obse     | R     |
|                      | veys |   |    |      |   | rvations | ecord |
|                      | and  |   |    |      |   |          | Re    |
|                      | In   |   |    |      |   |          | views |
|                      | terv |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|                      | iews |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+------+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
|                      | D    | D | P  | C    | T | C        | PPS   |
|                      | evel | i | ri | oach | e | lassroom | Re    |
|                      | oper | s | nc |      | a |          | cords |
|                      |      | t | ip |      | c |          |       |
|                      |      | r | al |      | h |          |       |
|                      |      | i |    |      | e |          |       |
|                      |      | c |    |      | r |          |       |
|                      |      | t |    |      |   |          |       |
|                      |      | S |    |      |   |          |       |
|                      |      | t |    |      |   |          |       |
|                      |      | a |    |      |   |          |       |
|                      |      | f |    |      |   |          |       |
|                      |      | f |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+------+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| 23. In what ways do  |      | √ |    | √    | √ |          |       |
|     Xtreme teacher   |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     materials,       |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     software, and    |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     equipment need   |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     to be improved?  |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+------+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| 24. How useful are   |      | √ |    | √    | √ |          |       |
|     the materials,   |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     software, and    |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     equipment for    |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     implementing the |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     program?         |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+------+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| *Instructional       |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| Processes*           |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+------+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| 25. To what extent   |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     did the Xtreme   |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     teachers         |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     implement the    |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     program with     |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     fidelity?        |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+------+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| a\. Which components | √    |   |    |      |   | √        |       |
| of the program were  |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| implemented with     |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| fidelity?            |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+------+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| b\. Which components | √    |   |    |      |   | √        |       |
| of the program were  |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| not implemented with |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| fidelity?            |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+------+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| c\. What were the    | √    | √ | √  | √    | √ |          |       |
| barriers to          |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| successful           |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| implementation of    |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| Xtreme Reading?      |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+------+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| d\. What steps are   | √    | √ |    |      |   |          |       |
| KU and district      |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| staff taking to      |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| improve fidelity of  |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| program              |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| implementation?      |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+------+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| e\. What is the      |      |   |    |      |   | √        |       |
| nature of the        |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| co-teaching          |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| relationship?        |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+------+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| *Formative           |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| Assessment*          |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+------+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| 26. What assessment  |      | √ |    |      |   |          |       |
|     activities are   |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     integral to the  |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     Xtreme reading   |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     program?         |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+------+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| a\. To what extent   | √    | √ |    |      | √ |          |       |
| were these           |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| assessment           |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| activities           |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| implemented?         |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+------+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| b\. In what ways are | √    | √ |    |      | √ |          |       |
| teachers expected to |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| use assessment data? |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+------+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+

Exhibit continues

Exhibit (Continued)

+----------------------+------+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| Research Questions   | Data |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|                      | Sou  |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|                      | rces |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+======================+======+===+====+======+===+==========+=======+
|                      | Sur  |   |    |      |   | Obse     | R     |
|                      | veys |   |    |      |   | rvations | ecord |
|                      | and  |   |    |      |   |          | Re    |
|                      | In   |   |    |      |   |          | views |
|                      | terv |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|                      | iews |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+------+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
|                      | D    | D | P  | C    | T | C        | PPS   |
|                      | evel | i | ri | oach | e | lassroom | Re    |
|                      | oper | s | nc |      | a |          | cords |
|                      |      | t | ip |      | c |          |       |
|                      |      | r | al |      | h |          |       |
|                      |      | i |    |      | e |          |       |
|                      |      | c |    |      | r |          |       |
|                      |      | t |    |      |   |          |       |
|                      |      | S |    |      |   |          |       |
|                      |      | t |    |      |   |          |       |
|                      |      | a |    |      |   |          |       |
|                      |      | f |    |      |   |          |       |
|                      |      | f |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+------+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| *Implementation      |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| Summary*             |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+------+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| 27. Overall, in what |      | √ |    |      |   |          |       |
|     important ways   |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     did the program  |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     as implemented   |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     differ from the  |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     program as       |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     planned?         |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+------+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| 28. To what extent   | √    | √ | √  |      | √ |          |       |
|     did fidelity of  |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     implementation   |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     differ across    |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     schools,         |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     teachers, and    |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     years?           |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+------+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| 29. What is the      | √    | √ | √  | √    | √ |          |       |
|     overall level of |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     satisfaction     |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     with the SR      |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     program?         |      |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+------+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+

[]{#__RefHeading___Toc204140197 .anchor}Exhibit 7\
Data Sources Linked to Research Questions for the Whole School
Intervention

