Page 1

The Delaware Valley Region Pennsylvania Association for Supervision & Curriculum Development


President’s Letter

Page 2

Profile DVR-PASCD Member

Pages 3-4

Text Dependent Analysis

Pages 5-6


Page 7

ESEA: What the future holds

Pages 8-10

PASCD Sponsors

Pages 11-16

Delaware Valley Region PASCD Officers Meredith Denovan….……….President Dorie Martin…….…......President-Elect President’s Letter ColleenPresident’s Lelli…….……....Past President Letter - March 2015 Rina Vassallo….……….Vice-President Helene Duckett …..…….…...Secretary Robert Magliano…………..…Treasurer


The Delaware Valley Region of the Pennsylvania Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development


To submit articles, information, or feedback, please contact: Monica Conlin Monica_conlin@yahoo.com Editorial Team: Monica Conlin, Bekci Kelly and Brooke Mulartrick

President’s Letter- Meredith Denovan Dear DVR-PASCD Members, Spring has arrived... finally. And with that comes DVR-PASCD’s annual spring event. In partnership with PAECT, we are continuing the theme of “Teaching and Leading in the Digital Age.” Save the date, April 20, 2015 and come to Cabrini College for another outstanding professional development opportunity. Registrants will chose from 3 offerings: Digital Literacy in the Elementary Classroom, 60 in 60 – App Attack, and Google Apps. Based on feedback from our fall event, we are offering 1-hour workshops plus a ½ hour application session. Go to our web site – dvrpascd.org – to find more detailed information about the workshops and register for this event. It is free for all DVR-PASCD members…another benefit of joining our organization. Register early to get your first choice! Each year DVR-PASCD grants two awards. The “Person of Promise” is given to an outstanding pre-service teacher who in the view of the nominee’s education faculty is a person likely to make a significant contribution to the teaching profession. The “Snag in the River” recognizes good teaching: “Good teachers put snags in the river of children passing by and over the years, they redirect hundreds of lives” (Tracy Kidder).Winners will be announced at the April meeting. This year DVR-PASCD will be funding three $250.00 grants for proposals that impact student learning and promote best practices. Applications can be found on our web site. As a professional organization, we are always looking to add to our membership. Please share this newsletter with your colleagues. In the meantime, feel free to contact us for information.We look forward to hearing from you! Sincerely, Meredith Denovan Delaware Valley Region-PASCD President mbd820@gmail.com

2 Click image above to register

Spotlight on Lyn Berenato Rina Vassallo, ED.D. Vice President- DVR-PASCD

Carolyn (Lyn) Berenato has been a valued member of the DVR-PASCD Board for six years and she is slated to be voted in as our next Vice-President at our April meeting. During her tenure on the board, she has distinguished herself by serving on our Higher Education and Membership Committees and has written articles for our newsletter. Meredith Deneven, president of DVRPASCD Board said, the following regarding Lyn’s new role on the board, “ We are thrilled to have Lyn step up to a leadership role on our board. Her experience and expertise in both K-12 and higher education are valued.” I had the opportunity to speak with Lyn about her involvement at the leadership level for this organization and she stated, “I became involved with DVR the year I retired as an elementary school principal and moved to higher education. I was the Graduate Director of the Educational Leadership programs at Saint Joseph's University. I wanted to become involved the Delaware Valley Supervisor and Curriculum Development as I saw it as a great fit for my new position and interests.” Although Lyn’s most recent career is in higher education she began her journey as an educator as an elementary teacher at St. Andrew’s School in Drexel Hill. She continued her teaching career by moving into the Philadelphia School District as a reading specialist and also as a consultant for Main Line Psychological and Educational. She then worked at Upper Darby School District as a Literacy Specialist and completed her career in K-12 education as both an assistant then an elementary principal there. As an administrator in Upper Darby, Lyn also very capably taught at Cabrini College in both the Leadership and the Reading Programs. In 2009, Lyn joined the Educational Leadership Department at St. Joseph’s University beginning as a visiting assistant professor and coordinator of the Masters in Educational Leadership. From 2010-2012 she served as the Director of Educational Leadership and Professional Studies Graduate Programs. Since 2012 Lyn has served as assistant professor in the Special Education Department. She has also interestingly been an educational consultant for the School Programs for the Barnes Foundation. Lyn shared a little about her unique role there, “I am currently a consultant for their 3

school programs. I worked with the Barnes to create school programs that are aligned with the Pennsylvania State Standards. The programs designed include:   

