To provide criteria to define the term “substantial deficiency in reading.” The effect will be to standardize the definition throughout the state and reduce confusion and disparities as to which students are receiving appropriate ....

 

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

State Board of Education

RULE NO.:RULE TITLE:

6A-6.053K-12 Comprehensive Evidence-Based Reading Plan

PURPOSE AND EFFECT: To provide criteria to define the term “substantial deficiency in reading.” The effect will be to standardize the definition throughout the state and reduce confusion and disparities as to which students are receiving appropriate interventions. The rule has also been updated to incorporate the plan template, clarify the role of literacy coaches, require district evaluation of plan implementation, and specifically enumerate the requirements for summer reading camps and the extra hour for elementary schools identified as one of the 300 lowest-performing. The effect is clarity for districts in determining which students should receive intensive interventions.

SUMMARY: This rule provides criteria to define “substantial deficiency in reading” to clarify which students should be getting intensive interventions per the District K-12 Comprehensive Evidence-based Reading Plan. It also clarifies requirements to aid in implementation of the plan and provides for evaluation of implementation of the plan. The proposed rule incorporates the form school districts must use when submitting their reading plans to the Department. It explains the methodology to identify the 300 lowest-performing elementary schools and the reading plan amendments that a school district with one of these schools must make.

SUMMARY OF STATEMENT OF ESTIMATED REGULATORY COSTS AND LEGISLATIVE RATIFICATION:

The Agency has determined that this will not have an adverse impact on small business or likely increase directly or indirectly regulatory costs in excess of $200,000 in the aggregate within one year after the implementation of the rule. A SERC has not been prepared by the Agency.

The Agency has determined that the proposed rule is not expected to require legislative ratification based on the statement of estimated regulatory costs or if no SERC is required, the information expressly relied upon and described herein: It is not anticipated that the proposed amendment will have any adverse impact on economic growth or business competitiveness, or increase regulatory costs or any other factor listed in s. 120.541(2), F.S. and will not require legislative ratification. The Just Read, Florida! office is already reviewing, approving, and monitoring the annual District K-12 Comprehensive Reading Plan. This rule change does not add additional regulatory requirements.

Any person who wishes to provide information regarding a statement of estimated regulatory costs, or provide a proposal for a lower cost regulatory alternative must do so in writing within 21 days of this notice.

RULEMAKING AUTHORITY: 1001.02(2), 1011.62, 1008.25, FS.

LAW IMPLEMENTED: 1001.215, 1011.62, 1008.25, FS.

A HEARING WILL BE HELD AT THE DATE, TIME AND PLACE SHOWN BELOW:

DATE AND TIME: January 13, 2021, 9:00 a.m.

PLACE: Daytona State College, Event Center, 1200 W. International Speedway Blvd., Daytona Beach, FL 32114.

THE PERSON TO BE CONTACTED REGARDING THE PROPOSED RULE IS: Rebecca Mead, Executive Director, Just Read, Florida! 325 West Gaines Street, Tallahassee, Florida 32399, [phone] [e-mail].

 

THE FULL TEXT OF THE PROPOSED RULE IS:

 

6A-6.053 District K-12 Comprehensive Evidence-Based Reading Plan.

(1) Annually, school districts shall submit a K-12 Comprehensive Evidence-Based Reading Plan for the specific use of the research-based reading instruction allocation on the form entitled District K-12 Comprehensive Evidence-Based Reading Plan, Form No. CERP-1, (effective February 2021). in the format prescribed by the Department for review and approval by the Just Read, Florida! Office pursuant to section 1011.62, F.S. The District K-12 Comprehensive Evidence-Based Reading Plan must accurately depict and detail the role of administration (both district and school level), professional development, assessment, curriculum, and instruction in the improvement of student learning of the B.E.S.T. English Language Arts Florida Standards as provided in Rule 6A-1.09401, F.A.C(LAFS). This information must be reflected for all schools and grade levels and shared with all stakeholders, including school administrators, literacy leadership teams, literacy coaches, classroom instructors, support staff, and parents. The District K-12 Comprehensive Evidence-Based Reading Plan must ensure that:

(a) Leadership at the district and school level is guiding and supporting the initiative;

(b) The analysis of data drives all decision-making;

(c) All intensive reading interventions must be delivered by a teacher who is certified or endorsed in reading;

