They are currently in development. There will be as many ready as possible by the 2009-10 school year.

It is important to note that schools using the Florida Assessments for Instruction in Reading for the 2009-10 school year (except for the pilot schools currently involved in the implementation study) will not have student data available until after Assessment Period 1 in fall of 2009. Therefore, schools will continue to use their current progress monitoring scores and screening assessments to determine student placement criteria for reading intervention for the beginning of the 2009-10 school year. The current screening procedures in place for determining fluency status and reading intervention placement for the 2008-09 school year (or a modification of that process) should remain in place for the start of the 2009-10 school year.

The 30th percentile cut point on the Maze and Word Analysis tasks has been provided as a guide to estimate the level of instructional support necessary for student success. This cut point may need to be refined within each school and district depending on local circumstances such as available resources and student performance. The 30th percentile cut point will be reevaluated by the Florida Center for Reading Research and Just Read, Florida! after data is collected during the third assessment period window in spring 2009.

The Broad Screen may be used to assess students scoring at Levels 1-5. It may be beneficial to test students who scored at Level 3 to be certain they are still on track. All students will also receive a Lexile score from the Broad Screen assessment.

There will be a Phonics Screening, Academic Vocabulary Inventory, Lexiled Text Passages, and Instructional Level Passages with Question/Response Templates provided.

Yes. Errors will be noted and teachers will receive professional development to help them provide appropriate instruction based on spelling error patterns.

No. The system is adaptive and therefore will provide passages at first grade level and above, if needed.

Third grade students who have been identified with a reading deficiency must be progress monitored; therefore, if districts/schools choose to administer the Florida Assessments for Instruction in Reading as their progress monitoring tool, it would be required. It’s important to note that the Florida Assessments for Instruction in Reading is appropriate for all students, and are useful for teachers when planning instruction to meet individual student needs.

No; However teachers will be able to use monthly Ongoing Progress Monitoring (OPM) to determine student progress.

FSP has prior FCAT in it whereas the RC percentile, ability, and Lexile do not. Thus, when RC percentile, ability, and Lexile scores are significantly higher than FSPs that’s a sign that true ability exceeds what’s demonstrated on FCAT. This could indicate improvement due to instruction and/or to the adaptive nature of FAIR’s RC screen which places students in passages they can actually comprehend. FSP, however, still remains a reliable predictor of performance on the upcoming FCAT because FCAT is not adaptive and requires that students demonstrate comprehension in grade-level passages.

Benchmark assessments are typically grade-level passages and questions that are intended to determine whether or not a student has an understanding of the benchmark. However, if a student does not perform well on this type of assessment, the teacher does not know if it was because he/she did not have an understanding of the benchmark, or if the student simply could not read the passage. The benchmarks measured by FCAT are assessed with the new assessment system; however, because the computer adapts to the student’s reading level, the benchmarks are assessed in a passage the student can read. This helps teachers formulate an instructional plan because they will know whether the student does not grasp the benchmark or simply could not read a grade level passage. If the student could not read the passage, valuable instructional time can be spent on assisting the student in improving his/her overall reading ability rather than re-teaching a benchmark that he/she already understands. Teachers will have the ability to measure students’ proficiency with the Sunshine State Standards through the use of monthly Ongoing Progress Monitoring (OPM) Reading Comprehension passages.

Yes. Districts may decide which grade levels or schools will participate in the assessment system. For example, a district may decide to provide the assessments for some schools (middle schools only) or some grade levels (grades 3-5 only). Districts are encouraged to implement the assessments for all grades and schools. For Correct II and Intervene schools the district must participate in the Florida Assessments for Instruction in Reading (FAIR) for Levels 1-3 students. The district may receive a waiver for Level 3 students from the Department if the district can demonstrate that the current reading assessment used in Correct II and Intervene schools is reliable, aligned to the NGSSS Benchmarks, and predicts FCAT performance. It will also be part of the statutorily required kindergarten screening assessment – the Florida Kindergarten Readiness Screener (FLKRS) assessment.

For students for whom the assessments would be appropriate, all scores will be applicable to develop IEP goals.

Within RtI, data are collected at each tier level of instruction to measure the effectiveness of the interventions so that meaningful decisions can be made about planning instruction. The Florida Assessments for Instruction in Reading scores can be utilized to determine appropriate interventions and whether those interventions are working.

They will meet all of the reading assessment requirements under Differentiated Accountability.

Yes, with qualification. In K-2, the Broad Screen and Vocabulary task in the Broad Diagnostic Inventory (BDI) are the only free standing measures. The comprehension task in the BDI and the Targeted Diagnostic Inventory require that the Broad Screen be administered. In 3-12, the Reading Comprehension Screen must be administered in order to take the Maze or Word Analysis tasks. For tasks that are skipped once the Broad Screen is administered, missing score reports will appear in the PMRN. It’s important to note that all students assessed with the K-2 Electronic Scoring Tool (EST) and 3-12 Web-Based Assessment Module (WAM) will have scores recorded and reported to the PMRN.

Districts may use the paper and pencil version and enter data online for the K-2 assessments. There is no paper and pencil version of the 3-12 Assessments as the computer adapts the passages on the Broad Screen for the student.

Yes. The Department will assure that the Florida Assessments for Instruction in Reading comply with all state and federal requirements for accommodations. A document has been created for K-2 and 3-12 that describes options for assessing ESE and ELL students. This information will be contained in the administration manual.

No.

Because the new assessments are funded with public school funds, private schools will not have access to the free assessment materials and PMRN. Private schools wishing to use the assessments may purchase the paper and pencil K-2 assessments, with the understanding that the PMRN will not be available. Access would not be available for the 3-12 assessments, as those assessments are provided online with a direct link to the PMRN. Districts have the option to include private schools in the professional development provided on the new assessments.

Twenty schools are officially participating in the Implementation Study. This includes 12 elementary, 6 middle, and 10 high schools.

There have been no issues in administering the assessment to multiple students at the same time at the state level. The issues that have occurred have centered on individual computers or computer labs. There is a wide difference in regard to bandwidths and hardware at schools and districts. Districts have used both wireless and hard wired computers and both worked equally well. We are in the process of completing data tests statewide to address the issues of multiple users to determine if there are obstacles to be addressed. A survey has been administered to district MIS Directors to ascertain technology and bandwidth issues that districts and schools may face.

Yes. Through an evaluation conducted at the end of the implementation study, all “lessons learned” will be distributed in a guidance document.

Students scoring in the yellow or red probability of success zones on the Broad Screen will take the TDI.

Each teacher will receive a kit with everything needed for administration including the K-2 Administration Manual, student score booklets, task cards, vocabulary booklet, probability of success chart, word building manipulative letters in plastic pouches, and ongoing progress monitoring (OPM) blackline masters.

Approximate administration times are listed below:

• Broad Screen (1 - 5 minutes)
• Broad Diagnostic Inventory (12 - 18 minutes)
• Targeted Diagnostic Inventory (5 - 18 minutes)

Flexibility is provided so that the assessment tasks do not all need to be provided in one sitting.

Yes. For effective desktop use, the teacher needs to be able to see the student as student responses are provided without the student being able to view the computer screen. If the computer screen is within the student’s view, the student could become distracted by watching the teacher score the responses, so appropriate placement of the monitor is important. A demonstration video will be made available detailing appropriate administration of the assessments using a desktop computer.

