Building Caring and Literacy in Our Communities

1

Building Caring and Literacy in Our Communities: The Development and Implementation of Rockin’ Reader®, a Volunteer Literacy Program

TECHNICAL REPORT

AUTHORS: Betsy VanDeusen-‐MacLeod Central Michigan University

Jim Taylor

Cracker Barrel Old Country Store®

James Herman Tennessee Department of Education

Suggested citation: VanDeusen-‐MacLeod, E., Taylor, J., & Herman, J. (2010). Building caring and literacy in our communities: The development and implementation of Rockin’ Reader®, a volunteer literacy program. Lebanon, TN: Cracker Barrel Old Country Store®.

2

ABSTRACT

This technical report chronicles the development and implementation of Rockin’ Reader®, a

volunteer literacy program that utilizes resources donated by Cracker Barrel Old Country Store®.

It outlines the original idea for the program that began with one elementary school counselor in

one school seeking to make a difference, beginning in her school community with two rocking

chairs, a collection of children’s books, and dedicated volunteers. The exploration of the concept

for replication in other school communities is documented; this readiness included visits to the

original school, consulting with education and literacy experts, and focus group data. The first

two years of implementation are highlighted, including the start-‐up process, documented

volunteer hours, and subsequent expansion. Discussion is provided regarding program features

and research connections, including shared book reading experiences, social capital

development, program use of technology, and the application of partnership principles.

3

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Int roduct ion 4

What is Rockin’ Reader®? 5

Program Deve lopment and Implementa t ion 6

2008-‐2009 School Year 8

2009-‐2010 School Year 9

Expansion Plans 9

Program Features and Research Connec t ions 10

Shared Book Read ing

Socia l Cap i ta l Development

Program Use o f Techno logy

Partnersh ip Pr incip les

An Example of Praxis: Rockin’Reader in Ac t ion a t R.N. Harr is Integra ted Arts/Core Knowledge Magnet School 18

Next Steps 19

Summary 20

References 21

Author Informat ion 23

4

“A journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step.” – Confucius

-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐

INTRODUCT ION While attending a leadership seminar in 2004, Linda

Minor, an elementary school counselor in Sylva, North

Carolina, was challenged to somehow “change the world to

bring about greater peace.” Accepting this challenge, Linda

thought about literacy and its ability to help people

understand and embrace different ideas, perspectives, and

communities. She remembered how her grandmother would

read to her from the comfort of a rocking chair, and it brought

back fond memories. Linda believed that children would enjoy the comfortable surrounding as much as

she did. Rather than developing and writing a new curriculum, Linda focused on her friends, colleagues,

and the community. She encouraged them to become volunteer readers and spend time reading with

children at her school. With that image in mind, Linda placed two Cracker Barrel double rocking chairs

in the library and was soon overjoyed by the response of not only the student, but also the volunteers.

Within a few months, dozens of volunteers were reading with children, and the program was quickly

becoming a tremendous source of hometown pride.

With the program gaining momentum, Linda shared the concept with Cracker Barrel Old

Country Store® (CBOCS) by sending letters and photographs to the company’s headquarters. Her

purpose was to show the company how volunteers and students were enjoying the rockers in her school

and to invite CBOCS to partner in making a difference in communities. CBOCS executives were

impressed with Linda’s idea and talked with her about sharing this idea with other schools. As a

restaurant and retail company with 594 locations in 41 states, CBOCS believed the donated resources

could be used in schools for many years. Over the next year, Cracker Barrel teamed with Linda and other

education experts to develop Rockin’ Reader®, a volunteer reading program that could be shared with

public elementary schools across the country. In this report, we describe the development and

implementation of the Rockin’ Reader program from its earliest days of sharing the idea with teachers to

a functioning system that has generated more than 50,000 volunteer hours in two years. The

foundational features of the program and research connections are also documented along with

supporting cumulative and qualitative data. Finally, we share next steps and recommendations for

Rockin’ Reader as its implementation continues toward a sustainable program for school communities.

5

What is Rockin’ Reader ®? Rockin’ Reader (RR) is a program that supports a school’s literacy efforts by providing a

comfortable and inviting place for volunteers to read with children. Developed by Cracker Barrel Old

Country Store (CBOCS), the Rockin’ Reader program seeks to build caring and literacy in the community.

At no cost to schools, the program provides public elementary schools with two double rocking chairs, a

barrel-‐shaped bookshelf, and a collection of 20 children’s books selected by a team of literacy and

education experts. Schools use these resources to build and strengthen their volunteer reading

programs as well as to create a special place where these volunteers inspire a child’s love of reading.

Results for the program are tracked through volunteer hours over the entire school year. The program

encourages schools to pursue their own unique ideas for promoting literacy while honoring the

following basic components:

• Volunteers and children sit in the double rocking chairs and enjoy reading a book together.