+----------------------+-----+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| Research Questions   | D   |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|                      | ata |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|                      | S   |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|                      | our |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|                      | ces |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+======================+=====+===+====+======+===+==========+=======+
|                      | S   |   |    |      |   | Obse     | R     |
|                      | urv |   |    |      |   | rvations | ecord |
|                      | eys |   |    |      |   |          | Re    |
|                      | and |   |    |      |   |          | views |
|                      | I   |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|                      | nte |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|                      | rvi |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|                      | ews |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+-----+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
|                      | Dev | D | P  | C    | T | C        | PPS   |
|                      | elo | i | ri | oach | e | lassroom | Re    |
|                      | per | s | nc |      | a |          | cords |
|                      |     | t | ip |      | c |          |       |
|                      |     | r | al |      | h |          |       |
|                      |     | i |    |      | e |          |       |
|                      |     | c |    |      | r |          |       |
|                      |     | t |    |      |   |          |       |
|                      |     | S |    |      |   |          |       |
|                      |     | t |    |      |   |          |       |
|                      |     | a |    |      |   |          |       |
|                      |     | f |    |      |   |          |       |
|                      |     | f |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+-----+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| *Professional        |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| Development for      |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| Teachers (Content)*  |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+-----+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| 1.  To what extent   |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     did teachers     |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     participate in   |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     group            |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     professional     |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     development?     |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+-----+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| a\. How many hours   |     | √ |    |      |   |          | √     |
| of PD were offered?  |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+-----+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| b\. What topics were | √   | √ |    |      | √ |          | √     |
| offered?             |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+-----+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| c\. What percent of  | √   | √ |    |      |   |          | √     |
| content teachers     |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| participated in each |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| phase of PD?         |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+-----+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| d\. To what extent   |     | √ | √  | √    | √ |          |       |
| were teachers        |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| satisfied with the   |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| group PD they        |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| received?            |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+-----+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| 30. What do teachers |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     believe are the  |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     primary outcomes |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     from the         |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     professional     |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     development they |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     received?        |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+-----+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| a\. How has their    |     |   |    | √    | √ |          |       |
| teaching changed?    |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+-----+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| b\. How has student  |     |   | √  | √    | √ |          |       |
| learning changed?    |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+-----+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| 31. How could        |     | √ | √  | √    | √ |          |       |
|     professional     |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     development for  |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     teachers be      |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     improved?        |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+-----+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| *Professional        |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| Development for      |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| School Literacy      |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| Coaches*             |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+-----+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| 32. To what extent   |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     did school       |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     literacy coaches |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     participate in   |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     group            |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     professional     |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     development?     |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+-----+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| a\. How many hours   |     | √ |    |      |   |          | √     |
| of PD were offered?  |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+-----+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| b\. What topics were | √   | √ |    |      |   |          | √     |
| offered?             |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+-----+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+

Exhibit continues

Exhibit (Continued)

+----------------------+-----+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| Research Questions   | D   |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|                      | ata |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|                      | S   |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|                      | our |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|                      | ces |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+======================+=====+===+====+======+===+==========+=======+
|                      | S   |   |    |      |   | Obse     | R     |
|                      | urv |   |    |      |   | rvations | ecord |
|                      | eys |   |    |      |   |          | Re    |
|                      | and |   |    |      |   |          | views |
|                      | I   |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|                      | nte |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|                      | rvi |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|                      | ews |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+-----+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
|                      | Dev | D | P  | C    | T | C        | PPS   |
|                      | elo | i | ri | oach | e | lassroom | Re    |
|                      | per | s | nc |      | a |          | cords |
|                      |     | t | ip |      | c |          |       |
|                      |     | r | al |      | h |          |       |
|                      |     | i |    |      | e |          |       |
|                      |     | c |    |      | r |          |       |
|                      |     | t |    |      |   |          |       |
|                      |     | S |    |      |   |          |       |
|                      |     | t |    |      |   |          |       |
|                      |     | a |    |      |   |          |       |
|                      |     | f |    |      |   |          |       |
|                      |     | f |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+-----+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| c\. What percent of  |     | √ |    |      |   |          | √     |
| literacy coaches     |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| participated in each |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| phase of PD?         |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+-----+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| d\. To what extent   |     | √ | √  | √    |   |          |       |
| were school literacy |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| coaches satisfied    |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| with the group PD    |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| they received?       |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+-----+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| 33. How could        | √   | √ | √  | √    |   |          |       |
|     professional     |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     development for  |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     school literacy  |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     coaches be       |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     improved?        |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+-----+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| 34. To what extent   | √   |   | √  | √    |   |          |       |
|     did school       |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     literacy coaches |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     participate in   |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     individual       |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     professional     |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     development with |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     either KU or     |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     district staff?  |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+-----+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| *Professional        |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| Development for      |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| School               |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| Administrators*      |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+-----+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| 35. To what extent   |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     did school       |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     administrators   |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     participate in   |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     group            |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     professional     |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     development?     |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+-----+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| a\. How many hours   |     | √ |    |      |   |          | √     |
| of PD were offered?  |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+-----+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| b\. What topics were |     | √ |    |      |   |          | √     |
| offered?             |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+-----+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| c\. What percent of  |     | √ |    |      |   |          | √     |
| school               |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| administrators       |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| participated in each |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| phase of PD?         |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+-----+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| d\. To what extent   |     | √ | √  |      |   |          |       |
| were school          |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| administrators       |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| satisfied with the   |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| group PD they        |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| received?            |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+-----+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| 36. How could        |     | √ | √  | √    |   |          |       |
|     professional     |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     development for  |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     school           |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     administrators   |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     be improved?     |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+-----+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| *Professional        |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| Development Summary* |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+-----+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| 37. What factors     |     | √ |    |      |   |          |       |
|     contributed to   |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     the successful   |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     implementation   |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     of professional  |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     development?     |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+-----+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+

Exhibit continues

Exhibit (Continued)

