SRP Blog

This blog is for participants in the Shared Reading Project: Keys to Success training. It is a place for all of us to discuss the Shared Reading Project throughout the United States.

Tuesday, September 12, 2006

SRP for deaf children with disabilities

Chachie and Sally Ann had this question in an earlier post: What has been the experience of tutors in dealing with deaf kids with disabilities?

Dave referred to the implementation evaluation that the Clerc Center did at our first five expansion sites. Twenty percent of the children in that evaluation, 24 in all, were identified with disabilities, including developmental disabilities, attention disorders, behavior disorders, learning disabilities, mental retardation, cerebral palsy, medical problems, and multiple disabilities. So those 24 children were very varied in their challenges and needs. Because this group of traditionally underserved deaf children was so diverse, it was not possible to make any generalizations about them from the quantitative data we collected for that evaluation.

Families and tutors of seven of these children were interviewed in more depth to understand how SRP was being implemented and experienced among families and tutors. The qualitative data we collected also indicated that the experience with each child was different and unique in its own way, requiring an individualized response that was appropriate for each family.

I remember one family whose deaf child had cerebral palsy, but who was also very bright. This child had several therapists working with her in the home at different times. For this family, the challenge was whether or not to participate in SRP and add one more commitment to their already full schedule. Then there was another family in which there was a young deaf boy with emotional and behavior problems. He was a challenge for both mother and tutor to work with. A third deaf child was very severely retarded and had not had much early intervention. The family were non-English-speaking immigrants from a patriarchally dominant culture. In this case, the father expected the tutor to work directly with the child, despite use of multiple interpreters to explain the how SRP was intended to work.

So, you can see that each case was really unique and needed an individualized approach. I think application or accommodation of SRP to the families of deaf children with disabilities is an area that deserves more study and innovation.

SRP Implementation and Outcomes Evaluation Exec. Summary

Wednesday, August 30, 2006

Questions from Others...any Response?

Hello.
I am going to type a few of the questions that I recently received. I would love to have any of you respond to any of the questions. And, if you have other questions, this would be a good time to do so. Thanks. -David Schleper, Clerc Center

Monday, August 28, 2006

Grant resources

Hello.
I recently got some information about grant resources. This is from Scholastic. I thought you might find it helpful. -David Schleper, Clerc Center

10 Great Ways to Get a Grant
Discover the secrets of successful grant writing thanks to several experts who give their best advice on drafting grant proposals that work.
Grant writing is seldom easy. As anyone who has applied for technology funding knows, a lot of schools are chasing the same pot of gold. With fierce competition for the technology dollars offered by corporations, foundations, and state and federal government, there's no room for mistakes. Yet pitfalls abound: For example, many grant seekers make the mistake of applying for the wrong grant. If the giver's goals and objectives don't match yours, you're wasting your time. To discover the secrets of successful grant writing, Scholastic Administr@tor spoke to several experts who gave us their best advice on drafting grant proposals that work.

Follow these 10 simple guidelines and your next grant proposal may stand a better chance of getting you the funding you need.
1. Assess your needs
Figure out your instructional technology needs before you write your grant proposal. Ask teachers for ideas about the kind of technology or training they need, how they'd use it in their teaching, and how it would help their students or in their jobs. Then, document your school's most compelling needs in your grant application. If you're asking for computers to improve teacher proficiency with technology integration, show the percentage of the teachers at your school who are at the beginning, intermediate, and proficient stages.
2. Think locally at first
Persuade local businesses and organizations to help support your project with matching grants, equipment donations, or volunteers. Form a technology advisory committee made up of teachers, administrators, business leaders, and parents to help formulate the grant request. If you haven't completed a technology plan, that should be the committee's first step. Next, undertake your own pilot program. Demonstrate its success and ask for help in expanding or enhancing the project. Find an impartial evaluator to analyze the pilot program, and then cite the results in your application. Establishing a baseline of success with technology will increase your odds of winning the grant.
3. Do your homework
Find out what kinds of projects the prospective funder has awarded in the past. Contact those schools and ask for a copy of their winning proposals. Analyze their content and style, and use their proposal as your model, personalizing it to fit your school or district.
4. Make it personal
Human contact can make a big difference when you're competing for a grant. Call the program officer and ask him or her to clarify anything in the request for proposals (RFPs) that you're unclear on. (You need to follow their guidelines to the letter. Even something as minor as the wrong font size can kill your chances.) And ask who'll be reading the grant so you can tailor your proposal to that specific audience. Speaking with the grant administrator can also give you a much better understanding of the funder's agenda. You can even mention your project idea to get an initial reaction.
5. Show passion
Show some excitement about the project in your proposal. Personalize it with a couple of brief one-sentence anecdotes, such as a comment from a student if it seems appropriate. Be upbeat. Study past grant winners' proposals for the tone you should use. Finally, be concise and avoid jargon, especially overused buzz words like paradigm and rubric. Use the informal, second-person you rather than one and include a few Is or wes.
6. Focus on learning, not the technology
Don't write as if you're asking for hardware and equipment. Emphasize what you intend to accomplish with the technology rather than focus on the technology itself. If you want five computers to help students improve their writing skills, focus on the need to teach writing skills. Create a realistic scenario describing how the students and teachers will use the technology to improve in this area.
7. Think long-term
Draft a time line of when you plan to achieve your goals and objectives. The time line should include plans to build on accomplishments after the grant runs out. Sustainability is crucial for a successful proposal, because funders like to see that the activities they're financing will continue beyond the life of the grant. For example, indicate your plans to start replacing the equipment in the third year of a five-year grant, and explain how you'll fund the upgrades.
8. Don't forget professional development
At least 30 percent of the funds you're asking for should go to professional development. Funders won't assume you'll be able to meet your goals and objectives if you don't intend to train your faculty or administrators to use the technology your requesting.
9. Spread the technology around
Show the ways you plan to share the technology you're requesting. Funders like to get the most bang for their buck. That can mean including in your grant plans to partner with another school and ways for students from both schools to use the technology for joint projects. Or tell about your plan to open up your school's new computer center to the community and have students teach residents how to use the equipment. Funders also like projects that can be replicated.
10. Ask for constructive criticism
If you're rejected, call the grant administrator and ask for a copy of the reviewers' comments on your proposal. If you can't get it, ask what the strengths and weaknesses of your grant application were and how you could improve it. That feedback will enable you to write a better proposal the next time you apply. Once you develop a strong application, you can submit it to different funders with only minor changes to fit each one's specifications.