The kindergarten Broad Screen Letter Naming and Phonemic Awareness tasks as well as the Broad Diagnostic Comprehension and Vocabulary tasks will be reported as part of FLKRS beginning with the 2009-10 school year. The kindergarten student scores from all tasks will need to be bubbled in on the FLKRS Response Folder as well as reported to the PMRN.

Yes. Teachers will receive professional development as part of the assessment training on the implications for instruction.

No. Lexiles (and other readability formulae) are not proven to be reliable at the primary grades, because they don’t measure the sublexical features most challenging to beginning readers.

Online Mazes for Ongoing Progress Monitoring will be available in grades 3-12. One-minute Oral Reading Fluency probes with equated passages will be available in grades 1-5 along with Targeted Diagnostic tasks for ongoing progress monitoring K-5.

There are two opportunities to become a master trainer for the Florida Assessments for Instruction in Reading. The first option is taking place now. The master trainer PD for participants supporting grades K-5 reading instruction is a four-day training. Day one was held beginning in January, and the remaining three days will take place within April 1 – June 1, 2009. The master training PD for participants supporting grades 6-12 reading instruction is only one day and will take place within April 1 – June 1, 2009. If you have not already arranged for the master trainer PD to take place in your district and you would like to do so, please contact Larry Bedenbaugh, Coordinator of Information Services for FLaRE at (407) 823-4247.

The targeted audience for the master trainer PD includes all district staff and reading coaches interested in becoming a master trainer for the new assessment system. Schools that do not have a reading coach may send a lead teacher to become a master trainer.

Detailed below are the elementary master trainer PD and secondary master trainer PD tracks:

Elementary Master Trainer PD Track

• Day 1 (January-May): Grades K-2 ~ How to Administer the Assessments
• Day 2 (April/May): Grades K-2 ~ Instructional Implications
• Day 3 (April/May): Grades K-2 ~ PMRN
• Day 4 (April/May): Grades 3-5 ~ All components (How to Administer the Assessments, Instructional Implications, and PMRN).

Secondary Master Trainer PD Track

• 1 Day (April/May): Grades 6-12 ~ All components (How to Administer the Assessments, Instructional Implications, and PMRN).

The second opportunity for district staff, reading coaches, and lead teachers to become a master trainer will occur as a part of the Summer Professional Development Academies being delivered in approximately 24 locations across the state.

*Please be advised that these training options are for all districts and schools (Reading First and non-Reading First) choosing to administer the new assessments in fall of 2009.

For grades K-2, teachers will receive grade specific training from a master trainer which will take approximately 2 ½ days to deliver in its entirety and one full day for grades 6-12. However, the entire training does not have to occur in one sitting. We highly encourage master trainers to deliver the training over a period of time.

The following timeframes are in response to the idea of one master trainer at the school level. These are the minimum times needed given budget and time constraints without impacting fidelity of implementation and instruction.

Grades	Delivery Date and Topic	Length of Session
K – 2	Before AP 1	K and 1 = Total = 8 ½ hours 2nd = Total = 6 ½ hours
	How to Administer Assessment * (K and 1st)	6 hours
	How to Administer Assessment * (2nd)	5 hours
	K-2 Data Entry	1 ½ hours
	K-2 Electronic Scoring Tool	1 hour
K – 2	After AP 1	Total = 4 hours
	K-2 Instructional Implications	4 hours
3-5	Before AP 1	Total = 2 ½ hours
	How to Administer Assessment	1 ½ hours
	3-12 Web-Based Assessment Module (WAM)	1 hour
3-5	After AP 1	Total = 3 hours
	3-5 Instructional Implications	3 hours
6-12	Before AP 1	Total = 2 ½ hours
	How to Administer Assessment	1 ½ hours
	3-12 Web-Based Assessment Module (WAM)	1 hour
6-12	After AP 1	Total = 2 ½ hours or 1 hour
	6-12 Instructional Implications (Reading/Intervention Teachers)	2 ½ hours
	6-12 Instructional Implications (Content Area Teachers)	1 hour
* = Grade specific trainings. All others are the range of grades in one training (K-2, 3-5, 6-12).

There will be video footage of live trainings as well as web-based trainings offered in fall.

Yes. Student scores may be pulled from the PMRN through the school and district download files. These fixed formatted text files may be imported into a separate database. Districts using the Florida Assessments for Instruction in Reading will utilize the PMRN for reporting student scores.

The assessment windows will be 35 days in length which is an increase of 25 days from the current practice.

• Assessment Period 1 – Fall (Instructional Days 6 - 40)
• Assessment Period 2 – Winter (Instructional Days 66 - 100)
• Assessment Period 3 – Spring (Instructional Days 136 - 170)

Yes. The data contained within the PMRN moves with the student. The new school will be able to access the student’s previous data within the PMRN, provided that the same Identifier is used across districts and schools.

Yes. The Cumulative Report will be available for educators to place in a student’s Cumulative Folder at the end of the year or if a student transfers to a new school. The report shows the results of all the Florida Assessments for Instruction in Reading tasks and Year-End Outcome tests for the selected year.

Yes. A Missing Score Report will be provided identifying those students rostered in the PMRN whose scores have not been submitted. The 90% rule is no longer in place.

Student information will initially be entered into the PMRN via the import of the Department of Education’s Survey 6 from the Bureau of Education Information & Accountability Service (EIAS), as is the current practice. There will be an initial upload specifically for year-round schools followed by an initial upload for the traditional calendar schools. The district updates school identification numbers, etc. manually throughout the year, as is the current practice. PMRN School Level Users (SL1, SL2, and SL3) may need to add or delete new or withdrawn students.

Summer access to the PMRN will be available to view scores only. The current process for year-round schools will continue.

District lead administrators will not have access to principal log-ins/passwords on the PMRN as this would be a violation of the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA).

For participating schools, principals will be required to register their schools on the PMRN at the beginning of the school year following current practice. The PMRN student data is obtained by FCRR through Survey 6 at the beginning of the school year. Districts will indicate which students will be participating in the assessment through the Responsible Instructor-Reading file as part of Survey 6 following current practice. Therefore, only the students who will be participating in the assessments, as defined by the data sent by the district, will initially be uploaded to the PMRN.

Students’ performance on reading assessments is currently displayed with their demographic information in the School Risk Level Demographics Report. Drawn from the FTE Survey where data is imported into the PMRN, this report give the percentage and number of students in different demographic categories in each level of risk of the selected measure. These reports will allow School and District Level Users to monitor how certain subgroups of students are progressing towards their Adequate Yearly Progress goals.

There are several different types of PMRN reports which will be provided for the Florida Assessments for Instruction in Reading. These reports range from displaying a single student’s performance on a single assessment at the current time to the performance of an entire school population over a period of years through archived data. Student data will be gathered and displayed in the following levels of reports: state, region, district, school, class, and student. This list is not all inclusive; more detailed information will be provided during the assessment training.