+----------------------+-----+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| Research Questions   | D   |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|                      | ata |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|                      | S   |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|                      | our |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|                      | ces |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+======================+=====+===+====+======+===+==========+=======+
|                      | S   |   |    |      |   | Obse     | R     |
|                      | urv |   |    |      |   | rvations | ecord |
|                      | eys |   |    |      |   |          | Re    |
|                      | and |   |    |      |   |          | views |
|                      | I   |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|                      | nte |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|                      | rvi |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|                      | ews |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+-----+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
|                      | Dev | D | P  | C    | T | C        | PPS   |
|                      | elo | i | ri | oach | e | lassroom | Re    |
|                      | per | s | nc |      | a |          | cords |
|                      |     | t | ip |      | c |          |       |
|                      |     | r | al |      | h |          |       |
|                      |     | i |    |      | e |          |       |
|                      |     | c |    |      | r |          |       |
|                      |     | t |    |      |   |          |       |
|                      |     | S |    |      |   |          |       |
|                      |     | t |    |      |   |          |       |
|                      |     | a |    |      |   |          |       |
|                      |     | f |    |      |   |          |       |
|                      |     | f |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+-----+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| *Instructional       |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| Coaching*            |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+-----+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| 38. To what extent   |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     did teachers     |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     participate in   |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     coaching?        |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+-----+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| a\. What percent of  |     |   |    | √    | √ |          |       |
| teachers worked with |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| their school         |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| literacy coach?      |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+-----+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| b\. What activities  |     |   |    | √    | √ |          |       |
| did teachers work on |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| with their school    |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| literacy coach?      |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+-----+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| c\. How much time    |     |   |    | √    | √ |          |       |
| did teachers spend,  |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| on average, with     |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| their school         |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| literacy coach?      |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+-----+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| d\. To what extent   |     |   |    | √    | √ |          |       |
| were teachers        |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| satisfied with the   |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| coaching they        |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| received from their  |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| school literacy      |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| coach?               |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+-----+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| e\. What percent of  | √   |   |    |      | √ |          |       |
| teachers worked with |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| the KU professional  |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| developers?          |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+-----+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| f\. What topics did  | √   |   |    |      | √ |          |       |
| teachers work on     |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| with the KU          |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| professional         |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| developers?          |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+-----+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| g\. How much time    | √   |   |    |      | √ |          |       |
| did teachers spend,  |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| on average, with the |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| KU professional      |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| developers?          |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+-----+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| h\. To what extent   | √   |   |    | √    | √ |          |       |
| were teachers        |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| satisfied with the   |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| coaching they        |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| received from the KU |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| professional         |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| developers?          |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+-----+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| 39. To what extent   | √   |   |    | √    |   |          |       |
|     did school       |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     literacy coaches |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     implement the    |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     specified        |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     instructional    |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     coaching         |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     activities?      |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+-----+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+

Exhibit continues

Exhibit (Continued)

+----------------------+-----+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| Research Questions   | D   |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|                      | ata |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|                      | S   |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|                      | our |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|                      | ces |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+======================+=====+===+====+======+===+==========+=======+
|                      | S   |   |    |      |   | Obse     | R     |
|                      | urv |   |    |      |   | rvations | ecord |
|                      | eys |   |    |      |   |          | Re    |
|                      | and |   |    |      |   |          | views |
|                      | I   |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|                      | nte |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|                      | rvi |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|                      | ews |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+-----+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
|                      | Dev | D | P  | C    | T | C        | PPS   |
|                      | elo | i | ri | oach | e | lassroom | Re    |
|                      | per | s | nc |      | a |          | cords |
|                      |     | t | ip |      | c |          |       |
|                      |     | r | al |      | h |          |       |
|                      |     | i |    |      | e |          |       |
|                      |     | c |    |      | r |          |       |
|                      |     | t |    |      |   |          |       |
|                      |     | S |    |      |   |          |       |
|                      |     | t |    |      |   |          |       |
|                      |     | a |    |      |   |          |       |
|                      |     | f |    |      |   |          |       |
|                      |     | f |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+-----+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| 40. How does         |     |   |    | √    |   |          |       |
|     coaching vary    |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     with teacher     |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     content area?    |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+-----+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| 41. How does         |     |   |    | √    |   |          |       |
|     coaching vary    |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     for content and  |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     Xtreme teachers? |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+-----+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| *District and School |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| Level Administrative |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| Support*             |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+-----+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| 42. What types of    |     | √ | √  | √    | √ |          |       |
|     support has the  |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     district office  |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     provided to SR   |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     schools?         |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+-----+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| 43. What additional  |     | √ | √  | √    | √ |          |       |
|     support is       |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     needed from the  |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     district office? |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+-----+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| 44. What types of    |     |   | √  | √    | √ |          |       |
|     support have     |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     administrators   |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     provided to SR   |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     teachers and     |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     coaches?         |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+-----+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| 45. What additional  |     | √ |    | √    | √ |          |       |
|     support is       |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     needed from      |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     school           |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     administrators?  |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+-----+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| *Staff               |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| Characteristics*     |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+-----+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| 46. What recruitment |     | √ | √  |      |   |          |       |
|     strategies were  |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     used to find     |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     teachers and     |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     coaches for SR?  |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+-----+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| 47. What training    |     |   |    |      | √ |          |       |
|     and experience   |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     do teachers and  |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     coaches have?    |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+-----+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| 48. To what extent   |     | √ | √  |      |   |          |       |
|     did teacher and  |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     coach            |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     characteristics  |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     meet desired     |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     criteria?        |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+-----+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| *Classroom Materials |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| and Equipment*       |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+-----+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| 49. What materials,  |     | √ |    |      | √ |          |       |
|     software, and    |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     equipment were   |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     content teachers |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     expected to      |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     have?            |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+-----+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| 50. To what extent   |     | √ |    |      | √ |          |       |
|     did teachers     |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     have the         |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     materials,       |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     software, and    |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     equipment they   |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     needed to        |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     successfully     |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     implement the    |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     program?         |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+-----+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+