• Twice a year, partner schools report their volunteer hours via an online link at the Rockin’ Reader website.

• Partner schools have the flexibility to incorporate additional books that are appropriate for the age-‐group of children.

• Partner schools ensure that the children are provided with a safe, comfortable, and enjoyable learning experience with the volunteers.

Schools are encouraged to use the materials to best fit their physical environment; while a suggested

diagram is provided, different arrangements and configurations are encouraged and can be seen from

school to school in order to encourage greater access for all students and to accommodate practical

space considerations. Figure 1 shows a suggested conceptual diagram and example of one school’s

Rockin’ Reader area.

6

Figure 1. Conceptual Diagram of suggested RR environment; photo from Hawthorne Elementary, Indianapolis, IN

Program Deve lopment and Implementa t ion

Exploration and Readiness To understand the concept and its potential for expansion, Cracker Barrel Old Country Store

(CBOCS) visited Linda Minor’s school -‐ Fairview Elementary School in Sylva, North Carolina. From the

beginning, company officials recognized the importance of engaging highly specialized educators in the

fields of education and literacy because these experts could help develop a program that would indeed

be a complementary resource for schools. In late 2007, three education consultants, including two

representatives from the Tennessee Department of Education (TDOE), accompanied CBOCS officials on a

second visit to Fairview Elementary School. The consultants agreed that the concept had potential for

expansion. They stressed the need to identify a local advocate in each school who could envision how

this resource could strengthen their ongoing literacy efforts. Over the next six months, these

representatives provided insights and recommendations for establishing the credibility of the program

in elementary school settings while not competing or interfering with current school literacy curriculum

and instruction.

To help CBOCS further understand this undertaking, TDOE representatives arranged meetings

with Metro-‐Nashville (TN) Public Schools personnel in January of 2008, including members of the

administrative staff and literacy educators. These meetings, including a focus group with 25 literacy

coaches, continued the development of the concept based on Linda Minor’s volunteer reading program.

7

Discussion centered on naming, planning, and implementing the program, and a plan of action was

developed to move from the program discussion stage to implementation.

This connection with TDOE also provided access to a strong and established network of state

directors and schools enacting the Reading First initiative:

The Reading First legislation (Title I, Part B) is part of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act signed into law on January 8, 2002 (U.S. Department of Education, 2001). The basic premise of Reading First (U.S. Department of Education, 2002) is that all of America’s children can learn to read well by the end of third grade when given instruction that is tailored to their needs. The Reading First initiative builds on the findings of years of scientific research which, at the request of Congress, were compiled by the National Reading Panel (National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, 2000). Reading First has been implemented in all 50 states in the United States as well as the United States territories.

In addition, schools participating in Reading First initiative were targeted for support because of

chronic student achievement issues and at-‐risk community demographics. To be eligible for Reading

First, schools fit within the following eligibility requirements:

Eligible applicants include local education agencies that first must have 40% or more students, or 50 or more students failing the [State Test] in the low category on the 4th grade Reading test. Eligible districts must additionally have one of the following:

• 15% or more, or 1,000 or more students from families with incomes below the poverty line; or

• Location in a geographic area designated as an Empowerment Zone or Enterprise Community; or

• 50% or more, or 8 or more buildings in school improvement status for reading.

In the April of 2008 during a National Reading First conference, TDOE personnel arranged a meeting

between CBOCS officials and several state directors of Reading First programs. These directors offered

insights to build the program and later suggested individual schools in their respective states that would

benefit from such a resource. Over the next five months, CBOCS finalized the resources that would be

donated to each school and communicated with the administrators of participating schools for the

upcoming school year.

8

2008-‐2009 School Year

At the start of the 2008-‐09 school year, the Rockin’ Reader program launched its first year of

implementation by establishing partnerships with 125 schools in seven states with the majority of these

schools connected to the Reading First program. At each partner school, a primary contact was

identified to oversee the local development of the program. In most cases, this primary contact was the

school’s Reading First literacy coach. The program provided new resources to support and strengthen

the school’s on-‐going literacy efforts. Rockin’ Reader established a goal of 15,000 volunteer hours for

the school year across all partner schools in the program. Though the program did not require a certain

amount of volunteer hours, the company agreed with the educator recommendation to establish a goal

for schools to keep in mind. If each

school recorded 125 volunteer hours

during of the school year, the 15,000 goal

would be exceeded. At the end of the

school year, school reports showed the

volunteer hour goal was easily exceeded

as volunteers contributed 16,400 hours

of reading time with children. During this

first year, partner schools took

ownership of the program in their

respective schools, and that ownership

demonstrated strong volunteer support

while helping to establish the program’s

credibility.