Students assessed during instructional days 6-40 (AP1), 66-100 (AP2), and 136-170 (AP3) will have scores assigned to them and the scores will be reported at the class, teacher, school, district, region, and state levels. New students can be added and assessed during instructional days 40-60, 115-130, and 175-185 so that the student’s reading performance can be determined and the proper level of instruction may be delivered. The scores can be viewed by the teacher, but these scores will not be reported in the school and higher level reports. No assessments can take place during instructional days 1-5, 61-65, and 131-135, or after instructional day 185. Scores are normed for the data collection windows (40-60, 66-100, and 136-170. Scores on the student and class reports that are achieved outside of those windows have a dagger next to them to indicate that they are outside of the norming window and should only be used for initial placement for instruction.

No. The predictive validity is based on logistic regressions relating the Broad Screen to end of year norm-referenced tests (SESAT Word Reading in Kindergarten and SAT 10 Reading Comprehension in grades 1 and 2). The relationship between grade-level SAT 10 Reading Comprehension performance and scoring Level 3 on FCAT is very high (.75).

The 40th percentile was used as the grade-level cut point for SAT 10 because that is the cut point used nationally for federal reporting (e.g., Reading First, U.S. DOE evaluations).

For K-2, the third and final assessment is a prediction of current year performance on SAT 10. For 3-12, the last assessment predicts to the current year’s FCAT.. The grades 3-10 Reading Comprehension screen in the last assessment period can only predict to the current year’s FCAT because future predictions require statistical analyses of current year FCAT data, which cannot be completed until June of the current school year. However, FCAT performance is highly related from year to year. Therefore, predictions in the last assessment period are most relevant to summer and fall placement decisions.

FCAT simply asks about grade-level proficiency and, therefore, reports only on performance on grade-level passages. However, a more precise estimate of the underlying latent variable – reading comprehension – can be obtained by making the test adaptive and improving on the correlation between the ability estimate and FCAT performance. For example, a 9th grade struggling reader given only grade level passages (as in FCAT) on a predictive assessment is likely to give up and guess, making their prediction of FCAT very poor. However, in our adaptive screen, that 9th grader’s performance on the grade level passage would be used to provide an easier passage and possibly an additional easier passage to improve on the prediction to current year FCAT.

A series of logistic regressions to estimate the mean log-odds of success on the FCAT are generated using a reading comprehension autoregressor as well as an estimated theta score from the computer adaptive test. The score from the Reading Comprehension screen is correlated with the FCAT at .72, indicating that 52% of the variance in scores is shared.

Yes. The reliability coefficient will be published in the technical manual available in July 2009.

FCRR will continue to develop items and complete psychometric work for all assessment tasks K-12. Because students are placed into passages according to their instructional level, they will not be reading the same passages within a year. FCRR has banked additional items for all assessment tasks K-12 and plans to field test and conduct psychometric analyses on new items and passages to avoid exposing students to the same items.

FCRR purposely set the probability of grade-level success high (i.e. .85) to reduce the risk of under-identifying students who develop reading difficulties. The flip side of identifying success (i.e. the green zone) is identifying risk (i.e. the red zone). If we increase the probability of risk we necessarily under-identify those who truly develop reading difficulties and we increase the likelihood of over-identifying children. The solution is to pay closer attention to the actual probabilities of success – and less to color zones. A student with an 80 percent chance of grade level success is a very different student than one with a 20 percent chance. The reading teacher should use student results on all tasks to inform instructional decisions.

It is unlikely that a student could have a .85 or higher probability of success on FCAT if below grade-level passages were read on the Broad Screen (Reading Comprehension). However, the Broad Screen is an adaptive test and it is primarily a student’s skill in answering comprehension questions that determines the next passage administered. Thus, it is possible for a student to have a passage characterized as below grade-level in the mix of passages taken but have performance improve sufficiently to score with a .85 or greater probability of passing current FCAT.

Score types were selected that are familiar to teachers – raw (e.g. error types), percentiles, and standard/scaled scores (with a mean of 100 and a standard deviation of 15). Ability scores (like FCAT’s Developmental Scale Score) are provided to look at growth.

Yes. The technical manual should be complete by the end of June 2009, after data from the spring assessments in the implementation study have been received and analyzed.

The minimum and recommended requirements are listed below for all computer specifications, including screen resolution requirements.

K-2 Web Application

• Minimum specifications required for assessment use:
  • Platform - PC
    • Intel® Pentium® II 450MHz, 128MB of RAM, Internet Explorer 6.0
    • Mozilla Firefox version 1.5
    • Resolution 1024 x 600
    • Flash Player 9.0
    • JavaScript/Cookies enabled
  • Platform - Apple
    • PowerPC® G3 500MHz or faster processor
    • Intel Core™ Duo 1.33GHz or faster processor
    • 128MB of RAM, Mozilla Firefox version 1.5
    • Resolution 1024 x 600
    • Flash Player 9.0
    • JavaScript/Cookies enabled

K-2 Web Application

• Minimum specifications recommended for assessment use:
  • Platform - PC
    • Windows; Intel® Pentium® III 1GHz or faster processor, 512MB, Internet
    • Explorer 6.0 or higher, Mozilla Firefox version 1.5or higher, Resolution
    • 1024 x 768, Flash Player 9.0 or higher, Java Script/Cookies Enabled
  • Platform - Apple
    • Intel Core™ Duo 1.83GHz or faster processor; PowerPC® G4 1GHz or faster processor
    • 128MB of RAM, Mozilla Firefox version 1.5 or later, Safari 2.0 or later
    • Resolution 1024 x 780
    • Flash Player 9.0
    • JavaScript/Cookies enabled

K-2 Adobe Air Application

• Minimum specifications required for assessment use:
  • Platform – PC
    • Windows; Intel® Pentium® III 1GHz or faster processor, 512MB RAM, Windows
    • Vista® Home Premium, Business, Ultimate, or Enterprise including 64 bit editions, Windows Vista SP1, Windows XP Tablet PC Edition SP3, Windows XP and SP3, Windows 2000 SP4, Windows 2003 Server
  • Platform - Apple
    • Mac OS X; Intel Core™ Duo 1.83GHz or faster processor; PowerPC® G4 1GHz or faster processor, Mac OS X 10.4.11,512MB RAM

K-2 Adobe Air Application

• Minimum specifications recommended for assessment use:
  • Platform - PC
    • Pentium 4 2GHZ or faster, 1GB RAM, Windows Vista® Home Premium, Business, Ultimate, or Enterprise including 64 bit editions, Windows Vista SP1, Windows XP Tablet PC Edition SP2 and SP3, Windows XP SP2 and SP3, Windows 2000 SP4, Windows 2003 Server
  • Platform - Apple
    • Mac OS X; Intel Core™ Duo 1.83GHz or faster processor; PowerPC® G4 1GHz or faster processor
    • Mac OS X 10.5.4 and 10.5.5
    • 512MB RAM

3-12 Web Application

• Minimum specifications required for assessment use:
  • Platform - PC
    • Intel® Pentium® II 450MHz, 128MB RAM, Internet Explorer 6.0
    • Mozilla Firefox version 1.5
    • Resolution 1024 x 600
    • Flash Player 9.0
    • JavaScript/Cookies enabled
  • Platform - Apple
    • PowerPC® G3 500MHz or faster processor
    • Intel Core™ Duo 1.33GHz or faster processor
    • 128MB RAM, Mozilla Firefox version 1.5, Safari 2.0
    • Resolution - 1024 x 600
    • Flash Player 9.0
    • JavaScript/Cookies enabled

