Mamaroneck Avenue School, a school with a diverse student population, wrestled with low test scores and all the accompanying assumptions for a long time. Over the years, concerns have been raised about the academic achievement of our students as measured by their performance on the New York State Reading (PEP) Test. The scores reflected a lack of literacy proficiency.
Our disappointment was heightened when our students' scores were compared with those of students in the other elementary schools in the district. Although teachers and administrators encouraged parents to look at only their individual child's performance (relative to his or her ability), parents instead focused on the school's results. Clearly, change was needed. But pro-moting change in schools is a complex issue with no quick fix.
We had to face tough questions. Mamaroneck Avenue School, located in an affluent suburban community of New York about 45 minutes from Manhattan, had seen its Latino population grow dramatically over the last 13 years. Was the diverse population compromising the level of achievement? More specifically, did the English as a Second Language (ESL) children have a negative impact on the school's test profile?
All teachers at Mamaroneck Avenue School had pride in our school and cared deeply for the children. We were conscious of the children's needs and always worked hard with our students. The level of anxiety grew as the test date approached. We knew that to generate change, we needed not only to focus on the test, but also to closely examine our instructional practice. We believed that our children could do appreciably better with a more comprehensive, systematic level of instruction both on the reading strategies necessary for a cloze test and on specific test-taking strategies. We had a basic understanding of the problem. It was time to implement a plan that would have a positive impact.
Assessing the Situation
For a long time we had questioned the practice of administering the test to an entire class, with children of varying ability levels all in one room. This method directly affected performance because the children experienced unnecessary pressure when they saw that their friends had finished but they still had several questions to go. We all knew the temptation to guess and mark anything, just to catch up.
The school's reading specialist examined the test manual carefully to see how much freedom we had to create smaller groups. Realizing that no guidelines restricted flexible grouping, we developed a strategy to create a student-friendly test setting. Allowing children to take an examination with others of comparable achievement levels and test-taking ability would make the test environment less stressful.
In addition, we looked more critically at the specific skills our students needed to develop and saw the need for a task force that would work with small, manageable groups of 3rd graders. Our mission was threefold: to familiarize the children with the test format, to enhance their individual reading skills, and to reduce test anxiety without compromising the integrity of the exam. With these goals in mind, the reading specialist looked at what information, documentation, and plan would excite teachers about a new and different approach. Each step led to new challenges. As the overall design grew, we recognized the need to redistribute our resources.
Developing Familiarity
An important part of the strategy to improve our 3rd grade reading test scores was implementing a plan that would also result in focused reading instruction. Too often, test preparation compromises important classroom instruction—something we wanted to avoid.
To familiarize students with the test and with other diagnostic data, we administered a practice test to the entire 3rd grade in November without preparing the students first. Using these scores combined with their previous knowledge about each child as a reader, classroom teachers worked with the reading specialist to group the children homogeneously for twice-weekly 30-minute practice sessions. Students worked with the reading specialist, the classroom teacher, the 3rd grade teaching assistant, or the classroom's teaching aide. Children who scored above an agreed-on score practiced only once a week. During the other practice session, they worked with the assistant principal on literature enrichment activities. ESL students worked with the ESL teacher.
We focused on the direct teaching of the reading strategies and skills that students needed to know to perform well on the state's cloze reading test, such as pronoun referents, signal words, and semantic clues. Because knowing these strategies helps all students become fluent and independent readers, our practice sessions were important and productive. During these sessions, students worked on cloze reading exercises at different levels, depending in part on their score on the practice test. Teachers used the practice exercises to model strategies.
We administered two more practice tests under the same conditions that students would experience during the May test. By familiarizing students with real testing conditions, we hoped that they would be comfortable and know what to expect. We shared the scores with teachers, students, and parents to give them feedback about each student's progress. Children took great pride in seeing their scores improve and pushed themselves to greater heights.
Parents appreciated the feedback as well as the additional practice sheets we sent home for them to work on with their children. This partnership with parents was an important part of our success. The practice tests helped us fine-tune our instruction and methods.
- Focused reading instruction emphasized specific strategies.
- Children worked in small groups with a professional.
- All students followed a consistent, predictable schedule.
- Teachers prepared the materials beforehand.
- Students and parents received regular feedback.
- Parents were involved in preparing their children.
Next, they learned that hard work will lead to positive results. Some students were disappointed with their scores on the first practice test. We explained that they would see an improvement if they were willing to commit to increasing their efforts both at school and at home on the practice work. After the second and third practice tests, these students were very proud of their improved scores. The children also learned that all readers—even the strongest—have room for improvement and that sometimes even teachers have different opinions about the best answer to a question.
In addition, students and teachers developed a strong sense of camaraderie as we pursued a common goal: improved test scores. School personnel constantly encouraged the students to try harder while praising them for their efforts. Pep talks by teachers, the principal, and the reading specialist led to a teamlike atmosphere. Teachers were proud of their students' progress. We all took the challenge personally.
Outcome
The results were dramatic. We certainly met our first-year goal of increasing the number of 3rd graders who passed the test. Over two years, the number of children scoring above the state reference point has steadily grown, to 95 percent of our students. We decided to raise the bar and focused directly on helping children reach the higher levels of "typical" and "distinction." The number of students who scored well above the reference point and attained these levels is impressive (fig. 1). Clearly, our plan had a positive effect on student achievement.
Figure 1. Percentage of 3rd Graders Who Scored at Three Levels of Reading Proficiency, 1996–1998
But equally important, the school community felt a renewed sense of pride, achievement, and accomplishment in its students and their performance. Our changes have resulted in a clear understanding that to solve a problem, the redeployment of staff, combined with effective collaboration among teachers, administrators, and parents, definitely gets results.