(d) Measurable student achievement goals are established and clearly described;

(e) Evidence-based instructional materials have a significant effect on improving student outcomes and meet strong, moderate, or promising levels of evidence as defined in 20 U.S.C. § 7801(21)(A)(i) and comply with Section 1011.67(2), F.S.; and

(f) Supplemental instructional materials have a significant effect on improving student outcomes and meet strong, moderate, or promising levels of evidence as defined in 20 U.S.C. § 7801(21)(A)(i) and comply with Section 1001.215(8), F.S.; and

(g) The identified three-hundred (300) lowest-performing elementary schools provide an additional hour per day of intensive reading instruction in accordance with Section 1011.62(9), F.S.

(2) Research-Based Reading Instruction Allocation. Districts will submit a budget for the Research-Based Reading Instruction Allocation, including salaries and benefits, professional development costs, assessment costs, and programs/materials costs. In accordance with Section 1008.25(3)(a), F.S., budgets must be prioritized for K-3 students with substantial deficiencies in reading as identified in subsection (12) subparagraph (9)(c)5. of this rule.

(3)  School Literacy Leadership Teams Reading Leadership Teams. Districts must describe in the plan the process the principal will use to form and maintain a Literacy Reading Leadership Team, consisting of a school administrator, reading coach, media specialist, lead teachers, and other relevant team members, as applicable.

(4) Professional Development. The plan must make adequate provisions to require principals to:

(a) Provide the professional development required by Section 1012.98(4)(b)11., F.S., which includes the training to help teachers integrate phonemic awareness, phonics, word study and spelling, fluency, vocabulary and text comprehension strategies into an explicit, systematic, and sequential approach to reading instruction, including multisensory intervention strategies necessary to implement the multisensory reading intervention identified in paragraph (9)(c) of this rule;

(b) Differentiate and intensify professional development for teachers based on progress monitoring data;

(c) Identify mentor teachers and establish model classrooms within the school; and

(d) Ensure that time is provided for teachers to meet weekly for professional development including lesson study and professional learning communities.;

(e) Provide teachers with the information contained in the K-12 Comprehensive Evidence-Based Reading Plan.

(5) Charter schools. Charter schools must utilize their proportionate share of the research-based reading allocation in accordance with Sections 1002.33(7)(a)2.a., and 1008.25(3)(a), F.S. All intensive reading interventions specified by the charter must be delivered by a teacher who is certified or endorsed in reading.

(6) Reading/Literacy Coaches.

(a) If the funding of reading/literacy coaches is part of the Research-Based Reading Instruction Allocation budget, reading/literacy coaches must be assigned to schools determined to have the greatest need based on student performance data in reading.

(b) Districts must use the Just Read, Florida! model or explain the evidence-based coaching model used in their district and how they will monitor the implementation and effectiveness of the coaching model. This must include how communication between the district, school administration, and the reading coach throughout the year will address areas of concern.

(c) The Just Read, Florida! reading/literacy coach model is described below:

1. The reading/literacy coach will serve as a stable resource for professional development throughout a school to generate improvement in reading and literacy instruction and student achievement. Coaches will support and provide initial and ongoing professional development to teachers in:

a. Each of the major reading components, as needed, based on an analysis of student performance data;

b. Administration and analysis of instructional assessments; and,

c. Providing differentiated instruction and intensive intervention.

2. Coaches will:

a. Model effective instructional strategies for teachers;

b. Facilitate study groups;

c. Train teachers to administer assessments, analyze data, and use in data analysis and using data to differentiate instruction;

d. Coach and mentor teachers daily colleagues;

e. Provide daily support to classroom teachers;

e.f. Work with teachers to ensure that evidence-based reading programs (comprehensive core reading programs, supplemental reading programs and comprehensive intervention reading programs) are implemented with fidelity;

f. g. Help to increase instructional density to meet the needs of all students;

g. h. Participate in literacy Help lead and support reading leadership teams at their school(s);

h. i. Continue to increase their knowledge base in best practices in reading instruction, intervention, and instructional reading strategies;

i. j. Prioritize Work with all teachers (including ESE, content area and elective areas) in the school they serve, prioritizing their time to those teachers, activities, and roles that will have the greatest impact on student achievement in reading, namely coaching and mentoring in classrooms;

j. k Work frequently with students in whole and small group instruction in the context of modeling and coaching in other teachers’ classrooms; and

k. Work with school principals to plan and implement a consistent program of improving reading achievement using strategies that demonstrate a statistically significant effect on improving student outcomes as defined in 20 U.S.C. § 7801(21)(A)(i).

l. Not be asked to perform administrative functions that will confuse their role for teachers; and,

m. Spend limited time administering or coordinating assessments.