3-12 Web Application

• Minimum specifications recommended for assessment use:
  • Platform - PC
    • Windows; Intel® Pentium® III 1GHz or faster processor, 512MB, Internet Explorer 6.0 or higher, Mozilla Firefox version 1.5or higher, Resolution - 1024x768, Flash Player 9.0 or higher, Java Script/Cookies Enabled
  • Platform - Apple
    • Intel Core™ Duo 1.83GHz or faster processor; PowerPC® G4 1GHz or faster processor
    • 128MB RAM, Firefox version 1.5 or later, Safari 2.0 or later
    • Resolution 1024 x 780
    • Flash Player 9.0
    • JavaScript/Cookies enabled

For the K-2 assessment system, scores will be collected and stored in the local computer’s memory for each task. At the end of each task, the assessment tool will attempt to send the scores to the Progress Monitoring and Reporting Network (PMRN). If the PMRN system is unavailable due to the lack of network access, the assessment tool will report the problem to the individual administering the assessment and ask them to verify their network connection and try again. If the network issue is resolved, the scores can be resubmitted, and the assessment can continue. In a worst case scenario (i.e. the school network fails for a significant period of time), the scoring information for the current assessment task will be lost and will need to be administered again. As soon as network connectivity is restored, the user will be returned to the appropriate task in the assessment based on the last successful task score recorded in the PMRN system. This only applies to the web-based version.

For the 3-12 Assessments, the application does not allow a user to progress through the tasks without an Internet connection. If a user experiences a loss of internet connection and the time exceeds the defined 3-12 assessment task timeouts, the application would consider the session to have timed out. For example, the reading comprehension task is not timed, so the task will pick up with the passage and question where the student left off. The Maze task is timed at three minutes in length. If the task times out for the Maze assessment, the student will need to restart the last attempted passage. For the word analysis task, which is untimed, the student will pick up with the last word attempted.

The Adobe AIR version will store the results locally in a file on the hard drive and there should never be a case of lost data due to network connectivity issues as a network connection will not be needed to administer the assessments while using the Adobe AIR application.

No.

There is a teacher log-in to begin the assessments. The websites are encrypted using 128-bits and authentication is by VeriSign. For the K-2 Assessments, the user’s credentials are unique and mirror those on the PMRN (user name and password). For the 3-12 Assessments, a pass key is generated every morning. The key is valid from 7am to 7pm each day. A user at the school must sign in to have the key generated. Only users (teacher and students) entering the key, identifying their class, name, and entering their date of birth, may access the assessments.

Yes.

The company providing the mini-laptops will provide technical support on the hardware. Vendors bidding for this contract must clearly meet technical support requirements outlined in the Request for Quote. The PMRN Helpdesk will be available to help with questions regarding the assessment applications.

No.

No.

No.

Yes.

For the 3-12 Assessment implementation study, the requirements overall are moderate even for low technology schools. The application is designed with virtually no graphics and utilizes technologies like AJAX, server side session states, and page view states to minimize the amount of data exchanged between the browser and the server.

Word Analysis is the task that would require the most bandwidth because it has to feed audio files during the task administration. When the task begins, it may need a few seconds to load on a slow connection. At the startup, Word Analysis needs to load about 300KB of data (180KB for the Task flash movie, ~60KB for the first two audio clips). To download this much data in ~30 seconds will require 64Kbps of bandwidth. The student computer will need about 56kbps of bandwidth to take the Word Analysis task without any delays. In a lab setting with 30 students all taking the Word Analysis task at once, the application will need to download about 2.1MB of data in less than 15 seconds. This will require a T1 or 1.5Mbps line. The fact to consider, however, is that this would be a peak bandwidth requirement. This is a highly unlikely scenario in a lab with 30 students. Students take different amounts of time to answer the same items and more importantly it is very unlikely that all 30 students will be taking Word Analysis at once.

Other tasks will use considerably less bandwidth because the heaviest elements are the performance feedback audio clips which are loaded in the background while the student is answering Reading Comprehension or Maze items, and will be completely loaded by the time students finish their first passage.

The only other assets that could be bandwidth intensive are the introduction flash movies.

• Word Analysis Intro is 971KB and loads in 2:22 minutes @ 56kbps.
• Maze Intro 872KB and loads in 2:07 minutes @ 56kbps.
• Reading Comprehension Intro is 515KB and load in 1:15 minutes @ 56kbps.

The application is built so that students are not penalized for the time that it takes to load items and content. For example, on the Maze task, the timer stops between the page flips that require a trip back to the server for the content. On the Word Analysis task, the time that it takes to load the items is not part of the students' allotted 45 seconds for each item.

Browsers cache Flash and audio content and these numbers will only be valid for fresh new content that has not yet been loaded.

A lab of 30 students can take 3-12 assessments on a 640Kbps broadband line. If schools are able to run FCAT Explorer on 30 computers consecutively, they will run the new assessments without any issues, as FCAT Explorer is more bandwidth intensive than the Florida Assessments for Instruction in Reading.

Assessment Period 1	Instructional Days
Lockdown	1 – 5
Data Collection	6 - 40
Make Up Window	41 - 60
OPM 1	21 – 40
OPM 2	41 – 60
Assessment Period 2	Instructional Days
Lockdown	61 - 65
Data Collection	66 – 100
Make Up Window	101-130
OPM 3	80 – 96
OPM 4	97 – 113
OPM 5	114 – 130
Assessment Period 3	Instructional Days
Lockdown	131 - 135
Data Collection	136 – 170
Make Up Window	171-185
OPM 6	150 – 167
OPM 7	168 – 185

Time will vary based on the rate and difficulty of the tasks for individual students. On average:

• For students scoring an FSP of 85% or above:
  • Broad Screen/Reading Comprehension - 10-30 minutes
• For students scoring 84% or below:
  • Broad Screen/Reading Comprehension - 10-30 minutes
  • Targeted Diagnostic Inventory/Maze - 6 minutes
  • Targeted Diagnostic Inventory/Word Analysis - 5-15 minutes

The FAIR is a comprehensive reading assessment. This means that it includes screening, progress monitoring, and diagnostic information to assist teachers with informing reading instruction to meet student needs. It also provides on-going progress monitoring for students that need to be monitored more frequently due to their identified reading difficulty. Furthermore, it predicts students’ probability of reading success on the end of year outcome measure. Further diagnostic information may be helpful if intensive instruction is found to be unsuccessful, and more information is needed; however, it’s important that the diagnostic assessment chosen to be administered actually provides additional information to assist teachers with intensifying instruction to meet student needs.

The FAIR is reflected in the Instructional Materials Charts C, F, and I, and Assessment Curriculum Decision Tree Charts D1, D2, G, and J.

Yes. There are many PMRN reports that assist educators with analyzing student data to better inform instruction. If a teacher would like to view results using ability score as the score type, they would select this score type on the Active Header Menu (AHM).