Since the beginning, CBOCS has

recognized the importance of building

awareness of the program both internally

and externally. The company assigned

all program responsibilities to its Outreach department. In the first year, Jim Taylor, Manager of

Community and Industry Relations, visited more than 30 partner schools in six states. He observed

volunteers in action, and interacted with literacy coaches, principals, and parents. Taylor also filmed

interactions between students and volunteers. The videos were later edited and posted on the

program’s dedicated website at www.rockinreader.org . In many cases, local CBOCS managers

accompanied Taylor on these visits and established positive connections with the schools.

9

2009-‐2010 School Year The first-‐year success carried over in the 2009-‐10 school year as the program added new partner

schools. With credibility of the program established, CBOCS expanded the program and revised its

selection process. Rockin’ Reader considered applications from any public elementary school, not just

RF schools. Consideration was also given to schools located near existing Cracker Barrel locations and to

schools that had Cracker Barrel employees involved in their education communities as a school

employee and/or parent volunteer.

An online application process generated 400 applications and ensured greater consistency for

selection, and the program added 100 new partner schools. This expansion increased the program to

225 schools in 29 states, and nearly half of the new partner schools were recommended by local CBOCS

employees. At the start of the 2009-‐10 school year, the goal for volunteer hours was increased to

25,000. To achieve this goal, each school would need to contribute a minimum of 111 volunteer hours

during the school year. The 2009-‐10 volunteer total of 52,615 hours exceeded all expectations. The

volunteer hours for 2008/09 and 2009/10 are summarized in Table 1:

Table 1. Volunteer Hours (based on suggested goal of 125 hours per partner school per year)

School Year Collective Goal (in hours) Documented Goal Status 2008-‐2009 15,000 16,400 + 9% 2009-‐2010 25,000 52,615 + >50%

Expansion Plans Based on the success of the program in its first two years as well as increased interest and

support, the Rockin’ Reader program has developed plans to add 75 new partner schools in the 2010-‐11

school year, increasing the program to a total of 300 partner schools. The online application and

selection process continue to be refined. In the application, schools are encouraged to communicate

their vision for implementation. The application itself is intentionally brief, based on educator feedback

that lamented a lengthy application process which required extensive research and documentation.

Beyond contact information, the Rockin’ Reader application asks only two narrative questions. Through

these narratives, a school provides its vision for the program and describes the strength of its existing

volunteer network. A detailed, point-‐based rubric is utilized to review each application. In addition to

program expansion, CBOCS is developing strategic partnerships, working with local chapters of national

non-‐profit organizations. Program connections are being developed with local chapters in conjunction

10

with new or existing RR partner schools. The concept encourages the local chapter to adopt the school

by providing a consistent source of volunteers.

Program Features and Research Connec t ions The foundational features of the Rockin’ Reader program provide structure and research

connections that contribute to its implementation, impact, and community connections. These features

include shared book reading, the development of social capital, program use of technology, and the

application of overarching partnership principles.

Shared Book Read ing

The shared book reading

experiences between children

and volunteers are at the heart

of the RR program. Research

indicates that shared book

reading, or reading aloud with

children, substantially improves

their reading skills, as well as

their written, oral, and auditory

skills (Duursma, Augustyn, &

Zuckerman, 2008; Bus, 2002;

Trelease, 2006). In addition, children that experience shared book readings have an increased positive

attitude toward reading more so than those who do not have these experiences. The amount of reading

children are exposed to and experience over time also impacts their reading development. For example,

Cunningham & Stanovich (1998) summarize emerging research consensus that indicates the majority of

children’s vocabulary growth over time happens through indirect language exposure, including shared

reading experiences, rather than through direct teaching. The power of shared book reading is

summarized by Trelease (2006):

We read to children for all the same reasons we talk with children: to reassure, to entertain, to bond, to inform or explain, to arouse curiosity, to inspire. But in reading aloud, we also: condition the child’s brain to associate reading with pleasure; create back ground knowledge; build vocabulary; [and] provide a reading role model. (p. 4)

11

Through the RR program, a school can establish a welcoming and comfortable place for children,

volunteers, and the community to interact. This environment reflects the shared reading environment

attributes recommended in early childhood research (Roskos & Neuman, 2002):

• Make reading enjoyable by choosing a comfortable place to read. • Establish a pattern of reading frequently to children. • Help children learn as you read. • Ask children questions as you read. • Encourage children to talk about the book. • Read many kinds of books. • Reread favorite books.

Socia l Cap i ta l Development

The RR program seeks to build strong literacy connections within partner schools and across

their communities. These types of connections constitute resources for schools that can be described

as social capital. Building on the idea that capital reflects resources available in a society, such as

financial capital (e.g., money and assets) and physical capital (e.g., materials and products), social capital

is a way of understanding the more

intangible resources available for access

in a community (Field, 2003). According to

Cohen and Prushak (2001), social capital

“consists of the stock of active

connections among people: the trust,

mutual understanding, and shared values

and behaviors that bind the members of

human networks and communities and

make cooperative action possible” (p. 4).