Exhibit continues

Exhibit (Continued)

+----------------------+-----+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| Research Questions   | D   |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|                      | ata |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|                      | S   |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|                      | our |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|                      | ces |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+======================+=====+===+====+======+===+==========+=======+
|                      | S   |   |    |      |   | Obse     | R     |
|                      | urv |   |    |      |   | rvations | ecord |
|                      | eys |   |    |      |   |          | Re    |
|                      | and |   |    |      |   |          | views |
|                      | I   |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|                      | nte |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|                      | rvi |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|                      | ews |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+-----+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
|                      | Dev | D | P  | C    | T | C        | PPS   |
|                      | elo | i | ri | oach | e | lassroom | Re    |
|                      | per | s | nc |      | a |          | cords |
|                      |     | t | ip |      | c |          |       |
|                      |     | r | al |      | h |          |       |
|                      |     | i |    |      | e |          |       |
|                      |     | c |    |      | r |          |       |
|                      |     | t |    |      |   |          |       |
|                      |     | S |    |      |   |          |       |
|                      |     | t |    |      |   |          |       |
|                      |     | a |    |      |   |          |       |
|                      |     | f |    |      |   |          |       |
|                      |     | f |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+-----+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| 51. In what ways do  |     | √ |    | √    | √ |          |       |
|     content teacher  |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     materials,       |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     software, and    |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     equipment need   |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     to be improved?  |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+-----+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| 52. How useful are   |     | √ |    | √    | √ |          |       |
|     the materials,   |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     software, and    |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     equipment for    |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     implementing the |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     program?         |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+-----+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| *Instructional       |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| Processes*           |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+-----+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| 53. To what extent   |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     did content      |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     teachers         |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     implement the    |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     program with     |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     fidelity?        |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+-----+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| a\. How frequently   |     |   |    |      | √ |          | √     |
| do content teachers  |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| use the KU Content   |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| Enhancement          |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| Routines?            |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+-----+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| b\. What proportion  |     |   |    | √    |   |          |       |
| of content teachers  |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| met frequency of use |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| criteria?            |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+-----+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| c\. To what extent   | √   |   |    | √    | √ | √        |       |
| did content teachers |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| implement the CERs   |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| with fidelity?       |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+-----+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| d\. What were the    | √   | √ | √  |      | √ |          |       |
| barriers to          |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| successful           |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| implementation of    |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| the CERs?            |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+-----+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| e\. What steps are   |     | √ |    |      |   |          |       |
| KU and district      |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| staff taking to      |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| improve fidelity of  |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| program              |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| implementation?      |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+-----+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| f\. How do teachers  |     |   |    |      | √ |          |       |
| rate the quality and |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| effectiveness of the |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| SIM materials?       |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+-----+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+

Exhibit continues

Exhibit (Continued)

+----------------------+-----+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| Research Questions   | D   |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|                      | ata |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|                      | S   |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|                      | our |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|                      | ces |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+======================+=====+===+====+======+===+==========+=======+
|                      | S   |   |    |      |   | Obse     | R     |
|                      | urv |   |    |      |   | rvations | ecord |
|                      | eys |   |    |      |   |          | Re    |
|                      | and |   |    |      |   |          | views |
|                      | I   |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|                      | nte |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|                      | rvi |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|                      | ews |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+-----+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
|                      | Dev | D | P  | C    | T | C        | PPS   |
|                      | elo | i | ri | oach | e | lassroom | Re    |
|                      | per | s | nc |      | a |          | cords |
|                      |     | t | ip |      | c |          |       |
|                      |     | r | al |      | h |          |       |
|                      |     | i |    |      | e |          |       |
|                      |     | c |    |      | r |          |       |
|                      |     | t |    |      |   |          |       |
|                      |     | S |    |      |   |          |       |
|                      |     | t |    |      |   |          |       |
|                      |     | a |    |      |   |          |       |
|                      |     | f |    |      |   |          |       |
|                      |     | f |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+-----+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| *Implementation      |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
| Summary*             |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+-----+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| 54. Overall, in what |     | √ |    |      |   |          |       |
|     important ways   |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     did the program  |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     as implemented   |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     differ from the  |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     program as       |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     planned?         |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+-----+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| 55. To what extent   | √   | √ | √  |      | √ |          |       |
|     did fidelity of  |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     implementation   |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     differ across    |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     schools,         |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     teachers, and    |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     years?           |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+-----+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+
| 56. What is the      | √   | √ | √  | √    | √ |          |       |
|     overall level of |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     satisfaction     |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     with the SR      |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
|     program?         |     |   |    |      |   |          |       |
+----------------------+-----+---+----+------+---+----------+-------+

## Summary of Level of Implementation Attained for Targeted and Whole School Interventions

Exhibit 8 presents a summary of the level of implementation attained for
the targeted intervention at each of the 9 schools. Ratings on 3
components were averaged: professional development inputs, classroom
model, and teacher "buy-in."