Yes. There are many PMRN reports available to teachers, reading coaches, and school administrators that provide assessment results for the end of the year. Educators could select a report that provides results from individual assessment periods or across all three assessment periods. The report that displays detailed information about individual student results for one assessment period is the Student Score Detail Box which is accessible by clicking on the magnifying glass on the Class Status Report.

For second grade, the Spelling task is delivered by the teacher, almost identical to administration of a traditional spelling test, and therefore it is not timed. For 3-12, the Word Analysis task is not timed but there is a five minute time out built in.

There are step by step directions on how to invalidate student scores in the PMRN User Guide which can be found at www.fcrr.org/pmrn/userguides.htm. Possible reasons for score invalidation to occur include, but are not limited to:

• Incorrect administration of the assessment
• The wrong student was assessed
• The student did not perform at the expected level due to external circumstances (i.e. death in the family) or stress

It is very important that teachers monitor students while taking the FAIR so this is less likely to occur. If external circumstances are causing such behavior and the student doesn’t perform as expected, then the scores could be invalidated. However, it is important to note that invalidation of scores should occur very rarely.

Yes. Also, teachers will be able to access resources based on the students’ performance on the TDI tasks from the Class Status Report on the PMRN.

Yes. The breakdown of literary vs. informational text mirrors the FCAT specifications.

Research indicates that a child’s vocabulary knowledge is a strong predictor of later word-level reading and reading comprehension skills (Beck, McKeown, & Kucan, 2008; Oullette, 2006; Stahl, 2003; Vellutino & Fletcher, 2007; Wagner, Muse, & Tannenbaum, 2007). Expressive vocabulary tasks assess word knowledge as well as how readily accessible the words are to the child. Words for the expressive vocabulary test were selected to tap into academic language at the K-2 grade levels. It is academic language that predicts understanding of written language. Therefore, we find that words that go beyond a child’s personal language predict their understanding of children’s world knowledge, which in turn predicts their comprehension of children’s literature (Snow, Porche, Tabors, & Harris, 2007).

The words were selected from a leveled database (Dale & O’Roarke, 1981) starting at the lowest levels and going up to grade 6. After the initial data analysis, words from grade 8 and 10 were added to ensure a level of difficulty high enough to capture the most advanced students. Once the words were selected, a word frequency index (Zeno et al., 1995) was used to make sure that the selected words are frequent in children’s literature in grades K-2. The words were chosen to represent the form classes typically used in expressive vocabulary assessments (nouns, verbs, and attributes) and represent home experience, world knowledge, and school language. Another criterion for expressive vocabulary measures is making sure the words selected are imageable or can be pictured clearly to represent the concept of the word within children’s experiences. After all the words were field tested, several statistical analyses were conducted to choose the items that had the strongest relation to a reading outcome.

Using similar procedures to other widely-used, standardized vocabulary measures, we determined synonyms for the target words for acceptable responses. This was accomplished using the Meriam-Webster’s Dictionary and Thesaurus. Once a list of synonyms was determined, we used the Zeno et al. (1995) word frequency index to retain responses within a similar frequency range as the target word. Responses to prompt words were created based on data from student responses collected during the field trials. Also, words that were a different form of an acceptable response or less specific word for the acceptable response were identified as words that would receive a prompt (e.g. “rescue” for “rescuing”; “carrot” for “vegetables”).

References

Beck, I. L., McKeown, M. G., & Kucan, L. (2008). Creating robust vocabulary: Frequently asked question and extended examples. New York: Guilford Press.

Dale, E., & O’Rourke, J. (1981). Living word vocabulary. Chicago: World Book/Childcraft International.

Oullette, G. P. (2006). What's meaning got to do with it: The role of vocabulary in word reading and reading comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 98, 554-566.

Yes. The class rosters can be generated to reflect individual grade level classrooms as well as Exceptional Student Education (ESE) and other special classroom rosters (i.e. reading resource small groups). Each ESE teacher would generate his/ her individual class rosters through the PMRN, however these rosters can only contain one grade level, so an ESE teacher may have several rosters for each class (i.e. 3rd, 4th and 5th grade rosters for one class).

Once a student is registered into the PMRN, his or her information would be available on the EST immediately.

FCAT data will be uploaded to the PMRN data base through Survey 6. Once the district submits Survey 6 data to the Florida Department of Education, it is provided to PMRN for uploading.

Yes. Historical data will be available for review.

Parent letters can be generated from the PMRN in English, Spanish and Haitian- Creole.

All data previously housed in the PMRN will continue to be available through the historical reports back to the 2002-03 school year.

Yes. The accommodations are provided in the K-2 and 3-12 Administration Manuals.

ESE students may receive the administration of the FAIR with either their ESE teacher or with their general classroom teacher.

Assessment is only valuable when it reveals new information that will impact instruction. It is important that districts use FAIR appropriately and do not over-assess using the Targeted Diagnostic Inventory (TDI) in grades 3-12. While teachers are allowed to override the computer system and require students to take the TDI even though their FCAT Success Probability (FSP) score is 85% or higher (the green success zone), this should be done with caution. The probabilities of success on FAIR are set to minimize under-identification (at less than 15%) to be sure a student that has a reading deficiency is not overlooked. Thus, there is a tendency to over-identify students who need to take the TDI. Consequently, students scoring with an 85% or higher chance of success on FCAT will continue to make gains with current instructional practice and do not need additional testing. The price for over-testing can be loss of instructional time, teacher frustration, and no better instructional decisions for those students who score well on the Broad Screen/Reading Comprehension task. Thus, it would be inadvisable for districts to administer the TDI to all students who score in the green success zone (FSP = 85% or higher).

There are no specific levels for the Grade 1 and Grade 2 reading passages, but rather, they get progressively more challenging as the student moves up the number of passages. Target passages have been established to help teachers determine if the student is meeting grade level expectations. A Target Passage Guidance Document that shares more information on this topic is posted under the Teacher Resources link located under the FAIR section on the FCRR website: http://www.fcrr.org/fair/index.htm.

Also, teachers are encouraged to use the total correct, percent accuracy, and fluency scores from the reading comprehension passage to help determine the right ‘level’ of passage for the student. It’s important to note that leveling procedures and formulas, especially at the younger grades, are highly variable and have reduced reliability.

The error will be changed in the future. For now, the recommendation is that teachers use their professional judgment. Once students complete this task, they move on whether or not they are Below Expectations (BE) or Meeting Expectations (ME). Therefore, only the student’s starting point at the next Assessment Period would be affected. If a student says ‘pu’ or ‘u’, the teacher may wish to follow up by saying to the student, “Now say it without the initial /p/” or, “remember we are deleting the initial sound on this task.”

For help with inputting the Grade 2 Spelling task scores, refer to the PMRN User’s Guide, Section 6: Student Scores. The PMRN User’s Guide is located at http://www.fcrr.org/pmrn/v3_guides/index.htm.

