4.+Logic+Model+-+Design


 * Logic Model - Design**




 * Program Intentions and Logic:**

The ultimate goal of the Fountas and Pinnell's Guided Reading (GR) program is for the students to achieve independent reading of increasingly difficult text. The GR program is an instructional approach/program that involves teachers working with small groups of students who demonstrate similar reading behaviours and who read at a similar instructional level. Fountas and Pinnell (2001) believed that guided reading makes it “possible for students not only to read a more difficult text but also to reflect on the text, understand it, and use it as a way of learning more about reading” (p. 192). With each GR lesson, focused instruction is given to students at their point of need, without which many students would fail to progress (Fountas & Pinnell, 2001).

In the Guided Reading program, levelled texts are provided to the students and these texts are considered to be at a student’s instructional level if they are read at about 90% accuracy (90-94% accuracy is considered to be an instructional reading level) (Clay, 2002). The reading groups are flexible and based on short-term needs. GR is a time for students to read unfamiliar text that has some challenge to it. The students apply known strategies to the unfamiliar text. The teacher then provides support in developing new strategies while reading. It is an opportunity for all the students in the group to independently and quietly read from their own copy of the text. GR develops students’ comprehension, fluency, and critical response to different types of text. It provides a supportive setting where students feel confident to meet new challenges. The purpose of GR is to allow the teacher to observe students while they work with unfamiliar text and to provide ‘just in time’ instruction for each student within a meaningful context. Assessment for learning is embedded in the process as teachers take regular running records of student reading to inform instruction. Formal assessments of student reading are conducted four times during the course of the school year: at the beginning of the program to establish preliminary GR groups; in November, prior to fall report cards; in March, prior to spring report cards; and finally at the end of the year to track longitudinal growth and overall program effectiveness.

** ﻿ Logic Model Explanation **
 * Inputs: **

Guided reading has been a part of a balanced literacy program at this school for the past 10 years. When first introduced, there was a great deal of system support and training that accompanied the program. The Board has since discontinued support and monitoring of the program. However, the administration and teachers delivering the program would like to evaluate the efficacy of their Guided Reading program.

The administration has set aside specific time for guided reading professional development, workshops, and training sessions. They have also scheduled specific time for Guided reading sessions within the school year, and teachers designate a classroom area in which GR will occur. The Fountas and Pinnell (1996) Guided Reading Resource book is used as a reference guide. In order for the program to run smoothly, the school needs to have an extensive collection of GR books, ideally with six copies of each title, in a range of levels, from A to P. Assessment tools, such as the DRA or DIBELS, are also necessary to establish reading groups, inform instruction, and subsequently monitor student progress.

// a) Activities // ﻿Before implementing a GR program, teachers should receive training on how to structure and deliver the program. The Fountas and Pinnell (1996) guide book is used as a resource in this training. The program begins with the teacher administering an initial testing of student reading levels using the criterion referenced Developmental Reading Assessment, early in September. The students are then placed in ability-like groupings and participate in two to four 20 minute (approximately) guided reading sessions per week. Each lesson consists of pre-reading, reading, and post-reading activities. Teachers select appropriate texts for each group and provide students with copies of the same title to read. In pre-reading, the teacher gives students an introduction to the story, focusing on meaning, language, and visual information in the text, while keeping in mind the students’ prior knowledge, skills, and experience. Pre-reading activities serve to build expectation, often by inviting predictions, engage students in the story, and set the stage for successful independent reading.
 * Outputs: **

During the ‘reading’ portion of the lesson, the teacher ‘listens in’ as students independently read texts. The teacher makes observations, confirms attempts, prompts for appropriate strategy use where necessary, and builds on successes and challenges to inform instruction.

Post-reading activities build student comprehension and allow the teacher to focus on the appropriate teaching of strategies, based on the successes and challenges that students encountered. Students and teacher discuss and respond to the story, perhaps noting personal connections, or extending story ideas. At times, the teacher may extend the story by engaging students in various response activities, such as writing, art, or drama. The program works on fluency by having students re-read passages over time. Teachers perform weekly running records to track progress and inform flexible groupings and instruction. Teachers formally assess students with the DRA three times per year: in November and March to monitor progress, and in June as a final assessment.

// b) Participants // The participants currently include training staff, administrators, teachers, and all grade 1-3 students in the school (48 students in total).