-   **Professional development inputs** were defined as teachers'
    attendance at group professional development sessions during the
    summer of 2006 and the 2006--2007 academic year, and teachers'
    qualifications. Two teachers co-taught in the targeted intervention
    classes and both teachers' attendance at professional development
    sessions was averaged to create a school-level score.[^1] In terms
    of teacher qualifications, the school district goal was for each
    teacher who primarily taught the Xtreme Reading curriculum to have a
    reading endorsement qualification (i.e., 1 of the 2
    co-teachers).[^2]

-   The **classroom model** was defined as an average of fidelity
    ratings from 2 sets of classroom observations per school: one from
    winter and one from spring of 2007. Fidelity ratings were based on
    observations by RMC Research.

-   **Teacher "buy-in"** included teachers' survey responses about 2
    domains, averaged across fall, winter, and spring responses:
    (a) their perceptions of group professional development sessions and
    in-school coaching by professional developers, measured by agreement
    on a 1 to 5 scale with items such as "The 2006 professional
    development on the Xtreme Reading program prepared me to use the
    program effectively in my classroom" or "Observations conducted by
    the professional developers have helped me to implement the Xtreme
    Reading program"; and (b) their perceived effectiveness of the
    Xtreme strategies, measured by ratings of helpfulness on a 1 to 5
    scale for metacognition program components such as Word Mapping
    Strategy, Self-Questioning Strategy, Visual Imagery, etc.

[]{#__RefHeading___Toc204140198 .anchor}Exhibit 8\
Summary of Implementation of Targeted Intervention in Year 1

+---------------+------------------+------------+----------+----------+
| **Schools**   | **Professional   | *          | *        | *        |
|               | Development      | *Classroom | *Teacher | *Overall |
|               | Inputs**         | Model**    | "B       | P        |
|               |                  |            | uy-In"** | attern** |
+---------------+------------------+------------+----------+----------+
| **Middle      |                  |            |          |          |
| Schools**     |                  |            |          |          |
+---------------+------------------+------------+----------+----------+
| > Alpha MS    | High             | High       | Medium   | H-H-M    |
+---------------+------------------+------------+----------+----------+
| > Beta MS     | Medium           | High       | Medium   | M-H-M    |
+---------------+------------------+------------+----------+----------+
| > Gamma MS    | High             | High       | High     | H-H-H    |
+---------------+------------------+------------+----------+----------+
| > Delta MS    | Medium           | Low        | Medium   | M-L-M    |
+---------------+------------------+------------+----------+----------+
| > Epsilon MS  | High             | High       | High     | H-H-H    |
+---------------+------------------+------------+----------+----------+
| **High        |                  |            |          |          |
| Schools**     |                  |            |          |          |
+---------------+------------------+------------+----------+----------+
| > Kappa HS    | Low              | Medium     | Low      | L-M-L    |
+---------------+------------------+------------+----------+----------+
| > Lambda HS   | Medium           | Medium     | Medium   | M-M-M    |
+---------------+------------------+------------+----------+----------+
| > Sigma HS    | High             | Medium     | Medium   | H-M-M    |
+---------------+------------------+------------+----------+----------+
| > Theta HS    | Low              | Low        | Low      | L-L-L    |
+---------------+------------------+------------+----------+----------+

In terms of professional development inputs, 40% of middle school
teachers and 25% of high school teachers attended more than 75% of the
professional development sessions. Regarding teacher qualifications, 3
middle schools and 1 high school had an Xtreme Reading teacher with a
reading endorsement. Thus, the majority of schools did not have a
teacher with this level of qualification teaching the targeted
intervention.

Exhibit 9 presents a summary of the level of implementation attained for
the whole school intervention at each of the 9 schools. Ratings on 3
components were averaged: professional development inputs, classroom
model, and teacher "buy-in."

-   **Professional development inputs** were defined as teachers'
    average attendance at group professional development sessions held
    during the summer of 2006 and the 2006--2007 academic year; average
    participation in in-school coaching with professional developers;
    average participation in in-school coaching with school literacy
    coaches; and the qualifications of school literacy coaches.[^3] The
    school district goal was that every school literacy coach would have
    a Master's degree and a reading endorsement qualification.[^4]

-   The **classroom model** was defined as an average of fidelity
    ratings from 2 sets of classroom observations per school (one from
    winter and one from spring of 2007); the average percentage of
    required content enhancement routines completed[^5]; and teachers'
    average self-reported use of routines in the month prior to survey
    completion in fall, winter, and spring. Classroom fidelity ratings
    were based on observations conducted by RMC Research staff.