5 + 3 + ii + iii

In order to achieve Florida's goal of having every child reading at or above grade level by the year 2012, the reading block should include all elements of the formula during an uninterrupted block of time that is at least 90 minutes in length:

Five components of reading:

• Phonemic Awareness
• Phonics
• Fluency
• Vocabulary and
• Comprehension

3 types of assessment:

• Screening
  
• Progress Monitoring
  
• Diagnostic

Initial Instruction

• Whole Group Instruction
  
• Differentiated Instruction

Immediate Intensive Intervention

• In addition to the 90 minutes

It is considered an interruption when students are pulled from instruction (either initial instruction or immediate intensive intervention). Examples of interruptions include:

• Lunch
• Special Area (art, music, P.E., media, etc.)
• ESE pull-out (during whole group or differentiated instruction)
• Mentoring (during whole group instruction)
• Trips to the library
• Counseling
• Recess
• ESOL pull-out
• Computer Lab pull-out
• School Assemblies

Schools using Success For All (SFA) or Scientific Research Associates (SRA) Reading Mastery Plus as a Comprehensive Core Curriculum Reading Program (CCRP) may move students to another classroom for the uninterrupted 90 minute reading block in order to implement the program as designed. Although students are grouped homogeneously, teachers are required to differentiate instruction (using small, flexible groups) within the 90 minute reading block. SFA and SRA Reading Mastery Plus are the only two core curricula being implemented in Florida Reading First schools with research-proven effective results based upon grouping students homogeneously for the reading block.

Research shows that reading and writing have a reciprocal relationship. Writing should be explicitly taught. It is expected that spelling, writing, and handwriting will be taught, but if the lesson does not pertain to one of the five components of reading, the lesson should be outside of the 90 minute block (i.e., outside of the reading portion of the language arts block). More specifically:

Spelling
• Yes - as an expansion of phonics instruction in letter-sound correspondences
• No - if words are not chosen as an extension of phonics instruction

Writing

• Yes - as expansion of spelling or comprehension
• No - an explicit lesson on the writing process

Handwriting

• Yes - as a part of CCRP (Comprehensive Core Reading Program) instruction
• No - as explicit, systematic letter formation instruction

Within:
As differentiated classroom intervention for those students with identified reading difficulties.

Outside:
For students that require time beyond differentiated intervention on specific targeted reading needs.

It is the clear intent of Reading First, and the philosophy of Just Read, Florida!, that all students, including special education students, receive instruction in reading that is appropriate to their needs.
In general, the most effective way to do this is by having ESE teachers serve students in their regular classroom. This means that if a student is in a pull out program, the ESE teacher will come to serve the child, instead of having the child leave his/her primary classroom.
However, there may be a small percentage of students with disabilities who have an individual educational plan (IEP) that describes special reading interventions that would be more appropriately delivered in the special education setting. (These may be students served in self contained ESE classes.) In those instances, the 90 minute block may be delivered in the special education classroom by the ESE teacher.
Instruction for ESE students needs to be focused at the appropriate level and with appropriate content, and students should receive instruction in reading that is more intensive, or extensive, than children who learn to read more easily. ESE students can profit from the instruction that is provided by the regular classroom teacher during the 90 minute block, but may also have additional instruction from the ESE teacher.
More specifically,

Can iii be delivered in the regular classroom by the ESE teacher?
Yes.

By the general education teacher?
Yes, if the classroom is organized in an effective way and the teacher can provide instruction at the appropriate level. If the student has an IEP requiring special interventions in reading, then the ESE teacher could provide additional instruction outside the 90 minute block that was coordinated with and consistent with the work of the regular classroom teacher.

Can iii be delivered in the ESE classroom by the ESE teacher?
Yes, if the local school personnel, taking into consideration the skills of all the teachers involved, think that this is the best solution. What we want to guard strongly against is a situation in which ESE students actually receive less instruction in reading than their peers because they are taken into an ESE classroom where their time is divided between content instruction, reading instruction, and math instruction in a way that actually reduces the amount of productive reading instruction they receive. This iii instruction, in most instances, should take place outside of the 90 minutes.

*We encourage schools and districts to involve as high a percentage of their special education students in the 90 minute reading instructional block as possible. In all cases, careful consideration should be given to the setting and the instructional personnel that would most effectively meet the students' needs for effective instruction in reading.

Role:
To serve as a resource for differentiated instruction and classroom intervention.

Responsibility:
To increase intensity of both classroom instruction and intervention.

• Assessment administration
  • Screening
  • Diagnosis
  • Progress monitoring
  • Outcome measures
• Data analysis
• Differentiating instruction
• Differentiating intervention
• Sharing common student reading goals

Roles
• Organize schedules between special area teachers and general education/ESE teachers in order to make at least a 90 minute block of uninterrupted time available to teachers.
• Organize schedules between general education teachers, special education teachers, resource teachers, trained paraprofessionals and ESOL teachers in order to maximize instructional density.
• Decipher when to say no in order to make reading a priority.
• Provide professional development opportunities for teachers and other staff to be thoroughly trained in the school adopted reading programs.
• Organize and make available all assessment materials.
• Appoint a trained person to give all diagnostic assessments.
• Provide all needed materials to teachers.
• Consider variables, such as a teacher's knowledge base and training in specialized reading instruction, time restrictions from lack of flexibility in scheduling, lack of coordination in instructional services, and setting and resolve on an individual basis.
• Be the instructional leader in the school

Responsibilities

To increase intensity of:
• Classroom instruction
• Differentiated instruction
• Intervention

Please see our example Elementary Reading Block

http://www.justreadflorida.com/docs/endorse.pdf (PDF)

The reading endorsement is a "rider" to other certifications. A reading endorsement is made up of 15 university course credit hours (or 300 inservice points) while reading certification consists of 30 university course credit hours or a Master’s Degree in Reading. In essence, the reading endorsement is a mid point in relationship to the reading certification.

Teachers with the 30 hours or Master’s Degree in Reading must take the reading certification test to earn the K-12 reading certification. There is no provision for teachers to obtain a certification in those areas requiring a Master’s Degree such as the reading certification by taking the certification test without completing the required coursework. There is no provision for teachers to take a test for the endorsement.

Yes. This model is currently listed on the Webtool as "Model", and can viewed in the field entitled "District." Districts are encouraged to use the Model as the foundation to begin customizing their own plan to meet their distinct district needs. The model will be posted on the webpages of both the Just Read, Florida! Office and the Bureau of Educator Recruitment and Professional Development.

Reading remains the number one priority of the Governor, the Commissioner, and the K-12 Public Schools Chancellor. In order to increase reading achievement of all Florida students, it is imperative that the state’s teachers receive the latest scientifically-based reading research to help them provide effective instruction to their students.

Banking means saving/carrying-over excess points from one validity/renewal period tothe subsequent renewal period, and the provision is established in law Section 1012.585(3)(d), F.S.and in Rule 6A-4.0051(5), FAC. The use of a banking provisionfor the Reading Add-on Program is reasonable and ultimately best serves the needs of both students and teachers. Therefore, the Department will pursue the process of statutory revision and rule amendment to seek permission to bank hours for the reading endorsement.

Yes. While it is important to keep in mind that second language learners have distinctive instructional needs that require of their teachers specified knowledge, there is some overlap

between ESOL competencies and the Reading Endorsement competencies. We are completing a Crosswalk between the two in order to bridge training between specific ESOL requirements and those training requirements embedded in the reading competencies that address the needs of individual LEP students. Once overage has been determined as a result of the crosswalk, we will publish specific results prior to Dec. 31, 2003. From that point, the Department will convene a team to build extension activities for further inservice so that educators may earn points where appropriate as identified by the crosswalk. By the end of the 2003-2004 school year, we anticipate that the extension activities will be ready for dissemination to the districts.