Pictures and Words for grades 1-3 designed around art and elements in a story. The Art of Looking for grades 5 & 6 designed around art and mathematics and art and science Crossing Boundaries for grades 7 & 8 designed around art and geography and history

The programs involve the Barnes going to school classrooms and then the schools come to the Barnes.” Lyn is also a graduate of St. Joseph’s having completed two Masters’ Degrees in Reading and in Elementary Education, as well as her Ed.D. in Leadership. In fact, her dissertation entitled A Historical Analysis of the Influence of John Dewey’s Educational Philosophy on the Barnes Foundation’s Art Educational Experience: 1922 to the Present ties in perfectly with the work she does with the Barnes Foundation, as well as, her undergraduate degree in Art History from Rosemont College. Lyn has informed me that she amazingly is in the process of completing her third Master’s Degree in Special Education at St. Joseph’s University. Lyn has distinguished herself by presenting numerous times on educational topics most notably at the PA Art Education Conference, the International Dyslexia Conference, the African American Museum and the American Educational Research Association. She has also published in the following educational journals: The Journal on Excellence in College Teaching, the Journal of Education and Learning and Scholar Practioner Quarterly, as well as our DVR-PASCD newsletter. In her spare time, Lyn informed me she is involved as a docent at the Barnes Foundation, reads voraciously and with her husband owns the Rita Water Ice in Bryn Mawr. When asked about Lyn’s new role, Dr. Dorie Martin, our current President-Elect, Stated, “When I think of Lyn’s impressive resume and the skill set that she brings to this organization, I am reminded of the J.F. Kennedy quote ‘Leadership and learning are indispensible to each other.’”


Text Dependent Analysis…the Conversation Continues with Some Resources to Consider By Dorie Martin-Pitone, Ed. D President-Elect DVR-PASCD

There is an under current of fear and anxiety associated with the new unknown – The ELA PSSA. Although we have practiced and prepared for text dependent questions and the text dependent analysis response section many still feel unsettled, there is uncertainty as to how to differentiate between a close read, the close reading process, and text rendering. How do we really know what the state will consider a solid text dependent analysis response? How much evidence is enough? The PA Core standards do not define how anyone should teach or a specific curriculum. The PA Core requires us to take the time and create the space for these rich learning opportunities to read complex texts at high levels, gather evidence from each and then write about the text with clarity. Educators begin to doubt if they are “doing the right thing” or “doing things right.” By accessing the provided link, you will hear David Coleman as he speaks about how the Common Core allows for diversity, innovation and exploration in several approaches to teach the standards especially through close reading and text dependent analysis of literary non-fiction. Coleman also highlights how the Common Core requires us to ask the type of questions that elicit higher order thinking and dialogue associated with the text. Students should then be able to express what they read through conversation, which requires inclusion of speaking and listening around the text. The speaking and listening standards are another area of emphasis with the PA Core standards and should be included College and career readiness in the process of teaching text dependent analysis. Please access the below link to see just one picture of text dependent analysis. David Coleman showing text dependent analysis in action

require students to be able to read more difficult text with great care and consideration.

(If the above link does not work) https://www.youtube.com/v/Ho_ntaYbL7o?version=3&f=videos&app=youtube_gdata One way that has been modeled for our students in response to a text dependent analysis question is to model the process of annotating text, collaborating through dialogue about the text and thinking deeply about text. When modeling for students to demonstrate understanding in response to a text dependent analysis question use the following:


1. What a text says – summary or restatement 2. What a text does – description: discuss important aspects of the presentation of the text (choices of content, author’s perspective, language, and structure) Students will develop habits for locating evidence in both conversations, as well as in writing, to demonstrate analysis of a text 3. What a text means – analysis: interprets the text and asserts a meaning for the text as a whole (putting the message in a larger context and determine theme) 4. Students will have three blank pages, but they don’t need to fill all three. Factors to consider: Doesn‘t need to be a five-paragraph essay; Holistically scored; Analysis and the evidence to support it is the key—and is more important in scoring than essay structure. 5. Classroom experiences stay deeply connected to the text on the page The TDA Checklist for Creating TDA Questions  Does the student have to read the text to answer the question?  Does the question require the reader to return to the text?  Does the question target the core understandings and key ideas of the text?  Can the question be answered with careful reading rather than background knowledge?  Is the question open-ended, not leading or providing the right answer?  Does the question require the reader to use evidence from the text to support his or her ideas or claims?  Does the question encourage students to spend time lingering over a portion of the text looking for answers instead of just a cursory look to get the gist of what is meant?  Does the question target standards/eligible content?  Does the question require the student to interpret or analyze author’s craft (literary devices, figurative language, text organization, viewpoint or potential bias) in order to create meaning (i.e. plot, theme, characterization, author purpose etc.)?  Does the question analyze interrelationships among concepts, issues, or problems within the text? Power Points & handouts have been posted by PDE to the SAS Website— http://pdesas.org Click on Teacher Tools at the top, log in, and click on Learning Communities. Search for and join the Text Dependent Analysis Professional Development Community. Download PPTs, passages, scored student sample and handouts


Commentary Dr. Robert Magliano Treasurer, DVR-PASD I’ve spent the last three months recovering from major back surgery. So, needless to say, I’ve had a lot of time to experience considerable pain, to feel down and somewhat depressed, and especially just to think. A longtime friend sent me the following story which I thought worth sharing: A group of students were asked to list what they thought were the present “Seven Wonders of the World.” Though there were some disagreements, the following received the most votes: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7.

Egypt’s Great Pyramids Taj Mahal Grand Canyon Panama Canal Empire State Building St. Peter’s Basilica China’s Great Wall

While gathering the votes the teacher noted that one student had not finished her paper yet. So she asked the girl if she was having trouble with her list. The girl replied, “Yes, a little. I couldn’t quite make up my mind because there were so many.” The teacher said, “Well, tell us what you have and maybe we can help.” The girl hesitated and then read: “I think the Seven Wonders of the World are: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7.

To see… To hear… To touch… To taste… To feel… To laugh… And to love.”

The room was so quiet, you could have heard a pin drop. Moral: The things we overlook as simple and ordinary and that we take for granted are truly wondrous! Gentle reminder: The most precious things in life cannot be built by hand or bought by man. Undoubtedly, reading this story has given me occasion to think even more and to have a much greater appreciation for my health and life in general! Positive thoughts and best wishes as we finish out the school year. 7

ESEA: What the future holds Andrew Cooradt DVR-PASD Communication In 1965, President Lyndon Johnson signed the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, (ESEA) into law. As the law was originally a part of President Johnson’s War on Poverty, the focus of ESEA was to provide federal funding to schools. Within the legislation, Title I was the largest component. The primary goal of Title I was to distribute greater financial resources to schools and school districts with a high percentage of students from low-income families. This federal funding was designed to close the ability gap in reading, writing, and mathematics between children of low-income homes residing in predominantly urban and rural areas and the children of middle income homes in the suburban areas. Research over the past 50 years consistently shows an indirect relationship between student achievement and poverty (Carmichael, 1997 & USDOE, 1992). ESEA has not remained static over the past fifty years. Between 1965 and 1980, ESEA reauthorization occurred four separate times. The objective of each of these reauthorizations was to ensure that the allocation of federal funds went to the students with greatest needs based on socioeconomic status and academic achievement. The result was that ever stricter rules and regulations were attached to Title I funds over the course of the fifteen years. A 1981 reauthorization, titled the Education Consolidation and Improvement Act (ECIA), worked to lessen some of the Title I regulations in an effort to place more of the control for using funding in the hands of local and state education authorities. A subsequent reauthorization in 1988 known as the HawkinsStafford Elementary and Secondary School Improvement Act, began connection Title I funding to classroom instruction and raising student achievement standards. In 1994, ESEA was revised again this time through the passing of the Improving America’s Schools Act (IASA). This act brought three major changes to Title I.

ESEA has not remained static over the past fifty years. Between 1965 and 1980, ESEA reauthorization occurred four separate times.

