| In an attempt to facilitate the upgrading of Pennsylvania reading programs and comply with state regulations to evaluate those programs, an evaluation/interpretation system was devised. The Keystone State Reading Association's (KSRA) "Twelve Criteria for Evaluating Junior High/Middle Schools' Reading Programs" (with program, students, parents, materials, staff qualifications and roles, and evaluation of students and program components) were used as a basis for the evaluation. Results of nine schools' 1981 Department of Education's (PDE) Educational Quality Assessment Test (EQA) scores were used. EQA scores assessed each school's predicted range on goals (and specifically that of reading) and these test results were used to compare degree of implementation by each school on the KSRA Criteria, as reflected by responses on a questionnaire completed by nine schools' faculties and administrators.;A large majority (93%) of 26 surveyed experts (college and university professors affiliated with the International Reading Association and published in the field) coupled with an extensive literature search confirmed that KSRA Criteria represented elements of good reading programs. In addition, an observable relationship was found to exist between dimensions associated with the criteria (teaching techniques, program and physical/environment characteristics, and professional standards) and reading achievement. Eighteen separate questions reflecting ten criteria, when positively implemented, were found to have high predictability for reading achievement. It appeared that higher achieving schools implemented more criteria than lower achieving schools. In addition, three criteria were found to be associated with higher achieving schools. They included: schools exposing students to a variety of reading materials and purposes; schools following the Pennsylvania Comprehensive Reading Communication Arts Plan (PCRP); and schools developing positive views through success in reading. Data pooled on faculty implementation of criteria revealed that "core" subject teachers (math, science, social studies, and English) generally tended to implement criteria more often than did other staff. Discrepancies became evident regarding degree of claimed implementation of criteria than the teachers claimed they did. Finally, it was found that reading specialists generally do not act as resource persons, nor do they frequently team plan with content teachers. |