As stated in the August 4, 2003, memo from Chancellor Warford, any teacher teaching a reading course at the secondary level will be required to have either the K-12 reading endorsement or K-12 reading certification. Additionally, any teacher teaching elementary reading courses must have one of the following qualifications: K-12 reading endorsement, K-12 reading certification, or elementary education certification. Federal law requirements of NCLB for teacher quality must be met by the end of the 2005-2006 school year – specifically, June 30, 2006. This requirement is reflected in Florida’s Course Code Directory for teacher qualifications of reading courses with the date of July 1, 2006.

It is recommended that districts submit to the Department their final school board approved plan no later than July 1, 2004, allowing two full years for the districts to help teachers meet the highly qualified teacher requirement of NCLB. Because the approval process involves the convening of experts, including district representation, the review process can take from 4-6 weeks, depending on scheduling considerations.

Yes. The K-12 reading endorsement certification indicates that the teacher is equipped to work effectively with struggling readers of various age groups.

As a clarification to the "Planning with the End in Mind" document distributed at Technical Assistance sessions in September and October 2003, districts may submit portions of their program for DOE feedback and technical assistance at any time during the process of building a district add-on program. For final approval and official review feedback, a complete School Board Approved Plan must be submitted to the Department of Education, Bureau of Educator Recruitment and Professional Development.

Yes, as long as districts post their plans on the Webtool. We encourage everyone to use the Webtool so that districts have access for viewing as many plans as possible. We would also like to post School Board-approved plans on our webpage pending district approval. We also plan highlighting best practices for specific competencies and posting these showcased practices.

No. However, optimally teachers will have the opportunity to work with students from a variety of age groups since the reading endorsement applies to K-12 students.

Yes. Consortia submitting an add-on plan on behalf of districts should also include letters of approval from the School Boards of each represented district.

Yes, Florida Online Reading Professional Development (FOR-PD) will be available for districts to use after January, 2004. Information about FOR-PD is available at Just Read Florida.

Yes. University reading courses that align with the competencies are acceptable for use as add-on reading endorsement inservice. Commercial products may be used as long as they meet the conditions of scientifically based reading research for alignment with the reading endorsement competencies.

Yes, as long as they have been identified as meeting the reading endorsement competencies.

No. Florida Statutes require that endorsement programs are based on the compilation of hours. See Section 1011.62, f.s., and 1012.98, f.s., Rule 6A-5.071(3)(b)(d).

No. During this capacity building phase, it is expected that reading coaches would be working toward the endorsement. Districts are allowed to use professional development funds to help coaches in working toward the reading endorsement.

No. The reading endorsement, approved by the Board of Education, is a competency-based certification with the last competency being a supervised practicum. Optimally, competency 6 is the culmination of all learning from previous inservice and field experiences for competencies 1-5 to provide the required evidence of increases in student reading performance. While districts are encouraged to generally approach learning as ongoing, competency 6 is distinctively the evidence of a teacher’s collective knowledge and skill put into action to prove competency that merits issuance of the reading endorsement.

The required 300 inservice hours includes demonstration requirements of competencies 5 and 6. There is the expectation that competencies 1-4 are predominantly clock hours, however, the endorsement is built on a continuum of expertise development. As educators progress toward the practicum, a shift in the proportion of knowledge acquisition to applications across the competencies is expected. (See page 5 of "Planning with the End in Mind" located at www.justreadflorida.com ) As a result, there is flexibility in how teachers earn hours or points and produce artifacts that meet criteria across competencies 1-4 in sufficient preparation for competencies 5 and 6.

Yes, we highly encourage districts to utilize teacher transcript review conducted by the district as part of their reading endorsement add-on program. Several teachers in the district may have already taken at least one reading course and may be interested in working toward the reading endorsement. Districts can accept any reading coursework toward the reading endorsement and convert university course credit hours to add-on program inservice points as long as the reading coursework meets each of the following:

• Aligns with the reading endorsement competencies
• Was completed within the past five years

Some Florida teachers may have completed enough reading coursework to satisfy at least the majority of the reading endorsement requirements -- 15 university credit hours of reading coursework that align with the reading endorsement competencies. In this case, it is important for these teachers to look at both their transcripts and the reading endorsement competencies to determine whether:

• They need to complete an additional course or courses in order to satisfy all six competencies, or
• Their transcripts contain sufficient coursework to meet all six of the reading endorsement competencies.

Because scientifically based reading research has impacted education and educational policy, it will be important for educators to realize the recency of reading courses as relevant.

Both the reading endorsement competencies and the information about applying for the reading endorsement are located in pdf documents on the Educator’s Webpage at www.justreadflorida.com

(See "Reading Endorsement Competencies" and "What I Need to Know to Qualify for the Reading Endorsement")

No. Because of NCLB, districts will need to provide opportunities for their teachers assigned to teach the reading courses to earn the reading endorsement by the end of the 2005-2006 school year.

Yes, two or more districts can develop and implement a reading endorsement add-on program as long as each participating district has acquired Board approval of the add-on program.

Community colleges can assist districts in the delivery of their reading endorsement add-on program by providing

• inservice for the program components
• contexts for teachers to participate in field experiences with struggling readers
• access to technology for taking online courses
• conducting collaborative action research

No. Because security of information is not an issue, it is not necessary for districts to obtain a username and password for data entry with the READ-on Webtool.

Yes, the district has the discretion but the Department favors a more flexible approach.

The practicum is the final field-based experience of reading endorsement training that requires candidates to administer different types of reading assessments and interpret assessment data as it relates to the major reading components (phonemic awareness, phonics, fluency, vocabulary, comprehension). The subsequent assessment results produce a student reading profile for use in instructional planning.

Reading research indicates that there are a variety of combinations of reasons as to why students are found to have reading difficulties. Student reading profiles may indicate that the source of struggle may be one, a combination of several, or all of the major reading components. Although research indicates that constraints in learning to read are most closely linked to the reading components, developmental differences are also important factors in providing effective reading services across the grade levels. Therefore, it is important that reading endorsement candidates have adequate preparation through multiple and diverse opportunities to work with students of varying reading profiles and varying age levels.

Districts have flexibility as to the nature, amount, and duration of the field experiences that they provide in their reading endorsement add-on program across the competencies. However, they must keep in mind that cumulative field experiences that focus primarily on different types of student reading needs and, secondly, at various age ranges will result in an effective investigative approach that prepares teachers for differentiated reading instruction based on varying student reading profiles across the age ranges as opposed to strictly differentiating by age which limits differentiated scope of experience. Such an approach will provide adequate preparation to produce the required evidence of student reading development for competency 6 that merits the issuance of the reading endorsement.