-   **Teacher "buy-in"** included teachers' survey responses concerning
    2 domains, averaged across fall, winter, and spring responses:
    (a) their perceptions of group professional development sessions and
    in-school coaching by professional developers and school literacy
    coaches, measured by agreement on a 1 to 5 scale with items such as
    "The 2006 professional development on the Content Enhancement
    Routines prepared me to use these routines effectively in my
    classroom," "On-site coaching by professional developers has helped
    me to implement the Content Enhancement Routines," or "My school's
    Striving Reader's literacy coach has helped me to implement the
    Content Enhancement Routines"; and (b) their perceived effectiveness
    of the content enhancement routines, measured by ratings of
    helpfulness on a 1 to 5 scale for the Unit Organizer, Framing
    Routine, and Vocabulary LINCing Routine.

For middle schools, teachers taught both language arts and social
studies so results are not separated by discipline. However, high school
results were separated by discipline, particularly since in some schools
participation was higher among one group or the other.

[]{#__RefHeading___Toc204140199 .anchor}Exhibit 9\
Summary of Implementation of Whole School Intervention in Year 1

+----------------+---------------+--------------+----------+----------+
| **Schools**    | *             | **Classroom  | *        | *        |
|                | *Professional | Model**[^6]  | *Teacher | *Overall |
|                | Development   |              | "Buy-I   | P        |
|                | Inputs**      |              | n"**[^7] | attern** |
+----------------+---------------+--------------+----------+----------+
| **Middle       |               |              |          |          |
| Schools**      |               |              |          |          |
| (combined      |               |              |          |          |
| language arts  |               |              |          |          |
| & social       |               |              |          |          |
| studies)       |               |              |          |          |
+----------------+---------------+--------------+----------+----------+
| > Alpha MS     | Medium        | Medium       | Low      | M-M-L    |
+----------------+---------------+--------------+----------+----------+
| > Beta MS      | Medium        | Medium       | Medium   | M-M-M    |
+----------------+---------------+--------------+----------+----------+
| > Gamma MS     | Medium        | Low          | Medium   | M-L-M    |
+----------------+---------------+--------------+----------+----------+
| > Delta MS     | Low           | Medium       | Low      | L-M-L    |
+----------------+---------------+--------------+----------+----------+
| > Epsilon MS   | Medium        | Medium\*     | Medium\* | M-M-M    |
+----------------+---------------+--------------+----------+----------+
| **High         |               |              |          |          |
| Schools**      |               |              |          |          |
+----------------+---------------+--------------+----------+----------+
| > Kappa HS     |               |              |          |          |
+----------------+---------------+--------------+----------+----------+
| > Language     | Medium        | Medium\*     | Low\*    | M-M-L    |
| > Arts (LA)    |               |              |          |          |
+----------------+---------------+--------------+----------+----------+
| > Social       | Medium        | Medium\*     | Low\*    | M-M-L    |
| > Studies (SS) |               |              |          |          |
+----------------+---------------+--------------+----------+----------+
| > Lambda HS    |               |              |          |          |
+----------------+---------------+--------------+----------+----------+
| > LA           | Medium        | Medium\*     | Low      | M-M-L    |
+----------------+---------------+--------------+----------+----------+
| > SS           | Low           | Low\*        | Low\*    | L-L-L    |
+----------------+---------------+--------------+----------+----------+
| > Sigma HS     |               |              |          |          |
+----------------+---------------+--------------+----------+----------+
| > LA           | Medium        | Low\*        | Low\*    | M-L-L    |
+----------------+---------------+--------------+----------+----------+
| > SS           | Medium        | Medium\*     | Low      | M-M-L    |
+----------------+---------------+--------------+----------+----------+
| > Theta HS     |               |              |          |          |
+----------------+---------------+--------------+----------+----------+
| > LA           | High          | Low\*        | Low\*    | H-L-L    |
+----------------+---------------+--------------+----------+----------+
| > SS           | Medium        | Medium\*     | Low      | M-M-L    |
+----------------+---------------+--------------+----------+----------+

\*Asterisks reflect schools where teacher participation was low or
variable across types of data, suggesting caution interpreting these
results.

In terms of professional development inputs, 40% of middle school
teachers and 50% of high school language arts teachers participated in
an adequate number of professional development sessions. However, all
high school social studies teachers participated in a less than adequate
number of sessions. Teachers were encouraged but not required to
participate in in-school coaching with professional developers and
school literacy coaches; as a result, there was considerable variability
in how much coaching teachers received. Amount of coaching is a possible
intervening variable for interpreting fidelity of implementation of the
whole school intervention. In terms of literacy coach qualifications,
only 2 middle schools and 1 high school had literacy coaches with a
Master's degree and a reading endorsement; at 1 middle school and 3 high
schools, coaches had a Master's degree but no reading endorsement.

## Discussion of Selected Implications from Year 1 Implementation Study

### Facilitating Factors for Implementation of Targeted Intervention

Overall, the targeted intervention teachers were satisfied with the
Xtreme Reading curriculum. Survey results indicate that they found the
reading materials to be of high interest to the students and they
experienced few difficulties motivating students to read. In most
instances, the teachers appreciated having a co-teacher and access to
their school literacy coach and the professional developers when they
needed assistance.