Wednesday, July 12, 2006

RE: The 15 Principles on May 22

Just to let you know that the 15 principle powerpoint for site coordinators is now available. This is for the site coordinators who took the 15 principle training, "The Shared Reading Project: Keys to Success--Training for Site Coordinators." Those who took that 5-day training can download the powerpoint for their tutors and families. - David Schleper, Clerc Center

Tuesday, July 11, 2006

SRP Summary for 2006

Hello.
Here is a short summary of what we have learned related to the Shared Reading Project. Lori Lutz (lori.lutz@gallaudet.edu) developed this, and I thought some of you would like to have this information. -David Schleper, Clerc Center

Each year, the Shared Reading Project directory survey is sent to all individuals who have completed the one-week Keys to Success Training for Site Coordinators. The survey asks them to update their contact information, indicate whether or not they want to be identified as a SRP site, and to report the number of SRP families they served. Based on the 2005-06 survey responses:

Twenty-nine schools, programs, organizations, and others identified themselves as a SRP site for the 2005-06 school year.
— Mid-Atlantic Region – 4 SRP sites [DC, MD, and PA]
— West Region – 9 SRP sites [AZ, CA, CO, NM, and UT]
— Midwest Region – 8 SRP sites [KS, MI, MN, MO, and WI]
— Southeast Region – 4 SRP sites [FL and KY]
— Northeast Region – 4 SRP sites [MA, NY, & VT]

Sixteen of 29 SRP sites reported on the number of SRP families they served. These 16 SRP sites served a total of 187 SRP families.

Different evaluations were conducted to assess the outcomes of the Shared Reading Project. The SRP process and outcome evaluation [1998-2001], focused on five expansion sites and utilized both qualitative and quantitative measures of implementation and family outcomes. Some reported family outcomes were:

— Participating families shared books an average of 5.2 times a week, in comparison to the reported findings by the 1996 National Household Education Survey that 83% of 3- to 5-year-old children in the general population were read to three or more times a week by a family member.
— Families who shared books frequently during the early weeks also tended to share books at similar rates near the end of the tutoring period.
— Higher booksharing rates were associated with families who used a language other than English, families with several adults living in the home, fewer booksharing problems before participation in Shared Reading Project, familiarity with relay, and participation in more Shared Reading Project sessions.
— Participating parents reported improved sign language skills and increased communication with deaf and hard of hearing children.
— As parents learned more attention-getting and book-sharing strategies, their children’s attention seemed to increase.

The Clerc Center evaluated the Shared Reading Project: Keys to Success training to assess its impact on training participants six months and one year after training. Surveys were used to collect quantitative and qualitative information about training participants’ experiences in implementing a Shared Reading Project. The follow-up surveys were sent to people who completed Keys training during the years 1999-2003. From the year follow-up evaluation, we learned about different types of family change. Those survey respondents who successfully set up SRP talked about changes they observed in participating families and children:

— Reading -- Families increased the frequency with which they read books to their children, changed how they read with their children, and perceived their ability to read to their deaf children differently.

— Sign language -- Parents learned more signs, increased their vocabulary, and improved their signing skills. Parents’ level of confidence in their skills increased as well.

— Communication – Several SRP coordinators indicated that communication in families improved.

— Knowledge of child development – One SRP coordinator reported that parents seemed to learn more about what to expect as their child grew.

These findings are some of the most recent data we have on the Shared Reading Project.

Monday, May 22, 2006

The 15 Principles Powerpoint for tutors and families

This is the downloadable Powerpoint file for SRP site coordinators to use in the training that is provided for tutors and families.

Use of this is permitted only for those who are licensed by Clerc Center as approved Shared Reading Project Site Coordinators that completed the training.

Powerpoint SRP for Site Coordinators

Thursday, May 18, 2006

Research on Adults Reading to Deaf Children

I thought you would be interested in hearing some of the newer research on reading to deaf and hard of hearing children. Every once in awhile, when I find a new article related to research on adults reading to deaf children, I will let you know. Please feel free to add more if you find others!
-David Schleper, Clerc Center

Books on Reading to Children

A new book that is coming in October 2006 is called, "Let's Read Together: Improving Literacy Outcomes with Adult/Child Interactive Reading Inventory (ACIRI)." It is by Andrea DeBruin-Parecki, Ph.D., and will be published by Brookes Publishers.

The book explains about the quality of shared reading that really affects emergent literacy. It includes the only tool to measure the quality of adult AND child interactions during joint book reading. It is grounded in scientifically based reading research and is extensively field tested.

For more information, go to the web site at http://www.brookespublishing.com/store/books/debruin-parecki-7624/index.htm

It is a good book to look at related to evaluation.

-David Schleper, Clerc Center