Appendix B. REL Midwest CLC Study – District Administrator Interview DRAFT
Improving Adolescent Literacy Across the Curriculum in High Schools
District Administrator Interview
The Improving Adolescent Literacy Across the Curriculum in High Schools project is an effort to improve students’ performance in high school-level coursework and state tests through the use of the Content Literacy Curriculum (CLC) -- a school-wide, literacy across the curriculum school reform framework.
High schools in the Midwest have been selected to participate in a national study of the CLC program. The US Department of Education has sponsored this study of the CLC to determine if this program has a positive impact on how students read and how well they do in high school.
This interview asks questions about your school’s current literacy improvement efforts and should take about 90 minutes to complete. Your responses will be kept strictly confidential – we are looking at responses overall, not at what specific individuals have to say.
For questions, call Jim Kemple at
The U.S. Department of Education wants to protect the privacy of individuals who participate in surveys. Your answers will be combined with other surveys, and no one will know how you answered the questions. This survey is authorized by law (1) Sections 171(b) and 173 of the Education Sciences Reform Act of 2002, Pub. L. 107-279 (2002); and (2) Section 9601 of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA), as amended by the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act of 2001 (Pub. L. 107-110).
According to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, no persons are required to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a valid OMB control number. The valid OMB control number for this information collection is XXXX-XXXX. The time required to complete this information collection is estimated to average 90 minutes per respondent, including the time to review instructions, gather the data needed, and complete and review the information collected. If you have any comments concerning the accuracy of the time estimate(s) or suggestions for improving this form, please write to: U.S. Department of Education, Washington, DC 20202. If you have comments or concerns regarding the status of your individual submission of this form, write directly to: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, 555 New Jersey Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20208. |
We are interested in discussing what is currently going on at the high schools in your district.
Literacy Instruction/ Formal Literacy Initiative or Intervention |
|
|
|
|
If YES, continue to question 4. If NO, continue to question 12.
|
|
|
|
Probe: Was there a perception of need or failure that prompted the use of this program?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Materials |
|
|
Probe: Technology includes listening centers, computers, printers, handhelds, or intervention software.
|
|
|
|
Assessment |
|
|
|
|
Data-Driven Instruction |
|
|
If YES, continue to question 17. If NO, continue to question 28.
|
|
If YES, continue to question 18. If NO, continue to question 19.
|
|
|
|
If YES, continue to question 20. If NO, continue to question 22.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Professional Development |
Probe: Some examples of professional development are: differentiated instruction, student centered classrooms, integrated curriculum across content areas, cognitive and metacognitive strategies, and student ownership.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Attitudes/Support |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Closing Comments |
|
|
File Type | application/msword |
File Title | Literacy Instruction |
Author | MDRCER |
Last Modified By | DoED |
File Modified | 2007-08-21 |
File Created | 2007-08-21 |