In addition to supporting school

communities, the RR program expands a partner school’s network beyond its local connections. This

comes at no cost to the school and provides valuable social capital as friends, colleagues, professional

organizations, and the community at large learns of the school’s involvement in this program. In

addition to the support of local communities, social capital benefits also accrue from well-‐connected

networks between organizations (Cross & Parker, 2004).

Social capital development is emerging as a critical aspect of study in school improvement

research literature. Research findings suggest that social capital may provide a counterweight to

economic and social disadvantage and may offer particularly significant educational resources for those

who are otherwise relatively disadvantaged (Stanton-‐Salazar & Dornbusch, 1995). With the RR program

12

focus on schools with at-‐risk community demographics, its implementation has the potential to enhance

school improvement essential supports. In a 2006 report on their extensive research in Chicago Public

Schools (Sebring, Allensworth, Bryk, Easton, & Luppescu, 2006), the Consortium on Chicago School

Research at the University of Chicago summarized what it considered to be the five essential supports

that are critical to school improvement: leadership, parent-‐community ties, professional capacity,

student-‐centered learning climate, and ambitious instruction. This report also contributes new findings

about the link between the social capital of school communities and their capacities to improve:

To learn more about why these differences in school improvement rates occurred, we turned to a growing body of research in urban sociology on the quality of social relationships in communities and how these relationships influence the quality of everyday life and shape collective capacity to solve local problems. These relationships are often called social capital. (p. 3) These patterns suggest that the school works in interaction with the community: if social capital

is weak in the broader school context, the social organization inside the school must be strong enough

to compensate. Feedback from partner schools helps to illustrate this point. The following example

demonstrates how a school community utilized the program area to build its social capital and

connections as the welcoming Rockin’ Reader environment provided comfort and additional benefits for

students and families during school activities:

I wanted you to know what a great addition to our school your program has been. The chairs and the bookcase are located centrally in the library and are commented on daily. We had 175 students apply for our kindergarten program alone. The rockers were used by all while waiting. They shared books with the students waiting to be tested and their siblings. It seemed to calm many of them. Our list of volunteer parents is quite lengthy and the Rockin’ Reader materials have given them a place to go with kids to read. We highlight different selections and put them in the bookshelf. Thank you so much for offering this program. Our school has truly enjoyed it! -‐Debbie Butrum, Media Specialist -‐McFadden School of Excellence, Murfreesboro, TN

Program Use o f Techno logy

The RR program leverages a variety of technology supports to interact and communicate with

partner schools and the wider community. These supports include a comprehensive program website,

online application and data submission, electronic newsletters, and social networking. These

technology activities are structured and consistent, and designed to interact with both social and

content dimensions which are consistent factors in the development of web-‐based communities (Calvin,

Stein & Wheaton, 2004).

13

Rockin’ Reader Website (www.rockinreader.org). The primary technology communication

mechanism for Rockin’ Reader is the program website. Wenger (2001) provides three important

developmental guidelines for website development, all of which are incorporated in the RR technology

infrastructure. The first guideline is to use mainstream, established software and programs that have

technical support available. Secondly, a prototype approach is recommended where the website

development starts small and continues over time. Finally, the portal should be easy to use,

understand, and navigate. Table 2 summarizes the major website topic categories as well as specific

examples.

Table 2. Rockin’ Reader Website Content Summary (August 2008-‐Feburary 2010) Website Topic Categories Specific Category Examples School Profiles • Video segments featuring volunteers at partner schools

• Special events and community activities (e.g., “Multi-‐platinum country music artist Josh Turner read to kids at a Nashville school”, Read Across America, March is Reading Month)

• Digital photos submitted by partner schools “In the News” • Local print and broadcast media stories (reprinted with permission)

• Local news coverage links • CBOCS news releases • Visits from dignitaries

History/Recognition • Historical program information and documentation • Partner School Listings • “Rock Stars”: recognition of schools reporting high volunteer hours

Teacher Resources Downloadable documents including the following: • Volunteer Log Sheets • Volunteer Information and Tip Sheets • Program logo for publicity purposes • Certificates of appreciation

Program Application and Data

• Online application • Web-‐based link for data submission • Documentation required for participation

Online Application & Data Submission. The RR program utilizes an online application process for

interested schools that offers an easy, effective, and efficient mechanism for the reporting of

information between the schools and the program office. The application asks for basic school

information, contacts, the location of nearest CBOCS restaurant with map assistance, and current

literacy grants/programs operating at the school. In addition, the applicant provides the school vision

for the RR program and a description of the school’s current volunteer base. Finally, schools indicate

how they become aware of the program and any connections and/or referrals from local CBOCS

employees. All schools selected for the program agree to track volunteer hours associated with the

14

program and submit the total number of hours by way of a web-‐based link. These technology supports

seek to decrease the paperwork load on schools, and to ease both the application and data submission

logistics for both partner schools and the program office.