3. Coaches are prohibited from performing administrative functions that will detract from their role as a literacy coach, and must limit the time spent on administering or coordinating assessments.

(d) Minimum Qualifications. Literacy Reading/literacy coaches must have experience as successful classroom teachers. Coaches must exhibit knowledge of evidence-based reading research, special expertise in quality reading instruction and infusing reading strategies into content area instruction, and data management skills. They must have a strong knowledge base in working with adult learners. Coaches must be excellent communicators with outstanding presentation, interpersonal, and time management skills. The coach must have a minimum of a bachelor’s degree and advanced coursework or professional development in reading is required. The reading/literacy coach must be rated highly effective and be endorsed or K-12 certified in the area of reading. The literacy coach must have a highly effective rating from the most recently available evaluation that contains student achievement data.

(7) District-level monitoring of the District K-12 Comprehensive Evidence-Based Reading Plan Implementation. The plan must demonstrate adequate provisions for:

(a) Monitoring the level of implementation of the District K-12 Comprehensive Evidence-Based Reading Plan at the school and classroom level, including an explanation of the data that will be collected, how it will be collected, and the frequency of review. Districts must also explain how concerns are communicated if it is determined that the District K-12 Comprehensive Evidence-Based Reading Plan is not being implemented in a systematic and explicit manner, based on data to meet the needs of students.

(b) Ensuring that all instruction in reading is systematic and explicit, based on data, and uses an evidence-based sequence of reading instruction and strategies to meet the needs of students at the school level and determining appropriate instructional adjustments.

(c) Ensuring that data from formative assessments are used to guide differentiation of reading instruction.

(d) Incorporating reading and literacy instruction by all content area teachers into subject areas to extend and build discussions of text in order to deepen understanding. This must include a description of the utilization of leveled classroom libraries and independent reading practice.

(e) Reporting of data elements as required by the District K-12 Comprehensive Evidence-Based Reading Plan within the Comprehensive Management Information System as provided in Rule 6A-1.0014, F.A.C Automated Student and Staff Data Base System. These data elements include:

1. Student Enrollment in Reading Intervention;

2. Reading Endorsement competency status for teachers; and

3. Reading Certification progress status for teachers.

(f) Evaluating District K-12 Comprehensive Evidence-Based Reading Plan implementation and impact on student achievement.

1. Districts must annually evaluate the implementation of their District K-12 Comprehensive Evidence-Based Reading Plan.

2. The evaluation must:

a. Analyze elements of the district’s plan, including leadership, assessment, curriculum, instruction, intervention, professional development, and family engagement;

b. Include input from teachers, literacy coaches, and administrators at the school level; and

c. Identify elements in need of improvement and strategies to increase literacy outcomes for students.

3. Districts must provide their evaluation of the District K-12 Comprehensive Evidence-Based Reading Plan to the Just Read, Florida! Office by the deadline established in subsection (14) of this rule.

4. The district must use the evaluation to improve implementation of the district’s plan for the following school year to increase student achievement.

(8) School-level monitoring of District K-12 Comprehensive Evidence-Based Reading Plan Implementation.

(a) Districts must describe the process used by principals to monitor implementation of, and ensure compliance with, the reading plan, including weekly reading walkthroughs walk throughs conducted by administrators.

(b) Districts must describe how principals monitor collection and utilization of assessment data, including progress monitoring data, to determine intervention and support needs of students.

(9) Summer Reading Camps. For summer reading camps required by Section 1008.25(7), F.S., districts must:

(a) Provide instruction to grade 3 students who score Level 1 on the statewide, standardized English Language Arts assessment;

(b) Implement evidence-based explicit, systematic, and multisensory reading instruction in phonemic awareness, phonics, fluency, vocabulary, and comprehension; and

(c) Provide instruction by a teacher endorsed or certified in reading.

(10) Parent Support through a Read-at-Home Plan. In accordance with Section 1008.25(5)(c), F.S., the parent of any student who exhibits a substantial deficiency in reading, as identified in accordance with subsection (12) of this rule, must be provided a read-at-home plan, including multisensory strategies, that the parent can use to help with reading at home.