 * Outcomes / Impacts: **

The outcomes have been subdivided into three categories short, medium and long term goals, each progressively enhancing the students' independent reading and comprehension skills. The short-term goals all focus on targeted and measurable academic components, such as an increased knowledge of reading strategies and critical thinking skills. Students will also improve their phonemic awareness, understanding of the alphabetic principle, and comprehension strategies. We would expect to see some immediate growth in each of these categories within the first weeks if the program is successful. The medium range goals will take some time to achieve and they are not as easily measured. Students will exhibit increasing independence in their reading and their ability to read a wider variety of texts. Students will be able to identify and apply reading strategies when reading familiar and unfamiliar texts. Through these guided reading sessions, students will expand their vocabulary and increase their reading fluency. Through increased confidence in their reading skills, students will develop an increasingly positive attitude towards reading. As the students progressively improve over time, they will be become more engaged in reading and school in general, which will in turn increase the student’s academic success. All of these goals will culminate in the program's long-term goal, which is to create independent, fluent readers who can problem solve strategically and read for meaning at all times. All of these outcomes are often the result of continually meeting short-term goals but it should be clear that a true cause-effect relationship cannot be assumed for the medium or long-term goals.

Two assumptions were made in the development of this logic model for the program evaluation. As this GR program has been in implementation for the past ten years and the Board spent a great deal of money in training and professional development, we have assumed that those administering the Developmental Reading Assessments and Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills have received training with both assessment tools and are effectively administering these formal assessments.
 * Assumptions:**


 * External Factors:**

There are many external factors that could potentially affect the ultimate goal of this GR program, however, there are two major factors to consider. The first is individual student readiness for learning, including basic foundations in literacy and basic concepts about print. If students do not have the fundamental basics of print awareness and literacy skills then the GR program will not be as effective for them, especially if they are alone in a group of students of higher ability. Another major external factor for consideration is the amount of support given from home and amount of time spent reading outside of school. Some students are fortunate to have support at home and various other extracurricular activities (e.g., homework club). This extra support could enhance their reading skills and knowledge in comparison with other students within their GR group who may not be as fortunate to receive added support from home or other organizations.


 * First Steps:**

Logic models are "living documents" that can and will change over time and should be revisited with stakeholders. (Alkin, 2010, p. 78) Therefore, it was important for our GR participant-oriented program evaluation that our stakeholders were involved in all aspects of our evaluation, but especially the development of the logic model. According to Alkin (2010), "engaging in the process of constructing a logic model provides a depiction of the program theory--the logic behind what the program intends to do" (p. 78). The stakeholders requested our guidance in all aspects of the evaluation. Therefore we began by observing and researching the GR reading program. Alkin (2010) has stated that "you must learn about the program before you are able to engage stakeholders in developing a logic model" (p. 74). As our stakeholder were keen to learn about the efficacy of their GR program, their participation was vital to the program evaluation success. In order to coach our stakeholders through the development of a logic model for their GR program we conducted a Logic model workshop as one of the first steps of our program evaluation. Meeting with stakeholders to explain what a logic model is and why it is important, as well as a step by step work through of "the process of developing the logic model will help stakeholders develop a common language to describe what they are doing and will facilitate great understanding of their program" ( Alkin, 2010, p.75). Participants were asked three questions to start off the Logic model workshop:

1. What are the ultimate goals that you hope your program will accomplish? 2. What program changes must take place in order to accomplish these ultimate goals? 3. What activities are part of this program?

Participants produced a list of items for each question as a group at the workshop. We then listed the activities, outputs, and outcomes in separate lists and discussed how each column related to the next. We then had stakeholders place the activities, outputs, and outcomes on sticky notes and had them create a large draft logic model. This allowed all of us to see that the logic model can "work in both directions simultaneously" (Alkin, 2010, p. 77); we did not have to start at the ultimate goal and work backwards, nor did we have to start with the Activities and work forward to the ultimate goal. In the working session, we reiterated Alkin's four pieces of advice on the creation of logic models: (1) arrows should show the relationships between individual items in the logic model, (2) every activity should have at least one arrow leaving it, (3) every output should have at least one arrow entering and at least one leaving it, (4) every outcome should have at least one arrow entering it (p. 77). After the completion of our workshops, we all, stakeholders and evaluators felt as though we were on the right track and working as a team to evaluate this GR program for the benefit and success of the students.