Social Networking. The

program is featured on social

networking sites such as

LinkedIn, Facebook, and Twitter.

These networking vehicles offer

immediate connectivity and just-‐

in-‐time communication (Dunlap,

2009) as well as the additional

power of social networking tools

which lies in their potential to

extend learning beyond the

boundaries of a classroom and

school community (Newgarden, 2009). While content is similar across these vehicles, the unique nature

of each network provides multiple ways for members to participate in the social media environments.

The Rockin’ Reader LinkedIn networking group has been established and is monitored and updated by

the program office. The program Facebook Fan page includes video profiles, partner school photos, and

periodic updates. The Twitter stream for Rockin’ Reader provides brief, periodic updates that highlight

positive stories from partner schools and successful volunteer engagement and opportunities.

Electronic Newsletters. Electronic newsletters are distributed through email communication on

a monthly basis from the RR program office. The primary audience for this distribution is partner

schools. While the content of the newsletters is similar to the social networking topics, the newsletters

provide ideas for volunteer engagement, links to various media articles, highlights of ideas that are

working in schools, and reminders for data submission and other program related information.

In sum, the technology supports provided by the RR program provide value-‐added features that

continue to increase and benefit the program community at multiple levels. This allows educators to

focus on the important task at hand, developing life-‐long literacy skills with children in caring

environments:

15

Although the most important aspects of community building are the interpersonal skills that humans bring, technology can provide the opportunity to organize, edit, and archive the postings of participants. Easy-‐to-‐use documentation and technical support also help participants get beyond the technical challenges to focus on the process of community building. The less intrusive the technology, the more the participants can concentrate on the project and learning at hand.” (Yoder, 2003, p. 20)

Partnersh ip Pr incip les

True partnership development can best be understood as a mindset and as a way of interpreting

the world (Knight, 2002). When the world is viewed through a partnership lens, human connections and

relationships are viewed in new ways. The Rockin’ Reader program embraces this partnership mindset

by encouraging and modeling the following six essential partnership principles:

Equality. The principle of equality states that each partner shares equal rights and

responsibilities. Each partner’s opinion is important, and every point of view is worth hearing. This

following example from an electronic newsletter distributed by the program office articulates this

principle of equality:

Thank you! I really appreciate your work and commitment to teaching the next generation. Please contact me directly with any concerns you have about the Rockin’ Reader program. Cracker Barrel wants this program to be a resource, and your feedback will help us understand how this program can build caring and literacy in the community. (August 2009 Newsletter) Choice. This is a defining characteristic of a partnership. Partners choose to work together for

mutual benefit and for collective influence. Partners are people and/or entities who both have a say,

who both guide the direction of whatever endeavor they share, who both have the right to say yes and

no, and make choices, as long as they are partners. By design, Rockin’ Reader is a voluntary program

that is governed by documented and agreed-‐upon partner agreements and mutual accountability. To

participate in the Rockin’ Reader program, the school principal reads and agrees to the program

requirements related to implementation, materials, volunteers, data reporting, and publicity.

Voice. The partnership principle of voice encourages and values the opinions of those viewed as

equals in the process. In addition, enabling people to feel they are being heard can be a deeply

motivating and meaningful experience. Most development is significantly limited unless the voices of

more than one person are encouraged and heard. The focus group with Metro-‐Nashville (TN) Public

School literacy educator focus groups held prior to first year implementation represents an example of

partnership voice. These educators shared their ideas, suggestions, and any concerns about the

potential implementation of such a volunteer program. Eight of the participating literacy coaches in this

16

focus group now have the program at their schools. The discussion included thoughts on coordination,

organization, the volunteer base, safety, and resources. Examples of teacher input are provided here:

Teacher: My first thought is that this would take a lot of time to coordinate and organize. Plus, securing a consistent flow of volunteers would be a challenge. We’re fortunate that we have a consistent flow of college students who have volunteerism requirements for their degrees, but not all elementary schools have that resource. Teacher: I think the program is worth the effort. Teachers would accept the oversight responsibility. You need a mission statement and a goal. With a mission statement in hand, teachers would fit the theme into their program. You provide general guidelines, but leave the implementation to the teacher. Teachers will figure out what works best for them. They just need to know what you want to accomplish. If you give them flexibility in their approach, you will see them create great programs. Teacher: You need a special place in the school to place the rockers, perhaps a corner in the library. It would not cost much money. If CBOCS provided the rockers and the books, there’s not much expense that we would be incurring. We always have volunteers helping in school; we would just encourage the same volunteers to serve in this new way. Teacher: For the most part, volunteerism is strong during the initial push, but does interest decline after a few months? Then you’re left with students feeling disappointed that the volunteers are not coming back. The students are sad when the relationship disconnects. What about background checks? Who would pay for that?