### Variations in Implementation of Targeted Intervention by School

Patterns of participation in professional development indicate that
middle school teachers participated in a greater amount of professional
development as compared to high school teachers. For example, 90% of
middle school teachers participated in more than half of the sessions
offered in Year 1, compared to 62% of high school teachers. When
considering teacher qualifications, 60% of middle schools had a
qualified reading teacher in their Xtreme classrooms, compared to 25% of
high schools. Given the rigorous, proscribed curriculum for the targeted
intervention, variability in professional development and/or teacher
qualifications across schools may have implications for fidelity of
implementation, and thereby have implications for impact on student
outcomes.

In general, fidelity of the classroom model (based on 2 sets of
classroom observations) was higher among middle schools than high
schools. In addition, there was variability across schools regarding
teacher buy-in (teacher perceptions of professional development,
in-school coaching, and perceived usefulness of the curriculum). Again,
however, middle school teachers generally reported somewhat more
positive perceptions than high school teachers.

### Barriers to Implementation as Planned

The Xtreme Reading teacher surveys administered in the fall, winter, and
spring asked teachers to respond to the prompts "Please indicate why you
have not implemented routines and strategies you marked 'Not
Applicable'" and "What suggestions do you have for improving the
Striving Readers program?" The majority of teachers reported the
curriculum was well organized and easy to use, but several expressed
concerns regarding the materials. Some teachers considered the
behavioral components of the curriculum too juvenile for high school
students, and some believed that too much time was allocated to the
behavior units at the beginning of the year. Others reported that the
reading material was too mature for middle school students, and some
teachers described the Book Study component as poorly developed.
Teachers suggested providing a wider variety of reading materials,
organizing the student binders using such devices as page numbers and
color coding, and providing more books for the classroom libraries.

Implementation barriers related to co-teaching included a lack of time
to collaborate and coordinate (both within and across schools);
inadequate training on how to co-teach; and, in some cases, a lack of
careful screening to ensure the compatibility of the co-teachers (some
administrators complained that they had not been apprised of the need to
take into consideration co-teacher compatibility). The Xtreme Reading
teachers also expressed concern that school administrators did not fully
understand or support the Striving Readers program, and some reported
misgivings regarding the selection of students for the intervention
(e.g., that the selected students' skills were too high or too low for
the program).

Interviews with the professional developers revealed additional barriers
to the implementation of the targeted intervention. Several professional
developers were concerned that the teachers were struggling to implement
the program with fidelity, and some believed that the teachers needed
additional training that emphasized following lesson plans and picking
up the pace. The professional developers estimated they spent about half
of their time on site working with the targeted intervention teachers in
part because they were more willing to work with the professional
developers than the whole school intervention teachers, and in part
because many targeted intervention teachers were experiencing
significant challenges managing student behavior and implementing all 8
stages of instruction for each reading strategy. Finally, when the
professional development was provided in August 2006, 3 of the 9 Xtreme
content teachers had not yet been hired, and had to catch up on training
in September and October.

Discussions with the district Striving Readers leadership team revealed
some dissatisfaction with the quality of teacher and student materials.
District staff had expected to receive a finished curriculum, and
instead had to spend excessive time duplicating teacher and student
materials and organizing them in binders. The Striving Readers district
literacy specialists reported that printing and distribution of
materials detracted from the time they wanted to spend working in
schools with teachers and school literacy coaches.

### Implications for Changes in Targeted Intervention in Subsequent Years

Proposed changes to address teachers' concerns about the curriculum
include outlining alternate pacing options for teachers who want to
spend less time on behavior units at the beginning of the year, and
providing alternate books with more appropriate content for middle
school students. In addition, school literacy coaches will provide more
in-school coaching to Xtreme Reading teachers in Year 2.

### Facilitating Factors for Implementation of Whole School Intervention

Although many teachers and school administrators were critical of the
summer professional development sessions, most agreed that monthly site
visits provided by the professional developers were very beneficial.
Principals reported that they experienced constructive interactions with
the professional developers and received positive feedback from the
teachers. One principal remarked, "I liked the manner in which \[the
professional developers\] came in alongside teachers and helped make
connections when teachers didn't see the connections." Principals also
appreciated the technology provided through the grant, the Striving
Reader program's focus on low-achieving students, the emphasis on
planning and structuring content instruction, and the emphasis on
teacher collaboration to achieve a common goal. Many teachers commented
favorably on the content enhancement routines and reported that they
helped themselves and their students to better conceptualize and grasp
content.

### Variations in Implementation by School

Patterns of participation in professional development indicate that high
school social studies teachers participated in less group professional
development than high school language arts teachers or middle school
teachers. Teacher participation in coaching, either from professional
developers or school literacy coaches, varied considerably with no clear
patterns other than that middle school teachers were more willing to
receive coaching from professional developers. Overall, no schools met
the target of 14 hours of contact per teacher per year with professional
developers (median of 2.8 hours per year), or the target of 14 hours of
contact per teacher per year with school literacy coaches (median of
11.2 hours per year). Most schools had literacy coaches with either a
Master's degree and reading endorsement, or simply a Master's degree.
Two middle schools had literacy coaches who lacked both qualifications.

Fidelity of the classroom model (based on winter and spring classroom
observations) is interpreted with caution due to limited participation
among high school teachers (26% participated in winter observations and
19% in spring observations). At both times, fidelity ratings across all
schools were generally below 79% accuracy. Regarding teacher buy-in
(teacher perceptions of professional development, in-school coaching,
and perceived usefulness of the curriculum), high school teachers had
considerably poorer perceptions than middle school teachers.