First, it introduced math and reading/language arts standards as a method of assessing student progress and providing accountability. Second it allowed schools with 50% poverty rates to implement school-wide Title I programs, down from the previous 75% rate. The final major shift brought about through IASA was that it allowed for greater local control giving officials at the federal and state levels the authority to waive regulations if they believed those regulations interfered with school improvements. The last reauthorization of ESEA occurred as the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB), signed into law in January of 2002. NCLB placed the emphasis of ESEA on student achievement and the accountability of schools. 8

Under these changes annual standardized tests became required in grades 3-8 in reading and math and once in high school. NCLB went beyond previous reauthorizations and tied federal funding to student performance including the imposition of sanctions if schools did not achieve designated levels of proficiency. Additionally these levels of proficiency increased every year until the 2013-14 school year, when every child was supposed to be able to demonstrate grade level proficiency. NCLB held to the original intent of ESEA by requiring schools to delineate achievement by designated underachieving subgroups as well. It is now 2015, and following the longest stagnant period of the law, the U.S. Congress is once again making plans to reauthorize ESEA. As of now, there are different ideas as to the future role of the federal government in education. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan called for the following in a recent speech to mark the 50th anniversary of ESEA. - Increase in ESEA funding by $2.7 billion for 2016 - Expand opportunities for high quality pre-school - Increase focus on subjects beyond reading and math - High expectations for learning for all students - State developed standards that prepare students for college and career. - Open information about schools’ ability to help all students progress - Teacher evaluations that identify excellence and take into account student learning growth - Annual statewide assessments in reading and math for grades 3-8 and once in high school - Work with states to streamline assessments so they take up less instructional time - Have states set limits on the amount of time spent on state and district -wide standardized testing, and notify parents if those limits are exceeded Senator Lamar Alexander (R-TN) chairman of the Senate, Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee introduced the Every Child Ready for College or Career Act this January. In this bill he proposes the following: - Elimination of Annual Yearly Progress requirements - Elimination of Annual Measurable Achievement Objectives for English Language Learners - States to be responsible for developing a single statewide accountability system which would o Differentiate between schools based on student achievement , o Determine specific interventions for identified schools






States required to adopt challenging academic content and achievement standards in reading/language arts, math, and science to be college and career ready without remediation States required to create assessments aligned with those standards States need to disaggregate achievement data by the same current subgroups Secretary of Education prohibited from mandating, directing, controlling, coercing, or exercising and direction of supervision over state standards Two Assessment Options o 1. States adopt assessment systems but can choose between current annual requirements for grades 3-8 and once in high school, or grade span assessments or a combination. States could use performance-based, formative assessments, summative scores from multiple assessments, or another system deemed appropriate by the state. o 2. Maintain current law regarding type and frequency of assessments With either of the assessment options local education agencies (LEAs) are permitted to administer their own assessments as long as those assessments are, valid, reliable, aligned with state standards, and approved by the state. Neither option would require that student test scores be used to evaluate teachers. States would have to establish a system whereby Title I dollars could follow low income students to the public school of their choice Most sections of ESEA would have appropriation of funds frozen at 2015 levels through 2021. Title I Part A could receive an additional $500 million Charter schools could receive an additional $47 million.

This topic will continue to be debated this year as the administration and Congress expand and argue their ideas.


A&B EDUCATIONAL ENTERPRISES Alyssa Heeneke 215-283-0122 C: 215-740-6836 aheeneke@verizon.net Delaware County

Ann Tuteur P: 215-793-0834 C: 215-688-2502 abentprse@aol.com Bucks, Montgomery & Philadelphia Counties

Missy BlatsteinP: P: 267-462-4174 C: 215-680-7506 mtblatstein@gmail.com Chester County

We are pleased to represent the following cutting edge print and digital educational publishers: Benchmark Education: www.benchmarkeducation.com Heinemann: www.heinemann.com The Booksource: www.booksource.com Lexia: www.lexialearning.com The Center for the Collaborative Classroom Newmark Learning: www.newmarklearning.com (formerly Developmental Studies Center): Okapi: www.myokapi.com www.collaborativeclassroom.com Reading Plus: www.ReadingPlus.com







Profile for Delaware Valley Region PASCD

DVR-PASCD Newsletter - March 2015  

DVR-PASCD Newsletter - March 2015  

Profile for dvrpascd