With the RR program underway, feedback and voice from partner schools continues to be

encouraged, considered, and acted upon. The following example of school feedback regarding data

submission is an example of partnership voice:

Feedback from schools: Over the summer, we received great feedback from our schools. We wanted to learn how to make Rockin’ Reader a better program. One concern often raised was the amount of statistical information that we required each school to document. Last year, each school was responsible for tracking four separate numbers. This year, we have reduced that number to one. Beginning this year, each school will only track the number of volunteer hours associated with the program. (August 2009 Newsletter) NOTE: Volunteer log was adapted for this change and available on website for schools.

Reflection. This key principle allows ongoing information and feedback on the status of the

partnership and its implementation. Reflection includes reflection in action (when partners reshape

what they do while they are doing it) and reflection on action (where partners think back on what has

been done in order to discover what contributed to success and to an unexpected outcome). The

following communication between the program office and a partner school about impressive volunteer

hours (1,045 in one semester), and how the school did it, represents the key principle of reflection in

partnerships:

17

This is a result of a special program that we did at the beginning of this year, a competition between the two local high schools to see who could sign up the most volunteers to read w/kids at our school. We've had a great response! (I believe it was over 200 volunteers, but I'm not sure right now of the final count). It was just a 10-‐week "blitz" but many of the mentors are staying on for the rest of the year! I'll keep you posted as the year continues! (Email communication, December 2009) -‐Rebekah Jimenez, Mary Beck Elementary – Elkhart, IN

Dialogue. Partners engage in conversation, learning together as they explore new ideas.

Dialogue brings people together as equals so they can share ideas, create new knowledge, and learning.

The following email communication is an example of the interactive and positive dialogue that occurs

regularly in the Rockin’ Reader program:

I just wanted to let you know that we received our Rockin' Reader delivery yesterday -‐ just in time for our Family Reading Night last night! We got everything set up just in time and the parents LOVED it! I'll be creating a volunteer schedule next week to get started...I can't wait!! Thank you so much for providing such a wonderful opportunity to schools. Everyone who saw the rockers, barrel and books were all smiles! I'm including a link where we first shared the news of Rockin' Reader with our parents. I'll be updating soon with pictures and more information now that it's arrived. Thanks so much! (Email communication, August 2009) -‐Jamie Champagne, Library Media Specialist, Odenville Intermediate School – Odenville, AL

Praxis. The principle of praxis means that partners have opportunities to apply new ideas to

real-‐life practices, encouraging and supporting creative activity. The RR program supports the idea of

praxis by providing clear, concrete, and manageable components that may be applied uniquely in each

local school community. Because practice is contextualized and reflection is central to this approach to

learning, praxis is impossible without a partnership relationship. As Bernstein (1991) states, “Praxis

requires choice, deliberation, and decisions about what is to done in concrete situations.” (p. 160).

Partners understand the importance of partnership principles and are excited by the possibilities offered

by the new ideas being developed.

18

An Example of Praxis: Rockin’ Reader in Ac t ion a t R.N. Harr is Integra ted Arts/Core Knowledge Magnet School

R.N. Harris Integrated Arts/ Core Knowledge Magnet School in Durham, NC has been a Rockin’

Reader partner school since 2008. The program is facilitated by the building literacy coach, Connie Britt.

She offers her insights into how the program came to Harris as well as its implementation, benefits, and

lessons learned. These are captured through interview field notes:

R.N. Harris Integrated Arts/ Core Knowledge Magnet School first heard of the Rockin’ Reader (RR) program through an email communication that sounded promising. The program focus on creating supportive literacy environments and the attractive materials available at no cost to schools encouraged the school to look further into the program. Connie took the information to her principal who supported and encouraged the application process. Connie manages and facilitates the program, and she viewed this responsibility as a way to be a leader in the building, as part of her professional growth, and as a way to promote reading in the school community. Harris School has a strong volunteer pool from a variety of sources including two nearby colleges within walking distance, existing volunteer networks including retirees, grandparents, other community members, community services activities through high schools and universities, and other local community connections. The Rockin’ Reader area is available before, during, and after school. There is a volunteer sign-‐in sheet in the office that is the primary recording mechanism, and class schedules and other information are available to support access to the RR area. Connie always has her walkie-‐talkie at-‐the-‐ready to help facilitate and support the daily activities of the program during the busy school day. Harris School is seeing benefits on multiple levels. Students love the 1-‐1 attention; Connie used the word “mesmerized” to describe how the students feel about the connection with a caring volunteer. Connie knows the students who need extra attention and intentionally targets them for sharing book reading time in the program. Students are highly motivated to read and often ask to go to the RR area to engage with books and volunteers. Teachers are very supportive of the program and seek out access during both formally scheduled times and as teachable moments arise. The RR area provides another outlet area, outside the classroom, for a comfortable place to read. Teachers suggest individuals and groups of students who are eager to read with volunteers. Parents love the program and are often seen spontaneously reading in the RR area during PTA meetings, Curriculum Nights, and with siblings and young ones just learning to handle books. Volunteers enjoy the interaction with students. In addition, district staff members are encouraged to read each time they are in the building and the secretary helps to remind them. Organizationally, Connie did a lot of work, up-‐front, to organize and provide a structure for the program which continues to pay off as the program is implemented. Once the organization was in place and communicated to the school community, the program really “runs itself”. The volunteer participation ebbs and flows, with some slow weeks and then others much busier; they work around the schedules of the volunteers and school and community events. The technology support of the program is extremely helpful during the busy realities of school. Submitting data online is easy, and all the program resources and tools are right there and available to access and download. Connie looks at the ideas and videos from other schools to get ideas and has principal support to try them and other new things. Connie reflected that once the program is underway, “Word gets out” and people communicate the positive nature of the RR program and encourage others to volunteer their time. (Phone Interview Field Notes, May 11, 2010)