The reading endorsement is unique in that it has competencies for the required 300 in-service hours. Each of the six competencies depicts the major topic with a general heading such as Language and Cognition that lends itself for use as an instructional strand or area of study referenced in Section IV (Instructional Design and Delivery) on page 15 of the Add-on Manual with a subsequent possibility that course titles may have commonality across school districts. However, training content, training hours, and course numbers are specific to districts and their add-on program. Additionally, as stated on page 21 of the Add-on Manual (Section VII, Management Plan), districts are expected to develop a management plan for their add-on program which includes admission requirements and the conditions for accepting transfer credits into their program. Management processes vary from district to district, and, as stated on page 22 of the Add-on Manual, it is the district’s option as to whether it will accept transfer credit. If provisions are made to accept transfer credit, the management plan must address procedures for determining that the credit is equivalent to the program in-service components.

As stated on page 23 of the Add-on Manual, credit earned while employed in another district may be applied toward a certification provided the component was earned as part of an approved Add-on Certification program. Also, necessary documentation for entering district transfer must be provided.

Inservice participants transferring from one district to another must request that an official Inservice Transfer Record be sent from the previous employer to the HRD Director of the entering district.

A matrix entitled "Just Read, Florida! Professional Development Chart" provides information regarding the competency alignment and is located on the Educators Webpage of the Just Read, Florida! Website at www.justreadflorida

Reading is the number one priority, and reading has been declared a critical teacher shortage area. Districts receive state professional development dollars to make sure that teachers are trained in instructional practices of scientifically based reading research, and each district is responsible for a reading endorsement add-on program. Should a district determine that neither local nor commercially-provided professional development is sufficient or feasible to meet teachers’ needs and university coursework is the best way to meet that need, then districts could use the professional development funding to pursue that coursework. A district may utilize university reading coursework as long as the coursework aligns with the competencies to meet the reading endorsement requirements.

Yes, content of CRISS training, developed through Project CRISS (Creating Independence through Student-owned Strategies), does align with the following specific indicators for competencies 1 and 2.

• Competency 1:
  • Comprehension (1.E.2; 1.E.3; 1.E.4)
  • Integration of major reading components (1.F.5)
• Competency 2:
  • Vocabulary (2.D - for purposes of semantic mapping and semantic analysis)
  • Comprehension (2.E)
  • Integration of major reading components (2.F.2; 2.F.3)

Districts need to provide training that aligns with all specific indicators A through F in order to satisfy all of competency 1 and all of competency 2. Those utilizing CRISS training will need to keep in mind the remaining required specific indicators as they plan to deliver their inservice from other additional training sources in order to meet all of competencies 1 and 2:

• Phonemic awareness (1A; 2A)
• Phonics (1B; 2B)
• Fluency (1C; 2C)
• Vocabulary (1D; 2D – for the purposes of morphemic analysis)
• Integration of the major reading components (1.F.1; 1.F.2; 1.F.3; 1.F.4; 2.F.1; 2.F.4)

The original CRISS training was designed as a two-day or twelve-hour workshop for initial knowledge acquisition with follow-up sessions provided sometime later. In order to appropriately assign inservice points per specific indicator, it will be necessary to do each of the following:

• assess total  inservice hours of CRISS training for knowledge acquisition that has been delivered to the candidate; one inservice hour equates to one inservice point
• establish method of competency with applicable follow-up assignments and criteria for demonstrating competency
• provide opportunity for reading endorsement candidates to earn additional inservice points by completing follow-up assignments that meet district-established criteria for demonstrating competency

For example, Competency 1, DOE lists "Reading Coach training in Orlando" for 24 hours – what are the indicators for that course? Knowing this will allow us an opportunity to design offerings for the remaining 36 hours for that competency.

A matrix of professional development offerings sponsored by Just Read, Florida! is located at justreadflorida.com . This matrix entitled Just Read, Florida! Professional Development Chart addresses reading endorsement competency alignment and appropriate assignment of inservice hours. As follow-up, another matrix subsequent to this one will be posted by early January with a list of the applicable competency specific indicators for each of the professional development offerings. In the meantime, it is important to keep in mind that several of the DOE-sponsored professional development offerings listed on the chart are an overview, and, therefore, all specific indicators in competency 2 were addressed as an overview in the sessions. Therefore, districts will need to provide additional professional development opportunities for their reading endorsement candidates in order to meet the remaining inservice requirements for those competencies.

The matrix lists professional development offerings that have already occurred largely during the summer and fall of the 2003-2004 school year for targeted audiences and for purposes that met specific federal or state grant criteria:

• Reading First dollars for teachers assigned to teach at identified Reading First schools
• Florida State Appropriation for reading coaches and teachers working toward the reading endorsement

Online options for professional development provide flexibility for both teachers and districts. The Florida Center for Reading Research (FCRR) has been in the process of posting guidelines to review professional development programs in reading. To obtain a copy of these guidelines, you can contact FCRR by calling 850-644-9353 or visiting their Website at www.fcrr.org

It is imperative that districts uphold high standards in the selection of a supervisor for the practicum for the following reasons:

• the reading endorsement is a competency based certification
• teachers are required to generate evidence of increases in student achievement data in the practicum, the culminating demonstration of teacher competency

The supervisor must have reading expertise as evidenced by state reading certification or university status specifically for reading. Secondly, the supervisor must have completed Clinical Educator training or its equivalent (peer coaching, collegial coaching) for clinical supervisors of teachers and student services personnel. It is important that the supervisor have clinical skills in diagnosis of developing a professional's performance, feedback on performance, and the planning and implementation of professional development plans.

Through the approval process for the add-on, the Department, using a peer review process, will review the submitted programs and provide districts with a summary of the reviewers’ ratings and comments in addition to the official notification of the results of the review. The contact person for District Add-on Reading Programs is Patricia Cheavers from the Bureau of Educator Recruitment and Professional Development. Her contact information is 850-245-0435 and her email is patriciacheavers@fldoe.org

This training was provided at the beginning of the 2003-2004 school year for those reading coaches hired at schools funded by specific federal or state grants. The following reading coaches in your district would have attended the training:

• Reading First reading coaches (grades K-3) hired at Reading First schools with federal Reading First dollars
• Elementary or secondary reading coaches hired under the Reading Coaches Model Grant from this year’s state appropriations

This training focused on various aspects of the roles and responsibilities of a reading coach within a school and district.

Yes, the Department is pursuing such an effort. However, due to the complexity of the process and the volume of courses to be analyzed, it is anticipated that this undertaking will take a considerable amount of time. Once the analysis is completed, though, the identified reading courses will be posted on the appropriate Websites.

Additionally, the Just Read, Florida! Office has sponsored several university projects of reading course offerings specifically for the purpose of supporting district reading endorsement add-on programs in order for teachers to earn the reading endorsement and for teacher recertification. These projects are:

• Florida Online Reading Professional Development (FOR-PD) through the University of Central Florida (UCF). Identified as RED5147: Developmental Reading, this three-hour university online course aligns with competency 2 of the reading endorsement and is provided on an ongoing basis for Florida teachers to complete at their own pace.
• Summer Institute & Reading Coursework through Florida State University (FSU) includes a series of reading course offerings that align with the reading endorsement competencies. Once final approval of the course descriptions for the next round of offerings is completed, the Department will post information about specific course numbers and titles, their competency alignment, and each of the course locations throughout the state.

While certification is not required for college teaching, many college instructors do hold Florida certificates. If the individual holds a temporary or professional certificate, he or she can add the reading endorsement by completing the application and endorsement requirements. An endorsement can never stand alone on a Florida Educator's Certificate.