(11)(9) Assessment, Curriculum, and Instruction.

(a) Elementary schools must teach reading in a dedicated, uninterrupted block of time of at least ninety (90) minutes duration daily to all students. The reading block will include whole group instruction utilizing an evidence-based sequence of reading instruction (comprehensive core reading program) and small group differentiated instruction in order to meet individual student needs.

(b) K-12 reading instruction will align with Florida’s Revised Formula for Success, 6 + 4 + T1 +T2 + T3, 6+4+ii+iii which includes the following:

1. Ssix (6) components of reading: oral language, phonological awareness, phonics, fluency, vocabulary, and comprehension;

2. Ffour (4) types of classroom assessments: screening, progress monitoring/formative assessment, diagnosis, and summative assessment; 

3. Core instruction (Tier 1): is standards-aligned; includes accommodations for students with a disability, students with an Individual Educational Plan (IEP), and students who are English language learners; provides print-rich explicit and systematic, scaffolded, and differentiated instruction; builds background and content knowledge; incorporates writing in response to reading; and incorporates the principles of Universal Design for Learning as defined in 34 C.F.R. 200.2(b)(2)(ii);

4. Immediate intervention (Tier 2): is standards-aligned; includes accommodations for students with a disability, students with an IEP, and students who are English language learners; provides explicit, systematic,  small group teacher-led instruction matched to student need, targeting gaps in learning to reduce barriers to students’ ability to meet Tier 1 expectations; provides multiple opportunities to practice the targeted skill(s) and receive feedback; and occurs in addition to core instruction; and

5. Immediate intensive intervention (Tier 3): is provided to students identified as having a substantial deficiency in reading as identified in accordance with subsection (12) of this rule; is standards-aligned; includes accommodations for students with a disability, students with an IEP, and students who are English language learners; provides explicit, systematic, individualized instruction based on student need, one-on-one or very small group instruction with more guided practice, immediate corrective feedback, and frequent progress monitoring; and occurs in addition to core instruction and Tier 2 interventions. In accordance with Section 1008.25(4)(c), F.S., students identified with a substantial reading deficiency must be covered by a federally required student plan, such as an IEP or an individualized progress monitoring plan and receive intensive interventions from teachers who are certified or endorsed in reading. initial instruction (ii) including building background and content knowledge, motivation, the provision for print rich, explicit, systematic, scaffolded, and differentiated instruction, and writing in response to reading; immediate, intensive intervention (iii): including extended time, targeted instruction based on student need, small group or one-on-one instruction, accommodations, and more frequent progress monitoring.

(c) Data from the results of assessments will guide differentiation of instruction and intervention in the classroom.

(d) (c) Districts are required to develop Assessment/Curriculum Decision Trees to demonstrate how data will be used to determine specific reading instructional needs and interventions for all students in grades K-12. The chart must include:

1. Name of assessment(s): screening, diagnostic, progress monitoring, local assessment data, statewide assessments, or teacher observations in use within the district. Pursuant to Section 1002.69, F.S., the Florida Kindergarten Readiness Screener (FLKRS) must be used as a component of identification for kindergarten students, and according to subsection (12) of this rule, the assessment tool used to identify students in grades K-3 with a substantial deficiency in reading. and Ppursuant to Section 1008.25(4)(a), F.S., the Florida Standards Assessment-English Language Arts (FSA-ELA) must be one of the components used for grades 3-12;

2. Targeted audience (grade level);

3. Performance criteria used for decision-making for each instrument listed in subparagraph (11)(d)1. (9)(c)1. of this rule at each grade level;. Districts must explicitly state the criteria used by the district to identify K-3 students with a substantial deficiency in reading accordance with Section 1008.25(5)(a), F.S. District-selected performance criteria must identify students at a proportional rate compared to district performance on statewide assessments such as FLKRS and FSA-ELA;

4. Assessment/curriculum connection; and

5. An explanation of how instruction will be modified for students who receive instruction through distance and blended learning; and

65. An explanation of how instruction will be modified for students in grades K-12 who have been identified as having a substantial deficiency in reading who are in need of intensive intervention. not responded to a specific level of reading intervention with the initial intensity (time and group size) provided.