19

Next Steps As the Rockin’ Reader program looks to its third year of implementation in school year 2010-‐

2011, this technical report serves as a way to reflect on activities to-‐date and look to the future through

a partnership lens. To summarize the program to-‐date, we turn to the growing body of research on the

implementation stages of innovations (Fixsen,

Naoom, Blase, Friedman, & Wallace, 2005). In

their extensive research synthesis of innovation

implementation in the social sciences, they have

identified typical and logical stages of

implementation that are cyclical in nature and

lead to innovation sustainability. These six

stages are exploration, installation, initial

implementation, full implementation,

innovation, and sustainability. They assert that

full implementation takes between 2-‐4 years,

and the Rockin’ Reader program is in the heart of this work as it enters in third full year of

implementation, balancing the scaling-‐up of partner schools with reflecting on implementation in each

unique school community. Future technical reporting and evaluation will focus on more in-‐depth

information on school-‐level implementation as well as efforts to innovate and sustain the program over

time. A summary program timeline is provided in Figure 2:

Figure 2. Rockin’ Reader program timeline 2004: Linda Minor purchases rockers for reading program 2005: Her idea gains local community support. 2006: Linda shares her idea with CBOCS 2007: The idea is developed as a concept for other schools. 2008: The Rockin’ Reader program is launched in 122 schools in 7 states 2009: Rockin’ Reader expands to 225 schools in 29 states 2010: Expansion continues; connecting program to strategic partners

20

Summary From its inception, Rockin’ Reader (RR) was designed to build caring and literacy in

communities, many of which reflect lower socio-‐economic demographics. For example, 68% of students

in RR schools qualify for free or reduced lunch (Source: National Center for Education Statistics,

www.nces.org). The program provides additional resources to support ongoing and comprehensive

community literacy efforts with an ongoing commitment to serving communities in need. In her

conceptual framework for understanding the effects of poverty on reading development, Neuman

(2008) cites fewer material resources, fewer language supports, and reduced human and social capital

as poverty-‐generated stressors that contribute to decreased reading achievement. She also indicates

that these are environmental influences that are subject to intervention through mediating mechanisms

such as enhanced background knowledge development as well as comprehensive language and family

supports. To accomplish this, Neuman advocates a comprehensive community approach:

This requires a convergence of efforts, working together to build a more potent coalition of quality instructional interventions that systematically and fundamentally change the conditions under which children who are disadvantaged grow up. Such a 360-‐degree surround would include quality instruction in school but also would provide out-‐of-‐school resources that could powerfully affect children’s opportunity, motivation, and support for learning to read. (p. 12-‐13) In this technical report, we have chronicled the development and implementation of the Rockin’

Reader program in its first two years. In addition, the program features and research connections to

shared book reading, social capital, and technology use have been described and documented.

Overriding the program implementation are the key principles involved in a partnership mindset; these

principles were described with examples from program documentation and through partner school

voices. We close with a quote from Linda Minor, who sparked the idea for the program from her

commitment to promote caring and literacy in her community so that others may do so as well:

“With great sensitivity, professionalism and hard work, Rockin’ Reader has brought warmth, companionship and the love of reading to a new level. When I think of the children and adults who have shared special moments through this program, my

eyes tear up. Thank you for investing in the future!” -‐Linda Minor-‐

For more information, visit www.rockinreader.org!

21

REFERENCES

Bernstein, R.J. (1991). Beyond objectivism and relativism. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. Bus, A. (2002). Joint caregiver-‐child storybook reading: A route to literacy development. In S.B. Neuman & D. K. Dickinson (Eds.), Handbook of Early Literacy Research. New York: Guilford Press. Calvin, J., Stein, D. S., & Wheaton, J. (2004, March). Building web based communities: Factors supporting collaborative knowledge-‐building. Paper presented at the Academy of Human Resource Development International Conference, Austin, TX. Cohen, D., & Prusak, L. (2001). In good company: How social capital makes organizations work. Boston: Harvard Business School Press. Cross, R., & Parker, A. (2004). The hidden power of social networks: Understanding how work really gets done in organizations. Boston: Harvard Business School Press. Cunningham, A.E. & Stanovich, K. (Spring/Summer 1998). What Reading Does for the Mind, American Educator, 22, 8-‐15.