As noted above, middle schools and high schools varied in some patterns
of implementation of the whole school intervention. In general, middle
school teachers were more receptive to trying the content enhancement
routines in their classrooms, working with the professional developers,
and allowing classroom observations. This receptivity occurred despite
extenuating circumstances in 4 of the 5 middle schools: 1 school was
preparing to close, 2 were preparing to merge with elementary schools,
and 1 was preparing to become an all-girls school. Potential
implications of these changes may include higher than usual staff
turnover (meaning a loss of some literacy coaches and teachers
experienced in using content enhancement routines in Year 2),
administrator turnover, and introduction of initiatives related to
school reorganization that compete for teachers' and administrators'
attention and resources in Year 2.

### Barriers to Implementation as Planned

Data on the barriers to implementation during Year 1 were gathered
through the fall and spring school administrator interviews; fall,
winter, and spring teacher surveys; school literacy coach surveys and
interviews; and fall, winter, and spring professional developer
interviews. From the school administrator viewpoint, the primary
barriers to implementation included their own lack of knowledge of the
targeted and whole school interventions, difficulties in implementing
multiple reforms or new programs simultaneously, the late hiring of key
staff, some teachers' unwillingness to participate in the program, and
conflicts between the professional development requirements for Striving
Readers and other initiatives. Some principals believed that
implementation would have been more successful if all teachers had been
involved (rather than only language arts and social studies teachers),
if the district's summer principal training hadn't been scheduled at the
same time as the Striving Readers administrator training, and if issues
with the teachers' union could have been worked out in advance.

Teachers suggested that the summer professional development could have
covered all of the content in much less time and complained that the
professional developers did not take into account the knowledge they
already had. Teachers also cited insufficient time for collaboration
with other teachers and the absence of clearly communicated expectations
as barriers to implementation. The professional developers agreed the
district's failure to clearly communicate implementation expectations
was a problem, along with a lack of consequences for teachers who
refused to participate. They suggested that more administrative support
would have been helpful---particularly to recognize teachers who
successfully implemented the program. Professional developers also
posited that teachers in this district lacked planning experience and
consequently struggled to incorporate content enhancement routine
planning into their daily routines. Finally, the lack of a district
curriculum for most subjects thwarted implementation. Some teachers
developed content enhancement routines for lower level or simple
concepts rather than the complex concepts for which the routines are
most helpful.

### Implications for Changes in Whole School Intervention in Subsequent Years

Proposed changes to address teachers' concerns included reorganizing the
content and structure of summer professional development sessions;
involving district literacy specialists in selection of content
enhancement routines for math and science teachers in Year 2 to make
routines applicable to their content areas; and clearer communication of
district expectations for teachers in Year 2.

[]{#__RefHeading___Toc204070709 .anchor}Appendix

Appendix A\
Stages of Xtreme Reading Strategy Instruction

  ------- ----------------------- -----------------------------------------
  Stage   Instructional Practice  Purpose

  1       Describing              Teacher provides rationale and describes
                                  steps for the strategy.

  2       Teacher Modeling        Teacher demonstrates the strategy by
                                  thinking aloud and gradually involving
                                  students.

  3       Verbal Practice         Students verbally rehearse the steps of
                                  the strategy until they can understand
                                  and name the strategy steps.

  4       Guided Practice         Teacher models expert reading behaviors
                                  using current and previously learned
                                  strategies and prompts students to use
                                  strategy steps.

  5       Paired Practice         Students practice the strategy with a
                                  peer using materials at their
                                  instructional level and provide feedback
                                  to each other. Students periodically read
                                  to each other, checking accuracy and
                                  fluency on timed oral reading passages.
                                  The teacher monitors the pairs and
                                  provides feedback.

  6       Independent Practice    Students apply the reading strategy to a
                                  passage using a worksheet to record their
                                  use of the strategy. Students then take a
                                  reading comprehension test.

  7       Differentiated Practice Students apply the reading strategy to
                                  individual oral reading with the teacher,
                                  and the teacher provides more specific
                                  individual feedback (occurs during
                                  independent practice time).

  8       Integration and         Students apply strategies to text from
          Generalization          other classes and participate in class
                                  discussion of strategy use.
  ------- ----------------------- -----------------------------------------

> *Note.* Information provided by the Center for Research on Learning at
> the University of Kansas, November 2007.

[^1]: Attendance data were provided by the school district.

[^2]: Qualifications were self-reported on teachers' surveys.

[^3]: Attendance data were provided by the school district.

[^4]: Coaches self-reported their qualifications on surveys.

[^5]: Completion rates of required routines was determined form school
    literacy coach records.

[^6]: Classroom observations contributed 50% to Classroom Model ratings,
    and teacher participation was quite variable across time points
    (winter and spring) and schools (i.e., range of 10% to 100% of
    teachers participating). In general, participation was higher and
    more consistent across time points in the middle schools, and lower
    and more variable in the high schools. Schools with asterisks \* in
    this column had low observation participation rates, which may limit
    the interpretation of these ratings.

[^7]: Teacher "buy-in" is derived from teacher survey responses, and
    some schools had lower teacher response rates than others. Schools
    with asterisks \* in this column had low response rates, which may
    limit the interpretation of these ratings.