7. The decision trees This must include specific criteria for when a student is identified to receive intensive reading interventions by a teacher who is certified or endorsed in reading, what intensive reading interventions will be used, and how the intensive reading interventions are provided. Districts must identify the multisensory intervention provided to students in grades K-3 who have a substantial deficiency in reading.

(12) Identification of Students with a Substantial Reading Deficiency. A student is identified as having a substantial deficiency in reading if any of the following criteria are met:

(a) The student scores at the lowest achievement level/benchmark as identified by the publisher during a universal screening period, on an assessment listed in the district’s approved District K-12 Comprehensive Evidence-based Reading Plan;

(b) The student scores at the lowest achievement level/benchmark as identified by the publisher during progress monitoring administration at any time during the school year, on an assessment listed in the district’s approved District K-12 Comprehensive Evidence-based Reading Plan; or

(c) The student has demonstrated, through consecutive formative assessments or teacher observation data, minimum skill levels for reading competency in one or more of the areas of phonological awareness; phonics; vocabulary, including oral language skills; reading fluency; and reading comprehension.

(13) Three-hundred (300) Lowest-Performing Elementary Schools. 

(a) The three-hundred (300) lowest-performing elementary schools are identified annually based on a three-year average of the points earned by a school in the school grading component of achievement in English Language Arts and the points earned by a school in the school grading component of learning gains in English Language Arts, as set forth in Rule 6A-1.09981(4)(a), F.A.C. The points for these two school grading components are summed and then averaged for each elementary school. The elementary schools are then ranked from lowest to highest based on this average in order to identify the three-hundred (300) lowest-performing elementary schools.

(b) School districts will be notified of the schools in their district that have been identified as one of the three-hundred (300) lowest-performing elementary schools at the same time districts are notified of school grades, as provided in Rule 6A-1.09981, F.A.C.

(c) By the date set by the Department as provided in subsection (14) of this rule, school districts that have one or more of the lowest-performing elementary schools must amend their District K-12 Comprehensive Evidence-Based Plan to ensure that:

1. An additional hour per day of intensive reading instruction is provided to students in the school. The additional hour may be provided within the school day;

2. The additional hour per day of intensive reading instruction is provided by teachers and reading specialists who have demonstrated effectiveness in teaching reading; and

3. The intensive reading instruction delivered in this additional hour includes research-based reading instruction that has been proven to accelerate progress of students exhibiting a reading deficiency, including:

a. Differentiated instruction based on screening, diagnostic, progress monitoring, or student assessment data to meet students’ specific reading needs;

b. Explicit and systematic reading strategies to develop phonemic awareness, phonics, fluency, vocabulary, and comprehension, with more extensive opportunities for guided practice, error correction, and feedback; and

c. Integration of social studies, science, and mathematics text reading, text discussion, and writing in response to reading.

(14) Annually, the Department will post at https://www.fldoe.org/academics/standards/just-read-fl/readingplan.stml the deadlines for school districts to submit their District K-12 Comprehensive Evidence-Based Reading Plan, the amendment for the three-hundred (300) lowest-performing elementary schools, and the district evaluation of plan implementation. 

(15) The following documents are incorporated by reference in this rule:

(a) District K-12 Comprehensive Evidence-Based Reading Plan, Form No. CERP-1(DOS link), effective, February 2021;

(b) 20 U.S.C. § 7801(21)(A)(i) (DOS link), effective, December 10, 2015; and

(c) 34 C.F.R. § 200.2(b)(2)(ii) (DOS link), effective, December 8, 2016.

These documents may be obtained from the Department at https://www.fldoe.org/academics/standards/just-read-fl/readingplan.stml.

Rulemaking Authority 1001.02(2), 1011.62, 1008.25 FS. Law Implemented 1001.215, 1011.62, 1008.25 FS. History–New 6-19-08, Amended 4-21-11, 2-17-15, 12-22-19,

 

NAME OF PERSON ORIGINATING PROPOSED RULE: Rebecca Mead, Executive Director, Just Read, Florida!

NAME OF AGENCY HEAD WHO APPROVED THE PROPOSED RULE: Richard Corcoran. Commissioner, Department of Education.

DATE PROPOSED RULE APPROVED BY AGENCY HEAD: December 03, 2020

DATE NOTICE OF PROPOSED RULE DEVELOPMENT PUBLISHED IN FAR: September 28, 2020