Dunlap, J. & Lowenthal, P. (2009) Tweeting the night away: Using Twitter to enhance social presence. Journal of Information Systems Education, 20(2). Duursma, E., Augustyn, M. & Zuckerman, B. (July 2008). Reading aloud to children: the evidence. Archives on Diseases in Childhood, 93(7), 554-‐557. Field, J. (2003). Social capital. New York: Routledge. Fixsen, D.L., Naoom, S.F., Blase, K.A., Friedman, R.M. & Wallace, F. (2005). Implementation research: A synthesis of the literature. Tampa, FL: University of South Florida, Louis de la Parte Florida Mental Health Institute, The National Implementation Research Network (FMHI Publication #231). http://www.fpg.unc.edu/~nirn/resources/publications/Monograph/pdf/Monograph_full.pdf Knight, J. (2002). Partnership learning fieldbook. The University of Kansas Center for Research on Learning: Lawrence, KS. Retrieved from http://www.ku-‐crl.org/partnership/Documents/PartnershipLearningFieldbook.pdf National Institute of Child Health and Human Development. (2000). Report of the National Reading Panel. Teaching children to read: An evidence-‐based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction: Reports of the subgroups (NIH Publication No. 00-‐4754). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office. Neuman, S.B. (2008). The mediating mechanisms of the effects of poverty on reading achievement. In S.B. Neuman (Ed.) Educating the other America: Top experts tackle, poverty, literacy, and achievement in our schools. Baltimore, MD: Brookes Publishing Newgarden, K. (September 2009). Annotated bibliography: Twitter, Social Networking, and Communities of Practice, On the Internet, 13(2).

22

Roskos, K., & Neuman, S. (2002). Environment and its influences for early literacy teaching and learning. In S. B. Neuman and D. K. Dickinson (Eds.), Handbook of Early Literacy Research. New York: Guilford Press. Sebring, P. B., Allensworth, E., Bryk, A. S., Easton, J. Q., & Luppescu, S. (2006). The essential supports for school improvement. Chicago: Consortium on Chicago School Research at the University of Chicago. Stanton-‐Salazar, R., & Dornbusch, S. (1995). Social capital and the reproduction of inequality: Information networks among Mexican-‐origin high school students. Sociology of Education, 68(2), 116-‐135. Trelease, J. (2006). The Read-‐Aloud Handbook: Sixth Edition. New York: Penguin. U.S. Department of Education. (2001). No Child Left Behind: Executive summary. Retrieved March 3, 2008, from www.ed.gov/nclb/overview/intro/execsumm.html U.S. Department of Education, Office of Elementary and Secondary Education. (April 2002). Guidance for the Reading First program. Retrieved September 15, 2007, from http://www.ed.gov/programs/readingfirst/guidance.pdf Wenger, E. (2001). Supporting communities of practice: A survey of community-‐ oriented technologies (version 1.3). Retrieved January 3, 2007, from http://www.ewenger.com/tech/index.htm. Yoder, M. B. (2003). Seven steps to successful online learning communities. Learning and Leading with Technology, 30(6), 15-‐21.

23

Author informat ion: Betsy VanDeusen-‐MacLeod, Ph.D. is Assistant Professor/Reading & Literacy in Teacher Education & Professional Development, Central Michigan University in Mount Pleasant, MI and may be reached at [email protected]. She is also the former Michigan Reading First Coordinator -‐ Michigan Department of Education. Jim Taylor was Manager of Community and Industry Relations, Cracker Barrel Old Country Store and may be reached at [email protected]. James Herman, Ph.D. Candidate – University of Tennessee/Chattanooga, is Director of PreK-‐12 Reading and English/Language Arts and Reading First Director, Tennessee Department of Education and may be reached at [email protected]. The development of this technical report represents a collaborative partnership from three authors, each representing a different focus area. VanDeusen-‐MacLeod reviewed and synthesized program documentation and provided the research framework; Taylor provided extensive documentation from a variety of sources as well as detailed program knowledge regarding its development and implementation; and, Herman provided an additional check on drafts and revisions as well as providing a historical perspective related to his involvement in the program’s early development. Special thanks to Connie Britt, Laska Creagh, Shelbi Frayer, Linda Minor, and Darlene Schoolmaster for additional manuscript review and feedback.

Building Caring and Literacy in Our Communities

Documents

Transcript of Building Caring and Literacy in Our Communities